UNITE-d, but not done

Congratulate Angelica Corp. and UNITE HERE for resolving the most public piece of their dispute—the piece that is about labor unions. And throw in kudos to the students and institutions that have kept laundry company Angelica in the spotlight for its labor conditions and relationship with workers. But don’t issue any praise to any of these players for improving the plight of workers in the low-wage laundry facilities.

The owners of Angelica and collective bargaining group UNITE HERE reached an agreement last week that allows workers in all Angelica’s non-union facilities to choose whether to let UNITE HERE serve as their exclusive bargaining representative. As for UNITE HERE’s side of the deal, the union has agreed to withdraw charges of unfair labor practices that it has filed against Angelica and to cease its campaign against the company.

In short, Angelica gets relief from the bad publicity that UNITE HERE and partner organizations have generated and the workers get to vote on whether to accept a union. Workers’ rights per se do not factor into the agreement at all. There is no guarantee of higher wages or better conditions or more benefits. How is this the major victory that both sides are claiming it to be?

Among the group most vocal in its excitement has been Students Against Sweatshops. SAS at Duke adopted the cause when Duke sold Angelica its laundry facility (which services most of Duke University Health System) in April 2004. SAS began a targeted campaign that included periodic protests ranging from bus stop demonstrations to wrapping the entrance of the Allen Building in aluminum foil. Its most public and disruptive protest occurred during an open speech by President Richard Brodhead to the undergraduate student body.

Although the methods SAS employed were sometimes objectionable, there are few people on campus who have not heard of their complaints against Angelica. Local media, including the News & Observer of Raleigh, covered their demonstrations and helped publicize their struggle. In the sense that Angelica and UNITE HERE settled the labor dispute because of public attention, SAS’s work contributed to this settlement.

But the majority of the time SAS rallied for support, it was for the cause of worker conditions—not for the right to unionize. SAS’s targets were at times confused, sometimes protesting against Duke’s contract with Angelica and sometimes objecting to outsourcing in general. The University was the easiest target, but as this settlement—which does not directly involve Duke—reveals, it was certainly not the most influential one.

Any role Duke played in this agreement was purely behind-the-scenes. As has always been University policy, it did not get involved in the direct question of whether the Duke Angelica plant should be unionized. Duke did, however, make Angelica aware that it wanted the laundry facility and UNITE HERE to resolve their private battle. The University’s motivation in this is often understated and perhaps misunderstood, but driving its non-involvement policy is a fundamental thought that all workers’ advocates ought to keep in mind: Sometimes unions are an aid to improving workers’ conditions, but they are not an end in themselves. The impetus is on the people involved to improve conditions; a union alone is no solution.