Duke University Clashes with Local Union

The problem arose when a $2 million budget deficit in Duke Dining Services became apparent and administrators blamed the lack of revenue at university contracted Bon Appetit dining locales. Duke's dining establishments are highly competitive, as restaurants vie for the $3,000+ worth of "food points" that each student is granted every year. The wide variety of separate non-contracted dining establishments on campus (including McDonald's and Panda Express), which are not university operated, make it difficult for cafeteria-style dining halls like Bon Appetit to compete for points. When administrators began proposing controversial solutions to resolve the deficit (like forcing students to spend larger portions of their dining plans on Bon Appetit restaurants) unhappy students began examining how to improve dining and fix the budget at the same time.

One such student, Mike Lefevre, a member of Duke Student Government, researched the labor contracts that Bon Appetit has with Local 77 and wrote a memo on the subject last year. He found that rules were often lenient, due to the strength of the union during negotiations with the university. For example, employees that show up to an 8-hour shift up to 3 hours and 59 minutes late are only considered "tardy". Workers can also leave their 8-hour shifts after working 4 hours and 1 minute without being marked "absent." Warnings are given out after 16 tardies or early departures and employees are dismissed on the 18th offense.

While disturbing, late policies are not the biggest dining concern for students. Though reflective of only the worst horror stories, student comments on the annual dining survey were sometimes shocking, describing rude workers and unsanitary practices. While most employees are friendly and helpful, there are undeniable concerns with others. The university acknowledged a problem when it decided to install 12 surveillance cameras in one Bon Appetit dining hall in order to monitor employee behavior.

Students responded last semester with columns and letters in Duke's independent daily, The Chronicle, citing a need to re-examine the quality of Local 77 workers and consider revamping their "bloated contracts."

I, for one, certainly do take campus dining issues seriously. After all, I'll be eating campus food until the day I graduate. But there is a much larger scope to consider in the case of employing Local 77 workers. Every school knows how important it is to maintain good town-gown relations, and Duke certainly has had its fair share of clashes, what with all the tension stirred up after the false 2006 rape allegations. An outright end to the next negotiations with Local 77 in 2011 would probably benefit neither Duke nor Durham.

But there, certainties regarding possible outcomes end. A strong-handed approach by the university would likely stir up anger from the community, perhaps leading to strikes or other protests. And, confronting a union is easier said than done; unions are renowned for their ironclad defenses, a strength when facing abusive employers.

At the same time, is it right for workers to take advantage of lenient labor contracts? Should students be forced to endure ostentatious hostility from dining employees, especially when, by all measures, Duke treats its employees well?

Issues with labor unions on campus are not unique to Duke. Thousands of union workers went on strike during freshmen move-in at Yale in 2003 over disagreements regarding wages and other benefits. The strike lasted for weeks, slowing down everything from dining services to everyday hospital business, even forcing professors to hold classes off campus for some time. Eventually, the university and union agreed to an eight-year contract with better pension benefits for nearly 4000 employees, but not without a flurry of nationwide media coverage.

A similar strike occurred in the summer of 2008 at the University of California school system. This five-day strike, organized by AFSCME Local 3299, included nearly 8,500 service workers and eventually resulted in a five-year contract and $64 million package of wage hikes. Defying a court order declaring the strike illegal, employees stretched their picketing efforts across ten UC campuses and five medical centers. Good news for UC employees, however, meant even more budget woes for the state of California, which is now approaching a $20 billion budget deficit.

Georgia Tech bus drivers were recently faced with a change in transportation when contracts shifted to Groome Transportation, a company that labor activists accuse of being union-busting. Such allegations were made after approximately 40 unionized bus drivers were replaced by non-unionized drivers in December of last year. Victor Groome, CEO of Groome Transportation, says it was because the unionized bus drivers all applied too late to be rehired. The local bus driver union, Teamsters Local 728, counters that its members were not informed that the hiring process had begun. Meanwhile, Teamsters 728 have held rallies with support from students this month and have filed a legal complaint against Groome, partly hoping that Georgia Tech administrators will demonstrate support for the union. The situation is still unresolved.

Run-ins of this sort will only become more prevalent as colleges face increased recessionary budget cuts.

This is not the first time Local 77 has conflicted with Duke. Four days after Dr. Martin Luther King was assassinated in 1968, a sit-in was organized in front of the Duke Chapel for Local 77 workers. Though students, faculty and workers alike all campaigned for higher wages, the university prevailed and Local 77 was crushed for years to come. A similar outcome for today's battle would be devastating for Duke's labor union, and could result in another unwanted hit to the school's image.

Worst-case scenario for the university, then? Duke adjusts its labor contracts with Local 77 to appease student uproar against lax worker habits. Resilient labor unionists then strike for days on end with some groups of students and faculty members at their backs. Other students grow increasingly frustrated with lack of housekeeping and dining services, while members of the Durham community rally behind Local 77. Because the 2006 rape allegations have not been completely forgotten, some aspect of this dilemma makes it onto the national news circuit. Eventually the university gives in to the union, but not without damaging labor relations for years on end and going through a rehash of events that the university is desperate to move past.

Duke's dining issues are currently being negotiated by students and the administration, but will not likely be resolved until that $2 million deficit has disappeared. The question now is who this burden will fall upon: students or employees?