'Blue flu' prompts threat from Administration

By Sheela V. Pai

JULIA TERNAN/YH Signs across campus serve as a constant reminder of the frustration of Yale police officers.

Twenty officers--approximately 95 percent of those scheduled to work--called in sick on Sat., Feb. 14. University spokesman Tom Conroy said the Administration "believes the officers did not report to work as scheduled as a concerted job action to withhold services from the University." The move forced the labor relations department to find non-union police supervisors to replace the officers who did not show up.

The Administration responded to the officers' bold step with a statement of their own on Wed., Feb. 18. Yale announced that officers who failed to show up for their shifts on Sat., Feb. 14 and were unable to submit documentation of their illness would not receive pay for that day. Conroy added, "Officers were advised that any future participation in similar activity may subject them to disciplinary action, which could include termination." According to YPBA Treasurer Christopher Morganti, the union has not responded to this announcement and is still consulting its attorney.

Morganti added that although the "blue flu" was not a union-organized action, it reflects the officers' anger with the lack of progress in negotiations. "In my opinion, [the cause of the job action] was frustration due to the length of time we have been negotiating a contract," he said. "When the officers come to work, it hits them in the face every day that they still don't have the benefits they deserve."

Yale police officers have been working almost two years without a contract due to disagreements with the University over pensions, disability, the length of contracts, and the no strike/no lockout clause, as well as the union's demand for an employee bill of rights. Union leaders are held responsible if they organize job actions under the no strike/no lockout clause.

The job action is part of a series of protests by Yale police officers over the past two years. In November, the YPBA submitted a grievance to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) claiming that union officials were denied leave to attend a rally. A grievance submitted in January opposing the University's contract clause that holds union officials responsible for strikes was withdrawn last week for unknown reasons. New Haven area NLRB attorney Jonathan Kreisberg said the NLRB hopes to rule on the merit of the remaining complaint within four months.

If the grievance is found to have merit, a hearing will probably be held. According to Kreisberg, it would not be likely to directly affect negotiations. "[The grievance] might have an impact if Yale has bargained in bad faith; they might have to take some action to remedy their bargaining," he said. However, if it didn't interfere with bargaining, "the violation would stand separate from the bargaining and it would be resolved in independent negotiations."

Conroy said the Administration's position will not change in response to Saturday's action. "The fact that the job action occurred will not make the University more or less eager to reach a settlement, nor will it coerce the University to change its offer or accept a proposal that it otherwise would not have adopted," he said.

Morganti, who was unsure about the eventual possibility of a strike, said he hopes to come to an agreement before the officer morale completely deteriorates. "When officers haven't had a raise for three years, it brings down morale...there is a good relationship with [officers and their supervisors] normally, but now there is a strain without a contract." 

Both sides agreed that the details of the Thursday negotiation meeting would not be released. However, Morganti said going into the meeting that although he did not have high hopes for an agreement, he still had a positive attitude. "I haven't [given the officers] any great expectations for tomorrow's meeting," he said, "because agreements don't happen quickly. If not at this meeting, it's the next."

Back to News...