Dave Jamieson/HuffPost SEIU staffers Andy Bonior (right) and Omar Martinez say the contract proposals from management would further weaken their staff union.

Workers at the Washington headquarters of the Service Employees International Union held a vote March 12 to determine whether they would be willing to go on strike. After months of negotiations, SEIU and its staff union still hadn’t reached a new collective bargaining agreement, creating the real possibility of a work stoppage inside one of the country’s largest labor unions. Most employees found management’s final contract offer unacceptable, fearing it would weaken their job security and the viability of their own union. But they knew management planned to stand firm ― especially when they found printouts of management’s talking points in copiers around the building. The document made clear in bold that management would budge no more at the table. It also included what some employees considered an ominous warning if they chose to walk out due to the impasse: SEIU “will be well prepared to conduct the business of our members without interruption in the event of a strike.” Translation: We can get by without you. In a sign of the staff discontent, 92 percent of those who cast ballots voted in favor of the strike authorization, meaning leaders of the staff union could declare a stoppage if and when they saw fit. “I like my job. I like my boss. I like SEIU. But there’s something wrong going on here,” said Andy Bonior, a communications specialist who has worked for the organization for 15 years. He said of the strike threat, “The union busting has forced us to do this.” SEIU, which is headed by its international president, Mary Kay Henry, is one of the most powerful advocates for service and health care workers in the country, representing 2 million members and leading the Fight for $15 campaign in the fast food industry. But while SEIU has been working to promote collective bargaining rights, it has overseen the erosion of its own staff union at its headquarters, which is part of the Office and Professional Employees International Union Local 2. The staff union says SEIU has misclassified employees in order to keep them out of the bargaining unit, leading it to file a grievance. They say management’s proposed contract would diminish the staff union even further by eliminating a key layoff protection for new hires. Management also wants to reserve the right to bargain with employees in two separate groups ― a move staffers say would reduce their clout.

The union busting has forced us to do this. Andy Bonior, SEIU employee

As the two sides head to mediation, the contract fight has turned into an emotional clash over SEIU’s core values. Dan O’Sullivan, an SEIU spokesman, said management welcomes the staff flexing its muscle with a strike authorization vote, calling it a show of the collective power they champion at the organization. O’Sullivan also called SEIU’s offer “an excellent contract.” “What they have ― the ability to negotiate a contract and go through a process where their voices are heard ― that’s what we want for the 89 percent of workers out there who don’t have a union,” he said. A Shrinking Staff Union SEIU employees do enjoy strong job security. Under the terms of the contract that expired last August, if a worker has at least five years of service at SEIU, management cannot eliminate that person’s position without offering another job. While management is willing to let current workers keep that valuable safeguard, its proposal would eliminate it for any future employees. If staffers were to agree to that, time and turnover would eventually leave no one with the protection. SEIU has argued that with the attacks on unions and their funding around the country, it can no longer afford to guarantee workers a “job for life.” But what management is proposing is the kind of two-tier system that labor groups like SEIU regularly fight on principle. Unions can foster resentment and fray over time when legacy employees have it better than those who come in the door after them. Some employees bristled at an email recently sent by Deedee Fitzpatrick, SEIU’s chief of staff, making the case for management’s “last best and final offer.” The note included the same kind of messaging on two-tier proposals that typically comes from the employers SEIU does battle with, reassuring current workers that they won’t lose anything ― only their future colleagues will. “Under SEIU’s offer, SEIU is honoring the commitment it made to all current employees. Each of you will continue to enjoy that benefit,” Fitzpatrick wrote. “The area of disagreement is around new hires who were never promised this benefit.” Employees of both SEIU and its pension fund have traditionally bargained side by side in past contracts. The staff union has asked SEIU to commit to that arrangement ― something management so far has declined to do. O’Sullivan, the SEIU spokesman, said management doesn’t want to be locked into bargaining a certain way in its next contract. Staffers say they worry that negotiating separately in two groups would weaken their leverage in negotiations or strikes. “If we were to accept that, that means a fraction of our strength,” said David Hoskins, a shop steward for Local 2 and a research analyst at SEIU. The drop in Local 2 membership inside SEIU might explain why Hoskins and others are so opposed to management’s offer. The staff union was 138 strong in 2014. Now it’s down to just 83, according to Local 2. The numbers have held relatively steady within the pension fund, but the drop-off has been startling for the rest of the unionized headquarters staff: from 109 members to just 52 in about five years.

ASSOCIATED PRESS SEIU has been the prime driver behind the Fight for $15 movement.