On unions, broadly
Graduate student unions exist at many public universities across the country, with differing contracts and bargaining units because different laws govern private and public universities. Public universities are governed by state labor laws, which tend to limit the subjects that can be negotiated. Harvard, like other private employers, is governed by federal labor law (the National Labor Relations Act). The NLRA requires bargaining over wages, benefits and other terms and conditions of employment. As noted above, no precedent exists for determining the boundaries of “terms and conditions of employment” for students at private universities, whose teaching and research are part of their academic training. Further, at most public institutions strikes are illegal under state law. In the private sector, however, under the National Labor Relations Act, strikes are legal and may be called by a union if negotiations break down at the table. For example, graduate students at Columbia University called a one-week strike at the end of Spring Term 2018.
New York University has had a graduate student labor union contract since 2015 (read more about the graduate student union at NYU). More recently, American University, The New School, Tufts University and Brandeis University also entered into labor contracts with unions representing small units of graduate students. Bargaining is underway at Brown, Columbia, and elsewhere. There are a number of state universities that have years of experience with unions representing their students. For those state universities, state laws—rather than federal labor law—provide guidelines regarding what can and cannot be negotiated in those union contracts. Those state-level rules and restrictions do not apply to private universities like Harvard.
As a typical first step, union supporters will ask others in their workplace to sign authorization cards, which serve as a written declaration of support for that particular union to serve as their exclusive representative in negotiating terms and conditions of employment. If union organizers collect enough cards to constitute a valid “showing of interest” among the group that the union seeks to represent (the “bargaining unit”), the union can file a representation petition with the NLRB. The NLRB will review that petition and, if the NLRB determines that the authorization cards demonstrate at least 30% support among all the employees in the proposed bargaining unit, it will process the petition and conduct a secret ballot election to determine whether a majority of the employees in the bargaining unit want the union to be their exclusive representative. Once the petition is filed with the NLRB, the authorization cards serve no further purpose.
If the union and the employer do not agree on the scope of the bargaining unit, or who will be included or excluded from the proposed unit, then the NLRB will resolve such matters in a hearing (either before or after an election).
As noted, the next step in the process is that the Board will conduct a secret ballot election in which all those in the proposed bargaining unit—not just those who signed authorization cards—can vote on whether they want to be represented exclusively by the petitioning union. If a majority of votes are cast in favor of representation by the union, then the NLRB will certify the new union unless there are grounds undermining the legitimacy of the election.
Employees who want a union to represent them typically affiliate with an established union and move to organize a new chapter of that union and achieve certification through an NLRB election. At Harvard, a group of graduate students chose to affiliate with the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace, and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, known as the United Auto Workers, to create the Harvard Graduate Students Union-UAW (HGSU-UAW).
Once an election determines that a union will be the exclusive representation of those in the bargaining unit, that union normally remains in place indefinitely to represent all future members of the bargaining unit.
However, there is a decertification process to remove an incumbent union. It is the reverse of the certification process and requires employees to solicit sufficient signatures to file a decertification petition with the NLRB and seek an election to vote the union out. Such a petition cannot be filed within the first year of a union’s certification, and if there is a collective bargaining agreement in effect it can only be filed between the 60th and 90th day prior to the contract’s expiration. Decertification movements are rare, and they cannot be sponsored, supported, or otherwise assisted by “management.”
Harvard student union membership
The official definition of the HGSU-UAW bargaining unit is as follows:
“All students enrolled in Harvard degree programs employed by the Employer [Harvard] who provide instructional services at Harvard University, including graduate and undergraduate Teaching Fellows (teaching assistants, teaching fellows, course assistants); and all students enrolled in Harvard degree programs (other than undergraduate students at Harvard College) employed by the Employer who serve as Research Assistants (regardless of funding sources, including those compensated through Training Grants)...”
"All undergraduate students serving as research assistants, and all other employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the [National Labor Relations] Act.”
The following student-held positions are generally considered to be within the scope of the bargaining unit:
- Teaching fellow
- Teaching assistant
- Course assistant
- Other instructional roles (e.g. lecturer, instructor) held by students in degree programs • Hourly-paid student research assistant (excluding undergraduate students)
- Graduate student research assistants—those students who are enrolled in graduate science and engineering programs who are receiving a stipend (or other compensation for their services—regardless of the source of the funds) and are performing research under the supervision of a faculty member.
Since a majority of eligible students voted in April 2018 to be represented by HGSU-UAW, all students who hold positions in the defined bargaining unit are now exclusively represented by the union on any matter that involves “wages, hours, or other terms and conditions of employment” for as long as they hold an eligible position. No individual student in this group can be excluded or will be able to negotiate a separate agreement. The HGSU-UAW is now the sole representative of the entire group.
The HGSU-UAW and the University’s administration are bargaining collectively on terms of an agreement. Once agreement is reached and the contract is ratified by HGSU-UAW membership, the contract will supersede terms previously determined by individual agreements between students and faculty based on a specific academic program or personal needs. Like the clerical, custodian, and food service employee unions, negotiations are being conducted with Harvard’s Office of Labor and Employee Relations, not with school deans or deans of students. Similarly, the collective bargaining process provides no role for elected student government representatives.
If you hold a position deemed to be part of the bargaining unit, you will be represented by the HGSU-UAW during the time you hold that position (unless the collective bargaining agreement specifies otherwise). This means that students who serve in teaching and research roles will likely cycle in and out of the union as they take on or complete these roles.
If you hold or have recently held a position that is part of the collective bargaining unit, then some information about you may be shared with the union. Under the National Labor Relations Act, the HGSU-UAW has the right to request and receive relevant information from the employer regarding its members. Therefore, the University is required to release certain information about its students holding bargaining unit positions.
However, any such disclosure is restricted by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (“FERPA”), a federal law that gives students certain rights with respect to their education records. Ordinarily, students must consent to the disclosure of information from their education records. However certain types of information, known as “directory information,” may be released to the public – or to the HGSU-UAW – without written consent by the student.
Under the Harvard University Common FERPA Directory Information Elements, which governs requests for directory information received at the University level, directory information includes things like your name, address, email address, field of study, degree program, and dates of enrollment. Directory information also includes the following employment-related information: job title, teaching appointment (if applicable), employing department, and dates of employment. This information may be provided to the HGSU-UAW.
If you do not want your directory information to be shared with the union, you should submit a FERPA block with your School’s Registrar’s Office. Please note, however, that this will restrict all disclosures of your directory information, not just disclosure to the union.
For personally identifiable information that is not directory information, the HGSU-UAW generally could not be given that information without your written consent. For more information regarding FERPA, see the FERPA Overview.
For private employers, like Harvard, federal labor law allows unions to propose in collective bargaining that members of the bargaining unit either become dues-paying union members or pay the union a similar fee, referred to as an agency or representation fee. While an employer does not have to agree to such a provision, a so-called “union shop” clause or similar variation is usually a major demand of any union since it ensures a revenue flow for the union.
The amount of union dues and union agency fees, if any, will not be known until the collective bargaining process has been completed. During the election, however, HGSU-UAW organizers stated that union dues would be 1.44% of the pay earned by members of a Harvard bargaining unit. That is the minimum amount of dues required by the UAW constitution. Some local unions decide to impose higher dues, however. At NYU, for example, which also has a student union affiliated with the UAW, the local union instituted dues and agency fees of 2%, which is automatically deducted from students’ paychecks. As an example, a graduate research assistant in the life sciences could pay more than $550 in union dues per year at 1.44% and more than $760 at 2%.
If a “union shop” provision as described above is included in the collective bargaining agreement, individuals who choose not to join the union may still be required to pay an equivalent fee. Depending on the terms of the contract in force, failure to pay dues could result in dismissal from a teaching or research appointment (the NYU contract has this provision). As noted, this is a negotiable item but most unions insist on such a clause in the collective bargaining agreement to ensure payment of dues.
You might have heard of a recent United States Supreme Court decision holding that the requirement that employees in a unionized workplace must pay either union dues or an equivalent amount as an agency fee is unconstitutional. That case, Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, involved a public sector employer, not a private university such as Harvard. Because of that distinction, the holding in Janus does not apply here.
Dues collected from UAW members are allocated between the local union, the International Union General Fund, and the International Union Strike and Defense Fund. While the exact breakdown depends on strike activity in a given month, the UAW dues FAQ provides an estimated breakdown showing that approximately 40% of your monthly dues would go to the local union, another 40% would go to the international United Auto Workers, and the final 20% would go to the UAW’s Strike and Defense Fund.
Contracts, bargaining, and negotiations
Yes. Collective bargaining is just that: collective. The union now represents all students in the bargaining unit and the provisions in whatever contract they negotiate will apply to all. Any exceptions would need to be explicitly stated in the contract or negotiated with the union. Any collective bargaining agreement must be ratified by more than 50% of the members but once it goes into effect, members are bound by provisions in the agreement while they are a member of the bargaining unit (that is, while they hold a job covered by the agreement).
When the parties have reached agreement on an individual article at the table, they initial the article as a “TA” or tentative agreement. That means that the TA’d article will not be reopened during negotiations, except by mutual agreement. Importantly, the TA’d article does not take effect until a complete contract has been agreed upon and ratified. The articles which have been TA’d can be found here.
Arbitration is a dispute resolution process that is used to resolve a dispute arising under a collective bargaining agreement. Usually, a neutral arbitrator, selected and paid by the union and the employer, has the power to issue a binding decision that is not subject to appeal except in very rare cases. However, arbitrators have no independent authority under law and only have the power and jurisdiction that the parties have given them through their negotiated provisions.
Usually, only the union may bring a case to arbitration following whatever grievance procedures the parties have negotiated. Typically, the grievance before the arbitrator is a claim by the union that the employer has violated a particular provision of the contract. For the most part, arbitration cases tend to involve either disciplinary issues, i.e. that the employer did not have just cause to discipline a particular worker (warning, suspension or termination), or other claims that the employer violated other articles of the agreement. For example, the union might claim that the employer failed to follow contract requirements in assigning work, or did not calculate pay correctly.
Arbitration is the final step of a grievance process described in the collective bargaining agreement. Those steps vary among contracts, but typically the grievance is reviewed by the supervisor at the first step. If the grievance isn’t resolved at that level, it is elevated to a second step of review, usually the next level of management, and then to a third higher step, still within the employer. If the grievance isn’t resolved at the third step, it is moved to arbitration. Sometimes the parties have only a two-step procedure; in other cases, multiple steps before arbitration. The parties (the union and the employer) jointly select an arbitrator (often using an agency such as the American Arbitration Association to manage the logistics) and the case is assigned a hearing date. At the hearing, both sides bring witnesses and other forms of evidence such as documents. The parties, usually represented by attorneys, present the case to the arbitrator. The process is similar to a trial in court before a judge or jury. Witnesses are called and examined by the attorneys – both direct examination and cross-examination. Documents are introduced as evidence. At the close of the evidence, the parties typically agree to submit briefs to the arbitrator summarizing the evidence and arguing their respective positions. The arbitrator considers the evidence and the briefs, and issues a written decision. If the arbitrator finds that the contract was violated, the decision would include a remedy for the violation.
The arbitrator is not an investigator. S/he expects the two sides – the employer and the union – to come into the hearing prepared with evidence to support their position, through witnesses and documents. Arbitration is not an alternative investigatory proceeding. In arbitration, the union is claiming the employer violated the contract; the employer is arguing that it did not.
Usually, only the Union can take a case to arbitration. A student, by themselves, has no right to take a case to arbitration. If a student worker who has been disciplined believes that the discipline was unjust, then they can ask the Union to file a grievance and take the case to arbitration if it is not resolved in the step grievance process.
No. An arbitrator would consider the testimony and other evidence and decide whether the contract had been violated. The arbitrator would then fashion an appropriate remedy for the injured student worker. That could range from an award of back pay, to reinstatement, to payment for mental health appointments or other medical costs. Imposition of discipline on the person who engaged in the contract violation is outside the scope of the arbitrator’s authority.
Title IX Office and Office of Dispute Resolution (ODR)
There are many resources and options available within the Harvard Community and beyond for students, staff, and faculty who experience sexual and/or gender-based harassment. Some options include:
Reaching out to your Title IX Coordinator to:
- seek interim measures (e.g., course related extensions, work and/or course schedule adjustments, leaves of absence, no contact orders)
- learn more about informal resolution and/or the formal complaint process
- learn more about the University’s Sexual and Gender-Based Harassment Policy
Seeking support from a confidential (or confidential privileged) resource on or off campus (e.g., The Office of Sexual Assault Prevention & Response, the Boston Area Rape Crisis Center, the Ombuds Office)
Reporting your concerns to the Harvard University Police Department or local police department
Seeking medical care from Harvard University Health Services, and/or local hospitals with sexual assault nurse examiners.
A full list of Harvard and community resources can be found here.
Informal resolution is a voluntary process through which the party initiating the request identifies specific allegations and, with the assistance of their Title IX Coordinator, the Title IX Officer, or ODR, addresses those allegations through a written agreement that is mutually acceptable to both parties, the School or Unit Title IX Coordinator, and the Title IX Officer or the Director of ODR in consultation with the Title IX Officer.
Informal resolutions may be facilitated by the School or Unit Title IX Coordinator, the Title IX Officer or Designee, or an ODR Investigator assigned by the Director of ODR.
No. Impacted parties may file a formal complaint with ODR without engaging in informal resolution. The informal resolution process is completely voluntary. In fact, most individuals who reach out to ODR proceed directly to the formal complaint process without accessing informal resolution. All parties, however, are informed of the option of informal resolution, as set forth in the procedures.
Disclosures are concerns regarding incidents of potential sexual or gender-based harassment that are brought to the attention of local Title IX Coordinators or the University Title IX Office; a formal complaint is a written and signed statement alleging a violation of the Policy. A complaint can be filed by the complainant or by a third party filing on behalf of a potential complainant (a “reporter”). Submitting a complaint to ODR starts the formal complaint process.
Student workers have multiple means of accessing additional information about the formal investigation process. Student workers may access information about the formal complaint process here and/or they may meet with their local Title IX Coordinator or the University Title IX Office to learn more about the ODR formal complaint process. Individuals may also contact ODR to set up a time to learn more about the University’s Policy and Procedures. It is important to note that student workers may meet with ODR whether or not a formal complaint is filed. Student workers also do not need to share their name or identifiable information when meeting with ODR staff or Title IX staff.
No. While impacted parties are encouraged to connect with resources available at Harvard, including their local Title IX Coordinators, the University Title IX Office, or the array of confidential resources available across the University, individuals may choose to go directly to ODR to file a formal complaint without first accessing other University resources.
There are no required steps prior to filing a formal complaint with ODR. Individuals who may have experienced sexual and/or gender-based harassment may file a formal complaint with ODR without first accessing other available resources at Harvard University.
There are no required steps prior to filing a formal complaint with ODR. Individuals who may have experienced sexual and/or gender-based harassment may file a formal complaint with ODR without first accessing other available resources at Harvard University.
Yes. Student workers may have a Union representative with them at any stage of the proceedings, including during any discussions of informal resolution.
The average length of time of an ODR investigation, as included in the ODR annual report, is approximately 3.5 months. ODR ensures that its investigators are as thorough as possible and works every year to ensure that the process moves quickly while maintaining the highest level of quality, fairness, and sensitivity.
Many factors affect the length of the investigation in a particular case, including the type and total number of allegations per complaint; how long ago the conduct occurred, over how long a period of time, and how many policies may apply as a result; the nature and volume of the documentation submitted as evidence; the number of witness interviews; scheduling challenges, such as: academic obligations (e.g., exams, final projects); University holidays; and parties’ and/or witnesses’ travel abroad; the need for language interpretation/translation; and extensions in time granted to parties to designate their respective personal advisors, which may include attorneys.
Once an investigation has been completed, both parties are provided with a copy of a draft investigation report. Parties are permitted, but not required, to submit written responses to the draft report within one week of receiving it. ODR considers any written responses from the parties before finalizing the report. A copy of the final report is provided to both parties, along with the Title IX Coordinator and the appropriate School/Business Unit official.
The report contains findings of fact, applies the preponderance of the evidence standard, determines whether there was a violation of the Title IX Policy, and, if a violation is found, outlines recommended measures to eliminate any harassment, prevent its recurrence, and address its effects. The final report does not include recommendations with regards to sanctions to be taken against an individual who is found to have violated the Policy. Sanction and disciplinary decisions lies with the appropriate official within the Respondent’s school or unit.
Both parties may appeal ODR’s determinations to an independent panel within one week of receiving a final report. Parties may appeal on two grounds: 1) procedural error that may change the outcome of the decision, or 2) substantive and relevant new information that was not available at the time of the investigation and may change the outcome of the decision.
Information regarding the outcome of formal complaints is available within the Office for Dispute Resolution and Title IX Office annual reports. For FY 18, ODR data and analysis information is found on pages 25 through 31.
Upholding the privacy of the individuals engaged in the formal complaint process is central to the work of ODR. Often complainants, as well as witnesses for both parties, express reluctance to participate in the formal complaint process without assurances that the University will not publicly share information pertaining to their engagement in the formal complaint process.
As the number of formal complaints grow, we are better positioned to share additional data pertaining to formal complaint outcomes. This measure of greater transparency is reflected in the expansion of data shared year-over-year within the Office for Dispute Resolution and Title IX Office Annual Report.
Beyond disclosure and formal complaint data, we understand the interest in greater transparency around disciplinary sanctioning. In partnership with Schools/Units, we are exploring the feasibility of sharing aggregate sanctioning data provided by Schools/Units as a supplement to the upcoming FY 19 Annual Report.
On strikes, broadly
A strike is an organized and collective work stoppage by a group of employees, usually with the goal of forcing the employer to accept the employees’ demands. For example, although the NLRA does not require the parties to agree to proposals made during collective bargaining, a union might call a strike to put economic pressure on the employer to accept the union’s proposed terms on wages etc. The striking workers typically organize a picket line in front of the work area where they hold signs, march, and chant to protest the employer’s actions. Workers on strike generally are not paid, because they are not working, although they might be eligible for payments from a union strike fund. Most collective bargaining contracts include a “no strike” clause which prohibits the unit members from engaging in a strike during the life of the contract. Since the University and the UAW do not yet have a collective bargaining agreement in place, the Union may legally call for a strike under the current state of the law.
A partial strike is a concerted attempt by employees, while remaining at work, to bring economic pressure to force their employer to accede to their demands. Thus, employees might do some of their tasks but not others.
The potential for a strike begins with a Strike Authorization Vote (“SAV”) by HGSU-UAW’s members. According to the UAW Constitution, all HGSU-UAW members must be given due notice that the vote is happening, and to pass, it requires a two-thirds majority of voting members in good standing. If/when HGSU-UAW achieves a SAV, they will need final approval for a strike from the UAW International Executive Board. Once authorized by the International Executive Board, a strike is not automatic, but the HGSU-UAW’s elected bargaining team could call a strike at any time.
Either the local union or the UAW International Executive Board may issue a call for a strike authorization vote. No one from the University, the NLRB or anyone else monitors the vote outside of the union officers.
Any updates regarding work disruptions will be posted on studentunionization.harvard.edu
Yes. While striking members of the bargaining unit are exercising a protected right under the National Labor Relations Act, the decision to participate in a strike or not is up to each individual unionized student worker.
Staff have the right to express their personal views, but staff members do not have the right to disrupt work activities.
Non-unionized staff have a right under the National Labor Relations Act to engage in concerted strike activity, and they are protected by the NLRA from retaliation against them based on that activity. However, no one who participated in a strike would be paid (unless the staff member uses paid time off to participate in the strike). Staff can use approved paid or unpaid time off to engage in those support activities, subject to the policies for use of that time.
Harvard staff who are union members are covered by no-strike clauses in their collective bargaining agreements, which means that those staff members do not have the right to participate in an HGSU-UAW strike by not working. They are expected to be at work and fulfilling their job responsibilities.
The University-wide Statement on Rights and Responsibilities provides additional guidance.
To cross a picket line of striking workers means that a person who is not on strike walks through the line and enters the workplace. That person could be a worker who has chosen not to strike, a manager or a replacement worker hired to fill in during the strike, a customer (or student), etc.
If there is a strike, the University and campus police will certainly be monitoring the situation to ensure the safety of University students and employees, including those who cross a picket line. The University has had experience with other strikes on campus and will have appropriate safeguards in place.
All students will still be expected to meet the requirements of their academic program. Failing to attend classes, otherwise meet course expectations, or make satisfactory progress toward their other degree requirements could have consequences for their academic standing, especially if the strike is of long duration. But again, that will depend on the academic requirements and standards set forth by the faculty member.
On legal guidance for managers
Department chairs, deans, many faculty who hold supervisory roles over the student workers, and other supervisors should be cautioned not to threaten, question or coerce student workers in any way.
Individuals who hold supervisory roles over student workers, including faculty, should be cautioned not to question student workers about their strike activities, such as asking them whether they are going to strike, who else is going to strike, how many student workers are supporting the strike, what is the level of support for the strike, how long it will last.
Once a strike has commenced, faculty may ask student workers whether they plan to continue to work. In doing so, they should be very careful not to threaten or coerce the student worker to continue to work in any way or to otherwise question the student worker about the strike itself. They may also verify, either by checking themselves or by asking student workers, whether sections/planned reviews are being held or whether lab assignments have been addressed.
Individuals who hold supervisory roles over students, including faculty, should be cautioned not to coerce or otherwise pressure student workers one way or the other with regard to whether they should go on strike.
Yes. While supervisors, including faculty, are cautioned not to threaten any student workers with adverse employment consequences if they do go on strike, this does not mean that student workers cannot be reminded, where appropriate, of their academic requirements and responsibilities.
On consequences for striking students
Members of the bargaining unit are exercising a protected right under the National Labor Relations Act and would not be disciplined for being on strike. However, HGSU-UAW members who don’t report to work during a strike or disruption may risk not being paid.In addition, the student workers would be expected to continue to meet their academic obligations in order to remain students in good standing. While they are allowed to strike, they still must attend any required classes as students and otherwise meet the academic requirements for their degree, including progress in their academic research.
Not necessarily. An employer of any type is not required to finance a strike by paying strikers for work not done.
On strikes and academic matters
The simple answer is, it could. It is difficult to predict the extent of the impact. We will work with individual schools to communicate updated information as effectively as possible during any type of disruption on campus.
The University’s top priority remains that the integrity of its course offerings is not compromised due to this disruption. Any student who attends class and completes the required course work will not be penalized. It is possible some grading may be delayed if a disruption takes place.
The University will make every effort to avoid this. However, this depends on the length of the strike, faculty course requirements, academic degree requirements and other related factors and cannot be answered in a vacuum at this stage.
It is the University’s expectation that classes should not be disrupted. However, if there are cancellations individual schools will do their best to communicate that information in advance if possible. It is possible the University may not know in advance about a disruption to a class schedule. If that happens, information will be posted instructing students on how to proceed.
Yes. Protecting the University’s academic mission remains a priority for the University and delivering curriculum to students is an essential part of that mission. There are no restrictions on ensuring that work gets done.
Yes. Protecting the University’s academic mission remains a priority for the University and delivering curriculum to students is an essential part of that mission. There are no restrictions on ensuring that work gets done. Faculty/managers have the right to hire additional staff, shift duties to current staff, or make arrangements for non-striking student workers to perform extra work for extra compensation.
With appropriate local approvals and policy compliance, faculty may hire staff to do the work the strike is leaving undone. Such staff may include:
- preceptors, lecturers, other non-ladder faculty
- course assistants and teaching fellows/assistants in the bargaining unit who have chosen not to strike
- teaching assistants who are not Harvard students
- qualified staff who are not Harvard affiliates
Any payment for such services should be discussed with the Administrative Deans before any commitment is made. Faculty and other supervisors are, of course, also free to do any needed work themselves.
As noted elsewhere in this guidance, in order to avoid any suggestion of coercion, supervisors should not ask student workers about their strike plans in advance of the start of a strike. However, once a strike has commenced, it will be essential to know whether your instructional staff are teaching or grading student work. Here are several suggested approaches:
- When a strike has commenced, you could send an email to all instructional staff in your course, asking them to let you know if they will be covering their sections and grading during the strike
- If you have just one TF, TA, or CA, you can ask them directly if they will be working during the strike
- Have someone check the rooms where the class is held
- Ask the students enrolled in the course if their class was held
Faculty are responsible for teaching course material, and students are responsible for learning it. However, the forms of teaching and learning may need to change if there's a strike, particularly if it goes on for some time. We rely on faculty discretion in making necessary adjustments, always with the best interest of students in mind. Such adjustments could include: reducing the number of independent assessments being carried out, having students work in pairs on assignments, automating some forms of assessment, e.g. multiple choice, utilizing contingency planning technology to enable students to attend their courses without stress.
As long as the student worker is still holding an active position, you can ask them to make up missed work. They will need to work with their local Registrar’s Office to confirm locations for makeup sections, or they can take advantage of the remote teaching technologies to organize make up sections. Enrolled students should be encouraged to attend if at all possible.
Any non-Harvard student and any other qualified individual may be considered for replacement teaching staff work. You can ask current non-Harvard affiliated instructional support staff in your department, as well as non-ladder faculty, if they would like to take on additional work at the rate currently assigned to the course. If you know that a TF, TA, or CA is continuing to work during the strike, then you may also offer that individual additional work to make up for the missing staff. You could also send a group email to all instructional staff in a course, offering them additional work during the duration of a strike.
While we cannot currently know how many TFs, TAs, and CAs will choose to strike, those who don’t strike, and who continue to teach, may be offered extra work.