Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Labor Relations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board pulls janitorial contract after union says outsourcing breaches bargaining agreement
Summary
A proposed $975 janitorial contract for the district art showcase was withdrawn after CSEA said outsourcing custodial work violated the union’s contract; trustees asked staff to confirm liability and venue requirements and to offer the work to employees first where feasible.
Margaret Caldera, president of CSEA Chapter 115, told the board the union filed a grievance and a cease‑and‑desist over the agenda item that would hire Merchants Building Maintenance LLC for janitorial services at an off‑site district art showcase.
"Our custodial staff are fully qualified and available to perform this work," Caldera said, adding that outsourcing would violate the collective‑bargaining agreement and state law unless the union was first consulted.
District staff said the vendor was proposed because the event would be held on private property and the district had concerns about liability and timing. Facilities staff told trustees the district’s facility‑use system can capture nonprofit status and other documentation and that rate schedules and permit data are stored in the system.
Trustee discussion centered on three questions: whether the mall or private venue requires outside contractors, whether custodians had been offered the work and declined, and whether using district employees for work on private property would raise insurance exposures. Superintendent Roach and staff said employees are typically offered the work first but that staff believed there was insufficient employee interest or the venue required contractor services. The motion to approve the contract was withdrawn later in the discussion so staff could review the contract and confer with CSEA.
Board action: after hearing the union’s concerns and receiving administration assurances that staff would follow up, the board withdrew the motion on the janitorial contract to allow staff and the union to resolve the grievance and confirm whether district employees could perform the work or if the landlord required the vendor.
The episode drew attention because the item was small in dollar terms (under $1,000) but raised broader questions about contracting practices, bargaining‑unit rights and the district’s procedures for vetting vendors for events held on private property.
