HomeMy WebLinkAbout6A - Resolution in Support of Workers' Rights~~~~QQA~O~~°s Suppor~t of Wor~ker~s'
Rights
Agenda Item VI-A
i
• . • .
Memo
To: Human Relat~ons Commtssion
From: Carmen At~lano
Date: July 14, 2004
Re: Resolut~on m Support of Workers' Rights
The attached mformahon ~s provided for your cons~derahon regarding a Resolutton m Support
Of Workers' R~ghts.
At ihe July 14 HRC meetmg you will conduct a pubhc hearing on this matter wtuch includes
presentauons from Serv~ce Employees International Union (SEN) Justice for Janitors and
Somers Buildmg Ma~ntenance (SBM) Under Agenda Acdon Item.VI.A., after considering
information prov~ded at the publ~c hearing and the attached written ~nformahon, you will make
a recommendatton to Crty Council
Please contact Richard or myself with any questions or comments that you may have.
Attachments:
Draft ResoluUon in Support of Workers' Rights
Information from SEN, Jushce for Jamtors Campaign
Information from Somers Building Maintenance SBM Recommendat~on
Staff Draft Resolution in Support
of Workers' Rights
STAFF DRAFT
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF WORKERS' RIGHTS
WHEREAS, ~anitors perform an honorable and essenrial service to businesses
throughout C~ty of Boulder thaY is a positive conTnbution to the economy of our region;
and
WHEREAS, despite the~r clear commrtment to working hard and their conMbutions to
local busmess, hundreds ofBoulder~anitors continue to struggle for better wages,
affordable healthcare, ~ob securrty and due respect; and
WHEREAS, workers have filed charges with the Nahonal Labor Relahons Board
(NLRB) allegmg that their employers have retaliated agamst them with intimidation,
threats and finngs to break up their efforts to orgamze and to improve their wages and
workmg condrtions; and
WHEREAS, it benefits our entire communrty when workers are able to raise their
wages, secure aFfordable health care for themselves and their famihes, gam rights to fair
and equa] treatment at work, and enhance the~r civic participation; and
WHEREAS, the Crty of Boulder has demonstrated a strong commrtment to working
families through rts programs for affordable housmg for families at all income levels,
creatmg opportumttes for children to achieve success in school, and rts support of safety
net programs through the Human Services Fund; and
WHEREAS, workers have the right to freedom of speech, freedom of associahon and
the right to form a union.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BOULDER:
That the Crty Council supports workers' efforts to improve the quahty of~obs in our
city, and that they are protected by the laws of our nation, state, city with regards to
safety, health, civil rights and other workplace and labor protections, including the nght
to organize collective bargaining units
That the City Council hereby reaffirms Boulder's commitment to human and civil rights
as outlmed m the City of Boulder Human Rights Ordinance and its strong opposition to
any acts of discriminahon m Boulder.
3. That the City Councii hereby affirms its belief that hardworkmg janitors should be able
to work under fair and hvable condrtions wrth reasonable compensation and benefits,
and should be afforded their nghts to freely consider the recognihon of umons to
represent their rights, free from harassment.
APPROVED this day of , 2004.
Mayor
ATTEST.
Crty Clerk, on behalf of the Director of Finance and Record
Manha, Janitor at Ball
Unlike corporations in the Denver area who use responsible union cleaning companies, Amgen, Ball, Sun
and Seagate outsource their janitorial work to SBM, a dirty cleaning contractor that maintains sweatshop-
like conditions. Janitors like Martha at Ball are often forced to work through injuries and harassment by
supervisors. Yet, janitors take home less than $1,200 per month on average and are "offered" family
health care at a staggering $540 per month~ Amgen and others, through SBM, are pushing their operating
costs onto the community by forcing full-time workers to rely on public services Corporations like Ball and
Amgen are supposed to be assets to our community - is this how we want local workers treated?
nd Up Against Outsourcing to Dirty C
CJr.ge Amgen, Ball, Sun and Seagate to get rid of SBl~tix and~ us~ a
responsible cleaning company that pro~i`des jan,itQr~:
Amgep'~rte D'uector. Enc Bergeson 303-401-2884, Ball CEO• R. David IIoovEr (~Q39)~4~9-3~L3~1
. Decent working, condi#~ons
. Affordable family heal4h care~ & fair wage~;~~;_ :~5 ~,~ ~'r
. Freedom~ to~fprm~a uniorr ~ :aT= r ;~`,, #rr_.,~ ~
SCN 303/698-7963 has a disnu[e wrth SBM and no o[her emnlover No reouest to s[on work or cease dehvenes or mckuos
07/16i2004 13'34 303-6982626 SEIU 105 PAGE 04/04
SBM CLAIMS: It respeCts the right to joln a union
THE TRUTH: SBM tramples on workers' rights
SBM rs not mterested in free choice: SBM says that rc"respects the nghu of iu employees to unionize" and that it
will let workers choose ireely However, SBM's long hiscory of threatenmg and haressmg worl<ers who stand up for
better worlang condinons teils a d(fferent story
NLRB efecpons are not democratic. NLRB-sponsored elections favor employers and are charaaer¢ed by mtense
ant~-union campaigns Employers can use cheir inherent pawer ro fire employees as a way to mnmidate them into voting
or even campaignmg agamsc rhe union The NLRB eleceion process is oken abused and can be dragged out for years
"CARD CHECK" creater a neuval uman eleUron enwronment. Card check is an NLRB approved e~ection mexhod
shat protecu employers and also allows workers co freely decide whether to choose a unwn When employers sign
"card count neutral~ty agreements," they agree to not mxerfere wrth the employees' decision whexher to form a union,
and the employees and xhe union agree not to disrupt the workplace shrough scrd<es, pickeang, or boycorts
SBM~s History of Threatening & Harassing Janitors
SBM waged an expensrve and prolonged campaign against ~anitors' seeking m form a union
in CahForma in which~
The NLRB found ewdence of more than 100 vrolations of federal labor law in ~ 5
invest~gatrons
Violations mcluded, solicieauon, threats, br~bes, survedlance, rnterrogation, immigrauon
harassment, discnmmanon, dlegal disctphne, coeruon, retahanon, and violation of all
prewous setclements
5 lawswcs were flied
2 ~amtors reporced being physically assaulted by a supervisor
SBM was found to owe thousands of dollars in back pay to ~anrcors.
The NLRB alsa found that SBM had formed an illegal company union They agency
forced SBM to disband the umon and rexurn dues to workers, and co stop threacenmg employees wirh discharge,
disciptine, and more ddfltult working conditions.
Current Charge5 Filed Against SBM With the NLRB
Currently, over 4D charges have 6een flled against SBM wah the NLRB for mterFering wrth ~anrtors federally protected
freedom to form a urnon Janitors have reported that.
SBM has mterrogated, fired, and threatened +amtors for speakmg ouc
SBM has comened mandaxory anu-uroon meetings and made repeated threats chat ~anitors would lose Yhair ~obs if
they voted for a union,
SBM superwsors have pressured ~anitors to sign an anti-unwn petition
07/16/2004 13:34 303-6982626 SEIU 105 PAGE 03/04
THE NUMB~R OF UNIOTIIZED WORICERS 15 SHRINKIN6
EMPLOYER 1N'1'ERFERENCE TO lINIONIZATION IS RAMPANT
If employers remain neutral when workers are forming a union, 96% of those workers w~n union representation
However, labor laws requiring employer neutralicy during Naaonal Labor Relations 6oard elections have been stripped
away over the years Today, with laws no longer protecting workers' freedom to unionize, employers routinely move
aggressive anti-union campaigns, wreh only 33% of workers winning union represenuxwn m such cases.
• 91 % of employers mandate anto-union meetings for workers trying to form a union
~ 80% of employers use supervisors to pressure workers against unionizmg in one-on-one meetings.
• 50% of employers threaten to shut down the company where workers are organfzing.
• 31 % of employers fire umon supporters during organizing drives.
CARD GHECK CREATES A NEUYRpL ENVIRONMENT
8ecause oF the abuses of the election process, Human Rights Watch has determined that NLRB elections fad to provide
a fair democratic process for workers Instead, growing numbers of workers and cheir employers are using another
form of umon election calted "card count neutrahty"
Card check proxects both workers and employers and creates a neutral environment. When employers sign "card count
neucrality agreements;' the employer agrees not to interfere in ehe employees' dension abouc whether to form a union,
and rhe employees and the union agree noc to disrupc the workplace through strikes, picketing, or boywtzs
The employer agrees co recognize the urnon once a neutral third parry verifies thac a ma~orrcy of the employees has
signed umon membership cards The employer and umon then immediately negotiate a conxract avoidmg legal delays.
MAJOR U.S. GOMPANIES WITH GARD GHEGK AGREEMEN'TS
i ~i~
~ ~~~~~t ~
', A~ u~ ~~' '° , Ir'I p
' o n
~;rr,~ii ~ AI~ i y~~„ jh~tn ,, i
~, „, ~i ~~~IIJ~' li~u ~'~I's"c i~ ~, ,ii~ n i i~ i.
i Ip4, ~ ~I, 6~i -~ ~p~~
teeG r, ~
~
,',,i,
'~' ~I, t^
,
,~ ~
~Y ~'~~ ~ ~~„ ~
~~~ ~@~"e~ I~er,mancn4e'
~ i ~, ~, ~, ~ i
Lea~r' b~' k, i U~ I~ ~ q~ ,p~~~,. ;'l i
I ~d I, W', I'
'
~ „ ~ ,
rny
~' r; 14FPI
~
~ q irdi ~ I ;i ~
j ~II ~ IVc~ ;;,~~st~mi Sr ~p, ~
' ~~,
,
~~ i~~ ~,~ ~ i;~, ,1~,
~ i~ '~;i~ ~'ri,u~~~'~~k i.u ~'tll , i i t ~'2
;
~
,~,i ~ ~~ ~,~, ;,
~1~U~tl~YM1~~I ~ ~~~~; ~~~i r ~ ~~
'~~~~o~i~~~~Wi ite- ~~ ~ ~,, ~,,,~
o~ i~~„ ~ i, ~,;
~~i
.~~:I '~~Ili I ~ II~~,I° i I~i '~~' ,~~~, ~I~~ ~~~
Janitorial employees of Somers Building Maintenance ralhed Thursday at the Boulder County Courthouse to protest wages and a lack of af-
fordable health care. Mayor Will Toor, state Rep. Jack Po~nmer, D-Boulder, and an archdiocese official spoke in support of the workers.
Janitors target clients in ~vage protest
Employees of a cleaning cqmpany in
13oulder put pressure on the firms thnt
use it, hoptng to draw attention tn whut
they say are unfair warking conditions.
By Marcos Mocine-McQueen
Denver Post Sfaff Writer
Soulder - Janitors trymg to force a cteanmg
company to provide h~gher wages and health in-
surance are takmg a roundabout approach -
they're trying to shame some of the company's
biggest customers, mcluding h~gh-tech and bio-
tech g~ants Ball Aerospace, Amgen, Sun Micro-
systems and Seagate Technology
About ioo protesters gathered in downtown
Boulder on Thursday and voiced anger at the
practices of Somers Buildmg Maintenance, or
SBM, a firm tha[ empioys 3,Soo people m a3
states. The protesters say [hat the company has
fazled to provtde health msurance, treatment for
~n~ured workers and fair wages
Evette Davis, a spokeswoman for SHM, denied
the protesters' cla~ms She sazd [hat SBM employ-
ees are ehgible for health care banefits, wh~ch
cost workers $~o a month for mdividuals or S$oo
per month for a family
Davts sa~d SBM pays more than ~ts competr
tors The company's Colorado ~amtors beg~n
earmng SS per hour, and all ofits nonumon Colo-
rado ~amtors earn an average of 38.99 per hour
At that rate, ~t would cost about a third of an
employee's pre-tax earcungs to insure his or her
family
Thursday's rally was orgamzed by the Service
Employees Internahonal Umon, which is trymg
to umomze the ~amtors
Woody Monroy, a spokesman for Seagate,
sa~d his company does not consider the ~ssue rts
problem
"We don't d~rectly employ these ind~viduals,
so we feel this ~s an ~ssue between the confractor
and the umon," Monroy said "Ohviously we
want to encourage both parties to work out their
d~fferences so we can move forward "
"We take corporate responsibility very seri-
ously and we work with all of our contractors to
make sure they do everything nght;' he said
But that answer is not satisfactory, accordmg
to Mayor Will Toor, who spoke at the rally.
"Corporat~ons can't evade th~s respons~b~lity
by outsourc~ng work," Toor sazd.
Rocfo Escobar spoke h~ghly of Amgen, the bio-
tech firm where she works as a ~anrcor
"It is a good company that produces wonder-
ful drugs and works to ttelp people around the
world;' Escobar sazd "HOwever, ~t is also a com-
pany that outsources ~ts mamtenance to Somers
Bu~ldmg Ma~ntenance "
And that, Escobar sa~d, is where the compa-
ny's ethics fall short She shook and held back
tears as she told the rally that desp~te workmg
full-time hours she has had to rely on Medica~d
to cover health care costs
"I think iPs a travesty m this country that peo-
ple can work full time and not Ue able to make
ends meet without the help of social services;'
Toor said
Escobar sa~d that many of her co-workers do
not qual~fy for Medicaid and are "stuck m a gap
wl~ere we have nothing "
Debbi Ford, a Colorado-based spokeswoman
for Amgen, said [hat the Nat~onal Labor Rela-
tions Board is exam~mng Somers' pract~ces and
said Amgen m[ends to let [he NLRB reach a con•
clusion before commentmg
"W e take very senously our obhgation to pro-
vide a safe and healthy workplace," Ford said.
The ~anitors who gathered also heard words of
support from state Rep. Jack Pommer, a Boulder
Democxat, and Mar Munoz-Visoso, who spoke
of behalf of [he Archdiocese of Denver
The other companies targeted by the protest
did not reply to requesYS for commenY.
Marcos Moc~rse-McQueen can be reached at
3~3-z47'9948 or mmcqueen@denverpost com
Information from SEIU, Justice
for .Ianitors Campaign
Page 1 of 1
Carmen Atilano - RESOLUTION TOR MONDAY NIGHT HRC MEETING.....
From: "Ron Alvarado" <RAlvarado@sbmcorp.com>
To: <~ohnsonrC ci boulder co.us>, <AtilanoCC~ci boulder co us>
Date: 7/16/2004 2.44 PM
Subject: RESOLUTION FOR MONDAY NIGHT HRC MEETING ...
CC: "Pete Gazlay" <PGazlay@sbmcorp.com>
Hello Carmen and Richard
Pete Gazlay and I have been discussing the draft resolution that is before your Commission on Monday evening
regarding Workers' Rights
We, too, believe in workers rights and welcome this opportunity to expand on them in this forum.
I am attaching some suggested edits for the Commission's consideration which, in our opinion, balance the
resolution's theme and content
You can see that suggested deletions are struck through, and suggested additions are underscored Our six
comments are in italics and within outlined text boxes Our request is that you share this proposed edited draft
with your Commission
On a day to day basis, I serve as the company's Chief Administratroe Officer Pete has shared with me you
willingness to meet with him earlier this week, and I am grateful that you, Carmen, called me a couple of weeks
ago to alert us to this important matter We respect and appreciate your desire and effort to obtain opinions and
input from all pertinent parties
.I plan to be at the Commission meeting on Monday evening along with Pete, to solicit the support oi the HRC on
our suggested edits so we can mutually support this resolution as it moves forward,
I look forward to meeting you Thank you
Rn~t fllva~ ado
SI3M
Main tel (916) 9223300
ONice direct (916) 565-3664
Fax (916) 565-3669
E Mail ralvarado~sbmcorp com
~
file.//C\Documents%20and%20Settings\atilcl\Local°Io20Settmgs\Temp\GWj00001.HTM 7/16/2004
~Carmen Atilano -~BOULDER RESO FinRev.doc ~ _ ' _ __ uW__ w,~_, ,~,_y v~~,~_ ~x rr, _ __ ~,~ Page 1 ~~
STAFF DRAFT
R~SOLU7'ION IN SUPPORT OF WORKERS' RIGHTS
i
I
WHI:R~AS, ~amtors perform an honorable and essenhal service to busmesses throughout
Crty of Bouldei that is a positrve contnbution to the economy of our iegion, and
WHER~AS, desprte then cleai commrtment to woikmg hard and their contnbuhons to
local husmess, hundi~ds of Boulde~ ~an~toiti conhnue to struggle for better wages,
affordable healthcare, and ~ob tiecw rty at~~-d~e-~es{~eeE, and
/(Bas~s for suggested ed~t. Tliere ~s no ob,/ectave ~nformntaon that any,/miator, in the cary's
service or the pnvnte secror, is not being a(forded reepect This word~ng should be
deleted )
~WI~R~AS; weike °~;;.:'~;;e
''~8Et1a - ~ -`~ , .~..e..., ....a
a
fFfi1Flg+--I9-~3~E8~E-ll}~-E~1ett-E~~AFES-f~6 ,
EOH~kE48R~-
2(Basis for suggested edit Ani~one ca~t file cltarges tutd ~nake allegahons to the NLRB
We are unaware of nn}~ "worker ° wlw has filed such charges agauzs~ SBM SBM had no
such charge,s agau~st ~t until tlte SE1U corpomte cnmpnign commenced a few months ago
llntil, nnd ~f, dae NLRB or a~udge mcrkes definu~ve fendengs o~i any nf the.re chnrges, we
be(teve thnt it ts maccurnte and clisingenuous to hnve thes recttcd m ihe C~ry's draft )
WH~REAS, rt benefrts our enure communrty when woikers are able to rvse their wages,
secure u1To~dable heal[h caie fo~ themselves and their fam~lies, gam nghts to fair and equal
heatment at woik, and enhance their crvic paiticipat~on, and
3(We siippoit fnir nnd compe~itrne wages, and provide them, along witk bene~ts
Hnwever, we siiggest the HRC gi~es~ion the stnteme~at that everyone benefits when wages
nre rntsed To w~tat exte~~t ~ At whnt pouat does a communety put ds compelihveraess en
~eopnrd~~ by uricompenttve wnges ~ Alsa, laave ~here heen violattoris of rights m1d ec~ual
ti ealment that dee Crty rs ativare of tlaat wrarrants this drsaga~age na ~his particulnr resolut~on
drnft~)
WHERGAS, the City of Boulder hne demonstrated a sti ong commitment to workmg
fam~lies [hiough ~[s p~og~ams for affoidable housmg for families at all meome levels,
cteapng oppoilumUes for children to nchieve succes5 m school, nnd rts support of safery
net piograms through the Human Serv~ces Fund, and
WHTREAS, workers have the i ight to frcedom of speech, freedom of associahon nnd [he
~a'C.armen Atiulano - BOULDEF4_F1ES0'FinFiev doc,~ ~ ~Y~y~~ y ~ y, ,m,_-~ - ~~ ~~ ~~~~~Pa~e 2i
w
r~ghC to €errN-a-an~en- a secret ballot election. consisCent wrth the law. on whether to be
renresented bv a labor umon
4(Bnsis for suggested edtt The law calls for n democrntic process, snnctioned by the
Nationnl Labor Rela~aons Board, to allow workers the opportunety to vote for or agamst
unmiiizahon Scnce this ~s a proposed resolution in support of workers' rlghts, thcs should
I be clarified nnd tnclude~l in this recital )
NOW, 7'HL,RTTORG,I3G IT R~SOLVTD BY TH~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BOULll~R:
That the City Council supports workers' eftorts to ~mprove the qual~ty of ~obs m our city,
and that they are protected by the laws of our nauon, staCe, c~ty w~th regards to safety,
heulth, crvii nghts and other workplace and Ixbor protechons, includmg the nght to
o~gamze collechve bargammg um[s and freelv determme for themselves if thev want to
unwmze throueh ~ lawful alect~on nrocess
5(Bascs for auggested edit We suggest that it as very importnnt for the Ciry to recognize ancl
nieinoraalize the lawful riglits of workers to vote for themselves ns to whether or not they want to
form a union Thts fundnmentnl rtght should be respected by all pnrties.)
That the City Council hereby ieaff~rms Bouldei's commrtment to human and crvd nghts
as outimed m the Crty of Boulder Human Rights Ordmance and rts strong oppos~hon to
any acts of discnmmat~on m Boulder
That lhe City Council heteby affirms rtS beLef that hardwo~kmg~amYOrs should be able to
woik under fau and Lvable condrtions wrth ieasonable compensat~on and benefrts, and
should be affo~ded their nghts to freely consider the recogmuon of umons to represent
their rights, consistent wrth the National Lubor Relations Act free from harassment ot
intimid~hon ?rom all uarties
6(Bnsts fnr suggested ediG The NLRB establtshes m law (Sectio~~ 7, NGRA) the right of
employees to pnrticq~nte far, or agarnst, unioniznno~z Tlais is the workers' fundnmenta! rtght ~
Addtttoi~nlly, nll pnrties shoi~ld respect the r~ghts wluch remove uihmidnt~ora from the process We
belteve that die suggested eclit provides thts balrince nnd perspective.)
APPROVED this d~y of
2004
~ Mayor
ATTEST•
i
~
~ . . . . _.~ .
Information from Somers
Building Maintenance SBM
Recommendation
Draft Submitted by SEIU Justice for Janitors
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF WORKERS' RIGHTS
WHEREAS, ~anitors perform an honorable and essential service to businesses
throughout Crty of Boulder that ~s a positive contribution to the economy of our region;
and
WHEREAS, despite their clear commitment to workmg hard and their contributions to
local busmess, hundreds of Boulder~amtars work for sub-poverty wages, wrthout
affordable healthcare, ~ob secunty or respect
WHEREAS, workers have filed dozens of charges alleging that their employers have
retahated against them with mtimidation, threats and firmgs to break up their efforts to
orgamze and to improve their wages and workmg conditions.
WHEREAS, it benefits our entire communrty when warkers are able to raise their
wages, secure affordable health care for themselves and their families, gain nghts to fair
and equal treatment at work, and enhance their civic participahon.
WHEREAS, the City of Baulder has demonstrated a strong commitment to workmg
famil~es through its programs for affordable housmg for families at all income levels,
creatmg opportunrt~es for children to achieve success m school, and its support of safety
net programs through the Human Sernces Fund, and
WHEREAS, workers have the nght to freedom of speech, freedom of association and
the right to form a union.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BOULDER:
1 That the City Council supports workers efforts to improve the quality of~obs m our
city, and that they are protected by the laws of our nation, state, city with regards to
safety, health, civii nghts and other workplace and labor protections, including the right
to orgamze collective barga~mng umts.
2. That the City Council hereby reaffirms Boulder's commitment to human and crvii nghts
as outlined in the City of Boulder Human R~ghts Ordinance and rts strong opposihon to
any acts of discnmmation in Boulder.
3 That the City Council hereby affirms its belief that hardworking ~anitors should be able
to work under fair and livable conditions with ~ust compensation and benefits, and
should be afforded their rights to form a union free from harassment.
4. That the City Council calls on the facility and buildmg owners and managers to support
~ anitors' freedom of assoc~ation and their efforts to raise their standards, and urge
owners and managers to hold their cleaning contactors accountable for responsible and
lawful behavior.
That the Crty Council supports the use of pubhc funds to mamtam and create qualrty
~obs in our city, using responsible contractors and oppose the use ofpubhc funds to
mterfere m workplace freedom and democracy
APPROVED this day of , 2004
Mayor
ATTEST:
Crty Clerk, on behalf of the Director of Fmance and Record
SBM has Interrogated and Fired Janitors for Suaaortina the Union
In March, workers reported that an SBM supervisor interrogated several ~anitors about their support for
formmg a union After weel<s of being harassed, one of those ~anitors was dismissed with no previous
warnings.
In April, two ~anitors were fired afcer an SBM supervisor found out they had signed union cards Janitors
report that the same supervisor handed out an anti-union flyer and threatened workers saying, "If I were
you guys, I wouldn't do it "
SBM has Threatened and Intimidated Janitors for Suaaortina the Union
• In March, an SBM supervisor interrogated and threatened a ~anitor on two occasions that she would be
fred ~f she paracipated in forming a union According to the worker's statement, the supervisor told her
that the ~anitors should be afraid because SBM would fire them and "the union will not be able to do
anything for you."
In March, a worker reported thax after she was interrogated by an SBM supervisor about her union
support, her loci<er was searched She also says that another SBM supervisor harassed her about her
union partiupation, and she recerved an anonymous phone call saying that "if you ~oin the union, you wdl
be fired."
In April, workers report xhat an SBM supervisor convened a meeting and threatened ~anitors that they
would Iose their ~obs if they supported the umon The supervisor allegedly said that "rumors are that if
you go un~on, we will lose the contract and you guys don't want to lose your ~ob over something
petty." A weel< later, the same supervisor repeaxed this threat, saying that workplace rules would change,
extra pro~ects would be added, breaks would be shorter, and people might be transferred to different
locations or have their shifts reorganized Threats were repeated in a third meeting, and when a ~anitor
complained aboux not recerving overame pay, the supervisor yelled that he was "sicl< and tired of all
these problems that are popping up ~ust because the union is coming around "
SBM has Pressured Janitors to Sian an Anti-union Petition
• In March, workers report that an SBM supervisor allowed two employees from a different work site to
enter a highly restricted area to asl< ~anitors to sign an anti-union petition Each ~anitor was pressured to
sign the petition in the presence of a supervisor
The Service Employees International Union
Building Service Division, Western Regional Office, www.5eiu.org
Janitors at Somers Building Maintenance (SBM) are trying to form a union to improve wages, health care,
and working conditions. In Colorado, SBM has viciously retaliated against workers and has been charged
with over 20 violations of federal labor law
Somers Building Maintenance (SBM) has signed contracts with ~anitors in the Service Employees
International Union (SEIU) in Oregon and California However, it has failed to meet the terms of those
agreements, even while it represents itself to its clients as a company that meets industry standards and
maintains harmonious labor relations
SBM Sians Contracts to Provide Health Care. but Will Not Pav Premiums
Aker signing a contract to provide ~anitors with health insurance in California, SBM has failed to pay the
required premiums SBM was fined over $10,000 in 2003 for failing to pay premiums for dozens of
employees over a 12-month period. SBM has yet to pay the fine or the full amount of the premiums,
leaving ~anitors without coverage Recently, a ~anitor went to the emergency room for an ear infection
and was refused care because the insurance bill was unpaid His eardrum burst because he was not
treated.
• After signing a contract to provide ~anitors with health insurance in Oregon, SBM refused to ~oin the
agreed-to health plan and failed to provide alternate coverage for workers. As a result, workers'
healthcare premiums went unpaid, and workers were forced to pay large medical bills.
SBM Refuses to Comalv With Contracts on Waaes & Pensions
• After signing a contract to provide ~anitors with pensions in Oregon, SBM sent its first contribution to
the pension fund two years late, and only after repeated threat of legal action
• In Oregon, SBM failed to pay the minimum wage scale specified in its contract. Aher continuous
monitoring and strong enforcement by the union, wage rates were ad~usted However, SBM has not
paid the back wages it owes workers
SBM Refuses to Resolve Labor Disautes
• After re-opening iu Sacramento contract in 2003, SBM walked away from the table and has refused to
bargain with SEIU ~anicors for the past 6 months. SEIU filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board
to compel SBM to return to the table, but SBM has refused,
SBM Fails to Comply with Union Jurisdiction
• In Oregon, SBM has failed to provide a timely roster of worl<ers or notification of new workers covered by
the contract to enable the union to represent those workers appropriately
In California, SBM has refused to recognize the union for buildings covered by an October 2002 agreement
with SEIU, or to honor its 2000 contractual agreement with SEIU to keep buildings union when taking them
over from other union contractors.
The Service Employees International Union
Buildin~g Service D~vision, WQStern Regianal OfficQ, ww~nr,
sBnn Faus to Monor contracis
Amaen Fails to Ensure that Janitors Have Affordable Familv Health Care
As a leader in the bio-tech industry, Amgen has a clear commitment to improv~ng the health of Americans
Yet the ~anitors who clean its facilities do not have affordable family health insurance In spite of its corporate
promise to "dramatically improve people's lives;' ~anitors at Amgen are paid poverty wages as low as $14,000
per year with family health care costs exceeding $500, forcing many to rely on the government for health care
Amaen is Failina its Corporate Promise for Lawful Business Conduct
Amgen's corporate code of conduct states that "every Amgen staff inember, contractor and temporary staff
member should conduct business in a highly ethical and responsible manner," and strongly promotes compliance
with health, safety, and labor laws for themselves and their suppliers. Yet, Amgen's cleaning contractor, Somers
Building Maintenance (SBM), is embroiled in a national labor dispute and is fanng legal charges for health and
safety violations An SBM ~anitor was recently killed at a Dell Computers facility where the Tennessee Drvision of
Occupationa~ Safety and Health has uted and penalized SBM for serious safety violat~ons Additionally, ~anitors at
Amgen report that safety and workplace in~uries are not being dealt with in an ethical manner
Janitors at Amgen Call for Imaroved Workina Conditions and Leaal Comaliance
Janitors who clean Amgen facilities are standing up for improved working conditions and trying to form a union.
As they have tried to organize in Colorado, the ~anitors have faced vicious attacks from SBM with I S workers
being fired The ~anitors have filed over 20 Unfair Labor Practice charges with the National Labor Relations
Board (NLRB) SBM has a long history of interfering with worl<ers' freedom to form a u~ion, and over the
years, the NLRB has found evidence of more than 100 violations of federal labor law,
How Amaen Can Live Ua to its Imaae and its Coraorate Promises
Amgen should take immediate steps to Irve up to its image as a leading health care company and a responsible
corporauon Amgen should meet with The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and work together to
improve the Irves of the ~anitors Amgen should ensure that SBM meets standards at other leading bio-tech and
hrtech companies by paying decent wages, providing affordable family health care, and creating a neutral
environment that respects ~anitors' freedom to form a union If SBM cannot meet those standards, Amgen
should switch to one of the many responsible union cleaning contractors used by its corporate peers
Amaen Contact Information
Kevin Sharer, Amgen CEO
One Amgen Center Drrve
Thousand Oaks, CO 91320-1799
Phone: (804) 447-1000
Fax. (804) 498- I 487
Eric Bergeson, Amgen Site Director
4000 Nelson Road
Longmont CO 80503
Phone (303)401-2884
~ TNe Service Employees International Union, Western Region 475-297-7766 ~
Submitted by:
Somers Building Maintenance (SBM)
DRAFT THOUGHTS - BOULDER RESO V.1
Whereas, The City of Boulder
^ Respects the rights of employees to determine for themselves whether they want
to be members of a urnon; and
^ Respects the rights and obligations of employers in allowmg their employees the
right to freely orgarnze a union; and
^ Expects that all parties, union, employer and employees to refram from
unfounded allegations, pressures and coeraon on or towards one another, m
order to allow an open and free dialog on the issues, and
^ Encourages workers to educate themselves as to the pros and cons of union
membership, and
• Believes that all workers are entitled to fair compensation for an honest day's
labor, and
^ Understands that employers cannot call for an election of employees to ~oin a
union, and
^ Respects the rights and authority of the National Labor Relations Board in
overseemg, admirnstermg and enforcing elections by employees and other labor
matters, and
^ Calis upon the free, democratic process of allowing employees the right to vote
for themselves as to whether they want to ~oin a union, consistent with the
National Labor Relations Act.
Now, fherefore,
The City of Boulder celebrates its commitment to a commurnty-wide workforce,
both in the public and pnvate sectors, that is free of discrimination, intimidation or
coercion, and the right of employee self determination with respect to union
membership
~ CLFANING COMPANY, LLC
S 1J ~ SZ47 ARNOLD AVEN EO'• M C~ttur+BCeucoar+u 9 65Z Fnx 916-565-3609
July 2,2004 By Federal Express
Ms. Cacmen Atilano
Human Relations Commission
Department of Housing and Human Services
1101 Arapahoe Avenue
Boulder, CO 80302
Dear Ms. Atilano:
Thank you for your call. T appreciata the opportuniry to talk with you, and to learn of the
cunent schedule for hearmgs and meetings regarding the SEIU Justice for Janitor's
organizing campaign in $oulder. We much appreciata you seeking out our perspective
on this matter.
I want to assure you that SBM takes ~ts responsibilities as a member of the Boulder
community seriously and understands its obhgations to be a good employer and a trusted
partner.
SBM is an industry leader, workmg m 23 states for some of the finest companies in
America. We enjoy a turnover rate that is one-third of the industry average, which we
believe clearly demonstrates a comm~tment to our employees and a high overall
employee satisfaction rate. SBM is an employer of choice that is committed to upholding
the best practices of its industry and its clients.
Unfortunately SBM is caught in the middle of a nationa] campaign by the SBIU to
organize the building services mdustry. The tenor and tone of the campaign is surprising
given that SBM actually has contracts with the SEIU in selected markets and has
historically worked harmoniously with the Union in those locations.
I want to stress that SBM respects the rights of its employees unionize, but believes the
nght to choose to join a umon should be theirs to make through a legally sanctionad
NLRB election. To date, the SEIU has not asked for an election, but instead has tried to
force SBM to sign a contract rather than hold an election. SBM firmly believes that it
undermmes the intelligence and self-determination of our employees to forgo this
democratic process.
You can be certain that SBM is committed to supporting its empioyees and providing a
positive work envirorunent at all of its locations - union and non-union alike. Contrary to
what the City may be hearing from the SEIU representatives, we do not discriminate, and
we do not stand m the way of our employees' efforts to join a union if they so choose.
Our company plans to attend the public hearing on July 19`~. In the meantime, we have
enclosed a series of documents for your information and distribution to the Commission
members.
1. Letter to the Editor of the Dailv Camera.
2. An Open Letter /PetitionsZfrom SBMEmplovees at two o~our Colorado worksites
The names of over 80 employees have been redacted to protect their privacy. These
unsolicited petitions indicate that our dedicated workforce is overwhelmingly supportive
of our company and our customers. Their view is, I believe, quite different from one that
the C~ty may be heazing from SEIU representatives.
3. Setttng the Record Strai ht~Alle_gat:ons and Facts This document is in response to
specific allegations that the SEIU has made about our company, customers and business
practices. It provides responses and accurately reflects the facts
4. Questeons and Answers This specifically offers some often-asked questions and
accurate responses.
5. SBM WaQes and Bene rts. Here aze some facts and figures about SBM's wages and
benefits.
6 Whv SBMSupports the NLRB Secret Ballot Election Process This is a brief fact sheet
regazding the company's support for secret ballot elections.
My team and I are ava~lable to speak with Commissioners prior to the hearing.
Additionally, we would, of course, like the courtesy of seeing any resolution that the
Commission may decide to draft or any other public materials in advance of the hearing.
Please do not hesitate to contact me, at the number and address on this letterhead, or our
Colorado Regional Manager, Pete Gazlay, at (970) 988-9925. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Ronald L. Alvarado
Chief Administrative Officer
Cc Pete Gazlay
Charles Somers
Sam McAdams
~ CLEANtNG COMPANY, LLC
S jJ~ 52M1'I ARNOLDZAVENEO'•McCieFuNaCniFOat+u 9 652 Fnx 916-565-3609
July 9, 2004
CommissionerMariagnesAyaMedrud NOTE: An individualized copy was
Human Relations Comm~ssion sent to each HRC member.
Department of Housing and Human Services
1777 Broadway
Boulder, CO 80302
B~Federal Express
Dear Commissioner Medrud:
I understand the HRC may soon consider a resolution at its July 19`h meeting, critical of
SBM and rts workplace practices. I see from reviewing previous City Council and HRC
hearing minutes that the SEIU has worked closely with staff to encourage this resolution,
but has only recently spoken with SBM I would respactfully submit that the HRC should
decline to make any decisions which could effect our firm's reputation and standing in
the community and wrth our customers unt~l you have heard all the facts
SBM takes its responsibilities as a member of the Boulder community very seriously and
understands its obligations to be a good amployer and a trusted partner. Unfortunately the
company is caught in the middle of a national campaign by the SEIU to organize the
building services industry. The SEIU corporate campaign is spectfically designed to
coerce amployers and employees to accept forced unionization The tenor and tone of the
campaign is surprising given that SBM actually has contracts with the SEIU m selected
markets and has historically worked harmoniously with the Union in those locations.
The fact is, SBM is an industry leader, working m 23 states for some of the finest
compames in America We en~oy a turnover rate that is one-third of the tndustry average,
which we believe clearly demonstrates a commitment to our employees and a high
overall employee satisfaction rate. SBM is an employer of choice that is committed to
upholding the best practices of its industry and its clients.
I want to stress that SBM respects the rights of its employees unionize, but believes the
right to choose to jom a union should be the~rs to make through a legally sanctioned
NLRB election. To date, the SEIU has not asked for an elechon, but mstead has tried to
force SBM to sign a contract rather than hold an election. SBM firmly believes that it
undermines the intelligenca and self-determination of our employees to forgo this
democratic process We are not anri-union; we are pro-employee rights
You can be certain that SBM is committed to supporting rts employees and providing a
positive work envirorunent at all of its locations - umon and non-union alike. Contrary to
what the City may be hearing from the SEIU representatives, we do not discriminate, and
we do not stand in the way of our employees' efforts to ~om a umon if they so choose.
Our company plans to attend the public hearing on July 19`h. In the meantime, we have
enclosed a series of documents for your information.
l. Letter to the Editor ofthe Daily_Camera
2. An Open Letter (Petitaons) from SBMEmplovees at hvo ofour Colorado worksites
The names of over 80 employees have been redacted to protect their privacy These
unsolicited petit~ons mdicate that our dedicated workforce is overwhelmingly supportive
of our company and our customers Their view is, I believe, quite different from one that
the Crty may be hearmg from SEIU representaUves.
3. Settingthe Record StraiQht Allegatrons and Facts This document is in response to
specific allegations that the SEIU has made about our company, customers and business
practices. It provides responses and accurately reflects the facts.
4. Questions and Answers_ This specifically offers some often-asked questions and
accurate responses.
5. SBM Wages and Bene~ts Here are some facts and figures about SBM's wages and
henefits.
6 YVhv SBM Supports the NLRB Secret Ballot Elect:on Process. This is a brief fact sheet
regarding the company's support for secret ballot elections.
My team and I would like an opportunity to meet wrth you in person to discuss this issue
pr~or to the hearing on the 19`h. Please do not hesitate to contact me, at the number and
address on this letterhead, or our Colorado Regional Manager, Pete Gazlay, at (970) 988-
9925. Thank you.
Since ly,
onald L. Alvarado
Chief Admmistrahve Officer
Cc City Manager
Boulder City Council
Susan Graf, President and CEO Boulder Chamber of Commerce
Pete Gazlay
Charles Somers
Paul Emperador
Sam McAdams
June 17, 2004
Letters to the Editor
The Daily Camera
PO Box 591
Boulder, CO 80306
Dear Editor,
With regard to the June 16, 2004 art~cle "Janitors Protest Lack of Heath Care," I would
like to assure res~dents of the Boulder Area that SBM values our employees and strives to
provide a respectful and safe workplace for all.
We feel that the article was quite misleadmg, and appreciate the opportunity to set the
record straight.
SBM is an industry leader, working in 23 states for some of the finest companies in
America We employ both union and non-union workers, and enjoy a turnover rate that is
one-third of the industry average, which we believe clearly demonstrates a commitment
to our employees and a high overall employee satisfaction rate. The fact is, SBM is an
employer of choice that is committed to upholdmg the best practices of its mdustry and
its clients.
SBM offers rts employees wages and benefits that meet or exceed most of our
competitors. In Colorado, 95% of our employees are eligible for healthcaze, and
additional benefits The company p~cks up at ]east 70% of single employee's healthcare
premiums and also offers family coverage plans. Furthermore, after four months of
employment, SMB offers rts employees a 401 (k) plan, a flex spending account,
voluntary accident plans, paid vacation time, sick leave, paid holidays, dental coverage
and a bonus plan
These benefits are in direct contrast to the 15% of umon employed janrtors in the Denver
azea who qualify for medical coverage, because the umon contract disallows part-time
employees from benefits. Furthermore, a union employee is only able to convert to full
time status after 3 years on the ~ob, if working in a building of 400,000 square feet or
larger, and if 85% of the janitors in that building are full-time workers. We think this is
an important difference worth noting.
I want to stress that SBM respects the rights of its employees to unionize, but believes the
right to choose to join a umon should be theirs to make through a legally sanctioned
NLRB election. To date, the SEN has not asked for an election, but instead has tried to
force SBM to sign a contract rather than hold an election. SBM firmly believes that it
undermmes the intell~gence and self-determination of our employees to forgo this
democratic process.
W Camere Letter ~o the Ed~mr
Unfortunately SBM is caught in the middle of a national campaign by the SEN to
organize the building services industry. The tenor and tone of the campaign is surprising
given that SBM actually has contracts with SEN in selected mazkets and has historically
worked harmoniously with the union in those locations.
Again, we appreciate this opportunity to set the record straight.
Sincerely,
---Original Signed By---
Pete Gazlay
Regional Manager
CO Camera Letter to the Edrtor
06/23/2084 12:05 3034012821
An ope~a letter to A,bagon Niinagement:
Cc: T6e SE~II in Deuver
Cc: 5BM Mana~em~e~ut.
PAGE 02
We, (the majoaity of the SBM sta~ warking at Amgen, wa~t to set the record
st~ei8~t.
• We do NOT beli~eva due Union (S~TCJ) faitly end accutately neprose[Uta all
SBM workera.
• We feel Amgen pravides a great work envuomnenk, at~d p~motes strong
eti~ical values tl~at we share.
• We believe that SF3M is a deceirt exnployer and that managem~nt treats us
fnirl~:
• We consider the Union to be unfsirly puttit~g our jobs and our faiau~y's sexutity
at risk
,.~.
•" ° • We £xl the small gnoup of U~aion svpporters hes been deeoitful and miaiead'u~g
and misrepresented our warkinig~ conditions ~tedly.
~ We do nut want Unio~a representatiaa~ and do not agee with their tsccics and
standetda of conduct. ~
Signed by the followmg SBM amployces, at AC7:
d
• ~ Z
' 3
. ~
. a
r ~
-'~r,~.s
n~ o nt?~
~ •.
, <
1) z~l ~.~~~.~~,~~~~s~c~nc~c~ 03/31/04
To Whom It May Concem:
On behalf of tltis docwnent we would I~ce lmng w"T'he Union" the
awareness tLat all of us that have sigaed below do not want, in any way to be
made uncomfortable in our work, homes or in any place where they may see
us and identify us as Somers employees; we do not want W be part of the
upion, we Wank you before hand.
Broomfield, CO
2) ~`-\ ~ p\o,` ~.cs ~..~\^ e L~ 03/30/04
On behalf of We employees of SBM in Seagate, we do not want for the union
to coutinue bothering us at our homes; those who are in agreement can sign.
3) ~~ er~ ~\c~~~ ~.a~ ~• ^~.~ e c1 3/31/04
4) 1\ a,ti,,~;~.c~~\~'~~, _.~.~•,~~,~~~ 4/1/04
5) o ~,,, p~c~ y e.a ~, :~,n n e~ 4R/04
6~ Z c~.•-~. ~~ \c~,~ e..~. ; ~. c~~ ~ c~ 4/2/04
To Whom It May Concern:
On behalf of these signatures we would l~ce to express to the union for them
to respect ow privacy at our homes, as on the street and at work. For them
not to use our phone numbers to call us.
Those wbo sign have no desire or interest in having a third party in our
company. Please respact our decision. Thank you.
~d ~~- ` ~~J ~~\ l~`,Ci',,~ ~Q~.:,
04/17/2004 16:09 FeR 19TOY886148
~oos
~)
~
~ -~.~-,~3-1,~~`~
~ -~v~~-~- ~-c~~~~q :
~ci ~-"~,~iD - G~~~$ -° ,resc~"~ ~r~v~'o5 ~accr "
~~ C~F9V1(7CtvT~tl rv1~_.. q-~.:~ CJ"~ ~~~ cv/C
~" ~~OS
!
~a~ c~~e. ab Ja:~~e1o.,~-~--no .~~-'w~a,~.~v,~ ~,o~ ~~~~--
h-w~- qt~e., porn~r~,~H w.o'~vp..~. rfo~- ~nC~rvipac.'l
t f
e,n .r..-~•~-~ro• ~~ab~~o, ct~~o.~. o en• ~vcalc~ure.,r ~v~q~ i
-~~~ s~•~~no~ vpQ~ r nos ~ ~d~v-~,~,~uev~'~:o'-v,o~ ew~~leo--_.
c~s t:lr•~ ~pl~l~P.~~ q'~e no p~ere-~nca s se'r
~txr'~CC'_ (~' 1A 17v~~0~ a~ av~~ewiar.~b rlk.c.4.a~-.
..^ ~~,~
~'~~~I, ~~ ~o .
1
~Y
I
~_y -
t:+~ ~~=.
a~-
-~ -
,a _,
~=
z'~--:
~. - ~ .
---~ ~ ~ ~
~~
~
t~a-
F~-
I~-y..
~ ~3
'S
, *~,,
;s,
~~\SS
~ ~i
~.i~si9nn~ 16:-0S~PA7E~k9`70E88~118
~d100~
.,.,_..---- -
' ~ , ?/
:~ 4" .
..i.
.
~
~~
~ :
.
__--.`_.. , ~.__...._._.~..._~T_.
.
.
J
_....
-~~ =~et~-t~, --d,~ -i~s +~.~.-p1-~-A~~
de aM' ~n ~.~~a~,ar,E- -~o -~~n ,rc.~nc~ '
,~. , ~i /1 ~ra~i~ Q5 ~ lcl __. ,
i • ~e~ • ~ ~ td'9c~ ~ ~5a • ~ea '
-~ c'1cUor~ O Cd/~ co~A .~~~'~• - {.~~rvv.d~r - .
~0 MQk.~ ~-~Ft(~M"R
.~
J
I
~~
. /
.:
04J17/P001 14:OI~PAIE l8702668Y48 ~008
; ~ ~~~ 3~ -
~ {~'
-~~~. ~ :~~,~..--- - - ~ : ~_. - ; --^_. .._._,. _ .. _: . _.~
..~.-~.~~~ ~,~..~~~ -~~~~.:-~r.~,,~~~as.~._. _~ _... ---- ~
.. ... .: ~~.~s_~A~ ~~1 ~~-.._~~. s~~ ~u~.~a.~.~"~aar~, _..._ , _ ` . . . . '
_... 1~v~~~CaC~C.'_''~i~Vt~;A.E1'A.. , E!Q .~.~El&Pi_ cbl.Ua..._fr~l,, l.l~ .,,.._ ~_.. . ..
. : -~~ :~' -~~. ~~~-a~., Y Q~--~~~~._.__. ,.__. ~_. -.~_ ,
_.•~i~s.raa.s.._--~~.~c~os..-~re~ ca~.w;s:i~Lsnsr.,~_.cca_,. .~. .~_ .
' ~~y~ -a
_ _~~1V~~~."F-~ '. ___' ~ _ ' _ .~r~~ .a ~ ..~..~..
. ~~'1-Q-'~ i~i!~~.~ rs~+~*~ca-a !~A'"DiC,~•4A~'i~ fi?.-"~. -J~A:l..hal~lS- -- ~ -- .
~~t,t~r. "~6."'~~2"~~~'~~,K~.6~~'~~~•~A. _._ ._ .
~ 4 ~
h,l~lJa.s~e~r.1!- CC1~.~p.A.~A-: ~.~b~...'F~.eb~q-:`a~t,."'R'~s-rAl~. -
Nu~~s~.~._!'0~~.~~1a.Al.,~.. ~'`alt~].~,.7~-S•. • - • - . ~ `~.
-„" -- ----_~ .. .~,,._---
. . . t- - - - ----. _ ' . .. . ' . ..
-.. ~ . . ' ,_.~. .._.. .., _ .~...y.,. .
___:"~~ ~` . . _... • -----• - -- =, .
, "}
..--- y - _.._ . ~ - - -- ~ -
-. _. ~ ..___.. ._ . ... . ,__. _ . .__ ~ i
~ , . i
-ir '
. [ ...__ --- •- - • ----• . _ . , . __
F
._.. _ t
-`-~ -- --~- ~ - - - _ _ _ .
ObF17/8604 t4:AD~PW( 18702086i48~ _ ~90d
~ ,..v, ° ' ,~ ' . ,
Y/i/%' ~I~
-ryQt;~r~'~ ' - ~t~¢tt~'.S~j~'o~V1Y A" ~
~ ~,~. ~
~~'.-' 7L"'~V"~C3" '~3E E°aTf}S "F i¢Mq5 G7i~1E2-g-~d.~S
.~~1p1P~zAIf2 t=~ t,q ~3N i O~ @UE 1~OS ~ i~Et~ ,
1\ltlsazYz-ca •'~tZ.d~lfl~%v~b E~] CASA cok0 EN t,r~
C~-~.g,.4~as..~a,~r~so-.~ y~ ~f~ tilo tisan3
tiuE.a.~~..os,.--r~~-s+a+~as,,~~r~2o,~.co~.u~.Rca~.~e co•~
-.;~so~ aes o
- i.:bS° ~.~~ ¢'a2~~ nx.,~5 1~~0 'T~EsE A n.~,cis O'T~tirEtico~,
1-J~'_Et4~E-`.l .'7i E '~i~'~1~ -~ F~ $ '~&~oal-~-& --~J4]
' -ai.?~~-r ~t,c~ _ C'aM.Ai~~~A .: '~st "F`w a,~o~ ~ ~G~~3t
,
tJu c s-Ctua ''fl~c`:c°~N ca.a a° A~'
~ ~ ~
~~.;. ..•,
~B'' . .
/~
04f17/PD09•11:04•PAR•1879~889i4i
„~toas _ ,
_~ i
-3", ./~,/os~ 6
~c~'~,'va E-.^S' ~p~,~rs po~av r~ _ ~
~~,~, .-~e~.rP o ~ 'za~ ~~~~. '~"~titi.~a-s Q.~t~~~ _. _ .
~E.~ ~.+?s n+~. A~ s~-.~Q.o~ G3oE ta~s "~~.~s'.~.~.~ .
~-~o~s~-~•4~'~+~vrac~vra~o~• ~ ~..AS~'i~ t~a~+o~~ e~1_~-r~
~C~~x~~ ~'- ~~ -`-C'"~ct:x~c+t5~'a~s~o~~ 'y zZu~" '~1a' us~w1 . • ,
..~~E~~•~o6~^~~„a~cb~+F'~».145••~A~ 'C~!-~~U~ S.~'Q-s~.. CA-.'1
. ...~°zt.r'~e'Q-o~•--,,. . ___ _. -- • • -~
.. ~ G..o S ~ :43L-~ ~ ~'ra-.a~!-1-e~ ~ 1_s1 Q • "'~'~S~E q~.W. ~' i~t0 "~kLs.m~ ,
_ t~~E~, •'Ta8 , -T~+J~a: • .~ E,4S '~ea~o!J ~i S E+~
;-Ju€s'~z.sti. . ~MPet..D 4+~•: .~t~o2 F'~•Yatt- ~E '~~P~~- •,~ ,
~.lU6s'~~-'"'i'7~Gg~on~.~ C~i2~'G~AS
~
`_ ~ .
.'
~ - - ,
J ~ V
04/17/2004~14:04-PAII~l~9'F02889k~8~ _ .....,.... ,~,.... ~007:. . ,.
Cr~ . f••-•q :-~"d~' +-~ •
'~~'fd~ . ~o~
" ~ cZ,P. ~.~ co cze,~s~i+av ~
'"P~z -~a° ii "D~ ' ~'s~aas F~-~..~.a~ ~xes~rss
~~¢~ racz a ~ca c~ra°•e4a ~ci~ +ao~ ~'~
t~v,e:s~x ^-i~~t ~~'ova'~ L~rJ cnsa • ~o~,~ .. E~ . ~4 1
CFaV.,~.~.k'- E~... "T~~aa~se '~ ~,~€• ~p • Vse~l -
-.~~-~¢~~•`T'~c.~-t~o~• "~~A~-~cat~.~+c~'• ~fiasf,' ~CQ-3•^~,
~o~ ~os
~ to-s ~swG ~b..'~+'~.t,~.~-~iS 1.1C1 "b-ES~.~+-.~S -:a~': 'T'tuC+~w S
~ l~'~a.~.s 'D ~ "~-E2. 3 E~9S ~~y,~'0.-S '~ '
IU~IE.S'~ -CA6.1~1~qa'341#- ~ '~t~ ~s~-~,{~2 ~L-' '-7~~'r~--'c~y~.
M NI~E.g~ '~G,CQ~C~ ~12AG~ YkC~ •
/ ~ 1/'++".~`~
-{~,•~~a~-.~..,~r
...~,~,..,u~,.~_~..w-- . . ...
~:~ SBM Setting the Record Straight
Recently the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has begun to attack SBM and
make numerous false allegations about its business practices. This document is designed
to provide accurate information to set the record straight
Facts about SBM Allegation: SBM does not provide adequate wages and
benefits for its employees.
Fact SBM offers its employees wages and benefits that meet
or exceed most of its competitors Benefits include a 401 (k)
plan, a flex spending account, voluntary accident plans, up to
three weeks of paid vacation time, sick leave, paid holidays,
dental coverage and a bonus plan After four months of service,
SBM picks up 50% of the monthly premwm for individual
employee coverage After one year of service, SBM picks up
70% of the monthly premium for mdividual employee coverage,
and pays about half of the monthly premium fee for an
employee's dependant After 5 years of serwce the cost of
medical coverage for dependants is decreased by more than
50%
Aliegation• SBM does not provide proper training and safety
gear for its employees.
Fact: SBM prides itself on having an outstanding safety record
and provides all of the necessary traming and eqwpment its
employees need to work safely at its clienYs facilit~es. In fact,
SBM's safety record is about 40% better than the industry
average
Allegation: SBM was somehow responsible for the death of
one of its emptoyees m Tennessee and was subsequently fined
by the state's Occupational Safety and Hazard Administration.
Fact. An SBM employee was mvolved in a fatal accident while
workmg on the recycle Ime of a customer's equipment SBM is
neither the owner or responsible for the mamtenance of the
equipment, which was provided by a third party As the
exposing party, SBM received a small monetary fine, but the
owner of the building was found to be at fault for the accident.
SBM created a memorial fund on behalf of the deceased
worker and paid off the employee's outstanding debt on his
BD Settmg the Rewrd She~ght
farm. Additionally, SBM worked with a workers compensation
attorney to ensure that the employee's family received all due
bene~ts
Allegation: SBM denies healthcare to workers injured on the
~ob
Fact: This is simply untrue SBM has an outstanding workers
compensation program designed to identify and treat
employees with workplace in~unes and help them to make a full
recovery so they can return to work. SBM's workers
compensation program is in accordance with the laws of every
state m which we operate In states where tt is applicable, SBM
employees may choose their own physicians to receive
treatment
Allegation: SBM has violated the law and is under criminal
investigation
Fact: Whde ~t is true that the SEIU has fded unfair labor
practice claims agamst SBM, to date the National Labor
Relations Board has investigated these claims and has not
issued any complaints agamst SBM SBM denies all allegations
of wrongdoing
Allegation• SBM conducted employee "layoffs" during the
holidays in 2003
Fact: SBM did not lay off any empioyees. Through a
competitive bidding process, SBM often wins contracts held by
other companies. In these circumstances Somers interwews
the existing employees and hires those workers who can pass
its mterview and screening process. Unfortunately it is not
always possible to hire everyone who applies, either because
they did not pass the mterview process, or because there are
not enough ~obs available to hire everyone. Often facilities
clearnng contracts change hands because clients want to
reduce costs and this can play a role in how many employees
SBM can hire.
Allegation: SBM is anti-union.
Fact: SBM is not anti-union, but rather pro-employee SBM
actualiy has contracts with the SEIU in selected markets and
B- Settmg the Recurd Strazght
has historically worked harmornousiy with the union in those
locations SBM respects the rights of its employees to unionize,
but believes the nght to choose to ~oin a union should be theirs
to make through a legally sanctioned NLRB election. To date,
the SEIU has not asked for an election, but has tried to force
SBM to sign a contract rather than hold an election. SBM firmly
believes that it undermines the mtelligence and self-
determination of employees for the SEIU to demand that they
forgo this democratic process.
Allegation: SBM pays lower wages to employees who are
foreign-born.
Fact Under no circumstances does SBM discriminate when
determining an employee's wage and benefit package.
BD Settmg tNe Rewrd Straight
~~SBM
SBM is a national facilities service company with more than 3,500 janitors. Below is
some important information about our company, our employees, and our values.
Questions 1. Do SBM janitors receive wage increases?
and Answers Yes Wages are reviewed annually for every employee Wage
mcreases are given based on performance and tenure.
2. What benefits does SBM offer its janitors?
S6M employees are eligible for medical and dental coverage, a
401(k) plan, sick days, vacation days, and bonuses. After four
months of service, SBM picks up 50% of the monthly premium
for individual empioyee coverage. After one year of service,
SBM picks up 70% of the monthly premium for individual
employee coverage
3. Does SBM provide proper safety gear and training for its
employees?
SBM pndes itself on havmg an outstandmg safety record and
provides all of the necessary traming and equipment its
employees need to work safely at client facilities. In fact, SBM's
safety record is about 40°/u better than the i~dustry average.
4. What happens if an SBM employee is injured at work?
SBM has an outstanding workers compensation program
designed to identify and treat employees with workplace
in~unes and help them to make a full recovery so they can
return to work In states where it is ailowed, employees may
choose their own physicians to receive treatment
5. The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) said
that SBM "is facing legal investigations." Is this true?
Whde it is true that the SEIU has filed unfair labor practice
claims against SBM, to date the National Labor Relations
Board has mvestigated these claims and has not issued any
complaints against SBM SBM denies all allegations of
wrongdoing
BD Q end A
6. Has SBM recently had to lay off workers?
Through a competitive bidding process, SBM often wins
contracts held by other comparnes. In these circumstances
SBM interviews the existing employees and hires those
workers who can pass its interview and screening process
Unfortunately it is not always possible to hire everyone who
applies, either because they did not pass the interview process,
or because there are not enough ~obs available to hire
everyone Often facdities cleaning contracts change hands
because clients want to reduce costs and this can play a role in
how many employees SBM can hire
7. How many SBM janitors work full-time?
More than 95°/a of SBM's ~anitors work full-time. Full-time
employees work 33 or more hours per week.
8. How many SBM janitors belong to a union7
There are approximately 260 SBM employees nationally who
are union members. This number represents less than 10% of
the entue SBM workforce
9. Does SBM let its janitors join a union?
SBM respects the nght of employees to choose whether they
want to ~oin a urnon Employees who choose to ~om a union are
not treated any differently than employees who are not in a
union
BD Q and A
SBM Wages and Benefits
SBM non-union janitors, on average, earn as much, if not more, per hour than
their SBM union counterparts.
Non-Union Jarntors Union Janitors
SBM Wa es in Ore on $8.89/hour $8.50/hour
SBM Wa es in Cal~fornia $8.25(hour $8.25lhour
SBM Wa es in Connecticut $10 00/hour $8.98/hour
No e These figures ara avereges
On average, SBM janitors earn comparabie, if not superior, wages relative to
their industry counterparts.
SBM Non-Urnon Wa es Com etitors Wa es*
Arizona $7.00/hou~ $6.89lhou~
California $8.25/hour $7.30/hou~
Colorado $8.55/hour $7.91/hour
New Mexico $7 00lhour $6 75lhour
Ore on $8.89lhour $8.00/hour
Washin ton $8.49/hour $7.80/hour
"CampeUtnrs wages averaged m their respecGVe stales mclude lhose ot tha follnwing compaa~es One suurce, Pdde,
Advancad, Star, Cascadian, ABM, AIOed, Keller Buildmg, Sta~ng SoluUOn, Cleaner Image and Jan-Pro Same
companies are union Averages cover wages at all sen~ofiry levels
SBM offers its non-union employees comparable, if not higher, starting salaries
than its competitor's union employees.
Minimum starting wage
for SBM non-union anitors Minimum starting wage for union
com etitors
Calrfomia $7 OOlhour $7.00/hour'
Colorado $8 00/hour $7.80/hour~
Ore on $8.00/hour $7.30/hour~
Washin ton $8.00/hour $7.41ihou~`
~ Number md~cates startmg wege of umon employees workmg for one of the wmpanms Ihat signed a CBA
2 Number mdicates s[artmg wage of BG Semce Soludons umon employees m Colorado
3 Num6er ind~cetes startmg wege of umon employees workmg Por one of the compames that signed a CBA
4 Number mdwates sfertmg wege of unwn employees work~ng for one of the compemes Nat signed a CBA
BD W ege•Benefit fact sheet (4)
SBM non-union employees receive benefit packages that meet or exceed those
of their union counterparts.
SBM Non-union Janitors SBM Union danitors
• Medical coverage . Medical coverage
Benefits Package . Dental coverage . Dental coverage
• Vacation leave (1 week • Vacation leave (same
after a year, 2 weeks after as non-union)
~4 years, 3 weeks after 6 . 6 paid holidayslyr.
years) . No sick pay
• Flex spendmg acct. . Bonus plans
• Voluntary accident plans . 401(K) plan
• Paid sick leave (where
applicable)
• 6 paid holidays/yr.
• Bonus plans
• 401(K) plan
SBM employees are able to receive medical coverage for both themselves and
their families at a minimal rate.
• SBM pays up to 70% of the monthly premium for indiwdual employee
coverage
. If enroiled, S8M pays about half of the monthly premium fee for
dependent coverage; after 5 years of employment, the cost of inedical
coverage for dependants is decreased by more than 50°Jo.
BD Wage-Se~fit fect shcet (4}
~~SBM
Why SBM Supports the NLRB
Secret Ballot Election Process
Issue Union membership in the United States continues to
drop sharply- from a high of 20 percent of eligible
workers in 1983 to 12 9 percent m 2003, the lowest
level since the 1930s In response, many labor
organizations have begun employing aggressive
recrwting tactics, often known as "corporate
campaigns", in an effort to reverse these declines and
remain financiaily viable
The Service Employees inlernat~onal Urnon (SEIU) is
currently focusing on organizmg seniice employees,
such as hotel workers, security guards, health
workers, and janitors This urnon has historically
sought to avoid free elections by employees, as
urnons have a losmg record from free elections.
Through a corporate campaign, the SEIU puts
pressure on employers and their customers in order
to force empioyees to accept urnonization.
In lieu of allowing employees to vote themselves
whether to elect a third party representation, the SEIU
tnes to force such agreements as a card check
neutrality agreement In this process, comparnes
waive their employees' legai nght to participate in
secret ballot election and agree to recognize the
union as the collective bargai~~ng agent if a ma~ority
of employees at a work site sign authorization cards
Some of the ma~or drawbacks to this process include
the lack of privacy m the election, which frequently
leads to intimidation or coercion of employees, and
the one-sided presentation of the agreement by the
urnon, whde the employer must remam neutral and
not provide its perspective
Unions often make promises to employees that upon
~oirnng a union, they wdi receive wage mcrease or
increased benefits All of these promises are without
merit however, since the terms of compensation and
BD NLRB Process Abbrev~ated Memo
other matters are bargained for in a collective
bargaining agreement. Nothing is guaranteed. Union
membership is also a finanaal commitment.
Employees must pay union dues and initiation fees.
Background For more than two decades, SBM has been providmg
budding services for Fortune 500 companies SBM is
a national facdities service company with more than
3,500 employees. SBM respects the nghts of its
employees to unionize and believes the nght to
choose to ~oin a urnon should be theirs to make
through a legally sanctioned NLRB election To date,
the SEIU has not asked for an election, but has tned
to force SBM to sign a contract rather than hold an
election SBM firmly believes that it undermines the
intelligence and self-determination of our employees
for the SEIU to demand that employees forgo this
democratic process.
Recently the SEIU has begun to attack SBM and its
clients and make numerous false allegations about
the safety practices and ethics of the companies. This
corporate campaign by the SEIU is a diversion from
the real issue~ the union's desire to force SBM's
employees to ~oin the union without a vote and the
mcreased revenue that comes from union dues. SBM
actually has contracts with the SEIU in seiected
markets and has histoncally worked harmoniously f
with the urnon in those locations 4
SBM is an Employer
of Choice SBM is an employer of choice that is committed to
upholding the best practices of its industry and its
clients. SBM is also an industry leader - that is why it
counts many leading companies among its clients,
and also why the SEIU has chosen to make it a
target.
SBM offers its employees wages and benefits that
meet or exceed most of its competitors. Benefits
include a 401 (k) plan, a flex spending account,
voluntary accident plans, up to three weeks of paid
vacation time, sick leave, paid holidays, dental
coverage and a bonus plan. SBM employees are able
BD NLRB Process Abbrev~ated Memo
to receive medical coverage for both themselves and
their families at a minimal rate. SBM pays up to 70%
of the monthly premium for individual employee
coverage. If enrolled, SBM pays about half of the
monthly prem~um fee for dependent coverage, after
five years of employment, the cost of inedical
coverage for dependants is decreased by more than
50%.
SBM also has an outstanding workers compensation
program designed to identify and treat employees
with workplace in~unes and help them to make a full
recovery so they can return to work. SBM's workers
compensation program is in accordance with the laws
of every state m which we operate. In states where it
is applicable, SBM employees may choose their own
physicians to receive treatment
SBM is an Industry
Leader
SBM pndes itself on providing the highest
quality services for the lowest possible cost.
Last year, SBM saved its customers over 25%
m serwce costs whde mamtaining customer
satisfaction of over 90%.
• SBM's customer satisfaction ranking is 96%
overall
• Everyday, SBM cleans 110 mdl~on square feet
per day nationally.
• SBM's safety record is about 40% better than
the industry average
• SBM's average employee turnover rate is one-
third of the national average rate
• On average, SBM ~anitors earn comparable, if
not supenor, wages relative to their industry
counterparts, both union and non-urnon
BD NLRB Process Abbrev~eted Memo