Committee reviews part-time custodial contract award; union representation and staffing questions remain

The Finance and Operations Committee reviewed a recommended award for the district's part-time custodial services and heard repeated questions from committee members about staff counts, union reporting and whether current SJ Services employees would be rehired by the new vendor.

Doctor White presented the procurement timeline and said the selected vendor (identified in the materials as the group doing business under ServiceMaster/Integrity Concepts) has a local office in Bridgeport, provided references that returned "excellent," and can have staff up and running in 45 days. "This right now represents a cost of approximately a hundred thousand dollars less than last, the contract that we're currently in for 2425," Doctor White said.

Committee member Miss Downer pressed for specific details. She repeatedly asked how many employees the contractor would employ, whether SJ Services employees would be retained or simply change company names, and whether the contract structure or an organizational chart would bypass Local 271's existing reporting. "I need the answer to how many employees these folks are gonna be employing and who are these employees," Miss Downer said. She added she was concerned that simply swapping vendor names could result in the same workforce under a new label.

Doctor Negron clarified this agenda item covered only the part-time custodial contract and that a separate ABM-related contract—previously discussed and containing the disputed org chart—was a different procurement. "This is just the 1 for the part time services. So this would be the 1 that if everything goes well, this would be the company that would then be coming in to replace SJ Services," Negron said.

Staff noted the selection committee included district stakeholders and that the recommended bid included an attendance tracking system the administration said was valued because it helps account for worker attendance. Doctor White and other staff members agreed to follow up with Miss Downer on two specific questions: the exact number of employees the contractor will employ and whether employees previously employed by SJ Services would be hired by the new contractor.

Doctor White also said the recommended vendor had a lower overall projected cost than other bids and that some lower bids were unclear when attachments and total costs were included. The committee did not vote to finalize the contract at the meeting; members asked staff to return with the staffing and vendor-composition details at or before the next meeting.