Union files unfair labor practice complaint

THE GORGE — An unfair labor practice complaint, financial stalemate, and discussion of campus safety marked October’s union bargaining at Columbia Gorge Community College (CGCC), alongside substantial progress on the new contract.

The state Employment Relations Board served the complaint, filed by the union, on Oct. 10. It alleges CGCC changed “status quo” workplace conditions during bargaining, which is illegal. Accusations include not handing academic professionals, now unionized, their letters of renewal and pay increases this past July; claiming the union is responsible for “unreasonable restrictions” in the workplace; and creating “a culture of fear and insecurity” by long bargaining, layoffs, increased disciplinary action and three terminations.

“The administration is aware of the complaint filed and is cooperating fully with the process. The college values its faculty and staff and is committed to maintaining a respectful, collaborative approach in negotiations, including with the newly unionized Academic Professionals,” director of marketing and communication Tom Penberthy told Columbia Gorge News via email.

“In the spirit of moving negotiations forward, the Union has compromised on many issues we feel strongly about. But if the college continues to cause unnecessary delays, we will seek mediation through the Employment Relations Board,” according to a collective statement from union leadership emailed to Columbia Gorge News.

Meanwhile, the teams are talking wages and campus safety issues.

The union agreed to a 4.5% increase in wages for 2025, dropping to 4% the following years; one step increase per year; and annual 3% longevity increases. The college proposed 2% wage increases instead.

Living wage for the Gorge is around $25 per hour, according to Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Union President and chemistry professor Rob Kovacich said on Oct. 4 he’d calculated it would cost the college less than $50,000 to pay all employees a living wage.

Administration returned their last financial proposal unchanged on Oct. 9, noting the state informed them of a potential 5% cut to community college investments mid-year following a projected decrease in state revenue.

Safety on campus

Since January, the union’s proposals have repeated one ask: Don’t put employees alone in a building without better safety measures.

Currently, the fire doors can’t lock, cell service and landlines are both limited in some classrooms, and houseless persons have sneaked in to sleep. Kovacich said an individual who was trespassed for assaulting two employees returned to campus multiple times in 2025, meeting an employee who was alone in a building at the time.

With the recent bond passage, CGCC will get a new security system, said Sam Draper, vice president of administrative services. He acknowledged Kovacich’s feedback that facilities workers and faculty want more involvement in this decision.

“I don’t know that we can guarantee anything to employees and students,” said Courtney Saldivar, director of institutional effectiveness. “I mean, students can have a seizure in class, and that has nothing to do with any safety provisions we’ve put in place to guarantee their safety. Like, you could trip on a cord ... we can do our best to put safety provisions in place.”

Kovacich said on Oct. 23 the issue would likely go to arbitration: “This idea of not placing adequate guarantees of employee safety and student safety, that’s not something that we’re gonna let go.”

‘A healthy workplace’

Union leaders wanted language defining and forbidding bullying, discrimination and harassment. Union adviser Kisa Clark said the union’s main interest is in having third-party arbitration available to employees through the contract.

The college struck most of it, saying they don’t want to set policies in stone.

Both agreed to make sure chemical dependency (addiction) is not grounds for dismissal alone. “Chemical dependency is often a complex brain disorder or mental illness. These are treatable health issues,” read the union’s note.

In other news

Administration suggested 13 hours paid leave per month for all new hires across the board, in exchange for removing their three personal leave days. Three current administrators would have their 16.67 hours per month grandfathered in, which the union won’t accept.

They’re still asking that laid-off employees be considered for open positions “even if they don’t meet every one of the qualifications,” then re-added to the recall list if they can’t perform the job properly within a month.

Still, “we made a lot more compromises,” Union Vice President tina ontiveros told administration  during a bargaining meeting on Oct. 23. “Because we are truly motivated to end this negotiation.”

The union agreed to strike the mission and values; rules for handling petitions to censor teaching materials; a requirement to post all board policies on the website; and the words “it is a management responsibility to communicate about college systems and services.” However, they still asked for a written commitment to “collaboration, cooperation.”

They compromised on discipline too, accepting notification periods and a structure of written warnings. Clark noted bargaining will reopen later if the college changes any discipline-related policies.

Under Oregon law, the college must re-open bargaining if it makes changes that impact working conditions, pay or discipline, called “impact bargaining.”

“Ultimately, the real issue is we can’t control college policy, but we can control the contract,” Kovacich said at the table on Oct. 23.