The editorial board of the Harvard Law Record has voted (3 in favor, 1 opposed, 1 abstention) to stand in support of Harvard’s dining service workers and their decision to strike. Local 26, the labor union representing the workers, and Harvard Corporation have been negotiating since May over details of the workers’ contracts, yet the administration remains unpersuaded by workers’ grievances, and provisions regarding health benefits and wages remain unchanged. As a result, on September 29, workers voted to authorize a strike. When Harvard fulfilled none of their demands, workers began to strike this past Wednesday.
While HUDS workers’ hourly earnings are competitive, their yearly salary is far from it. Typically Harvard does not provide the workers with work during the summer and winter holidays. Local 26 claims workers’ salaries are around $31,000, while the University’s representatives state figures closer to $35,000. According to the MIT Living Wage Calculator, even $34,000 is not enough to sustain a household consisting of more than one individual in the greater Boston area. Local 26 is asking that Harvard provide year-round work and guarantee a minimum salary of $35,000. The university has responded by offering a stipend of $150-$250 a week, depending on tenure of employment, for those available to work during the summer months.
The union is also requesting fairer healthcare coverage, as currently Harvard’s proposed health care plan for workers substantially increases co-pays. Such increases inevitably translate to sacrifices that these workers should not have to make: whether that means not taking their kids to the doctor’s office, or not being able to afford car insurance.
The fact that Harvard Corporation recently raised its capital campaign by more than $7 billion should evoke outcry when considering the workers’ current financial situation. As a newspaper comprised of students, the Harvard Law Record is indebted to HUDS employees. They support us every day. We are grateful for their services and believe that it is their deserved right to strike for a livable wage and a reasonable standard of living.
Editor’s note: The vote was among the editors-in-chief, opinion, and web editors. The result of the vote was three in favor, one opposed, and one abstention.