By Claudia Irizarry Aponte, THE CITY
This article was originally published
on
by THE CITY
More than 30,000 luxury building workers and doormen authorized a strike on Wednesday if they do not reach a deal on a collective bargaining agreement that expires April 20.
Luxury building workers and doormen at more than 3,000 buildings, from modest rentals to Billionaire’s Row supertalls, on Wednesday evening authorized a strike if they do not reach a deal on a new collective bargaining agreement to succeed one that expires on April 20.
Talks between the workers — negotiating through their union, 32BJ-SEIU — and the Realty Advisory Board on Labor Relations (RAB), which represents the landlords, are ongoing, with both sides meeting on Tuesday and slated to bargain again on Thursday.
A major point of contention for workers is a management proposal demanding cuts to the workers’ paid vacation and sick time, as well as proposals for workers to contribute toward their health insurance, which is currently paid for entirely by building and apartment owners.
Felix Figueroa, a concierge at The Hamilton, a Morningside Heights co-op in Manhattan, alleged that the RAB was going to extremes and “not bargaining in good faith.”
“They want to go from A to Z. We don’t think that it’s a good time to be moving backwards,” on health coverage two years into the pandemic, the 54-year-old said. “We should be moving forward.”
After a rally on Park Avenue, workers voted to permit a strike if a deal is not reached by April 20. If negotiations collapse and both sides do not agree to a contract, it would be their first work stoppage since 1991, which lasted 12 days.
The strike would impact more than 550,000 building residents, disrupting package and mail deliveries as well as building security if the more than 30,000 workers withhold their labor.
“On the 21st, there will be a strike if there’s no contract,” said 32BJ-SEIU president Kyle Bragg said in an interview during the Upper East Side rally in support of workers on Wednesday afternoon.
“We remain optimistic that the negotiations are progressing, but there’s a long way for us to go before we get an agreement,” he said. “We haven’t yet discussed economic issues beyond talking about what it takes to sustain our benefits packages, and so we hope to talk more about that tomorrow and then we’ll see where we’re at then.”
‘No, No, No’
The union contract covers superintendents, porters, handymen, concierges and door attendants in properties owned or managed by Related Companies, Allied Partners, Vornado Realty Trust and other firms that negotiate together as the Realty Advisory Board on Labor Relations, which has properties in every borough except The Bronx.
At the rally stretching along Park Avenue from East 79th Street to about East 86th Street, hundreds of those workers railed against the landlords’ demands, shouting during a call-and-response: “They say givebacks, we say fight back!”
Among those in attendance were a few powerful New York Democrats, including U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Gov. Kathy Hochul, and Upper West Side Councilmember Shaun Abreu.
Asked about the management proposals, building superintendent José Aponte, who held a sign that read “Strike ready,” said simply, “No, no, no. That’s not good.”
Realty Advisory Board President Howard Rothschild contended in a statement Wednesday afternoon that management’s demands for health insurance givebacks and cuts to paid time off were “reasonable.”
“The RAB has proposed fair and reasonable wage increases, as well as the sharing of healthcare costs through employee contributions to the premiums, of which employees currently pay zero,” the statement read. “Our relationship with the union has resulted in more than 30 years of uninterrupted labor peace and we continue to work towards that same goal this year.”
Pandemic Changed Nature of Job
Ardist Brown, a 61-year-old concierge at 66 Central Park West, noted that building workers had to take on several roles as COVID lockdowns turned residences into all-purpose live, work and play zones, making management’s proposed cutbacks to vacation and sick time sting more.
“I wore many hats during the pandemic: I became the home health aide, I became the dog walker, the package deliverer, I delivered food,” he said.
Even before the strike authorization vote, the Teamsters — who represent UPS drivers and other trucking and delivery services — vowed to support the doormen.
“The Teamsters stand in solidarity with our sisters and brothers at 32BJ and will give the union our full support to win their strike,” said Teamsters Joint Council 16 spokesperson Alex Moore in a statement to THE CITY Wednesday morning.
With market rents soaring, building workers are bargaining for a bigger piece of the pie, seeking increased wages and better benefits. In March, the median Manhattan asking rent reached an all-time high of $3,700 – more than 21% more than a year ago.
Workers are demanding a wage increase “at least” tied to inflation, which in New York City sits at a rate of 5.1%, and no changes to their health care, currently funded entirely by building and apartment owners.
Also front of mind for workers during negotiations are the more than 170 32BJ-SEIU members who died because of the coronavirus, including 40 who worked in residential buildings.
Brown, the 66 Central Park West concierge, got COVID in March 2020. He was back to work three weeks later. He was also around for the last doormen’s strike in 1991.
He had a message for the building owners: “Don’t forget about those who were in the business of saving lives during the pandemic.”
THE CITY is an independent, nonprofit news outlet dedicated to hard-hitting reporting that serves the people of New York.
The Union makes good points and deserve fair pay, though contributing zero to healthcare is a bit much in 2022.
The use of the word “luxury” in the headline and the article is very loaded and biased. Yea, having a doorman is a luxury. But as the article later notes, there are plenty of buildings that have doormen that are far from “luxury.” Putting this word in the headline is misleading and inflammatory.
Agreed, the headline is weird. This agreement is about building staff; might be doormen, might be handymen.
All these workers (and roles) are important, but the math is the math — this money will come for somewhere. And for the mostly non-luxury buildings who are covered by this labor agreement, any changes will reduce affordability for someone else.
Salaries should increase with inflation. But contributing nothing to healthcare in 2022 is way outside the norm. The 32-BJ pension plan was also on a Dept of Labor watchlist years ago.
Most building staff units and most building owners would probably prefer to negotiate with each other directly.
There is a crazy system where a union that was not elected by this generation of workers negotiates with an unelected board that represents 3,000 buildings. Decisions are being made miles away from where anyone actually lives or works.
Thanks to all of you above. Wanted to post this in the morning but didn’t have time. How did someone possibly come up with the term “luxury” buildings? So bizarre, so wrong.
i would criticize the headline a different way: ALL doorman buildings will be affected, not just luxury building doormen. or maybe that should be ‘door people’, or ‘door attendants’.
either way, i don’t feel ‘inflamed’ or ‘misled’ as you do, Leon — i didn’t take it personally.
Agree, but the union represents more than just doorpeople. Porters, handymen etc are also covered, and it’s not just buildings with doorpeople.
Wage increases tied to inflation aren’t even really wage “increases.” If the price of everything around you goes up by 5%, and your salary stays the same, your buying power goes down. So asking to keep up with inflation isn’t an unreasonable request — you’re effectively just asking not to receive a pay cut.
Obviously this strike will be a big pain if it happens, but I’ve got to say that, as laid out here, I’d have to be on the side of the union. Yeah, it’s money out of my pocket if they win, but their positions just don’t sound unreasonable.
Actually, the word luxury in the context of real estate does not necessarily indicate posh digs. A “luxury” building in the original use of the word had certain specific features. Google it to learn more.
Most jobs that offer healthcare require some contribution, no? These aren’t all ultra-luxury buildings.
It’s disgusting that they are asking these workers to take a reduction in pay and benefits. Let them pay less for the million dollar one bedroom in crappy buildings, and put the money toward paying people who open the f’in door for them. Outrageous.
I’m with you, Caryn. The workers in my building worked incredibly hard over the past 2 years and should not have to take a pay cut while the landlords hiked my rent to almost unaffordable levels. Shame on them for their corporate greed. Now that many of us are working from home and have essential deliveries on a frequent basis, this will really sting, but I side with the union. Maybe we should bang on our pots at 7:00 PM.
@ BishopN
The landlord owns the building and is entitled to charge whatever they want for rent. This is not “greed”. If the rent they’re asking is “unaffordable” then the apartment would remain empty. If you think your landlord is charging you too high for rent then move to The Bronx.
And since you’re so in favor of paying doormen higher salaries then this will increase your rent even more.
Solidarity with 32BJ-SEIU and all building service people! Landlords and real estate interests have gotten fat and rich for too long off the backs of service people and tenants. For those worried the money has to come from somewhere, there’s good cause eviction and right to remain legislation to advocate for in Albany that would prevent landlords from jacking up rents. I hope the union gets what they’re asking for and more!
I sure don’t live in a “luxury “ building, but it’s the UWS, and in any other city (except maybe SF), my rent would be considered WAAAAAY luxury. I like my simple building, no frills— but it is FANTASTIC having doormen. As a physician I find it IMMORAL that there is no health coverage— crazy and wrong. Good luck to these wonderful workers!!💕
@Anne. The workers have health insurance. The co-op owners and rental building landlords pay 100% of the cost. That’s very unusual and is the issue.
I know 50+ people who work in ‘luxury’ buildings and they have 30 days of vacation plus sick leave (which they can add to their vacation time). They are far better off than people who are not in a union. The article states that they have health insurance which is paid for by the building and apartment owners. Why is it wrong to expect them to contribute to their own health insurance?
Maybe because the union negotiated for it through collective bargaining on behalf of their members? Have we forgotten the bloody and violent struggle unions and their members have gone through to benefit all workers? We would be working 6 day weeks if it wasn’t for them. More power to 32B/J.
Sorry— I misread about health insurance…
Bottom line is these guys should get a fair shake from the high rents
When it goes too high, people will not renew.
I don’t know what my doormen make, but I like to think a significant hunk of my crazy rent goes fairly to THEM.
But, if rents keep going up, it is hard. Still, I have lived ALL over USA, and it’s hard to leave nyc if you love it…
Landlords know that…
“Luxury building workers” want to strike “modest rentals”. Many of the buildings whose employees are represented by the union by the union are not “luxury” buildings.
And the usual politicians come out in support of the 30,000 workers when most of their constituents are the 550,000 building residents. Why is that?
Shouting in the street by “hundreds” of people does not exactly constitute a vote by “30,000” building employees authorizing the strike.
One would expect more intelligent reporting from the Rag.
What is the alternative to the union? I don’t like the threat of striking… I also think that the staff deserves a good wage and health benefits.
The labor costs in some buildings (definitely not all) can be crippling because of the union wages. There is a wide spectrum of luxury in NYC. But I’m not sure that there is an alternative? Isn’t that a problem?
Oh for heavens sake. Plenty of people contribute to their health care and manage just fine. Talk about a luxury
So just because other people don’t get their health care covered, these workers shouldn’t either? IMO, health insurance should be a right, not a privilege, we’re the only industrialized country that doesn’t provide some sort of basic health care for its citizenry, and I see nothing wrong with providing it to workers whose union successfully negotiated it.
Being a doorman is difficult work. They were there 24/7 during the pandemic, when many of us hunkered down and had everything delivered, not to mention constant exposure to dozens, if not hundreds of people per day. I’m retired, but when I worked, I was making six figures at a desk job, and if I felt like getting a second cup of coffee and surfing the Internet before I settled down to work, I had that luxury, doormen do not.
Their job is physically taxing, especially with the exponential growth in deliveries (and the corresponding laziness in residents who say ‘Can you put it in the elevator?’ instead of coming down to get a heavy package) and I feel that providing them with health insurance at no cost is not unreasonable
But health care is not a right. It’s a commodity, which means someone has to pay for it.
There are 30,000 union members and 500,000 tenants that will be effected. Most of the tenants are not wealthy. All costs are passed on in maintenance and rent. As one of those 500k no one is paying for my healthcare and I did not get an inflation adjustment in my salary. I cannot believe this group would side with the union over the people.
All I have to read is that workers want a bigger piece of the pie to understand the bias in the workers’ argument. Why are workers entitled to share in the perceived gains due to higher rents? Are they also willing to share in the losses and aggravation that building owners endure when things go wrong? With unions, it’s always a one-way street. Without buildings being built and owned, there wouldn’t be a need for building workers. And there are fewer owners than workers. Let’s be realistic about which entities create value for many parties.
I would imagine the same ones supporting the union workers also frequently lament the problems their building workers have with finding parking spots and think they should get preferential treatment. It’ s kind of absurd to support both views when these workers aren’t experiencing the soaring rents referred to if they’re driving to work from far-flung locations that aren’t served well by mass transit. Can’t have it both ways.
There are many middle class coop owners struggling to keep up with the constantly escalating maintenance costs from city gouging real estate taxes, water and sewage etc. building workers are a huge chunk too so bargaining the union is normal – I pay 30% of healthcare premium. Wish those politicians would come out and demonstrate about my real estate taxes
Yes, I agree. The building staff should have a fair package, but when most of the tenants are not getting 5% raises year after year, they are also are feeling the strain over time.
Maintenance has increased steadily, far outpacing average wage gains. Health insurance for most workers are also some form of cost sharing whether that be premiums, HSA accounts, etc.
The points about high rents don’t really apply to Co-op buildings where the ones paying for the staff are the people living there.
I was involved in the last 2 contracts 4 years ago and before that 8 years ago Both side do not want a strike It comes down to what both sides feel is a fair deal. Icould tell you this paying part of a premium for health care is a non starter for 32bj. 32bj gives in on other points but WILL NOT give in on healthcare This will go right to the deadline and depending on where they are at will extend the deadline before striking