Contract Dispute Clouds Half Dome

Labor agreement for valley workers expires next week

by Glen Martin
San Francisco Chronicle - March 8, 2005

(For clarification: Under the Yosemite service employee's current contract's bargaining agreement, workers can strike only if the contract expires and bargaining teams do not agree to extend deadlines until a new contract is ratified.)

It could be a difficult summer in paradise if a disputed labor contract between Yosemite National Park's concessionaire and its employees isn't resolved by next week.

Members of the Yosemite Chapter of Local 535 of the Service Employees International Union say the concessionaire, Delaware North Corporation Parks & Resorts at Yosemite, wants to cut benefits to workers, making it difficult for them to live in Yosemite Valley and its environs.

Delaware North representatives say they are dealing in good faith with the union, and that the company's demands are reasonable. The current contract will expire at midnight Monday.

Positions seem to be hardening. Worker representatives say a collapse of the talks might lead to actions this summer that could impede concessionaire business in the park. Company executives maintain the union is attempting to strong arm them into accepting terms, and say they won't be intimidated.

Such actions, say union representatives, could involve sit-ins or other strategies that impede business at the stores, restaurants and hotels that operate within the park. The company, the park's sole concessionaire, employs about 750 workers in the off-season, and up to 1,500 from late spring to early autumn.
The major sticking points are proposals by the company to increase the number of hours an employee must work before receiving benefits and to increase employee health benefit premiums.

"They're aggressively trying to take back benefits, and that will make it impossible for many of us to live here," said Dana Behr, a union shop steward and a waiter at the Ahwahnee Hotel in Yosemite Valley.

Behr said the company wants to boost the number of weekly hours an employee must work to qualify for benefits from 25 hours to 35 hours.

"Most of us are already struggling to get our 25 hours a week from the company," she said. "I own a house in Mariposa, and I'm borrowing money to pay my mortgage because the company isn't giving me enough hours."

Behr said the concessionaire also wants to change the employees' health plan, requiring workers to pay 65 percent of the premiums, up from the current 25 percent.

"Most companies pick up half of the premium at a minimum," she said.

Company spokeswoman Kerri Holden said there were some hot button issues complicating the negotiations, but characterized the company's position as fair and reasonable.

She said the company favors increasing the number of hours for permanent employees, "because it's better for us. We provide a lot of employee housing in Yosemite Valley, and space is very tight. Having fewer people working longer hours is desirable, but many of the people who come up here do so for the lifestyle, and don't want to work full weeks."

Holden acknowledged Delaware North proposed heftier health premiums for employees, but said that was in line with guidelines established by other companies in the restaurant and hospitality business.

"We also offered to increase the general annual payroll by $200,000, but the union rejected that," she said.

Behr said workers generally are disinclined to strike.

"They're very afraid of losing their jobs," said Behr. "They can't afford to miss even one paycheck."

Behr said she is hopeful negotiators will agree to continue talks on a weekly basis if agreement isn't reached by the March 14 deadline. As long as negotiations continue, she said, the current contract stipulates that the union can't strike and the company can't lock out workers.

But if the talks bog down, Behr said, workers have some options.

"With the summer season coming up, this is happening at an advantageous time for us," she said. "We could hold a series of actions that would have a definite impact on the company. For example, we could pack restaurants with workers who take up tables all day, lingering over single coffees. Or we could put hundreds of workers in deli and snack bar lines, with each one buying a pack of gum."

The last time there was a major service labor dispute in Yosemite was 1989, when workers staged a series of actions that disrupted business throughout the park. The concessionaire at that time was the Curry Company, owned by MCA.

"The slogan at that time was 'We won't work for peanuts,' and workers tossed peanuts," said Behr. "This time our slogan is 'Don't buffalo us,' because Delaware North's headquarters is in Buffalo," N.Y.

Scott Gediman, a spokesman for the National Park Service, said agency officials have no role in the negotiations, but added they would take any negative impact on park visitors seriously.

"We are concerned with visitors having a good experience at Yosemite," said Gediman. "We have a contract with the concessionaire to provide services and lodging, and we support that contract. But if at some point services are disrupted and park visitors are affected, we would need to get involved."