Labor Rights Denied: Clark UNITE!'s dialogue with Clark U. Administration

The Clark administration is a key point of leverage for Clark UNITE! - students, alumni, and staff who are organizing in solidarity with food service workers considering the option of unionization under the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 615. The administration answers to students, alumni, and staff who are all stakeholders in this university, as well as dictates the terms of its contract with Sodexo, with whom food services are subcontracted out to. Clark's administration can amend the current contract with Sodexo, threaten Sodexo with contract non-renewal, and demand that labor rights be respected and enforced.

Clark UNITE! has attempted to engage the administration in dialogue about the urgency of labor rights on our Clark campus, only to have those concerns fall on deaf ears. On January 29^th, Clark UNITE! first sent a letter to the administration after hearing about a coercive and deceptive anti-union meeting. That letter is available on our blog.

That anti-union meeting was led by three Sodexo higher-ups from Sodexo corporate. At that meeting two Unfair Labor Practices (ULPs) were committed, that are currently being processed by National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) courts established by the 1935 National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The first ULP was telling employees that once they signed union petitions they were “signing themselves away.” The second ULP was telling employees that after they negotiated for a union that they would be making less money than before because of union dues. When unionization is negotiated with an employer, employees often negotiate for a pay raise as well. Why would anyone negotiate a contract in which they were making less money? These are two examples of false information that are protected against by law, keep in mind a law that was written in 1935 and does not reflect a shift towards a service economy. That anti-union meeting is part of a larger campaign of intimidating workers, such as reprimanding individuals, supposedly for excessive bathroom breaks, when employees are vocal about being pro-union.

The administration did not respond to Clark UNITE! until February 11^th, two weeks later. After a very public rally in support of worker’s rights on February 28^th, the administration agreed to meet with Clark UNITE! spokespeople to hear our demands. Several UNITE!-ers met with Executive Vice President James Collins, President John Bassett, and Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs David Angel. At that meeting on March 4^th administration was ostensibly receptive to our concerns and made a verbal commitment to labor rights and to a process of adopting a Labor Code of Conduct. Clark UNITE! was promised a prompt response, but after several more weeks without hearing anything, Clark UNITE! became increasingly concerned that labor issues would not be resolved before the end of the semester. Clark UNITE! asked administration for a second meeting by presenting them with our petition of over 1,000 Clark students and alumni, over 40 student groups, and 78 faculty members. That second meeting was to go over some of the language in our proposed Labor Code of Conduct, as the Clark administration requested, and to go over the response the administration was going to take to the pressing issue. At our second meeting on March 24th, again with with Bassett, Angel, and Collins, the administration reneged on their previous commitment to labor rights, reneged on their responsibility to all stakeholders of this university, and reneged on Clark's motto of "Challenge Convention, Change Our World."

Bassett, Angel, and Collins rejected all four of our demands. Those demands, which appeared on our petition, are again:

1) Clark University will immediately enforce a campus-wide policy of neutrality concerning the process of unionization to be followed by all of its subcontractors. This includes the right to recall for current employees, guaranteeing them preferential rehire whenever classes resume.

2) Clark University will tangibly support the process of unionization in the most expedient and fair manner for all university and subcontracted employees that desire union representation.

3) Clark University will enact Clark Unite!'s proposed Labor Code of Conduct for Clark University in a timely manner through the appropriate administrative channels.

4) No resources controlled by Clark University, financial or otherwise, will go towards supporting anti-union activities.

Nearly eight weeks later after being notified of the intimidation of labor at Clark, and leading Clark UNITE! to believe that they would take action, the administration claimed that neutrality would "limit Sodexo's right to free speech." They felt there was no need for preferential rehire because there have not been any problems yet (before the issue of unionization could be a point of discrimination). Administration felt it was more important to foster a culture of "trust" and "respect" with Sodexo management. And committed to only investigating individual cases when they occur, repeatedly saying "We'll cross that bridge when we get to it."

The only culture being fostered at Clark University is a culture of rampant classism. One worker was told by Sodexo management in front of Clark students, that if that employee wanted a better wage she should "go to college and get a better job." That is an example of why, though employees say wages and benefits are not adequate, that employees seeking unionization say what they want most is respect in the workplace. Clark Administration has expressed the same classism with their disregard for labor rights and denial of workers' agency.

Our demands must be met by the end of the semester. Food service employees are laid-off during months in which classes are not in session. Normally employees are invited back to work when classes resume, however pro-union employees are already having their hours cut while Sodexo is hiring new employees. Losing hours has huge consequences when you are providing for your family. It can be expected based on this behavior that Sodexo may not rehire employees who are practicing their right to organize by being vocally pro-union unless there is policy, and an enforcement thereof, by the Clark administration.

Here is a very real opportunity in which Clark can "change our world" by providing dignified employment. And administration is being antagonistic towards it.