 |
Howard “Howie” Reid 1966-2004 |
[ Site archived 4 Mar. 2004. ]
Harvard’s guards vote to accept a new three-year contract with the University.
Labor & Employee Relations agreed to reasonable increases in compensation levels for all security, museum, and parking workers. But we couldn’t reach an agreement on two issues: (1) where the seventeen remaining security guards would be assigned; and (2) whether management would replace all of Harvard’s union security guards with temp workers.
These items became the subjects of impasse bargaining. Management took the position that it needed a work-rule change so that it could transfer a guard to a different location without considering the guard’s qualifications, work record, or seniority.
We finally negotiated a settlement on August 28, 2003. A number of guards will be assigned to mobile patrol duty at problem areas on campus. The others will be assigned to static security positions at construction sites. They’ll have relatively little contact with community members. But we were able to reject management’s proposed alternative, which would have left the university community totally dependent on unscreened, untrained, underpaid temp workers—from a single agency.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Harvard University Security, Museum and Parking Guards Union represents Harvard University’s security guards, museum attendants, and parking monitors. The HUSPMGU and the Independent Security Union at the Museum of Fine Arts are the only two independent unions of security workers in Massachusetts. HUSPMGU (sometimes pronounced \'husp-mugoo\) was founded by Harvard’s own employees in 1996.
The intensity of employer resistance to union organizing campaigns peaked in the mid 1990’s, and Harvard’s management vigorously resisted our campaign to unite all of Harvard’s security workers into a single bargaining unit. After winning our certification election, we decided to affiliate with the International Brotherhood of Police Officers.
The IBPO was founded by a group of upstart police officers in Rhode Island forty years ago. It’s subsequently grown into the strongest protective-service union in North America. You can find more information about our international at <http://www.ibpo.org/> and at <http://www.nage.org/aboutnage.html>.
We won our first union contract in July 1999.
We’ve succeeded in establishing constructive relationships with management at Art Museums and at Parking Services. (One example of a grievance that was successfully resolved: Art Museums has agreed to restore its former policy of having the attendants in non-air-conditioned buildings wear lightweight cotton uniforms during the summer.)
But management at Police & Security has been refusing to discuss any of our members’ complaints. As a consequence, Labor Relations has informed us that HUSPMGU’s members now have more unresolved grievances outstanding than do all other university employees combined.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
—HUSPMGU, advertisement, Harvard Crimson, 11 July 2003, online ed., <http://www.thecrimson.com/>.
One benefit of being a union guard is that you can resolve a stressful dispute with your supervisor by following an established procedure for grievance resolution. You must consistently obey your supervisor’s directions, but you’re not going to lose your job because of an irreconcilable disagreement.
A nonunion guard doesn’t have this type of job security. A typical “contracted guard” working for a security service vendor on campus can’t afford to develop a real personal commitment to the Harvard community.
And even though a vendor’s guards are working on Harvard’s campus, they must act in their employer’s interests, not Harvard’s.
Prior to July 1999, each House Master could decide to have the College hire either a union guard who would be working for the House or a nonunion guard who would be working for a security service vendor. Masters invariably hired union guards.
A Master customarily expected that the guard would dedicate his career to serving the residents of the House. Students appreciated guards’ contributions to resolving problems and maintaining House spirit.
From The Unofficial Guide to Life at Harvard, 2004 ed., 10: “Perhaps the glue of the [Kirkland] house community is security guard Bob Butler, a living encyclopedia of everything from ’60s pop … to birthdays. Just dare him to guess your sign. And don’t let Bob’s gruff demeanor fool you—he cares a lot more than he lets on.”
But three weeks before the end of the current contract between Harvard and HUSPMGU, management proposed that nonunion guards working for a security service vendor replace the union guards working for Harvard.
We subsequently received letters from twelve of Mather’s staff members—masters, tutors, superintendents, and proctors—who have responsibility for the security of its residents.
An opposing perspective on the union’s history is provided by the Harvard Committee on Employment and Contracting Policies in “Findings of Fact: Uniformed Security Guards, Museum Guards, and Parking Attendants,” section II-E of its Final Report: Lower-Paid Workers at Harvard University, 2001, Atwork@Harvard, 2004, Harvard Univ. Office of Human Resources, <http://www.atwork.harvard.edu/serviceworkers/pdf/hcecp_final_report_12_01.pdf> 36-40.
Stephen McCombe
President,
1996-2003 |
William Duarte
Treasurer |
Daniel Meagher
President |
Howard Reid
Vice President,
1996-2004 |
John Hamilton
Trustee |
Lawrence
Mugisha,
Secretary |
“Strength in Unity”
|
