Medical School workers ratify contract

Last week, the laborers of Columbia University Medical Center (CUMC) faced a simple choice: yes or no.

And, after a full season of heated negotiations, members of the local union voted overwhelmingly “yes” last Thursday to ratify the new contract for workers at Columbia’s medical school.
This ratification came after six months of contentious negotiations—beginning in March when the previous contract expired—between administrators and union representatives from the Local 1199 Service Employees International Union.

According to Victor Rivera, president of the Supporting Staff Association for 1199, out of the 324 union members that came out to vote, 300 voted in favor of ratifying the contract, and 16 said no. The remaining votes were cast as blank ballots due to logistical discrepancies in membership, and would have been investigated further if it was too close to call.

Plus, the 324 voters represented over one third of the membership, which is unusually high for a ratification vote, he said.

The Medical Center said in a statement released to Spectator on Tuesday, “The University is pleased with the new four-year collective bargaining agreement between Columbia and 1199/SSA, and that the union membership ratified it last week.”

Though CUMC spokespeople have declined to comment on any specifics of the negotiation, representatives of the laborers said that at the start of the process, they were very concerned about some of the administration’s requests in areas of health care, tuition exemption, childcare subsidies, job security, and retirement and medical benefits. But according to Rivera and Bennet Battista, an organizer for the workers, the negotiators left the table two weeks ago with a 24-page agreement that was very favorable for the workers in most areas, notably health care—it secured the fully subsidized plan that was in danger of being dropped earlier in the summer.

In an interview on Monday, Rivera expressed great relief that last week’s ratification marked the end of the drawn-out negotiation process, at least until the new agreement expires in March of 2013. “I’ve learned throughout the years that every negotiation is unique and different,” he said of the strain the recession has put on this year’s process. “That caused a bigger challenge for us. Thank god for the strength of the members,” he said, adding that most were pleased with the document when it was released to the members on Oct. 1.

For the last two weeks, union committees and individual members have been reviewing the agreement and expressing concerns, Rivera said, adding that most only needed clarifications and were on board once they understood the details of the document. “Before they vote, they have to be educated,” Battista said in interview last week before the ratification.

And many workers agreed that, once they reviewed the document, they were quite pleased. “I think that the University also recognizes that we are in tough economic times,” Erica Yarborough, a clerk at the School of Public Health, said. “We went through a lot of extremes to come to some sort of agreement.” She added, “In the end, it seems like we forged a new relationship with the University.”

Ydanis Rodriguez, a candidate for City Council in Washington Heights who came out to support the union in protests in August, said that he was happy an agreement was reached and hopes this new contract will protect the workers’ rights. “Columbia is an institution, and the institution has power over the community. But the workers are an important component,” he noted.

Monique Dols, an administrative aide, said she was very pleased, though it was a bittersweet victory because of an unfavorable agreement on tuition exemption. According to Rivera, because they were successful in so many areas, they did have to make minor concessions in the tuition exemption benefit—a perk of the job—to help the University meet its financial needs. “I think that will really affect the younger workers a lot,” Dols said.

“Overall, I am happy with it,” she said. “We sent Columbia a strong message,” referring to the protests meant to pressure the administration over the summer, adding, “I knew that the members of the union had it in us to force Columbia’s hand.”