The Devil at My Doorstep

by David Bego

  If these words heightened Rev. Hawking’s view that Rev. Schaedel was about to endorse the IWJ’s fight, she was dead wrong for the next paragraph began, “In good conscience, I cannot sign my name to this petition. In fairness, let me brief y tell you why.” What followed were several bullet-point paragraphs explaining, among other matters: 1) there existed a conflict of interest as IWJ was “closely aligned” with SEIU, “a major financial contributor to IWJ;” 2) “rights of workers” meant letting workers decide for themselves whether they wanted to unionize after both the union and management presented “their respective case to the workers,” a reference to this not occurring according to union demands; 3) that EMS had filed numerous charges against SEIU with the NLRB and after “talking to some of our Catholic immigrant workers who work at various other companies, I have reason to believe that these charges are true;” and 4) some workers have been told “by union organizers and members of IWJ that they will receive 12 dollars per hour as ‘workers did in Cincinnati,’ but that “Catholic leaders in Cincinnati report that the union settled for just over seven dollars per hour, plus the employees had to pay 40 dollars a month for union dues. This would leave many I know (who presently make at least eight dollars per hour) worse off than they were before.”

  As a final bullet point, Rev. Schaedel suggested that based on his presence in downtown Indianapolis “over the past several months,” and his receipt of flyers from “union organizers making various claims about various companies,” he felt “even a surface investigation on my part reveals that most of those claims are simply false. Without truth, there will not be ‘justice and mercy.’”

  To emphasize his feelings, Rev. Schaedel added what I considered to be an important sentence, “. . . our Catholic clergy and other leaders must follow their own informed consciences in this regard.” How I wished this would occur—where all of the clergy as well as those pointing fingers at EMS and me would take the time to learn the true facts.

  Rev. Schaedel then wrote, “. . . as Vicar General, I want to make it clear that signatures of Catholic Clergy do not constitute a formal declaration of support for this initiative by the Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis. Nor does it necessarily constitute former support of the Catholic parishes in which they serve. In most cases, the majority of parishioners seem to have no idea that their pastor has even signed such a petition or joined the Indianapolis Clergy Committee.”

  In fact, Rev. Schaedel pointed out, “in talking to Catholic priests, whose names are listed, I find it worrisome that few of them seem to know what they were actually signing. In fact, at least one of the pastors whose name is listed has no idea how or why his name was included!”

  To close the letter, the Vicar said that while he advocated fair wages and benefits, and that the workers be treated with dignity and respect, “I am not in agreement with the tactics currently being employed by Interfaith Worker Justice and the union to accomplish these goals.”

  Kissing a priest might cause some to blush during these times of political correctness, but if Rev. Schaedel had been present when I read his letter, I would have kissed him regardless of the consequences. Certainly, his letter made it clear to Rev. Hawking, Rev. Wood, and the others that SEIU was using clergy and employees solely for the union’s own personal gain. SEIU didn’t give a darn about such shenanigans in accordance with Stern’s credo—using the persuasion of power to win at all cost.

  On December 23, one pastor, Steven C. Schwab, reacted to Rev. Schaedel’s letter by sending one of his own to Rev. Hawking. In part, it read, “I have learned that my name has been listed as a member of the Indianapolis Clergy Committee of Interfaith Worker Justice. At no time have I taken any action to associate myself with this group . . . I must insist that my name be at once removed from any association with this group.”

  As 2008 drifted into view, I still had hope that our “surge” initiative in filing the 33 charges against SEIU and letters such as the one sent by Rev. Schaedel might finally end the EMS–SEIU war. Certainly we had wounded the enemy, but it remained to be seen whether our strong stand had killed our foe. It hadn’t, at least not yet.

  On a cold and windy January 11, two days after a U-Haul truck with a rat in it was paraded before Market Tower, IFW held a prayer meeting. On Martin Luther King Day, January 21, SEIU sponsored a “Pray for Justice, March for Working Families” event. The union was not about to give up as the war extended beyond the two-year mark as evidenced by a new flyer being circulated featuring the words, “Corporations in Indianapolis Generate $1 Billion A Day; Janitors who clean their offices and laboratories earn as little as $26 a day without affordable health insurance. Something Is Wrong Here.”

  Attempting to satisfy his EMS contract commitments, his investors, and placate SEIU, Gerald Donaldson decided to “remain neutral” in the dispute. In a late January letter, he informed Revs. Woods and Hawking his company “would support any process that can be agreed upon between the two parties as an effective mechanism for determining whether or not employees wish to be represented by SEIU.” To indicate his support for workers, the company agreed to a “matching challenge of up to 25,000 dollars or to establish a scholarship fund for the City’s janitors in coordination with the Islamic Society of North America and Interfaith Worker Justice.” Reading the letter made me wonder what Revs. Woods and Hawking, and of course, SEIU, thought of my customers’ position. I was certainly pleased that Gerald was sticking by us and more than willing to agree to an acceptable process toward deciding whether EMS employees wanted to be unionized. Because the law provided for the secret-ballot elections, all we had to do was follow the law.

  It appears the responses from Gerald and Reverend Schaedel were not what the union expected and escalated the attacks against EMS. Beside a large photograph of a rat were the words, “Meet The EMS Rat” followed by “Why is EMS a Rat Contractor?” and “Unfair Labor Practices . . . Unsafe Working Conditions.” Under this were the words, “Damaged Electrical Extension Cord, Unlabeled Bottles of Hazardous Chemicals.”

  Reading this flyer made me want to take the afternoon off from the world. Imagine how badly I felt and then triple those feelings. For the company I had founded and loved to be labeled with such words as “rat” was simply beyond comprehension. And yes, while the electrical cord and unlabeled bottles were technically violations, they were miniscule in stature. But it didn’t matter, the union was going to use these violations to show how evil we were, how we didn’t care about safe employee working conditions. Ah, the power of words, the ability to choose what to say and what not to say so the worst surfaced for those who knew no better. If I thought the war was over, I was sadly mistaken. We had simply entered another phase of the costly encounter.

  To further the quest to embarrass EMS, four people, one dressed in a gray rat costume, appeared at an appreciation luncheon sponsored by IFMA for contractors like EMS on January 25. Even though the meeting was by invitation only and held in a private room at a local establishment, SEIU organizers violated private property and pushed pass the hostess into the room where they handed out yellow flyers. They only left when officials threatened to call the police.

  Through February, March, and April, less union activity occurred causing me to hope the worst might be over. Also, during this time period the union was in contract negotiations with contractors that had signed Neutrality Agreements. I was anxious to see the final contract as I anticipated it would be subpar just as the ones in Houston and most recently Cincinnati had been. It would be an opportunity to prove the only benefit the union was providing was the questionable right for the employees to pay union dues. Additionally, we expected soon a decision on the charges EMS had filed against the union for illegal recognitional picketing and secondary boycotting. We were not disappointed in the outcome of either situation and it appeared our efforts were beginning to bear fruit.

  The contract, despite a press release by the SEIU touting a great victory for janitors, was anything but t
hat and, in reality, a step back. Starting wages were set at seven dollars per hour less 25 cents per hour for the probation period at a time when the majority of janitors were starting at that or higher in Indianapolis. It also had a provision for an increase of 30 cents per hour for existing employees that barely covered monthly union dues. The union’s boast of up to 150 percent increase in wages was based on the same claims made in Cincinnati, already mentioned except for one major point. Every SEIU contract I have seen has a provision where building owners can set the hours based on security or energy demands. Basically this results in no change of operational hours in those buildings and as a result little or no increase in full-time employment. Additionally, they touted the fact that janitors now had recourse from management harassment and abuse.

  Digressing some, in discussions with union companies in both Cincinnati and Indianapolis because contracts have been negotiated and ratified in both cities, I have consistently heard the SEIU is disorganized and does not monitor any provisions of the contract very well including wages, benefits, hours of work, and worker rights. Basically, it’s business as usual for the contractors, and the SEIU keeps collecting monthly dues from the employees. Maybe this explains why so many companies sign the Neutrality Agreements, something my sense of right and wrong would not allow me to do to my employees!

  In April 2008, the Indianapolis regional office of the NLRB issued a complaint against the SEIU on the basis of charges we had filed in 2007. The complaint alleged that the union had engaged in illegal secondary boycotting at a local area golf course, as well as in illegal recognitional picketing at numerous downtown Indianapolis locations where EMS employees worked. This was a major victory for EMS, as we had demonstrated that the union’s months of picketing activities and related protests had extended beyond the permissible 30-day period with the union having requested an NLRB election.

  These series of events set the stage for the SEIU to sign an agreement with the NLRB that they would not picket EMS or conduct a secondary boycott of EMS in central Indiana. The union was told that if they did not agree to discontinue their illegal picketing activities, the NLRB was prepared to go to federal court to seek an injunction preventing them from doing do. With the writing on the wall, the union agreed to stop violating the law in this way.

  At that point the NLRB put pressure on me to sign an agreement settling a series of unfair labor practices that the union had filed alleging we had threatened or coerced EMS employees. I knew the allegations were blatantly false and simply a part of the union’s arsenal of words against me, but in hopes that these settlements would bring an end to the war, I agreed to post a notice saying that EMS would not violate the law—already true before we posted the notice. In settling these charges, EMS did not admit any liability or wrongdoing.

  All of this set the stage for the next major battle, strikers’ reinstatement, an important part of the SEIU’s Corporate Campaign playbook, which I did not fully understand at the time even though I suspected it was a major plank in their campaign.

  In May, we received a new challenge—several of the striking EMS workers asked to be reinstated. While I sympathized with their plight and truly believed they had been used by SEIU based on exaggerated claims as to what the union could do for them, we had to stand firm with our convictions that the strike was an economic strike and not an unfair labor practice strike, and that the strikers engaged in illegal recognitional picketing which the union had been found guilty of by the NLRB. I also had compassion for the replacements who had the courage to defy the union by accepting employment during a difficult time. I had great respect for these people and was not about to turn my back on them when they had been there for me.

  Through May, June, and July, the union pressed on. Several people accosted Dee, an EMS employee, as she left work at 11:00 p.m. Despite her telling them she was not interested, they harassed her as she walked away. Writing about this is easy to do, but it is important to remember how Dee, a quiet woman just trying to make money for her family, must have felt alone late at night as the workers approached her. I am sure she was scared; the exact feeling the union expected and wanted to occur. All because people like Dee had no taste for SEIU and their ruthless campaign to force unionization on hard working employees regardless of the consequences. Following the sorry episode, Dee wrote a letter to EMS expressing her appreciation for EMS’s support.”

  Letters to customers, including one from Rev. Woods to the Market Tower building owner “urging them to choose a different [cleaning] contractor” continued in July. Drum-banging and foghorn-yelling also continued as union supporters yelled, “EMS Has To Go.” On September 23, Allison Luthie, Community Organizer for Jobs With Justice sent a scathing letter to the Tenants at “101 W Ohio.” The lengthy first sentence read, “As you may know, seventeen individuals who work in the building in which your office is located are about to lose their jobs because your landlord, Amerimar Enterprises, has chosen to end its contract with their employer and begin a new contract with another cleaning company whose record as an employer leaves much to be desired.” She further explained that the reference was to janitors who had “helped make history” by “organizing as part of the Indianapolis Justice for Janitors campaign.” Having set her agenda, Allison then attacked EMS writing, “During the past several years we have heard many negative reports about EMS and its labor relations practice that suppress the rights of workers and perpetuate poverty in our community . . . . We found the stories of several current and former EMS workers from Indianapolis and Cincinnati, Ohio to be deeply disturbing. They told us of being subjected to a hostile work environment that includes unsafe working conditions and racial discrimination.”

  Replacing a union contractor as the cleaning source for this building had obviously struck a chord with Luthie, which was not surprising since the SEIU was a dues paying member of Jobs With Justice. But stating that we perpetuated poverty in the community and were guilty of racial discrimination was totally out of bounds and a true distortion of the facts! Regardless of these facts, Luthie had defamed our company. Lawsuits could be filed against Jobs With Justice just as they could have been filed against SEIU for any number of defamatory remarks and actions. But this was not my way. Certainly, I had hired legal counsel to defend our rights before the NLRB, and certainly I consulted with the attorneys regarding many of our actions, but I did not want to sue anyone unless absolutely necessary. But the temptation was there to haul JWJ into court, an organization totally in SEIU’s pocket despite their website motto, “building a strong, progressive labor movement that works in coalition with community, faith, and student organizations to build a broader global movement for economic and social justice.” Basically, JWJ was an extension of the SEIU, one that believed “organizing and mobilizing working people and their allies is key to building power.” One specific goal of theirs was: “Develop leaders and activists to lead our fights,” something quite evident during the SEIU campaign to destroy EMS.

  Many JWJ organizers had participated in song and prayer rallies in August when flyers were being passed out and cowbells used to bring attention to worker demonstrations. During late September, EMS employees at the university reported that SEIU organizers were outside the college chanting, “Hi, Ho, Hi, Ho, EMS Has Got To Go.” On October 1, tension nearly produced violence again when an employee of an EMS customer blocked a door where SEIU organizers and Interfaith Clergy were trying to enter. The employee was pushed causing her to spill coffee on one of the Clergy members. Police were called before any fights broke out. The clergy member filed a police complaint but later withdrew it.

  Five days later, SEIU tried another tactic, one causing me to throw my arms up in disbelief. Outside one of our buildings in downtown Indianapolis, about a dozen bags of trash were left on the sidewalk. Flyers stated that “Amerimar Treats Janitors Like Trash,” a reference to our customer. All I could do was apologize to those folks and tell them I hoped that such childish actions would ce
ase soon and once and for all. But the incidents did not stop because in mid-November, union organizers collected in front of Amerimar’s Philadelphia headquarters where they protested and handed out flyers. A month later in Cincinnati, SEIU representatives chanted and passed out flyers outside the Hixson Building. One union organizer blocked a door so employees could not enter. Police were finally called to quench any possible violence.

  Victory

  DESPITE HOPES SEIU WOULD DISAPPEAR INTO THE SUNSET, THE YEAR 2009 brought more conflict with the union. And continued heated debate about the controversial Employee Free Choice Act as union leaders like Stern pushed politicians toward a vote in the Senate. I proceeded along two fronts, continuing to fend off attempts by SEIU to destroy my company and a separate campaign to reveal the truth about the un-American nature of the EFCA, a threat to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, if there ever was one.

  On the SEIU side, we noted several attempts during the early months to continue the dirty campaign against EMS, but of main concern were the upcoming NLRB hearings. I knew we were the underdog going in based on our interaction with the Board to that point.

  The rub centered on EMS’s refusal to reinstate strikers who asked to be brought back to work when the strike ended. Remember in May 2008, the union had agreed not to picket or secondary boycott EMS. In exchange, we agreed to settle 13 outstanding NLRB complaints. This appeared to be a good deal on both ends, with my hope the SEIU would drift away and leave our employees, customers, company, and me alone.