Angered by the contract they recently inked with Harvard, disgruntled custodial workers from Local 254 asked the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) earlier this month to nullify the agreement.

Union members charged that Cathy Conway, their business agent, represented them in bad faith during the recent negotiations and vote.

Several workers, who spoke under the condition of anonymity, said that union members had no input in the negotiations and were never shown the entire contract before the vote.

The case is currently under investigation, and the NLRB must make a final decision on the matter by December, according to Ronald S. Cohen, the NLRB's supervisory field-attorney.

"If we determine there has been a violation of our statutes, we will try to settle the matter satisfactorily to all parties involved," Cohen said.

Cohen said he was not sure the NLRB would have the authority to nullify the binding contract solely on the basis of the alleged procedural errors in the ratification process, but said the case would be reviewed further.

Union members who were upset by the results of their meeting with the NLRB said they plan to draft a letter to the international union in Washington, DC, to alert them of the problems within Local 254.

"The next step is a tough one because I don't know where we stand," said Ray Clarke, one of the union shop stewards who brought the charge before the NLRB.

"I think if we could let other people know of the behavior of this union, we could discourage others from getting involved with unions [like this one]," Clarke said.

Cohen said the workers also have the option of trying to decertify from their current union if they are unsatisfied with the outcome of the NLRB investigation.

But workers cited a catch-22 situation, saying they would not be able to decertify from the union until the contract, which includes a 20-month wage freeze, a reduction in vacation time and a decrease in sick pay, is 90 days from expiration.

Union workers are also unhappy with the conduct of the University throughout the negotiation process.

At least one worker alleged that although it was the union which represented them unfairly, Harvard did nothing to protect the interests of its workers.

"How could the University allow this to happen to people who have been working for the University for years?," Clarke asked.

Conway, the union's business agent, repeatedly refused to comment when approached for this article.