Daniel Meagher, the president of the Harvard University Security, Parking, and Museum Guard Union said that the tension Harvard is experiencing—between the corporate model and its progressive, liberal identity—is one that is currently playing out all across the country.
Meagher argued that while the University frequently cites the standards set by the market during negotiations, it is the “social, political, and economic environment of Harvard,” specifically, that matters.
Referencing the health care benefits requested by the unions, Jaeger said that the University has a responsibility to be an innovative employer.
“We’re well aware, eyes wide open, that we’re asking Harvard in the health care area to do things that are really unusually progressive and innovative. And we think that’s exactly right,” Jaeger said.
Still, Hausammann said that the University’s non-profit status does not make it immune to consideration of the financial implications of its decisions.
“Considering economic factors isn’t at odds with being a non-profit,” she said. “We are fortunate not to be limited by quarterly results or shareholder demands, and that means that we need to be focusing on maintaining our ability to provide education, research, etc. for the years to come.”
Others agreed that the need to fund cutting-edge research and maintain a high quality of scholarship is just as important an element of Harvard’s financial commitment as supporting its staff. “I think we’re maximizing our ability to fulfill [Harvard’s] mission,” Murphy said. “Every dollar that goes towards the lab might be [toward] that lab that cures cancer.”
A NEW NORMAL?
After the lengthy and difficult negotiations with HUCTW this year, many unions have voiced concerns that future labor relations at Harvard will prove just as difficult.
“The big question at stake in our 2012 issues, or one of them that’s still being played out in other negotiations going on right now, is what is the new normal really going to be?” Jaeger said.
For Langley, the new normal promises contention. He stressed that Harvard’s progressive labor practices emerged only after concentrated effort from unions and the wider Harvard community. “In the future, we will have to fight harder to maintain those standards,” he said.
Jaeger said that during the negotiations, it became clear that uncertainty about Harvard’s future as an employer is rooted within the administration itself.
“I think there’s at least some confusion in senior administrative circles about what sort of employer Harvard is trying to be,” he said.
Yet Murphy maintained that although the two sides may disagree, the administration and the union leaders have strong, longstanding relationships that will enable them to deal with the difficult problems that need to be resolved.
—Staff writer Christine Y. Cahill can be reached at christinecahill@college.harvard.edu. Follow her on Twitter @cycahill16.
—Staff writer Dev A. Patel can be reached at devpatel@college.harvard.edu. Follow him on Twitter @dev_a_patel.