LABOR - Union request for Neutrality on Economic Development Projects

Stuart Appelbaum, the union head who spearheaded last year's successful fight to require some recipients of city subsidies to pay their workers more, has a new request for mayor-elect Bill de Blasio: labor neutrality.

"I’ve always believed that the best way to deal with income inequality is through collective action by workers," said Appelbaum. "And that means forming unions and negotiating contracts. I think that the best way to move forward is to be looking for labor neutrality and labor peace as part of our notion of living wage."

In its most basic formulation, labor neutrality means that a developer agrees not to interfere with the formation of a union, and the workers agree not to disrupt business by, say, going on strike.

Appelbaum would like to see labor neutrality language in play any time the city's economic development corporation subsidizes a development.

In some instances, labor neutrality agreements are already a prerequisite to doing business with the state.

For example, every bidder for the Aqueduct racino had to sign a labor peace agreement.

That paved the way for the employees of Resorts World, the winner of that bidding process, to unionize in 2011 and, ultimately, to this year's arbitration agreement granting workers hefty new raises.

"Thanks to a provision in New York law requiring a labor peace agreement for Aqueduct operators, [the Hotel Trades Council] was able to organize over a thousand workers and conduct productive negotiations with Racino operator Genting without disrupting operations at the Racino or jeopardizing hundreds of millions of dollars in gaming revenue generated for the State," said Josh Gold, the hotel's political director.

This year's state budget, similarly, included a provision that requires anyone bidding for one of New York's new casino operating licenses to sign a labor peace agreement.

"It’s been done at the casinos that are approved," said Appelbuam. "It’s done at the Port Authority. It’s done at public authorities around the country. Other cities and states have done it. And basically the notion is this: That if you’re using public money to support private development, you don’t want the public’s money to be used to deny workers the right to take collective action. So for instance, an employer receives $100,000, you don’t want that money to either be used ... to fight workers acting collectively."

De Blasio was a relative latecomer to the original living-wage battle, but he has since signaled his interest in further expanding living wage in New York City.

Appelbaum sees labor neutrality as the logical next step, since union membership also brings members more than just higher wages.

"We’ve always believed that the most effective anti popular anti-poverty program in the country is a union contract," he said. "And we think that thereare many things that are included in union contracts beyond wages and health care."

Did he ever make a similar argument to the Bloomberg administration?

"It’s a different era now," he said. "We knew that the mayor would not be receptive to that at all."

Neither de Blasio's campaign nor a spokesman for the E.D.C. had any comment.

But the push comes at the same time that the Supreme Court is deliberating on the constitutionality of such labor neutrality agreements.

Naturally, the proposal also raises some flags for some business leaders.

"The question as to whether the business community could support this really depends on what they mean by labor neutrality," said Kathy Wylde, president of the Partnership for New York City, a business advocacy group. "If it means a union shop and it results in making it more difficult to develop projects in lower income neighborhoods, it would raise concerns."

Source: Capital New York