Harvard security officers are now in the process of negotiating their first contract as members of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 615. Although we are thrilled that they now have the opportunity to bargain, their campaign for a better workplace will not be over until an acceptable contract is signed and implemented. And even after this process, the sustainability of such a contract will be very much contingent on the continued strength of the union and support from the Harvard community.

While this may seem overly cynical about the state of labor relations at Harvard, it is obvious from looking at the track record of our administration that workers’ rights are simply not their priority—and the Harvard security officers’ labor struggle is a clear example of this.

The fight last semester for a security officer union was by no means new. The same campaign dates back to the 1970s when Harvard security officers originally formed a union that maintained considerable strength for nearly 30 years. The struggle was renewed, however, a few years ago when Harvard decided to outsource all but 7 security officer positions to a private security firm, AlliedBarton.

Harvard made the switch—the University claimed—because subcontracting is more efficient and that as an educational institution, negotiating security contracts is not a main concern. Harvard, however, is not just an educational institution. As the oldest continually existent corporation in America, with an endowment nearing 30 billion dollars, and one of the area’s largest employers, it is an entity that cannot hide behind an educational veil; it is an entity that is more than capable of directly hiring security officers or at the very least ensuring that outsourced workers have just wages, fair grievance procedures, and a safe and respectful work environment.

It is hard to believe that a university that prides itself on its standards of excellence does not retain those same standards for subcontractors, like AlliedBarton, which are responsible for our own Harvard community members’ livelihoods. AlliedBarton can boast that it is the nation’s largest U.S.-owned security firm and brings in sizable profits, but the company’s track record in terms of labor policies is shameful.

Recently, many AlliedBarton employees have voiced their concerns about the company’s treatment of workers, including its failure to pay workers a living wage, offer affordable health care, and provide sufficient training and working conditions. All across the country, campaigns have developed to unionize security officers, which have already galvanized nearly 100,000 workers.

Thankfully, Harvard is leading the pack in these campaigns and our unionization victory last semester was a great step forward for the nation-wide movement. Nevertheless, Harvard should not take this victory, and sit idly by as AlliedBarton and security officers negotiate, but instead it should exert its tremendous influence to guarantee that AlliedBarton agrees to and implements a fair and just contract.

We realize that Harvard often needs a bit of a push to enact policies that support workers, and hope that once again the student body will be a large component of that force. Harvard students have a long history of recognizing the need for student-worker solidarity and of pressuring the Harvard administration to recognize what it means to be an underpaid worker at Harvard. Students have organized together to make the administration more accountable to the Harvard community, and to recognize that when any part of our community suffers, we all suffer.

In 2005, during the “Justice for Janitors” campaign, over 700 Harvard college students supported the janitors in their fight for better wages, and the Undergraduate Council (UC) voted in favor of the “Resolution in Support of Workers at Harvard.” Last year, over 1,150 students filled out comment cards demanding that dining hall workers receive fair treatment in their June 2006 contract negotiations.

Students have frequently stood with Harvard’s workers, and this student-worker solidarity has been tremendously effective. We can use our unique position to send a clear message to Harvard: Students care about the way that workers are treated. We need to continue to demonstrate to the administration that the guards that keep us safe and with whom we interact daily are just as much a part of our community as our deans and professors, and we will not allow their demands for a better workplace to go ignored. As a university, Harvard can choose to be a microcosm reflecting society’s worst ills (oppression, discrimination, inequality), or it can choose to push forward and set the standard for which all workplaces hope to reach.

As part of this push forward, we challenge students to not only put pressure on the administration but to challenge themselves to bridge the gap that exists between us and Harvard employees. This campaign should remind us of the immense privilege we have as students at Harvard, and to reflect on that privilege and its accompanying influence. Right now students have the opportunity to tell Harvard that every person deserves dignity and respect at work, that secure employment should not just be the luxury of the wealthy, and that no person should be working full-time and still struggling to support their family.

It is time to hold Harvard accountable and stand for security.

Alyssa M. Aguilera ’08-09, a Crimson editorial editor, is a Government concentrator in Cabot House. Claire Provost ’07, a Crimson news editor, is a special concentrator in Dunster House. Jessica G. Ranucci ’10 lives in Holworthy Hall. They are members of Student Labor Action Movement (SLAM).