Landlord shortchanges workersand tenants Landlord shortchanges workersand tenants! The night ...
The night before last New Year's Eve, about 100 members of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Local 32BJ, led by John Santos and joined by city council members Miguel Martinez (10th District) and Gale Brewer (6th District), gathered at Broadway and W. 81st St. to demonstrate against Mark Scharfman, dba FSM Management, Beach Lane Management, Big Apple Realty and a tangled web of many companies holding and/or managing approximately 90 apartment buildings (with more than 1000 rental units) throughout the city.
Scharfman, No. 38 on New York Press' "50 Most Loathsome New Yorkers 2003" list, owns and manages the two adjacent apartment buildings on the northwest corner of Broadway and 81st St.
Members of 32BJ challenged Scharfman to make a New Year's resolution to treat his buildings' service employees fairly. They demanded that Scharfman recognize workers' 32BJ membership, and give superintendents, doormen, porters and other workers fair pay, decent work schedules, health care, pensions and other benefits.
"It's almost unheard of for large buildings belonging to a major real estate owner such as Scharfman to not be members of 32BJ," said Councilwoman Brewer. "What that says to me is that the owner is not willing to pay the going wages and give the going benefits to employees, and that impacts on tenants too."
The correlation between workers' rights and tenants' quality of life, she explained, is "if a landlord doesn't give workers their rights, he usually isn't giving tenants their services. The landlord is shortchanging both workers and tenants. In the case of Scharfman, this seems particularly true, because my office gets numerous complaints from [his] tenants?about insufficient heat and hot water, elevator problems and many other violations in his buildings."
Martinez and Brewer were among 44 city council members who signed an Oct. 1, 2003, letter to Scharfman, requesting that he work with 32BJ to "address the needs of superintendents and maintenance workers and find a comparable solution to improving the working conditions of these workers."
According to 32BJ spokesperson John Hamill, 75 of approximately 100 workers employed by Scharfman have signed cards of intent to join 32BJ. That is a National Labor Relations Board-recognized way to establish unionization of a building's work force?if the landord agrees. Sharfman's companies have thus far refused.
The demonstration was held when tenants were returning home from work. Several residents avoided crossing the picket line by darting down an alley between the two buildings to reach basement entrances. Others took leaflets and stopped to ask what it was all about. Some cheered, claiming they, too, as tenants, have complaints against Scharfman.
According to 32BJ representatives, Scharfman has fired 10 employees in retaliation for attempting to join 32BJ and encouraging other workers to follow suit. Among them is Manuel Nina, superintendent of a six-story, 44-unit building in Washington Heights. Nina's employment was terminated with two weeks' notice after 11 years on the job.
Nina says Scharfman claims to have fired him because of "false medical claims and poor job performance." The real reason, he says, was his attempt to join 32B-J and getting "40 or 50 other guys to sign cards of intent, too."
Scharfman is trying to evict Nina, his wife and three young children?and other fired employees and their families?from apartments they occupy in his buildings. His eviction case is scheduled to be heard in Manhattan Landlord and Tenant Court on March 1; he will be represented by 32BJ attorneys.
The labor dispute has been brought before the NLRB, by cross cases filed by Scharfman's Beach Lane and FSM Management, Local 187 and 32BJ.
In an NLRB case filed on August 27, 2003, Scharfman accuses 32B-J representatives, including Manuel Nina, with harassing, intimidating and threatening employees with physical harm because of their Local 187 membership, and making false statements to obtain signed authorization cards for 32BJ.
On Sept. 9, 2003, 32BJ filed an NLRB case against Local 187 for accepting "unlawful assistance" from Beach Lane Management and FSM Management. Six weeks later, on Oct. 22, Local 187 filed an NLRB case against 32B-J for "making false representations and coercing workers upon fear of violence to execute authorization cards" to join 32BJ.
On Jan. 29, 2004, 32BJ filed charges against Scharfman's companies for firing and attempting to evict employees signing 32BJ cards of intent, issuing written warnings for 32BJ activities, promising higher pay to discourage 32BJ membership, threatening to sell property and hire outsiders for work previously given to employees, giving unlawful assistance to Local 187 and making unauthorized deductions from workers' paychecks for building violations. 32BJ seeks recognition of the union, as well as reinstatement for Nina and other fired workers, with full back pay and interest on withheld wages.
According to Local 187's legal counsel, Steven M. Coren of Coren & Braun, PC, "32BJ is aggressively attempting to interfere with Local 187's long-standing collective bargaining relationship with several of Scharfman's companies' employees since the 1980s, and those employees had all signed cards of intent for Local 187, as well as authorizations for deduction of dues from wages. Furthermore, Manuel Nina's claims regarding failure to provide medical coverage are inappropriate because Local 187's contractual agreements did not provide medical benefits until some time last year, which was after his injury occurred."
In response, 32BJ's John Hamill says, "Workers are guaranteed the right to choose which union represents them. Traditionally, in the labor movement, Local 187 has been considered a house union with stronger ties to management than to membership. We at 32BJ consider them to be a shady union, and the admission that they didn't even have health care for their members until six months ago speaks for itself. If, in the 21st century, they're unable to win those kinds of benefits for their members, they're totally ineffective."
Hamill says 32BJ hopes for an NLRB ruling by early March. Representatives for Scharfman's companies did not respond to requests for comments on the dispute.