DeKALB | NIU’s Building Services workers say they’ve had enough.

University officials, on the other hand, feel their managerial decisions are justified.

A 1 p.m. bid meeting Wednesday in the Holmes Student Center’s Heritage Room was followed by a march across campus by about 40 members of the AFSCME (American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees), Local 963. The group ultimately arrived at the Altgeld Hall third-floor office of NIU President John Peters, where an open letter to the NIU community was delivered.

A matter that has been disputed recently between the parties has to do with the new bidding process, in which staff members will bid on what is referred to as “campus entire.” In the case of “campus entire,” the proposed jobs on campus do not specifically state where custodians will be working or what their role will be, which is a change from the previous method in which job descriptions were specified for the workers that chose to inherit the bid. As the meeting progressed, many union members in attendance began to shout at Building Services supervisor Brian Hart, who conducted the meeting, demanding to know which areas would be covered by those accepting the “campus entire” bid, to which Hart declined to comment.

Hart believes the process is justified, citing managerial flexibility as one of its upsides.

“They had set areas, but it’s hard to manage that,” Hart said in reference to the old process. “This gives us more flexibility.”

Robert Albanese, associate vice president of Finance and Facilities Operations and the subject of much scrutiny from the union, echoed Hart’s viewpoint.

“What we’re stating is that due to the flexibility we need as management, we’ll assign where they work. From the employee’s point of view, they know they’re coming to work at NIU,” Albanese said. “With a campus this size, we need that flexibility. We reserve the right to move people.”

Work is defined and assigned during the course of the work day for those who accept the “campus entire” bid, said Steve Cunningham, associate vice president for Administration and Human Resources.

James Sheridan, president of AFSCME Local 963, feels the bid process is unfair to employees.

“The bid process where Mr. Albanese wants to have undefined areas, undefined work and undefined days, which makes it impossible for people with children and spouses to spend time with them, is unfair,” Sheridan said. “Who can work a job with undefined area, work and days on 48 hours notice?”

Upon conclusion of the bid meeting, Sheridan stood in front of the masses present, stating that “this bid process is a farce,” and asked the group, “would you like the old one back,” to which the majority responded yes.

Forty of the 70 or so members present at the bid meeting assembled in the King Memorial Commons, then proceeded to march across Normal Road toward Altgeld Hall.

Chants of “What do we want? Bid meeting! When do we want it? Now!” echoed across the area. As the group approached Altgeld, it began chanting “We want respect,” “We want Bob” and “We want Albanese fired.” The workers continued vocalizing upon entering Altgeld Hall, where they ascended to the top floor and presented the aforementioned letter to the office of President Peters.

Albanese felt the demonstration was unnecessary.

“We thought we were conducting the bid meeting within the parameters of our contractual agreement, but they thought otherwise,” he said. “They chose to put together a march. I understand their right to do so, but not their way of handling it.”

Some of the information cited in the letter presented to President Peters and the community is not completely accurate, Albanese said.

“They say they work for the Physical Plant, and that’s incorrect. They work for Finance and Facilities,” Albanese said. “I don’t know where they came up with that.”

The greatest point of contention in the letter is in regard to the union’s assertion that temporary workers and student workers are not subject to security background checks.

“Every employee in building services goes through a background check. Security is important to us,” Albanese said.

Another point the union stresses in its letter is that “anyone in Building Services may have the keys to your office, or floor, or locker room.”

“Temporary employees return keys at the end of their shift,” Albanese said. “We need to give people access so they can do their job. No one walks home with a set of keys.”

Shane Larsen, vice president of AFSCME Local 963, feels student safety may be at risk.

“The letter is referring to student workers being able to wander in and out wherever they please,” he said.

Cunningham believes the respective sides are close to a resolution.

“This incident is an exception to a good working relationship. I think we’ll see this resolved in the near future,” Cunningham said.

Albanese agreed that both sides can reach a compromise.

“We are in talks right now with AFSCME representatives about this issue. It is not fully resolved, but we’re confident it will be,” he said.

Larsen believes a resolution is possible, but does not expect the process to be an easy one.

“I foresee a resolution, but not out of any good faith,” he said. “They’ll be forced to by other people.”