Non-union city and commercially contracted security officers plan to walk off the job Thursday over what they allege are unfair labor practices by their employer, Abacus Corporation.
The rally will take place at 11:30 a.m. at War Memorial Plaza at 100 N. Holliday St. in Baltimore. Several Baltimore City Council members plan to join the rally, including Mark Parker (District 1), Jermaine Jones (District 12), and Odette Ramos (District 14).
Charges against Abacus include allegations of discrimination, coercion and firing workers over participation in legally protected union activities.
“We need city contractors to follow our laws and respect our workers,” Jones said in a statement. “I call on Abacus to respect security officers’ demands for the right to form a union so they can have the job security they deserve for keeping us safe.”
A press release from 32BJ SEIU, the local branch of the Service Employees International Union, states that Abacus has received more than $45 million in taxpayer funds since 2017 via contract renewals, increases, and extensions without a competitive bidding process.
The union chapter’s executive vice president, Jaime Contreras, invoked Martin Luther King Jr.’s support for unions in calling for fair treatment. The press release marked the anniversary of King’s assassination, which took place 48 years ago on April 4, 1968, while he was supporting a sanitation workers’ strike, recalling King’s quote, “There are pitifully few Negro millionaires, and few Negro employers. That is why Negroes support labor’s demands and fight laws which curb labor.”
“Abacus doesn’t get the message that stopping Black workers from forming a union is both against the law and another nail in the coffin of MLK’s Dream,” Contreras said in a statement. “MLK believed the right to collective bargaining was essential to achieving racial justice.”
One of the charges against Abacus was filed on behalf of Abacus officer Darian Wheeler, a single mother of four who was terminated after nine years of employment “despite an excellent record of service,” according to the release.
“I take pride in my job keeping people safe in Harbor East and the tenants appreciate my work,” Wheeler said.
Another charge involves an Abacus supervisor allegedly threatening to fire officers who brought security problems to the supervisor’s attention–problems they believed were contributing to break-ins at their site and impacting their working conditions. According to the press release, officers cited a hole in the fence, a broken security gate, inaccessible cameras, and insufficient equipment as concerns. “The supervisor told workers they would be replaced before the fence was fixed,” read the release.
The union also cites insufficient employee support. One Abacus officer described being violently confronted by six armed men stealing bikes while she was unarmed on the job. They threatened to use their weapons against her. She said she received no “meaningful” follow-up from Abacus. Three years later she reported stopping people posting as gas company representatives from entering a city site, and again said she said she received no follow-up from Abacus.
“Abacus failed to meet an industry standard of following up with officers after traumatic incidents, including offering free employee assistance programs such as professional counseling,” reads the release.
Abacus responded to the strike notice, saying that it contained many inaccurate and inflammatory mischaracterizations, and that “[t]he claims made by SEIU are factually incorrect and meant to mislead the public.” The company disputes having a contractor relationship with the city, but a “long-term commitment to the community.”
The statement includes specifics about compensation and benefits, the allegations by SEIU of unfair labor practices, how Abacus handles personnel matters and deals with workplace infrastructure at city-owned job sites, and the company’s commitment to their employees and customers.
“Abacus categorically denies any unlawful conduct, has cooperated fully with all regulatory processes, and is confident in the lawfulness of its employment practices,” reads the statement. “Characterizing pending charges as established violations is irresponsible and misleading.”
In another section, the statement says, “Our doors remain open to direct, good-faith dialogue with our employees — as they always have.”
The full statement is listed below.
