In one of several early shots fired in what's looking like a nasty and drawn-out labor conflict, Yale filed an unfair labor practice complaint Thursday against Locals 34/35 with the Hartford division of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
According to Gary Fryer, director of public affairs for Yale, the complaint alleges that the Locals have engaged in illegal activities by improperly intimidating and coercing merchants into not participating in Yale University Dining Halls' flex dollar meal-plan option. The NLRB's decision may not be known for at least a week, but could eventually result in legal action ranging from a court injunction against the unions to further adjudication at the federal level.
The alleged incidents of intimidation and coercion have occurred several times over the past two weeks, as crowds of union members met at restaurants to try to convince them not to participate in the program. Bobby Proto, president of Local 35, said, "I can assure you that there were no threats. We wanted to make sure the restaurants knew all the facts, that the Administration is using the flex dollars as a negotiating tool [against the union]. We went around with workers, customers of these restaurants who are union members....We've tried to give a more clear picture of what the flex dollars mean to the bargaining units."
"The Administration believes that these activities are illegal under the National Labor Relations Act, which states that unions cannot engage in a secondary boycott," Fryer said. A secondary boycott is the illegal practice of employees, who, out of grievances with their employer, apply pressure on a neutral third party in order to influence their employer.
Local 35 is not worried. "Filing these claims is easy; it's substantially more difficult to verify them," Michael Boyle, PC '79, chief labor negotiator for Locals 34/35, said. "The University has little chance of prevailing." In fact, the union sees the allegations as little more than a publicity effort, without any real substance behind them. "It's another lame attempt to paint the unions as the enemy of the undergraduate," Proto said. Boyle describedthe filing with the NLRB as a "media sideshow."
"The amount of press it will generate in student publications will be a good stalling tactic," he added.
Because of these efforts, Au Bon Pain may well withdraw from the flex dollar plan. "We're concerned about the negative publicity from the unions," Patrick Hudgin, Au Bon Pain's district manager, said. "We're waiting for the decision from our corporate attorneys." Dakota J's, Bangkok Gardens, and Broadway Pizza - which has experienced problems with its flex dollar computer system - are currently participating in the plan.
One of the union's primary objections to the flex dollar plan is that it is, in Boyle's words, "a tired attempt to garner student support without addressing the real problems of the Yale dining halls."
Boyle claims that Yale plans to use the profits from the flex dollar plan and the savings from the proposed "deep-chill plan" to renovate the dining halls. Proto accented the need for stronger leadership and management within the system: "The dining halls need change, they need to be led by someone who's creative, someone with food-service experience."
The NLRB filing follows hard on the heels of a summer of strained negotiations between unions and management. When students first heard about new meal-plan options this past spring, there was no mention that flex dollars could be used at local restaurants; under the initial proposal, on-campus locations like the Durfee Sweet Shoppe and Machine City's vending machines were to accept the flex dollars. According to both sides, the Administration proposed the revised and expanded flex dollar plan after talks with the unions broke down in July.
According to Boyle, Local 35 met with the Administration to discuss the creation of other "cash outlets" which would expand students' eating options within Yale. For example, potential projects included upscaling Durfee's, possibly establishing another location elsewhere on campus, placing additional vending machines in Machine City, and even opening Lord's Cafeteria in Commons to undergraduates.
Apparently, the Administration initially agreed to go along with the union's suggestions, but in return demanded a series of contractual concessions. Associate Vice President for Administration Peter Vallone said that the renovations, with an estimated price tag of over $700,000, were simply too expensive. "We could not do it...and not have even more of a money-losing operation," he said.
The University and unions tried to negotiate on wages and benefits in order to offset the high expenses, but those talks proved fruitless, leading the administrators to look elsewhere.
Proto claims that the University wanted to cut the wages of student dining hall workers, restructure the pay schedule for regular staff, and institute a lower starting wage for new hires.
Most significantly, the University wanted to eliminate the year-round employment dining hall workers currently enjoy, making them seasonal employees instead, he said. Although school is in only session for eight months of the year, Yale employs dining-hall workers in other capacities over the summer, such as painters or physical plant and maintenance staff.
"The average pay in the dining halls doesn't let you live a life of luxury in New Haven County," Proto said in response to the proposed wage changes. He said that he found the Administration's proposal "very surprising" when he sat down at the negotiating table to discuss matters such as renovating Durfee's. He said that when the union refused to consider the Administration's demands, "They punished us by going outside the dining hall system" - that is, by expanding the flex dollar plan to include local restaurants.
Fryer said, however, "The unions are under the impression that [the flex dollar plan] will harm them and that they will lose jobs. On the contrary, the flex plan, by encouraging students to stay on-campus, will help union workers."
It seems that while the flex plan itself does not directly hurt union workers, the University instituted it in response to labor conflicts. It is therefore interpreted by the unions as a program antithetical to their interests.
This week's "meetings" of gangs of union members at the participating restaurants, and the University's response of complaining to the NLRB illustrate how both Yale undergraduates and even New Haven businesses will be caught up in labor disputes in the months to come.
Proto declined to hypothesize whether this week's events will typify what will transpire as January's contract deadline draws near, but he promised that, "It's gonna be an interesting fall."
Emily Gold contributed to this article.
Copyright 1995, The Yale Herald, Inc. All rights reserved.
This article may be freely distributed electronically, provided it is distributed in its entirety and includes this notice, but may not be reprinted without the express written permission of The Yale Herald, Inc. Write to herald@yale.edu for additional details.