Hello OFNHP family,
I know many members are feeling anxious about the lack of information coming out of national bargaining.
Here’s the reality: we can’t ratify our local agreement until the National Agreement issues are resolved. The National Agreement lives as an appendix to our local contracts. Until those national issues are settled, there is no complete agreement to vote on.
I’m reluctant to make predictions in a moment like this. There’s too much uncertainty and too little information about what is happening at other local tables. But I hope we’ll have more clarity in the next few days regarding the timeline and decision points for our contracts.
As the saying goes, never make predictions—especially about the future.
In the meantime, I want to make sure every member is informed and prepared before we face any decisions about how to move forward.
If you have any questions, as always, feel free to email itsmyunion@ofnhp.org. Your feedback matters. We have been surveying our members about what types of actions they are willing to take, so check your email, including the junk folder, for the survey and reach out if you have not received it.
Kaiser says they want to move the National Agreement into local bargaining. What does that actually mean?
Let’s define terms clearly.
The National Agreement is the collective bargaining agreement between KP and the Alliance unions, including OFNHP. It is incorporated into our local agreements as an appendix.
National bargaining is the process where KP bargains with the Alliance unions collectively, rather than bargaining with each union separately.
KP is not proposing to end the National Agreement itself. However, they are proposing to end national bargaining as it exists today.
Under KP’s proposal:
- The 2021 National Agreement would remain in our local contracts.
- Tentative agreements already reached at the national table would be added.
- Any new agreements on outstanding issues—including retro pay, ATBs, contract alignment, and potential changes to the Performance Sharing Program (PSP)—would be negotiated at the local level and incorporated into local agreements.
To be clear: we have not reached agreement on any of those outstanding issues. We have stood firm on full retro and contract alignment for all OFNHP contracts.
Also to be clear: ending national bargaining does not automatically eliminate the benefits contained in the National Agreement. The question is about process and leverage—not whether the contract disappears overnight or lose any of the benefits in it.
What is the Alliance’s position?
As an Alliance, we believe that the fastest pathway to reaching a global settlement is through the national bargaining process.
If national bargaining process ends, KP would have to:
- Integrate the National Agreement terms into local contracts, and
- Resolve all outstanding issues at 53 local tables—including our six OFNHP units.
That is not a streamlined process. It’s a recipe for chaos and further delay.
Big questions remain about KP’s proposal. For example:
- If National Agreement terms are bargained locally, does the national dispute resolution process still apply? (That’s the enforcement mechanism of National Agreement terms.)
- Or would enforcement fall under each local grievance procedure?
Right now, we don’t have clear answers.
There are also economic implications to moving to local bargaining for some of our bargaining units. KP is proposing 21.5% in ATBs covering October 2025 through September 2029 (four years).
But our tech and dental hygienist contracts, if extended four more years, would run through October 2030. That would effectively stretch 21.5% over five years for those units—instead of four.
A scenario where our tech and dental hygienist members take less is unacceptable to OFNHP. We do not leave units behind. When we reached agreements on our local contracts, your bargaining unit leadership was clear that our agreements needed to be inclusive. That commitment has not, and will not, change.
Does ending national bargaining undermine the solidarity of Alliance unions?
KP cannot dictate whether unions stand together. That decision belongs to us. And I continue to meet, almost daily, with the Alliance Economic subgroup.
OFNHP is unequivocally committed to solidarity with our Alliance siblings whether national bargaining works like it does now or takes some other form of coordination.
This is about our values, but it’s also about our interests. We also need to be clear-eyed about KP’s break with many of the past practices that have defined it as labor and worker friendly. KP has:
- Pushed misleading public narratives,
- Absorbed financial losses to punish unions, and
- Used unfounded legal tactics to gain leverage.
They have even filed a lawsuit against all Alliance unions in an attempt to exit national bargaining. That lawsuit is proof of both KP’s acknowledgement that exiting national bargaining at this stage is unlawful and the extremes to which they will go to get what they want.
Whatever the structure of the National Agreement, nothing will stop us from working with Alliance unions heading into 2029.
Let’s be clear: if KP wants excellence, they have to invest in the people who make it possible. We serve the patients—not the C-suite.
Why haven’t we gone on strike in solidarity with UNAC/UHCP?
This is a hard question. I’ve wrestled with it too.
In December, members told us clearly: the issues they were prepared to strike over were tied to our local agreements. On December 23, we reached tentative agreements on all six local contracts. Those agreements delivered historic gains in pay and working conditions.
Striking in January would have meant striking over the National Agreement issues.
When UNAC/UHCP struck, all 15 of their local agreements were open. Our situation was different.
Striking alongside them would have meant tying the length and outcome of our strike to issues over which OFNHP had no control. If Alliance unions had been striking over the same issues at the same time, the calculus would have been different. That said, we respect UNAC/UHCP’s decision to do what is best for their members and support striking workers.
We will continue supporting UNAC/UHCP and the Alliance by applying pressure through collective actions, including informational pickets, Red Up Tuesdays, button and sticker actions, leafletting, and engagement with community and elected leaders.
A strike for OFNHP is never off the table. We will continue to assess the situation day by day, hour by hour, to determine which actions and levers to deploy as the situation evolves.
What is happening with local contracts?
Local Bargaining Unit Leaders are actively engaged in “redlining.” Redlining is the process in which the parties review tentative agreements and concepts reached at the bargaining table and incorporate them into the appropriate sections of the contract. This phase also includes contract clean-up work, such as formatting and pagination.
Each Bargaining Unit is progressing at a different pace with their management counterparts. Once this work is completed, Bargaining Unit Leaders will share the updated documents and resume town halls, tabling, rounding, etc. to ensure you have opportunities to ask questions.
Click Here for All Bargaining Updates
What should members expect going forward?
Your leadership is committed to providing you with clear information. We will continue to get your feedback through surveys, townhalls, and one-on-one conversations to make the best possible decisions for our union as a whole.
We will continue applying pressure until we have a fair contract that we can stand behind.
Stay ready, stay strong, and stay engaged.
Join OFNHP members at Westside Medical Center informational picket this Thursday Feb 19th. RSVP here.
In solidarity,
Sarina Roher, RN
OFNHP President