Unions still wield clout, but labor doesn’t always have legal edge

UNITED THEY STAND: Workers at the Providence Renaissance Hotel voted to join Unite Here Local 217 on Nov. 12. Among the union supporters were workers Hipolito Rivera, houseman, left, and Raquel Cruz, housekeeper. / PBN PHOTO/ MICHAEL SALERNO
UNITED THEY STAND: Workers at the Providence Renaissance Hotel voted to join Unite Here Local 217 on Nov. 12. Among the union supporters were workers Hipolito Rivera, houseman, left, and Raquel Cruz, housekeeper. / PBN PHOTO/ MICHAEL SALERNO

Unions may hold considerable clout in Rhode Island, but labor law doesn’t always favor their side.

In construction, developers can’t be forced to hire organized labor through the use of so-called project labor agreements. And in employment, although workers have a right to form unions, employers may appeal successful votes for unionization.

Providence Renaissance Hotel organizers, who say they have tried to form a union for several years, were worried before they took a vote to join Unite Here Local 217 that the results would be challenged. But following their recent 23-17 vote to join the union, the owner of the Renaissance said it would abide by the election results.

In construction, the use of project labor agreements, once required in Providence, then tossed out in 2000 in a court challenge, remains misunderstood, said Gregory Mancini, executive director and general counsel of the Rhode Island Building and Construction Trades Council, a trade organization for union workers.

- Advertisement -

In the court case, Providence had required a project labor agreement for the construction of the Courtyard by Marriott hotel, as well as all future large building projects, as a condition of approving a tax stabilization agreement. A lawsuit by nonunion contractors overturned the requirement.

“As a regulatory requirement, or a government requirement, it is a violation of labor law,” said Mancini. “It tilts the playing field in favor of the unions.”

The I-195 Redevelopment District Commission recently clarified its position on the use of union labor in developing the district lands, responding to a radio report that indicated unions would be required.

“The 195 Redevelopment Commission does not have and has never had a requirement for developers to hire union-approved contractors,” said Chairman Joseph F. Azrack in a statement. “That said, we are mindful that our construction trades are part of the solution for safe, expedient and quality work.”

If developers want a project labor agreement, they are free to negotiate one. Many large projects in Providence and Rhode Island have been the result of such agreements, which can insulate a project from work stoppages and delays.

Critics have said they also can lead to cost increases on projects.

Mancini argues they make good sense because they provide developers of large, complex projects with a large and sufficiently trained pool of skilled labor.

The most significant private project now under construction in Providence, the $220 million South Street Landing, is being built with union contractors, according to a spokesman for the development company.

When completed, South Street Landing will include apartment towers, a parking garage and a combined home for nursing education offered through the University of Rhode Island and Rhode Island College. It also will have administrative offices for Brown University.

Richard Galvin, president of CV Properties LLC, which is developing the project, recently declined a request for an interview on the subject of organized labor in construction. But in a statement he said that “we enjoy a good working relationship with various union organizations in both Boston and Providence, and we look forward to continuing those relationships as we move forward.”

CV Properties also plans to build a significant project in the I-195 Redevelopment District, a combined effort with Wexford Science & Technology of Baltimore that will include a 175-room hotel in its initial phase.

Galvin would not address whether the hotel construction will involve a project labor agreement, but according to the Local 217 union, he has already indicated he will agree to not intervene if employees want to unionize once the hotel is operating.

Local 217 argues that unions help communities, because many of the workers who would be covered through collective bargaining would see pay increases and improvements in health insurance coverage, benefits that would immediately reach their neighborhoods.

Conversely, the union said the Procaccianti Group, the Cranston-based company that owns the Renaissance Hotel, has tried to discourage hourly employees, such as housekeepers and doormen, from organizing since 2007.

Raquel Cruz, a housekeeper at the hotel since 2008, is among the union supporters. She said she’s paid $12.24 an hour, without health benefits. She believes she will do better under a union.

“They don’t want the union,” she said of hotel management.

The Procaccianti Group contends it has not tried to prevent employees from forming a union, but wanted the union organizers to follow the appropriate election procedures.

“The union is now doing what the hotel has advocated for over 21/2 years, namely, following the process of the NLRB,” said Ralph Izzi, a spokesman for the hotel company.

The national labor relations act has a clearly defined process, which calls for a secret-ballot election, he said. “Hotel management has never opposed a union, provided the procedure for an election under the NLRB is followed,” he said. •

No posts to display