Like Political Protesters, DC 37 Struggles to Organize in Central Park
After six months of closed-door negotiations, municipal union goes public with effort
July 14th, 2008
Several dozen members of DC 37, the city's largest municipal employee union, swarmed the gated entrance to the Conservancy Garden, a posh reception area tucked along the eastern edge of Central Park.
Well-dressed patrons of the Central Park Conservancy, the public-private partnership that manages the park, began to trickle in for music and refreshments. At 6 p.m. sharp, the protesters were there, too, handing out leaflets attacking the Conservancy's "anti-union tactics."
The spectacle was orchestrated in the hope of stoking a response from management.
A few minutes after the fundraiser started, management complied.
A Conservancy employee named Katie emerged to ask the protest organizers, with all the politeness she could muster, to "call it a night."
When D.C. 37 organizing director Edgar DeJesus refused, Katie explained that she would now have to call Conservancy President Douglas Blonsky.
Which is exactly what DeJesus wanted.
Central Park, cherished by New Yorkers as an idyllic escape from urban life, was also once the province of unions. But when the Conservancy was created in 1980 and charged with the task of revitalizing the park, the new organization began to replace municipal employees hired by the Parks Department with its own private workforce. Since then, the union workforce in Central Park has dwindled rapidly to a meager two dozen or so-a trend mimicked in parks across the city.
Late last winter, the union began quietly rebooting its organizing drive, approaching Conservancy workers after work and having them sign cards affirming their interest in forming a union. By early this year, DeJesus said, organizers had gathered signatures from a majority of the Conservancy's approximately 140 blue-collar workers-enough to petition for a union election. They could not find many of the other workers, since these were generally seasonal or part-time.
To secure the remaining signatures and convince the rest of the workers to support the union, organizers began approaching them in the park during working hours.
That, according to DeJesus, tipped off Conservancy management.
DC 37 alleges that Blonsky began meeting with workers to discredit the union effort and DC 37 during working hours. They also say he interrogated workers he suspected of helping union organizers in one-on-one "captive meetings."
DC 37 decided to first confront the Conservancy on Feb. 14, when organizers met with Blonsky and presented written proposals for how to conduct a fair and transparent union election. Eight days later, DeJesus said, he received a two-line email from the Conservancy's lawyer rejecting the proposal and retaining the right to campaign against the union.
Workers have since begun asking DC 37 for their cards back, and the number of park workers at union meetings has dwindled. At the same time, the Conservancy has been hiring seasonal workers for the summer months, winnowing the percentage of workers who have formally agreed to form a union.
One Conservancy worker who has helped lead the organizing effort said talk of the dispute had all but ceased among park employees, and that only a handful of his co-workers were still interested in unionizing. He said he felt deserted.
The Conservancy declined to comment on the allegations of harassment and union suppression. Through a spokesperson, Blonsky released a statement defending the Conservancy's treatment of its workers and calling for a union election.
"The Conservancy feels strongly that each employee-once they've been given a chance to learn all of the facts-has the opportunity to vote in a free and open government-administered election," he said. "Transparency is vital in this process."
The dispute has caught the attention of both the City Council and the Parks Department.
In April, Council Member Joseph Addabbo (D-Queens) wrote a letter to Conservancy employees co-signed by 27 other members of the Council supporting their effort to unionize. He said he had traded phone messages with Parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe about the issue, and that they would continue to monitor the situation to see if further action was necessary.
"If we get to the point where the workplace environment is being jeopardized, or even the work being done at Central Park is being jeopardized, then I believe it's in the best interest of the City Council and Commissioner Benepe to step in and resolve it," he said.
But, he added, "only if it gets to that point-and it may be heading in that direction."
Well-dressed patrons of the Central Park Conservancy, the public-private partnership that manages the park, began to trickle in for music and refreshments. At 6 p.m. sharp, the protesters were there, too, handing out leaflets attacking the Conservancy's "anti-union tactics."
The spectacle was orchestrated in the hope of stoking a response from management.
A few minutes after the fundraiser started, management complied.
A Conservancy employee named Katie emerged to ask the protest organizers, with all the politeness she could muster, to "call it a night."
When D.C. 37 organizing director Edgar DeJesus refused, Katie explained that she would now have to call Conservancy President Douglas Blonsky.
Which is exactly what DeJesus wanted.
Central Park, cherished by New Yorkers as an idyllic escape from urban life, was also once the province of unions. But when the Conservancy was created in 1980 and charged with the task of revitalizing the park, the new organization began to replace municipal employees hired by the Parks Department with its own private workforce. Since then, the union workforce in Central Park has dwindled rapidly to a meager two dozen or so-a trend mimicked in parks across the city.
Late last winter, the union began quietly rebooting its organizing drive, approaching Conservancy workers after work and having them sign cards affirming their interest in forming a union. By early this year, DeJesus said, organizers had gathered signatures from a majority of the Conservancy's approximately 140 blue-collar workers-enough to petition for a union election. They could not find many of the other workers, since these were generally seasonal or part-time.
To secure the remaining signatures and convince the rest of the workers to support the union, organizers began approaching them in the park during working hours.
That, according to DeJesus, tipped off Conservancy management.
DC 37 alleges that Blonsky began meeting with workers to discredit the union effort and DC 37 during working hours. They also say he interrogated workers he suspected of helping union organizers in one-on-one "captive meetings."
DC 37 decided to first confront the Conservancy on Feb. 14, when organizers met with Blonsky and presented written proposals for how to conduct a fair and transparent union election. Eight days later, DeJesus said, he received a two-line email from the Conservancy's lawyer rejecting the proposal and retaining the right to campaign against the union.
Workers have since begun asking DC 37 for their cards back, and the number of park workers at union meetings has dwindled. At the same time, the Conservancy has been hiring seasonal workers for the summer months, winnowing the percentage of workers who have formally agreed to form a union.
One Conservancy worker who has helped lead the organizing effort said talk of the dispute had all but ceased among park employees, and that only a handful of his co-workers were still interested in unionizing. He said he felt deserted.
The Conservancy declined to comment on the allegations of harassment and union suppression. Through a spokesperson, Blonsky released a statement defending the Conservancy's treatment of its workers and calling for a union election.
"The Conservancy feels strongly that each employee-once they've been given a chance to learn all of the facts-has the opportunity to vote in a free and open government-administered election," he said. "Transparency is vital in this process."
The dispute has caught the attention of both the City Council and the Parks Department.
In April, Council Member Joseph Addabbo (D-Queens) wrote a letter to Conservancy employees co-signed by 27 other members of the Council supporting their effort to unionize. He said he had traded phone messages with Parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe about the issue, and that they would continue to monitor the situation to see if further action was necessary.
"If we get to the point where the workplace environment is being jeopardized, or even the work being done at Central Park is being jeopardized, then I believe it's in the best interest of the City Council and Commissioner Benepe to step in and resolve it," he said.
But, he added, "only if it gets to that point-and it may be heading in that direction."
