SEIU 73 raises concerns about contracted custodial work at Cook County SD 130

Doug Taylor, speaking for SEIU 73, told the Cook County School District 130 board that contracted night‑shift custodial crews are not completing the work specified in their contract and that district custodians are still performing many tasks the contractor is paid to do. "People come in after the company's been there and there just really isn't a clear indication that anyone has been there other than the lights are on," Taylor said, adding that mops and buckets were left dirty and machines were not cleaned.

Ricky Baldwin, identified as chief negotiator for SEIU, expanded the account and said union members toured district buildings and collected photographs showing trash left behind, equipment not stored, and a damaged gym floor he attributed to contractor use of the wrong cleaning machine. "We brought pictures to you of the buildings after we went and toured all of the buildings," Baldwin said, asking the board to reconsider the decision to contract the late shift. He said the district spends "150 something thousand" on the service and questioned whether the district is getting value for that money.

Both speakers emphasized that district custodians continue to follow their checklists and that contractors' presence has not reduced custodians’ daily tasks. Baldwin said some problems predated the contract but that the late‑shift contracting decision coincided with new and recurring issues.

The speakers offered to provide the board with photographic evidence of the conditions they described. The board did not engage in a back‑and‑forth with the public commenters during the public‑comment period, per the meeting’s stated ground rules. The meeting record does not show an immediate staff response or a formal motion connected to the union’s request during the public‑comment period.

The board’s agenda later moved into the consent and action items; members did not vote on a motion related to the custodial contracting during the public comment segment. The district did confirm in subsequent discussion that three contract psychologists had been engaged on an as‑needed basis and that aggregate spending for psychological services the prior year was $154,272.

What happens next: The union representatives asked the board to reconsider contracting decisions; the transcript shows they offered documentation to board members, but the board did not announce an immediate follow‑up in public session.