2/27/2026 bargaining session: With SAV open, Columbia budges on Non-Citizen protections but refuses sanctuary campus
Yesterday, SWC’s bargaining team and member observers met with the university. The abduction of a student researcher on Thursday prompted us to return to our Non-Citizen Student Employee Article. Although the University resisted our proposals in the past, we were hopeful that Columbia administration’s public communications about Thursday’s events signaled a departure from their past position.
While we won certain concessions, we were disappointed by Columbia’s insistence that a sanctuary campus is “inappropriate” for a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA)—even as other universities have such provisions in their own CBA’s. Management claimed that this was “not a compelling reason” for them.
We also delivered all our remaining articles to the University, and the University provided a counterproposal to our Non-Citizen Student Employee Article. You can see all proposals by both sides on our bargaining tracker, and read the live transcription of yesterday’s session.
Here is an outline of the discussion on our Non-citizen Student Employee Article (for an explanation about what the red text means, see here):
Section 14: Sanctuary Campus
We demand that the University join the ranks of dozens of other universities in this country in affirming its status as a sanctuary campus.
Columbia refused to commit to this in principle, stating that the “entire proposal goes over the line.”
Columbia admin even refused to commit to placing signs at the entrances of the University that affirm our legal rights against unlawful search and seizure by ICE and DHS agents. This is recommended by many advocacy groups
Sections 2 & 3: Costs for Travelling Internationally/Working Abroad
We demand that the University make best efforts to arrange for workers to enter/return to the United States if they
Have work authorization but cannot enter/return to the US, or
Lose work authorization and must flee the US.
We demand that the University should also make accommodations to ensure that the worker can complete their duties from abroad, if necessary.
Columbia agreed to hold a PhD student employee’s position open for 60 days in order for the worker to obtain work authorization, but seemed resistant to extending that time window.
Columbia agreed to provide financial support for “unanticipated costs” related to immigration status, but would not cover other costs that uniquely burden international student workers at a time when visa renewals requirements are becoming increasingly frequent and stringent.
Section 1: Attorney on Retainer
We demand that Columbia retain an immigration attorney to provide non-citizen student workers with consultation and representation free of charge.
They countered by offering to create a list of attorneys for immigration issues—something that ISSO already does. The university refuses to commit to covering the cost.
Section 10: Fees Related to Work Authorization.
We demand that the University reimburse student workers for fees associated with work authorization and entry into this country.
The University countered that such reimbursement is a student issue and therefore irrelevant, despite the fact that companies routinely provide such financial assistance to employees.
Here is what some of the member observers had to say about the session:
In light of another student being abducted by ICE, I appreciated the bargaining team's swift response in bringing strong articles for non-citizen student safety. … The university continues to say we cannot bargain over terms that already exist in other student worker contracts. Instead of bargaining in good faith, they waste time hiding behind empty legal language.
– PhD worker in GSAS Natural Science
Even though we made a lot of progress today, I was surprised by the contempt I felt from the university’s side, particularly when they were unprepared to answer a question. At one point when our side recounted one of their side’s words to him, he had an outburst where he accused us of having a prohibited recording device. It’s those kinds of unnecessary outbursts that I find counterproductive.
–PhD worker in GSAS Humanities
Mobilization by the campus community and our allies in the city have ensured the safe return of our peer. It also put the necessary pressure on Columbia to show, for the first time, a willingness to move towards our position since the abductions in March 2025.
Only sustained pressure can help us win the essential protections we need. The Student Workers of Columbia is committed to continuing to hold the university accountable.
Our fight continues.