The Devil at My Doorstep

by David Bego

  One such group is the Interfaith Workers Justice (IWJ) Group. On April 10, 2007, SEIU began another phase of its campaign to break us by using this organization to pressure the pharmaceutical executives into demanding that I sign the Neutrality Agreement. This added a new, unexpected element to the equation as clergy influence was now another weapon SEIU would use to make me cave in to their demands.

  When I inspected the letter, I noticed the names of two clergy at the top: Rev. Darren Cushman-Wood, and Rev. C. J. Hawking, members of the Indianapolis Clergy Committee. The address was somewhere in Chicago, and I wondered why an organization that far away would be interested in labor issues in Indianapolis. Little did I know that this organization was a strong ally of SEIU and would do all it could to organize as many businesses like mine as possible. In fact, the Interfaith Workers Justice Group headquartered in Chicago according to unionfacts.com received one hundred thousand dollars in support from the SEIU in both 2005 and 2006.

  The letter’s first line read, “As ambassadors for over 125 clergy in Indianapolis, we arrive at your office today to express a deep concern about the contracting companies you have hired for janitorial services.” The text then specified that the organization believed that “all workers need to be paid a living wage, offered affordable family health care, and given a permanent voice on the job.” Having stated their purpose, the IWJ alleged, “EMS does not provide a living wage to janitors. This forces many janitors to work two or three jobs, rendering them absent from their families . . . .” Attached were the names of the selected clergy who allegedly supported the words IWJ employed in the letter. They included Rev. Wood, the author of a book titled Blue Collar Jesus. He was a man with whom I would wrestle for the duration of the war while attempting to open his eyes as to the snake-oil character of Stern and the SEIU.

  According to his biography book jacket cover, Rev. Wood graduated from the University of Evansville before studying at Union Theological Seminary in New York City. Later, he became the senior minister at Speedway [IN] United Methodist Church but a passion for labor issues triggered an adjunct professorship in labor studies at Indiana University. According to one of the endorsers for his book, Rev. Wood, a board member of the National Interfaith Committee for Worker Justice, believed “Christianity is for human rights for workers,” a bold statement, but a worthy one. Somehow this type of belief had led him to support SEIU and its organizing agenda.

  In his book, Rev. Wood, a mid-50s, medium height, paunchy fellow sporting a bald head, glasses and graying beard made it clear that he wholeheartedly supported the union movement in its entirety, based on religious principles: “Catholic social teaching has consistently affirmed the rights of working people to the basic human needs for just compensation, dignity, and the right to organize labor unions. Indeed, unions are seen as a legitimate way to express human solidarity and to contribute to the common good. They are an effective instrument of economic justice.” Reading this generalization made me question whether I agreed with his assumption, especially his belief that “Catholic social teaching” endorsed “the right to organize labor unions.” This seemed a bit of a stretch but if the union was truly attempting to protect workers as an “effective instrument of economic justice,” I was all for it. But was this the aim of Stern and the SEIU? From what I had seen thus far, it did not appear to be so.

  Rev. Wood later expressed his belief that “for over 100 years, American Catholics have responded to church teachings with active support for organized labor” before adding a caveat I agreed with, “At times, this support has been tempered by sharp opposition to socialistic and communistic elements within the labor movement.” While I was certain Stern was not a communist, despite a fellow union leader’s comparisons of him to Vladimir Putin in the newspaper, Stern’s socialistic tendencies made me wonder whether clergy like Rev. Wood might disagree with Stern’s agenda if he knew and understood the truth behind SEIU.

  One thing was for certain, Rev. Wood’s beliefs were strong when it came to comparisons between good, old-fashioned capitalism and mankind’s inclination toward sinful conduct. Expressing his view regarding connections with the image of God, he wrote, “Sin, then is anything created by human beings—any attitude, action, program, policy, custom, or system—that distorts and diminishes the image of God.” By that definition, capitalism, as it is currently structured, is sinful. The reason: “It alienates and suppresses the creativity of human work.” Such a statement made me shake my head and wonder how this suppression might stifle employees interested in working hard and earning a living wage because at EMS they were free from union restrictions and could vote their conscience in an election without fear of repercussion. I also wondered whether being an advocate of capitalism made me a sinner in God’s image. How could that be if my first priority at EMS was protecting the employees and trying to make their life better with a steady job, good wages, and benefits unmatched in my industry? I also wondered if Rev. Wood might consider SEIU guilty of sin because of their capitalistic tendencies to organize as many workers as possible with one true aim in mind—collecting dues to support various political agendas. SEIU certainly appeared to me, and to many others, as a capitalistic business operation with profit motives (despite being a non-profit entity), hidden behind their cloak of solidarity and unionism. Otherwise, how could Stern earn more than a quarter of a million dollars a year, borrow 80 million dollars to buy a downtown Washington D.C. office building for it’s headquarters, and spend more than 80 million dollars of members’ dues during the 2008 election on political candidates sympathetic to his cause, while at the same time underfunding members’ employee benefit plans?

  Speaking, it appeared, to folks like me who fought back against the union movement where its intent was questionable at best, Rev. Wood wrote, “It has become commonplace for companies, large and small, to hire union-busting consultants whenever their employees begin to show an interest in joining a union.” I was innocent of these charges as I had no intention of busting any union but simply wanted my workers to know the true facts and be able to decide whether they wanted to be organized through the time-tested and time-honored secret-ballot election. In fact, on several occasions I had requested both the union and the clergy group to petition the NLRB for a secret-ballot election. Their response—it takes too long to have an election and it is weighted too heavily in favor of the company. This belief exists despite statistics indicating that unions win more than 50 percent of such elections. But this is not good enough for Stern or Rev. Wood. They want to win 100 percent of the time by having the company sign a Neutrality Agreement, or by getting the EFCA passed. What the workers want is incidental to the SEIU agenda.

  I did agree with Rev. Wood’s conclusion that “labor unions also run the potential of becoming idols. When they lose sight of how their interests contribute to the common good, when their internal procedures stifle participatory democracy, when an elite and self-serving leadership perpetuates corruption, then the union becomes an idol that truncates the image of God in their members.” To this, and his words, “This is the sin of the labor organizer’s situation. The organizer is tempted to perpetuate this sinful context by using people, concocting half-truths, and seeking quick gains in the name of helping the cause,” I simply said, “Amen” as this described the conduct of the SEIU and Stern to a “T.”

  Another statement Rev. Wood made in his 2004 book resonated with me as I tried to assess the validity of my new adversary: “In many cases, the only thing restraining the wickedness of a corporation is a labor union.” While this may be true of some companies, I felt that if I could show Rev. Wood this was completely false at EMS, perhaps he would understand my reluctance to bow to SEIU demands. Demands truly targeted at, to use his words, stifling “participatory democracy.”

  Adding Rev. Cushman Wood, the Interfaith Worker Justice, and the Indianapolis Clergy Committee to the mix meant my opponents on the battlefield were growing by the day. When my head hit the pillo
w at night, my mind was a twisted mess trying to keep track of all the brushfires burning as the union stepped up its game plan to destroy EMS’s reputation, forcing us to agree to the Neutrality Agreement. Sometimes, I hoped that I might wake up and realize the war had just been part of a bad dream. But this wasn’t to be as each day presented a new challenge.

  By mid-April, the SEIU targeted the Sallie Mae building in Indianapolis. Reports reached me that between 7 and 9 a.m., several organizers appeared on the street distributing flyers stating that EMS “Keeps Janitors in Poverty.” Their efforts stopped rush-hour traffic, causing me to decide that a meeting with Rev. Wood might be in order. Certainly, I was anxious to meet this man who was so concerned with social justice yet backed a union like the SEIU—one that didn’t appear to give a damn about it.

  On April 23, 2007, I held a meeting with Rev. Wood, Rev. C. J. Hawking, Sister Mary Ann, Father Tom Fox, and Rev. Linda McCrae along with my daughter Kelly, head of human resources at EMS. Rev. Woods began the discussion by saying that he understood, based on his meeting with one of our customers, that I was willing to remain neutral regarding unionization. I said that was true and that we had encouraged the SEIU to petition for a secret-ballot election with the NLRB.

  Rev. Woods then proceeded to inform me that their definition of neutral was for me to sign a Neutrality Agreement. Things then tensed up a bit, especially after I made it clear there was no intention on my part to sign the Agreement. This did not win me any friends in the building. As blank faces greeted every word, I told the clergy my true feelings. Because EMS currently paid above-average industry wages along with medical and dental benefits, holiday pay and vacation time—wages and benefits better than the union negotiated in Cincinnati, it was not in the best interest of our employees for me to sign the Agreement, especially when it was not morally right for me to make their decision for them.

  Forging ahead, I used the example of St. Louis unionized workers. They currently were paid 6 dollars and 75 cents per hour, well below our wage pay scale of nearly eight dollars per hour. I also emphasized that union members were required to pay as much as 40 dollars a month in union dues, decreasing their take home pay. When the argument was offered about workers being subject to “revolving door” policies based on large turnover, I attempted to discuss certain employees at EMS who had made false accusations about their work status. But the clergy did not want to hear about them, and I was diverted into explaining how the average tenure for an EMS worker was 2 years and that many jobs were designed to supplement income—part-time. The union never mentioned much about this, but I thought it an important point because we were proud of those who picked up some extra income by working a few hours a week. They were just as important to us as our full-time employees especially as many worked with short notice when a client needed a building or plant cleaned because of an emergency.

  The discussion became rather heated when Rev. Hawking wondered why I would not sign the Neutrality Agreement. My explanation that doing so would give up the employee’s right to a secret-ballot election appeared to fall on deaf ears, and I was chastised for not being a “leader.” Attempting to keep my composure in light of jabs at my character, we moved on to Rev. Wood’s concerns about what information was being provided to the workers by both EMS and the union. Once that subject was debated and re-debated with my explaining how the union appeared to be less interested in workers knowing all the facts, a tense atmosphere began to permeate the room when Rev. Hawking suddenly exclaimed, “[I] received a call from [a] Sallie Mae [executive] to let me know that they would no longer be using EMS’s services because EMS would not recognize the union.” When I mentioned that was not the information I received, she boldly replied, “Are you calling me a liar?” Regrouping, I denied this, but expressed disbelief that Sallie Mae had made such a claim as I knew their executive would not make such an assertion. To bolster her argument that the call had been received and its substance correctly interrupted, Rev. Hawking said that she had a voice mail on her cell phone from the executive confirming the company’s intention to dump EMS because we were non-union. Before I could ask to hear it, Rev. Wood announced that he had to leave. As a parting comment, he said he did not care if SEIU was a “less than forthright organization” as he believed in what unions could do for people. I looked at Kelly and she looked at me as we were both thinking, “What?” Before I could ask him his meaning, he asked if I was going to be a “leader” by signing the Neutrality Agreement, and when I said “No,” he said, “You are obviously anti-union and I am pro-union and I have more important things to do.” He shook my hand and left.

  Later, in the meeting with the clergy, a moment occurred that still seems unreal. Father Tom Fox, a Franciscan priest working in the Hispanic ministry for the Archdiocese of Indianapolis made a telling comment. A caring man, he was over a year later described in a newspaper article as a “saint” by one admirer. When a reporter called for an interview, I even added a nice compliment to the mix as I respected the man, despite disagreeing with him about many union issues and his comment on this day.

  Comparisons were being made between the wages that janitors earned in Indianapolis and Cincinnati; I pointed out an apparent discrepancy—that our workers were making more money per hour and had access to better benefits than union workers in Ohio. Father Fox then spoke up and said, “David, please understand, we don’t care about the facts. All we care about is that unions lift people out of poverty and we want you to be union.” This was disturbing as I knew full well that those workers in Cincinnati were being hoodwinked by savvy union language promising higher wages but also containing omissions about union dues payments reducing the take-home pay. These workers were also told about better benefits not realizing that most didn’t kick into being until three years after the signing of any agreement and only if an employee worked full-time for at least six months. Because many union employees still only work part-time despite supposed gains, they would never be eligible for such benefits. This is because although the union differentiated between full- and part-time (full time 35 hours versus 30 hours for EMS employees), the union contracts contained out-clauses where the building owners or managers could set working hours because of energy or security concerns. When they did so, they were often the same hours. Therefore, the facts didn’t fit the impressive statements of up to 150 percent improvement in take-home-pay the clergy proposed as the reason for lauding the union for saving workers from so-called poverty situations. It was thus clear that these clergy did not understand at all the factual evidence in the union contracts. Worse still, apparently they did not care.

  Another tense moment occurred when I asked if the clergy’s congregations were aware and approved of their work and position on this issue. I was told in no uncertain terms by several members of the group that it was not their congregation’s concern or decision. I then asked again if it wasn’t important to make sure they had the facts. Linda McCrae who was sitting next to my daughter said they did not need to know the facts as they were busy people. Kelly nearly jumped out of her seat at that point but I restrained her before she could act. Thank goodness I had told her to let me do the talking at the meeting. Otherwise, the outcome of the meeting might have been worse than it was.

  Kelly probably could describe my facial expression better than me, but I am sure I was blank-faced for what seemed like five minutes. In fact, I wondered if I had really heard Father Fox and Linda’s words correctly, but after a moment’s thought, I realized I had. Because I didn’t want to cause a scene, we moved on to other subjects but the words spoken resonated in my confused mind for sometime to come. If he and Linda, and others like Rev. Wood, didn’t care about the facts, then what could be done?

  After some talk about various wage scales for workers both in our industry and others, I asked Rev. Hawking about the voice mail message she had mentioned. She finally agreed to let me listen, and when I did, there was nothing in the message about Sallie Mae canceling our b
usiness. Rev. Hawking backtracked a bit, but it was clear to me and the others that she had exaggerated her communication with the Sallie Mae executive. Considering the deception later, it disturbed me that someone like Rev. Hawking was providing others with false facts inflaming an already delicate situation. The old adage, “the truth shall set you free,” is still a tried and true staple and I was convinced that if I could simply help people like these clergy understand the facts, they would soon soften their position regarding their support for the SEIU. Despite my efforts, such a blessing never occurred.

  Later, when we asked the Sallie Mae executive whether EMS lost the Sallie Mae account because we were not union, she denied it as well as making any statement to that effect to Rev. Hawking. Instead, the account changed cleaning contractors because of a “nationwide contract decision” having nothing to do with the SEIU–EMS stalemate. It was all price-related. She thanked us for our 16-year business relationship and wished us nothing but the best.

  As the calendar turned to late April, another EMS customer, The Children’s Museum, was subject to union activity. A van approached the building full of union organizers. They passed out flyers and posted one on the customer’s bulletin board. On April 27, protesters banging buckets to make themselves noticed collected at the corner of Market and Illinois streets before police responded and broke up the rally.

  On the first day of May, union organizers in purple shirts bearing flyers with the headline, “Try Your Fortune On $45 A Day,” appeared in quick succession at Market Tower, Indianapolis Power and Light, and in front of the Guaranty Building. Featured on the flyer was a full paragraph of accusations by “Sadie–EMS Janitor.” She alleged that when she “got sick and had to miss days because I was in the hospital, EMS f red me.” Such statements hurt me deeply as this was not at all what had occurred, and she knew it. Seeing people like Sadie being used by SEIU made me want to strike out with every bit of energy I had to stop the madness. But I knew Stern and his union buddies would welcome such behavior and I had to swallow my tongue and do my fighting in other ways.