Jackson Backs Union; Meets With President

University administrators and leaders of the Harvard Union of Clerical and Technical Workers yesterday disclosed new and telling details about their ongoing contract negotiations.

As a visit from the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson focused public attention on the talks, both sides went further than usual in marshalling facts to make their case to the public.

The union took the unprecedented step of disclosing the details of its bargaining position. Union chief negotiator Bill Jaeger said yesterday that the union now wants a 4.15 percent pay increase for the first year of its new contract.

Jaeger said the difference between the union's 4.15 percent request and management's offer of about 4 percent amounts to $123,000. Harvard's annual operating budget is about $1 billion.

Union leaders see management's refusal to close the small gap as a disappointing sign, while a management spokesperson said the smallness of the gap is itself a sign of progress.

Jaeger said the difference is "the best evidence yet that we're not arguing about money."

"It's about the University being afraidpublicly to listen to its workers," Jaeger said.

Said union organizer Kris Rondeau, "what we'refinding is that all good faith attempts atconversation and negotiation are just rejected,flat out rejected."

Harvard Vice President for Government,Community and Public Affairs John H. Shattuck saidthe narrowing gap on the wage issue is "a positivedevelopment."

"Clearly, it does show some signs of progress,"Shattuck said.

But Shattuck cautioned that the negotiation isto set a contract for three years, not just one.While the union has offered to agree now on thefirst year of the contract and negotiate thefollowing two years later, management has refused.

Shattuck said a three year contract isnecessary for the "stability" of the Universityand its staff. He said Harvard's contracts withits other unions are all for at least three years.

The sides are farther apart on a pay raisepackage for years two and three of the contractthan they are for year one, negotiators said.

Management disclosed some details of themediation process for the first time yesterday. A"fact sheet" from the Harvard office of news andpublic affairs said outside parties beganfacilitating the talks in July (the old contractexpired June 30). Later, the fact sheet said, "atthe request of the union the Federal mediator wasjoined by [a] second mediator."

Jaeger called that description inaccurate, butsaid he was bound to keep information about themediators confidential.

The management fact sheet reiterated paststatements about management's 4 percent offer, anoffer above the rate of inflation and above themedian wage increase for union contractsnegotiated in New England during the first threequarters of 1992.

A union handout included an array of financialinformation that described Harvard as "aprosperous and thriving university."

The union has been raising the stakes in thewar of words. "They are looking for a fight,"Rondeau said. "We'll make this a national fight."

Jaeger echoed Jackson, framing the contractquestion this way: "It is a moral question. It isa test of the University's character. It is astruggle for Harvard's soul and we intend to win."

Shattuck agreed that it is possible to framethe question of a pay raise in moral terms. "Ithink Harvard has an obligation to provide fairand progressive employment relationships," hesaid.

The moral argument is really at the core of theunion's plea for a wage increase--union membersearn less than others at Harvard, so they deservea bigger raise, because they need it more.

Jaegerput the argument in humorous terms atyesterday's rally. "Management negotiator DavidBray's increase, not his whole salary but just hisincrease from July 1, could buy lunch for ourwhole 3,600 person union," Jaeger said. "And itmight be a good idea, because we're running out ofmoney between paychecks."

But Shattuck had an economic response toJaeger's charge. The management spokesperson saidpay raises must be examined in the context of thesurrounding market.

Harvard's clerical and technical workers,Shattuck said, are paid "more than market wages,"while salaries for faculty and administrators are"somewhat below market.

"It's about the University being afraidpublicly to listen to its workers," Jaeger said.

Said union organizer Kris Rondeau, "what we'refinding is that all good faith attempts atconversation and negotiation are just rejected,flat out rejected."

Harvard Vice President for Government,Community and Public Affairs John H. Shattuck saidthe narrowing gap on the wage issue is "a positivedevelopment."

"Clearly, it does show some signs of progress,"Shattuck said.

But Shattuck cautioned that the negotiation isto set a contract for three years, not just one.While the union has offered to agree now on thefirst year of the contract and negotiate thefollowing two years later, management has refused.

Shattuck said a three year contract isnecessary for the "stability" of the Universityand its staff. He said Harvard's contracts withits other unions are all for at least three years.

The sides are farther apart on a pay raisepackage for years two and three of the contractthan they are for year one, negotiators said.

Management disclosed some details of themediation process for the first time yesterday. A"fact sheet" from the Harvard office of news andpublic affairs said outside parties beganfacilitating the talks in July (the old contractexpired June 30). Later, the fact sheet said, "atthe request of the union the Federal mediator wasjoined by [a] second mediator."

Jaeger called that description inaccurate, butsaid he was bound to keep information about themediators confidential.

The management fact sheet reiterated paststatements about management's 4 percent offer, anoffer above the rate of inflation and above themedian wage increase for union contractsnegotiated in New England during the first threequarters of 1992.

A union handout included an array of financialinformation that described Harvard as "aprosperous and thriving university."

The union has been raising the stakes in thewar of words. "They are looking for a fight,"Rondeau said. "We'll make this a national fight."

Jaeger echoed Jackson, framing the contractquestion this way: "It is a moral question. It isa test of the University's character. It is astruggle for Harvard's soul and we intend to win."

Shattuck agreed that it is possible to framethe question of a pay raise in moral terms. "Ithink Harvard has an obligation to provide fairand progressive employment relationships," hesaid.

The moral argument is really at the core of theunion's plea for a wage increase--union membersearn less than others at Harvard, so they deservea bigger raise, because they need it more.

Jaegerput the argument in humorous terms atyesterday's rally. "Management negotiator DavidBray's increase, not his whole salary but just hisincrease from July 1, could buy lunch for ourwhole 3,600 person union," Jaeger said. "And itmight be a good idea, because we're running out ofmoney between paychecks."

But Shattuck had an economic response toJaeger's charge. The management spokesperson saidpay raises must be examined in the context of thesurrounding market.

Harvard's clerical and technical workers,Shattuck said, are paid "more than market wages,"while salaries for faculty and administrators are"somewhat below market.