Issues arise over hiring non-union janitors

By David Drucker Daily Bruin Contributor

The Los Angeles janitor pay-raise debate reached Westwood
Village last week when picketing workers brought traffic at the
intersection of Westwood and Wilshire Boulevards to a
standstill.

But on campus, the issue is that the Anderson School doesn’t use
the unionized Facilities Management Services ­ instead bidding
out janitorial services to the non-union Diamond Contract
Services.

"Both times the contract became available, there was a bidding
process," said Anderson School spokeswoman Lynn Lipinski. "The
second time, the union company failed to submit a bid, so they
weren’t even an option for us."

When the Anderson School moved from Public Policy to its new
location in 1995, UCLA’s Facilities Management was underbid by
Pasadena-based DCS, Lipinski added. Prior to 1995, the school used
Facilities Management for its janitorial services.

But according to Bob Battle of the American Federation of State,
County and Municipal Employees, Local 3299 ­ the union that
represents UCLA’s unionized custodians ­ the situation at the
Anderson School is emblematic of an institution-wide trend to
replace union employees.

"They’re trying to get rid of long-term employees because it’s
cheaper for the university," Battle said. "The big problem for us
is the fact that they’re denying career university employees
jobs."

Lipinski confirmed that DCS was the lowest bidder, but added,
"It’s my understanding that Facilities Management didn’t want the
work because of the late hours and the specific operations
required."

Regardless of the specific arguments, the L.A. labor
controversy, now in its third week, has expanded into philosophical
issues of fairness. Derek Smith, owner of DCS, took issue with the
idea that his employees are underpaid.

"It’s not right to compare what the private sector pays to what
the university pays," said Smith. "If they want to pay more than
the going rate, there’s nothing we can do about that."

"Our personnel who work at the Anderson School receive full
health benefits of which we pick up 100 percent of the tab," he
added.

Smith went on to say that a recent L.A. Weekly article
inaccurately reported his employees’ compensation at $5.75 to $8.00
per hour

According to Smith, they start at $6.00 per hour and top out at
$8.00 plus.

Alfred E. Osborne Jr., associate professor of business economics
at Anderson, who specializes in entrepreneurial studies said the
issue of "fairness" is irrelevant.

"Any employer who pays more than what the market will bear is
giving away value," said Osborne. "The market tells you what a job
is worth."

Osborne also pointed out that recent immigrants, who are among
the statistical leaders in new small business start- ups, will be
ultimately hurt the most by artificial wage increases.

"Starting small businesses is an easy way to get assimilated
into the economy," Osborne said. "If you raise costs, it’s harder
for immigrants to move into the entrepreneurial sector."

Osborne also questioned the fairness of locking non-union
employees out of jobs by restricting university contracts to union
companies.

But Battle explained that the AFSCME is concerned for non- union
workers as well.

"The union is concerned about everybody," Battle said. "We want
everyone to be paid a living wage and receive the benefits they
need to take care of their families."

"Non-union companies are exploiting their workers’ situations by
paying them less," he added.

Smith, whose company also has contracts with California State
University Long Beach, CSU Mission Beach and Cal Poly Pomona,
disagreed.

"I started this company in 1992 by investing most of my personal
savings, and took two and a half years before I was able to pay
myself a salary," he said.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *