There is a way to settle the current strike

The current student-worker strike seems intractable, as we have noted in prior posts. Both parties have positions - Grand Principles - that seem mutually exclusive. Both seem to be focused on legalism. Maybe PERB will somehow resolve the dispute. But legal remedies are at best slow. And they can be appealed, including Friday's court decision. Both PERB and courts worry about precedent. Decisions that might "work" in this case could create problems in the future when other unrelated disputes end up in the legal process. So the legal process may not lead to desirable outcomes for either party.

From the UC administration's perspective, the fundamental issue is the no-strike clauses it signed and the idea that a deal is a deal and that the deal was that during the life of the contracts, there would be no strikes. Period! UC is undoubtedly happy with the Friday court decision, although whether that will be the final word is uncertain. Strikes can continue unofficially. Appeals are possible, etc.

The union's stance is that there is an exception to adherence to the no-strike concept when an unfair labor practice has occurred. Of course, the union's position is that there was an unfair labor practice. Period!

Whereas the union views the use of police and arrests as a workplace issue about which UC was obligated to bargain, UC administration sees the matter as outside the scope of bargaining and political.

These are all Grand Principles that are hard to compromise. As we have noted before, unlike, say, a pay increase, it is difficult to split the difference and reach a mutually satisfactory solution. So the only remedy seems to be the legal system in which one side will eventually "win," i.e., have its Grand Principles validated. The problem here is - as we keep noting - the legal system is uncertain. And it could lead to decisions which muddy the waters rather than clarify them.

So, what to do? Let's note that the union, even if it believes it doesn't have to rely on the no-strike clause and use grievance and arbitration processes to resolve the dispute, it could voluntarily agree to do so, reserving the view that its action was not legally reguired. UC administration could voluntarily participate in the process without a PERB or court decision stating it was required. In short, both parties could put the issue of legal requirements aside. They could also put aside the question of whether either side had committed an unfair labor practice. They could put aside their Grand Principles.

Another thing both parties could voluntarily do is agree that whatever decision might be reached through voluntary use of the grievance and arbitration process would be both binding AND non-precedential. Thus, Grand Principles would not be violated. That is, a neutral arbitrator could make a decision for this contract period only that would be binding but would not apply as a precedent in future contracts. That would allow the parties at some future date when the current contracts expired to address issues of when no-strike clauses apply or do not apply through negotiations. Resolution of conflicting Grand Principles could be deferred for now.

If the parties were to agree to such an arrangement, they could voluntarily withdraw their various filings with PERB and the courts. The issue of decisions and appeals would then be moot.

You can imagine variations of what is outlined above, so long as the parties voluntarily agreed to the non-precedential process and agreed to set aside the pursuit of legal remedies. They could postpone their seemingly mutually exclusive positions for resolution through bargaining at a later date. In short, Grand Principles could be put off to the future for a decision.

Are the parties at this point ready to consider departing from their current approaches? Maybe not yet. And maybe they will want the dispute to drag on with strikes (perhaps unofficial), disruptions, PERB filings and court filings for some time to come. This type of deal depends on both parties arriving at a point where they want a way out of that approach. But as time passes, perhaps the willingness to consider alternatives will increase.