top
US
US
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Yale’s hospital: Poster child for union-busting

by PWW (reposted)
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — Yale-New Haven Hospital (YNHH) is 650 miles from the notorious anti-worker Smithfield Foods livestock processing factory in Tar Heel, N.C. On Smithfield’s killing floors and in New Haven’s healing wards, the workers have something in common. Their employers use illegal, anti-democratic union-busting tactics to deny a voice on the job.
In December 2006, the YNHH administration outraged workers, elected officials, clergy, the media and the entire community when they defied a conduct agreement and undermined a union election they were certain to lose. The hospital became the new poster child for why the Employee Free Choice Act (HR 800) is a top priority in the 110th Congress.


The case history

In 1973, the hospital’s 140 food service workers made history when they won union representation with New England Health Care Employees Union District 1199. For 34 years the dietary workers have fought hard to maintain modest wage and benefit increases, despite the fact that the remaining 1,800 service, maintenance and clerical workers at the hospital are unorganized.

“If it wasn’t for the food service workers all these years actively organizing, none of the wage increases or benefits would exist. Yale-New Haven Hospital would be the Wal-Mart of health care,” says Ray Milici, a chef with 45 years seniority who helped lead the original organizing drive.

When 2,600 clerical and technical workers at Yale University formed Local 34 of the Hotel and Restaurant Employees union, HERE, and won a first union contract in 1984, joining 1,500 service and maintenance workers already organized in Local 35 HERE, hopes were high that the hospital workers would be next to win the right to a union.

Although they are legally separate, YNHH and Yale University have interlocking directorates and huge endowments. They are notoriously anti-union. Employees of Yale University at the medical school who are members of Local 34 often work side by side with employees of YNHH, doing the same job for better wages and benefits won in their union contract.

But, without the strength of a fully organized hospital, the ability of both the hospital’s dietary and the university’s union workers to win big improvements is limited.

Many hospital workers, unable to afford health care for themselves, hold down two or more jobs to make ends meet. Hospital worker Minnie DaCosta says she wants a union because she has had to rely on HUSKY, the state-funded health plan, to cover her children.

Nine years ago, Locals 34 and 35 joined with 1199 to form the Federation of Hospital and University Employees. By pooling resources, the unions hoped to organize the rest of the hospital.


Bosses create atmosphere of fear

YNHH immediately began utilizing all their resources to create an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. While claiming that good conditions at the hospital do not warrant the need for a union, they illegally arrested workers who distributed union literature to co-workers on their own time and barred union organizers from the public areas of the hospital.

The long organizing drive is a showcase of the uneven playing field. Management has had access to all of the workers, all of the time. When the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) found that management violated the law, there was no substantial penalty. Pro-union workers, on the other hand, faced discipline or loss of job if they tried to talk to their co-workers about the union.

In 2002, nearly 1,200 hospital workers courageously signed an appeal for card-check neutrality. They wanted the hospital to recognize the union if a majority of workers signed union cards. Around the country, when employers have agreed to card-check neutrality, workers have readily chosen to join unions and achieved significant gains.

The hospital insisted instead on a NLRB election process, including the right to challenge the results if the majority were to vote for the union. Employer challenges often take years to settle, during which time workers’ rights are denied.


Community and union join together

The surrounding New Haven community, majority African American and Latino, was hurting from the anti-worker policies of the city’s largest employer. As industrial jobs left town, Yale’s discriminatory hiring practices and aggressive expansion into working-class neighborhoods were destroying affordable housing, creating traffic and parking problems and degrading the environment. The needs of the community became closely intertwined with the status of workers’ rights at Yale.

A movement for a social contract emerged, with labor, clergy and grassroots leadership. The Connecticut Center for a New Economy and Community Organized for Responsible Development (CORD) issued studies, organized meetings and conferences and went door to door urging people to become involved. So much support was built up that the 30-member Board of Aldermen unanimously passed a Community Benefit Agreement resolution, requiring any large new development in the city to have neighborhood input.

When the hospital announced plans to build a $430 million cancer center, CORD insisted that in order to get zoning approval the hospital must agree to the Community Benefit Agreement covering card-check neutrality, hiring and training of workers who live in New Haven, and neighborhood needs, including youth services and health care.

The hospital tried to ignore CORD, but after months of demonstrations, stormy hearings and public pressure, a compromise was reached. The hospital agreed to a hybrid election process conducted by the NLRB with an independent arbitrator replacing the normal lengthy appeals process.

A code of conduct was signed which allowed union organizers access to non-work areas in the hospital and prohibited the administration from harassment and captive audience meetings. The hospital also agreed to community demands for jobs, training and neighborhood programs.

More
http://pww.org/article/articleview/10623/1/360/
Add Your Comments
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$225.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network