A strike is a coordinated stoppage of work to make an employer meet the needs and demands of workers. In our case, TAs, RAs, and others stop paid work (grading, teaching, and research) across the university. All together we represent over 3,000 workers that contribute to education and research at Columbia. Striking sends a clear message that Columbia University relies on our labor and that we can no longer continue without a fair and meaningful contract. Historically, for other unions and in this union, strikes have been a key successful strategy to getting worker needs and demands met.
The bargaining committee is authorized by the 96% YES vote of March 2020 (1,833 to 77) to call a strike if needed to advance negotiations.
We will stop working (online and in-person) and engage in organized strike events like picketing for the duration of the strike. We will be engaging in virtual, as well as in person pickets to bring awareness to our strike. Virtual pickets will include teach-ins, virtual rallies, and outreach campaigns. Additionally, we can ask that other unionized workers, who are able to, to refuse to work with the school; for example, during our strike in April 2018, many delivery drivers refused to cross our picket lines to bring packages to campus.
We hope that the administration will agree to our demands in order to avert a strike. If and when we do have to strike, if the administration remains intransigent a strike could go on for some time until we reach an agreement that the unit votes to ratify.
The law protects our right to strike. Since the 1970s, thousands and thousands of RAs and TAs across the US—including here at Columbia in 2004 and 2018—have engaged in lawful strike activity without being fired. Beyond these legal protections, mass participation is our best protection since it makes it difficult to single out anyone even if Columbia did contemplate such an extreme action.
An employer has a legal right to withhold pay from striking workers for the days that they were on strike. Columbia has not withheld wages from salaried workers in past strikes. In the event that they do withhold pay, striking workers who spend 10 hours per week on the picket line will become eligible for the UAW strike fund on the 8th day. This does not mean the strike fund will not cover the first week; the first week, as well as any future weeks, will be covered as long as the strike lasts over 7 days. The UAW strike fund currently pays $275/week. Workers with costs in excess of that amount will also be able to draw on a separate hardship fund administered by GWC workers.
International students have the same rights as US citizens to participate in union activity. Visa requirements in no way compromise your right to belong to a union that represents you in a US workplace. It is illegal for Columbia to retaliate for protected activity. Thousands of international student workers across the United States have struck and been otherwise active in their unions for more than 40 years, including here at Columbia. Administration’s anti-strike campaigns often target international students because their visa status makes them more vulnerable, but you are protected. Over the last five years, no graduate student worker union has reported any complications among their members arising from the dual status of being both an international student and a unionized employee. In fact, the GWC-UAW international students working group has been very active over the last seven years and accomplished a lot as part of our union campaign.
You would not have legal or academic protection if you refuse to go to your own classes. Student workers should continue their academic progress while striking; refusing to attend your classes as students is not legally protected.
Ultimately, our working conditions are our students’ learning conditions: the contract provisions we win through striking will make Columbia a better place to teach and to learn. You can see suggestions on how to talk to your students here.
A partial strike consists of you doing part of your TA/RAship work and striking on the other part and would be unprotected by labor law.
Work/research that is absolutely necessary for your dissertation progress is academic work that you may continue. We want to be sure that any action allows the maximum number of people to participate with maximum impact on Columbia. The overall goal here is to strike on our paid work to pressure Columbia in bargaining, not delay our dissertation work. Conversely some grad workers will have to complete the bare minimum necessary to maintain their own research (e.g., tending to animals or live cultures) while refraining from other lab work.
You are not obligated to tell anyone about the strike, but you can and should talk to them. Ideally, they will tell the administration to bargain for a fair contract. You can see suggestions on how to talk to faculty here.
Strikes are more effective when there is large participation. It is important that we stand together if we need to strike, and show solidarity with each other. Our union will not penalize members who do not participate in a strike.
There are UAW funds to support workers on strike, as well as crowdsourced funding. This means strikers can and will get paid in the event that pay is docked. During our strike in April 2018, over 1,500 of our colleagues from across the university participated. In the event of a strike that lasts more than seven days, and if Columbia exercises its right to stop paying those who strike, all striking workers would be eligible to receive strike pay from the United Auto Workers (the national union we are affiliated with) of up to $275 per week for the duration of the strike. We could also raise money independently for those who would face extreme hardship in a strike (e.g., those with dependents). In order to qualify for the strike benefits, workers are asked to perform strike duty, such as picketing.
The decision by the National Labor Relations Board that granted our collective bargaining rights, defined members of our union as all undergraduate and graduate student employees performing instructional services and graduate employees performing research service.

As stated in the NLRB decision, these titles could include, but are not limited to: “All student employees who provide instructional services, including graduate and undergraduate Teaching Assistants (Teaching Assistants, Teaching Fellows, Preceptors, Course Assistants, Readers and Graders): All Graduate Research Assistants (including those compensated through Training Grants) and All Departmental Research Assistants employed by the Employer at all of its facilities, including Morningside Heights, Health Sciences, Lamont-Doherty and Nevis facilities.”

If Program Assistants are providing instructional services or work similar to research assistants, then the Union considers you to be included in the bargaining unit. Whether you are included in the final bargaining unit or not, you have the same rights as unit employees to strike in support of our demand that the University offers us the contract we deserve.


The National Labor Relations Board has decided that undergraduate teaching assistants are included. If you want to sign up, contact us at
TA and and RA working conditions are undergraduate learning conditions! At a large research university like Columbia, TAs and RAs take on a significant portion of the teaching and grading responsibilities for undergraduate instruction. They conduct cutting-edge research as part of world-renowned research labs whose presence at Columbia also enhances the quality of undergraduate education. In order to maintain these standards of excellence it is crucial for Columbia undergrads to recognize TA and RA labor and support these workers’ right to negotiate a fair contract with the University through collective bargaining, so our TAs and RAs have the time, energy, and resources to devote to our undergraduate experience.
Well-endowed universities like Columbia don’t need to raise tuition or lower financial aid to accommodate fair working conditions. Through fundraising and investments, Columbia’s endowment has grown to over $8 billion. Columbia has the money to fairly compensate the people who keep it running without adversely affecting other student populations. If you are a student worker, having a union allows you to negotiate your working conditions directly with Columbia. Having a union on campus also gives all students a greater voice in issues that will positively affect everyone at the university (for example, addressing problems with payroll and advocating against tuition increases across the board).

There has been no research showing that student unions raise the price of tuition. At institutions such as the University of Washington and the University of California, graduate worker unions have been instrumental in helping to campaign against tuition increases.


Eligible voters are Columbia graduate and undergraduate students who are currently employed by the university, have been employed by the university in the past, or whose program includes a degree requirement to be employed by the university in one of the categories outlined by the NLRB decision (i.e. graduate and undergraduate Teaching Assistants, Teaching Fellows, Preceptors, Course Assistants, Readers, Graders, Graduate Research Assistants [including those on Training Grants], and All Departmental Research Assistants), and who have signed a union authorization card or similar card authorizing representation by GWC-UAW. If you have not done so already, you may fill out a union authorization card here.
Signing an authorization card in order to vote in our union’s elections complies with the UAW constitution and UAW Local 2110 by-laws: “All members in good standing working under the jurisdiction to be represented by the Steward or Bargaining Committee person shall be entitled to nominate and to vote for the Steward or Bargaining Committee person.” (Article X, Section 4), and “Non-members covered by an agency shop clause in a UAW contract shall receive all the material benefits to which members are entitled but shall not be allowed other membership participation in the affairs of the Union” (Article 6, Section 20).
No. Formal membership does not start until we vote to ratify our first contract, fill out membership cards and start paying membership dues when working under the contract.

Click here to read more on membership.


As TAs and RAs, we do a large amount of the teaching, grading, grant-winning research, and administrative work at Columbia, often under precarious conditions regarding compensation and benefits. Through collective bargaining, we can ensure livable wages, adequate benefits, clear workload expectations, and consistent and transparent employment policies that will enhance our conditions and our work – and ultimately, enhance Columbia.
Collective bargaining is a process, recognized and protected by federal law, that equalizes the power relationship between employees and their employer. Under collective bargaining, we elect representatives to negotiate on equal footing with Columbia and put the terms of our employment into a legally binding contract. Through collective bargaining, graduate employee unions have successfully negotiated improvements in wages, hours, benefits, and terms and conditions of employment. Without collective bargaining, Columbia has unilateral power to change our conditions or decide whether or not to make improvements. For example, Columbia currently decides unilaterally whether or not to make sure we get paid on time or whether our stipends keep up with the cost of university housing.
Collective bargaining equalizes the power relationship between employees and their employer.  Without collective bargaining, Columbia decides unilaterally whether to make improvements, keep things the same, or take things away.  For example, Columbia decided unilaterally to replace our dental coverage with a far inferior option for the 2016-17 year and they continue to decide unilaterally whether we get paid on time, whether we get annual pay increases that keep up with housing costs, etc.  With a union, we harness our collective power and negotiate as equals with Columbia to reach a legally binding contract that Columbia cannot change without our consent.  Read here for examples of what academic workers have won through collective bargaining at other universities.

The process allows us to decide democratically what issues to prioritize in these negotiations.  As such, what RAs and TAs have won through collective bargaining at other universities varies, but in general, gains have been made in minimum stipends, health benefits, workload protections, and family benefits.  At NYU, for example, under their first contract in 2002, they won:
  • 38% increase in minimum stipends (which also led Columbia to increase stipends at the time), and a 15% increase for the small number already making more than the minimum;
  • Elimination of health insurance premium sharing (a savings of $1000 annually);f
  • guaranteed tuition/fee waivers for all graduate employees covered by the contract;
  • a fair grievance procedure;
  • protection against having RA/TA appointments withdrawn at the last minute;
  • workload protections;
  • increased child care subsidies; and
  • $100 per day for required pre-semester training or orientation.
Additional improvements established in the 2015 NYU contract include:
  • guaranteed annual minimum increases on total compensation, which protects and insures increases in stipends and other pay. During the current academic year, funded PhD TAs who teach both semesters will receive at least $37,783;
  • implementation of a family healthcare fund to provide up to 75% of premium subsidies;
  • implementation of a childcare fund, which provided a benefit to bargaining unit members of $2,140 per child in the first year of the contract;
  • an improved dental benefit amounting to a savings of $240 per year to each graduate employee covered by the contract; and
  • reinstatement of most of the protections negotiated in the 2002 contract.
No.  Collective bargaining has not produced this result at other universities where RAs have collective bargaining.  If you look at two current UAW contracts that include RAs, at the University of Washington and at the University of Connecticut, you see very clearly in both cases that the workload language does not have the effect Coatsworth suggests.

Instead, because collective bargaining is a democratic, nuanced and participatory process, the unions at UW and UConn have negotiated provisions that empower individuals – say, a TA who is being required to work so many hours that it detracts from their dissertation – to choose to address a workload problem, while simultaneously allowing those of us, like RAs doing paid “work” that helps our dissertation, the freedom to choose to spend as many hours in the lab as desired.

Put another way, the provisions of a contract would be negotiated between the university and the union. The university has no incentive to propose an hours-capping provision, since it benefits from the research labs produce. The union would have no reason to add such a provision, unless its member RAs made clear they wanted one, through bargaining surveys and other democratic channels. That seems unlikely – to put it mildly. Thus, it is hard to imagine anybody at the table making such a proposal, and even harder to imagine grad workers voting to ratify a contract that included it.
No. Collective bargaining has not produced that result at other universities.

At the University of Washington, probably the most similar to us since it has a large medical school with hundreds of RAs, a variable pay system existed before the contract and continues under the contract. Under that system, there are minimum pay rates that all departments must follow, but departments are free to pay higher rates. Graduate workers at UW democratically chose to preserve that system, and, while those at the lower pay rates have experienced larger increases, everyone’s pay has gone up after unionization.

In another example, under the first contract at NYU, the minimum stipends for the poorest-paid workers went up 38% over 4 years, while the small number of people above the minimum got at least a 15% raise over 4 years. Again, no one took a pay cut. In the second contract at NYU, the lowest paid workers at NYU Poly received signing bonuses of up to $1,500 and will see their hourly wage double (from $10 to $20 per hour) over the life of the contract, while the highest paid PhD workers received signing bonuses of up to $750 and will see their total compensation increase by roughly 13 percent.

A slightly different example is UConn, where graduate assistants had the same pay rates before unionization and the contract raised all those by 3% per year (in addition to significant increases in fee waivers that are worth an additional 3.2-7.6 percent wage increase, depending on FTE and academic standing). The contract also ensures additional step increases based on academic progress.

In all cases, these guaranteed gains were larger than the small percentage in membership dues, which is why these contracts were overwhelmingly ratified.

Feel free to read summaries of the before and after effects of collective bargaining at these and various other universities on the GWC-UAW website.

At Columbia, we will decide what to bargain for and we will determine our own fates collectively with the ratification of our contract. In hundreds of conversations across campus over the last two years, no one has said the Union should propose leveling pay or that anyone should take a pay cut, so we can rest assured pay leveling will not be a union proposal.
Many graduate employee unions cover employees with diverse interests.  At the University of Washington, University of Connecticut, University of Massachusetts, and New York University,  RAs and TAs have negotiated strong contracts together.that addressed issues that affect everyone such as health, dental and vision benefits, guaranteed annual pay increases, sick leave and family benefits while simultaneously including provisions important to a particular group(s).

For an example of how the unions at UW and UConn addressed an issue that might affect RAs and TAs differently, see the response to the question on workload, above.  Another example of an issue that might matter more to RAs than, say, TAs, is vacation.  At UW, for example, TAs tend to get time off during academic break periods by default, but it was a huge priority for many RAs—while many had PIs who would allow time off, many had PIs who would not and it was totally arbitrary.  The contract now guarantees all RAs the right to at least four weeks of paid time off with no work expectations per year.  Other examples would be holidays, health and safety,parking and transit, and travel.  On parking, this was important to RAs who want the ability to drive in to do a short procedure late at night in order to keep an experiment going. RAs at UConn who had the same parking issue really benefited from the union contract, which cut parking prices in half for Graduate Assistants, both for the reasons at UW and because public transit is very limited there.
No. There is no evidence of collective bargaining having any of these effects. Both the union membership and the administration have to agree on a contract and neither party would want that result.  Collective bargaining simply means we can negotiate as equals in order to hold Columbia more accountable to do the best it can do.

As an example of how this plays out, in the first contract for postdocs at the University of California, the union negotiated significant pay increases, and the union and the university agreed to a phase-in process so that PIs would have the ability to accommodate the improvements without disrupting current research. Before collective bargaining, the University decided such things unilaterally, and some postdocs made as little as $18,000 per year even though UC had a “policy” stipulating that the minimum postdoc salary should have been $37,000.

Empirically, the overall number of RAs (and TAs) has grown at the University of Washington since unionization in 2004, as has the number of postdocs at the University of California since unionization in 2008.  Overall grant revenue has also increased at UW and UC over those years, showing that these institutions remain competitive in recruiting top talent to their research programs.
That is not how grievance procedures work under a union contract. In fact, contracts typically encourage informal resolution of problems before putting them into the formal grievance procedure.

If there were a dispute, or an alleged violation of the contract, an individual RA would have the option of involving the union or not. If you talk to people at the University of Washington, for example, you’ll hear that they don’t need to file with their union in order to request vacation time under the contract or to ask to leave early one day for a family commitment. They talk directly to their PIs and advisers just like we do at Columbia. The difference is, if there is a problem, they have the option of involving a union representative to help resolve it. Normally, that effort to resolve the problem is done informally.

The language at the University of Washington is instructive. Article 8 of their contract says “The parties support the resolution of problems at the lowest possible level and to that end encourage informal discussions to resolve problems without the grievance procedure. Prior to initiating a grievance, the aggrieved party is encouraged to discuss the matter with the immediate supervisor. If requested, a Union representative may be involved in the discussion. Resolutions from pre-grievance discussions, although final, shall not be precedential.”  And if it is not resolved informally, it can be put into writing and, ultimately, taken to a neutral arbitrator to decide whether the University violated the contract.  But the decision to take these steps is in the hands of the individual RA.
The fact is our hands are tied now. We don’t have the power to make changes in our working conditions, now. We aren’t even empowered to negotiate with the Administration. The Administration has made changes in the past that haven’t been to our benefit, like changing the dental benefits. With a contract, their hands are tied. They can’t make changes without negotiating with us.

The contract can always be “re-opened” or renegotiated if both parties (the Union and the Administration) are in agreement to do so. Additionally, if new programs or new positions are created that weren’t contemplated by the contract, the Administration has a legal obligation to bargain the terms of employment for the new workers with the Union.

Furthermore, if this is a concern going into bargaining and a priority, we can negotiate for the ability to bargain during the life of the contract for things that are not addressed in the contract.

We also asked other grad employee unions (University of Washington and University of Massachusetts), and they have told us that this has never been a problem.
Union contracts typically include a grievance procedure, which provides due process to a member (or the union as an organization) if a problem arises during the contract or the administration is not fairly adhering to the contract.  Though many grievances are resolved quickly and informally, most contracts allow for unresolved grievances to be taken to an outside neutral arbitrator whose decision is legally binding.

For example, GSOC at NYU just won an arbitration case involving NYU’s wrongful denial of tuition remission benefits to workers in the School of Education and the School of Social Work.  Affected graduate workers will receive a refund of approximately $1500/semester for each semester they were affected.

For more examples of how a fair and effective grievance procedure can work, you can check out highlights of how graduate employees at the University of Washington have successfully enforced their rights under the Union contract on issues ranging from pregnancy discrimination and tuition/fee waivers to payment and health and safety issues.
Currently, Columbia determines RA pay rates unilaterally, and those rates – as well as projected increases – are factored into grant proposals to agencies like NIH, NSF, DOD, etc. With collective bargaining, we would negotiate as equals with Columbia for improvements to our pay rates. RAs at UMASS and the University of Washington, as well as postdocs at the University of California, have negotiated guaranteed annual increases to their pay rates through collective bargaining.
In fact, the administration can change student worker classifications right now, without any recourse. But a union contract can protect against this. In the first year of the contract at UW, the University tried to reclassify several hundred graduate researchers on training grants so that they would not be covered by the contract. The union was able to stop this reclassification through a grievance. This ended up being huge when the University tried to deny Workers Compensation coverage to Trainees, but the Union prevailed through the grievance procedure (scroll down to health and safety and workers compensation).
These kinds of reprisals are unlawful and there have been no reports of this being a problem in decades of unionization at more than 60 university campuses across the US. Moreover, the more of us who have unions nationally, the more normal it becomes as part of life at large research universities like Columbia. With a union, in the unlikely case something like this occurs, a graduate worker will have the law, the institutional backing of the union and thousands of colleagues on their side. Without union protections, we hear far too many stories of people who suffer abuse and feel there is no meaningful avenue of recourse, especially with issues like sexual harassment.
The union believes strongly that faculty should refrain from making any comments on unionization, as whatever they say may influence a graduate worker’s opinion since they are our supervisors.  Our experience is that most faculty agree with that basic idea.  At NYU in 2013, when the administration strongly encouraged faculty to refrain from discussions on this issue, 98 percent of participating graduate workers voted “yes” for GSOC-UAW to be their union.  At Columbia, over 100 faculty signed a statement urging administration neutrality last year.

We have also done work to educate faculty about shared interests we have, such as federal research funding. Some number of faculty, as well as numerous academic professional societies, signed our petition to increase STEM research funding.  We are also proud that the UAW appears to be the only national union with an official position in support of increasing federal research funding.


The UAW is one of the strongest unions in the country.  It also represents 50,000 university workers across the US, including more grad student workers than any other union, hundreds of support staff at Columbia, as well as adjunct faculty and postdoctoral researchers.  The UAW brings decades of organizing and bargaining experience and expertise to our campaign.
UAW Local 2110 is a technical, office and professional local of the UAW which represents 4,000 workers in the New York City area including: graduate employees at NYU; contingent faculty at Barnard College; support staff at Columbia University, Barnard College and Teachers College; and employees at the Village Voice and Museum of Modern Art. UAW Local 2110 has won cutting-edge contracts at Columbia and elsewhere, fighting race and gender-based pay discrimination, winning child care subsidies, flex-time, paid family leave, domestic partner benefits, job security and health and safety protection.  Local 2110 is also the union that helped organize grad employees at NYU and won the first-ever grad employee union contract at a private university, twice (2002 and 2015).
Under UAW policy, no dues are paid until after a contract has been negotiated and approved in a democratic vote by RAs and TAs.  Dues in UAW Local 2110 are 2% of gross pay received from Columbia for work performed that is covered by the contract.  The dues rate can only be raised by a vote of the membership.  Dues are not paid on the monetary value of benefits such as health care premiums, tuition exemption, childcare benefits, etc.

Dues provide the financial resources necessary to have a strong union, including paying for legal costs, staffing, supplies, equipment, etc.
Dues cover all of the day to day cost of having a strong union, including paying for the best legal representation (such as that utilized in the NLRB case), staffing, rent, equipment, and supplies.   Dues also go toward the UAW Strike and Defense Fund, giving us leverage at the bargaining table because Columbia knows we would have the capacity to strike if necessary.   Dues also pay for the following:

  • Technical support for contract negotiations:
    • Health insurance experts who can take on the University’s consultants in order to pursue the best benefits for the best price
    • Researchers who can help analyze University finances. Legal advice where necessary
    • Experienced negotiators to help achieve our goals in bargaining, both at the bargaining table and in terms of developing an overall contract campaign

  • Support for new organizing campaigns (for example, the organizing staff and legal support for the GWC-UAW campaign is paid for by existing UAW members’ dues money)

  • Political action: 3 percent of dues money goes toward the UAW Community Action Program (CAP), which supports progressive community and political action, including legislative and other policy advocacy on issues that matter to UAW members – for example, the UAW advocates strongly for fair, comprehensive immigration reform and expanded federal support for research funding, among other topics. [NOTE: legally, dues money cannot be used for federal campaign contributions, such as the presidential race—that money comes from members’ voluntary contributions separate from, and in addition to, dues.]
Most of the day-to-day work enforcing the contract and representing our membership is provided by the local union; thus, Local 2110 keeps at least half of the dues.  The rest of the dues is allocated to the International Union (18%) and the Strike and Defense Fund (32%).  Depending on the overall financial health of the Strike and Defense Fund, both the Local and the International Union receive an additional allocation of dues called a “rebate”.


While the vast majority of GWC-UAW organizers are volunteers, the union has hired a few student employees temporarily to work part-time on the campaign at certain points. Building our union requires a lot of resources, especially given the large number of research and teaching assistants at our university. One of the reasons we chose to work with the UAW originally was because of its commitment to utilize a small number of committed organizers from our bargaining unit as part-time staff when the work was heavy, in addition to UAW organizers who have experience in other higher education organizing and bargaining campaigns. If you are ever interested in working for the union, send us an email!
Bargaining committees are elected by the members of the bargaining unit they represent, who also determine the size and composition of the committee. Most memberships balance a need for a committee that is manageable in size and still representative of discipline, job title, etc..

By way of example, the bargaining committee at UConn had six members, who came from Engineering, Sciences, Humanities, Social Sciences and Education. At the University of California, they had two committee members per campus.
First, and most importantly, RAs and TAs share many common interests. For example, health care, family benefits, pay increases, protection against discrimination and sexual harassment, time off for vacation or other reasons, tuition and fee waivers, timely payment for work performed, protection against last-minute loss of appointments, international student rights, and a fair grievance procedure affect RAs and TAs all across campus and are typically central issues in contract negotiations regardless of who is on the bargaining committee.

Second, RAs and TAs will get to vote democratically to approve not only the initial bargaining goals prior to negotiations but also the final contract negotiated by the committee, which encourages democratic accountability.  In the recent University of California postdoc contract campaign, the most recent UAW academic example, a majority of all 6,200 postdocs voted in favor of the bargaining committee’s initial demands, which were based on extensive surveys, and voted to accept the final contract.

In electing our bargaining committee, we plan to  follow the example of other graduate unions in the UAW that have tended to balance a need for a committee that is manageable in size and still representative of discipline, job title, etc.  At NYU and UConn, several meetings were held soon after official union recognition to work out the size of the bargaining committee.  At UConn, they ended up electing six committee members who came from Engineering, Sciences, Humanities, Social Sciences and Education, all the major disciplines on campus.  The contract they negotiated increased stipends; resulted in a new, and significantly improved, healthcare program; improved workload protections; reduced fees; included protections from discrimination; and, included provisions for job security.  When the final agreement was put to a vote, graduate assistants voted 99% in favor, with a majority of all those eligible voting yes.

We will do the same—soon after the election, we will hold meetings to determine the size and composition of the committee.  While we have examples from other universities, we will have to figure out what will work best at Columbia.
For our first contract, those union supporters working in the bargaining unit who have signed union authorization cards, would be eligible to vote in the ratification vote. At a ratification vote for a first contract it is customary to provide employees with the opportunity to sign up.
Local 2110 has union by-laws that lay out how the union is governed. Modifications to the bylaws can be made by membership vote. GWC-UAW as a bargaining unit can also develop its own unit bylaws to address issues that are specific to the unit.
Local 2110 is governed by a Joint Council composed of delegates from every workplace. The number of delegates each workplace has is based on the number of dues-paying members they have. If all 3,000 workers in GWC-UAW joined the union and paid dues, GWC would be entitled to 60 delegates to the Joint Council.