Judge Rejects Harvard Objections to Vote for Union Representation

A National Labor Relations Board judge has rejected all of Harvard University’s objections to a union representation election last May, potentially paving the way for the first collective bargaining agreement between Harvard and its clerical employees, it was disclosed Monday.

On May 17, about 51% of Harvard’s clerical employees, who ranged from secretaries to scientific-instrument makers, voted in favor of representation by the Harvard Union of Clerical and Technical Workers, and 49% voted against the union.

The vote, which culminated a decade-long campaign, had been viewed as a key test of the ability of unions to organize white-collar workers.

Improper Campaign Alleged

Shortly after the election, Harvard announced that it would challenge the vote. University officials alleged that the union improperly campaigned near the polls--including the placement of “Vote Yes” balloons near buildings where voting was being conducted--and that it “interrogated” employees on how they voted.

But, in a stinging opinion, Administrative Judge Joel A. Harmatz spurned the university’s contentions, noting that “puffs of this sort of smoke do not indicate the existence of any flame.” He said the university’s legal brief was “replete with misinterpretations of the record.”

Kris Rondeau, the union’s chief organizer, said in a telephone interview from Cambridge, Mass., that she would call Harvard President Derek Bok today and ask him to recognize the union. “Harvard has gotten a reputation as one of the most serious union busters in the country and it has to stop sometime,” she said. “Now is their chance.”

Harvard Vice President Robert Scott issued a statement asserting that the judge’s opinion “does not accurately reflect the record of the hearing.” Harvard has 14 days to decide whether to appeal to the full NLRB.