Campus, News

BU service workers ratify tentative contract with BU management

Service workers at Boston University ratified their contract with the university Thursday. MIA CATHELL/ DAILY FREE PRESS STAFF

A four-year contract between 740 Boston University service workers and BU management was ratified Thursday.

Workers had previously voted to authorize a strike if negotiations were not resolved by midnight on Oct. 31, but a strike was avoided when the university and workers’ bargaining committee came to an agreement shortly after the deadline.

Custodians, groundsworkers, tradesmen and maintenance staff voted for ratification during the day in Agganis Arena, said Roxana Rivera, vice president of 32BJ Service Employees International Union, which represents the BU service workers.

The decision was approved by “an overwhelming majority of voting members,” according to the official 32BJ SEIU press release.

The actual count could not be disclosed, Rivera said.

The new agreement protects the workers’ current wages and benefits, Rivera said, and service workers were able to push back against the university’s attempts to institute unpopular practices such as the creation of a lower-paid custodial position.

“Our overall goal was to keep BU jobs good jobs, because they are good jobs” Rivera said. “We want to make sure that they are maintained at that level, as BU has prospered in the last years.”

The agreement covered key issues such as health care benefits, a 10.25 percent wage increase and safety concerns, according to the press release.

The bargaining committee unanimously recommended that members vote “yes” on the ratification, according to Rivera.

Both the committee and the university brought fair proposals to the table, Bradley Mitchell, a mail service operator on the committee, said.

“We met in the middle,” Mitchell said. “I think we got the best contract we could do. Negotiations are all about treating each other equally and getting to an agreement.”

BU spokesperson Colin Riley wrote in an email that the BU administration appreciates the effort brought to negotiations on both sides of the issue.

Bargaining committee member Mark Slavin emphasized the student support BU’s service workers received.

“I gotta say, the kids did it,” Slavin said. “Students are great. Loved that they backed us up. They always do. And I can’t say enough great things about the students. They’re awesome.”

Kobi Kassal, a senior in the School of Hospitality Administration, said he often interacts with BU’s service workers in his capacity as an event manager for the Student Activities Office.

“They are truly the hardest working people at this university,” Kassal said. “It was ridiculous that BU wasn’t working with their union.”

Saahil Adusumilli, a freshman in the College of Arts and Sciences, said her experiences with BU’s service workers have been positive.

“I think they are a crucial part of campus life, and they are all really friendly and really nice,” Adusumilli said.

Hunter Trambaugh, a freshman in the Questrom School of Business, said if the service workers had gone on strike, the university would not be kept in good condition, negatively impacting students. BU’s service workers have been nice and helpful to Trambaugh, he said.

“If I ever have a problem, they have it resolved, and they are super accessible,” Trambaugh said.

Boston City Councilor Josh Zakim, who had sponsored a city council resolution urging equitable contracts for BU’s service workers, wrote in an email that he was glad BU and the service workers union had reached an agreement.

“As a city we have a lot of work to do to address issues of inequality,” Zakim wrote, “and providing good jobs is an important aspect of that … These employers work hard every day, often behind the scenes, to keep the campus beautiful and running smoothly.  They deserve fair wages, a safe work environment, and adequate insurance benefits.”

Shayna Scott contributed to the reporting of this article.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated the ratification process for the contract was delayed and incorrectly identified the time the agreement was reached. An updated version of this article reflects this correction.

More Articles

Comments are closed.