Despite achieving a tentative labor contract agreement last week, a subset of the city’s unionized residential building service workforce shared concerns about the massive union’s representation of its rank-and-file members.
The Realty Advisory Board on Labor Relations (RAB) and the union 32BJ SEIU reached a late-inning agreement on April 17 that narrowly avoided a strike, which would have seen thousands of essential building workers walk off the job, leaving trash uncollected, dirty lobbies, and no one to sort packages or make minor building repairs.
But longtime union members told amNewYork that they were less concerned about the union’s fight for a fair contract and more about the organization’s willingness to enforce its already hard-won terms fairly.
One member, who spoke under the condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation, told amNewYork that he thought the union cared more about its public appearance, rather than being a true advocate for its rank-and-file members.
“ So 32BJ, they pretend like: We’re doing this for you people, for our members, for our workers,” the union member said. “But when we have legit complaints about things, harassment at work, harassment due to favoritism, medical issues, disability, they’re nowhere to be found. There’s a sense that they usually side with management.”
Representatives from 32BJ SEIU have not yet responded to requests for comment.
Union members against each other in court case
Multiple members and retired members described an, at times, adversarial relationship with the union, especially when differences with building management came to blows — sometimes in court.
Michael Belvin, a longtime porter with Electchester Management and 32BJ union member for 28 years, sued his employer in 2017 over what he said amounted to years of a racist and hostile work environment. Belvin, who is Black, described being greeted with stuffed gorillas attached to his locker, racial slurs, and management openly making light of racial violence.
Belvin told amNewYork that he felt sandbagged by the union during the lawsuit that he and fellow union member, Michael Mayers, brought against Electchester Management.
Belvin said their shop steward, who represented union members from their building, spoke out against him and Mayers in court.
“ Are you kidding me?” Belvin said. “That you would come down here and testify against the members that put their trust in you, for management. And the union allowed them to go and they kept him as a shop steward.”
The lawsuit went on for years. Court documents showed that the union shop steward for Belvin and Mayers testified that Belvin, contrary to the allegations, had the one being discriminatory and bullying other union members — an accusation Belvin denied.
Still, a judge found enough evidence to corroborate Belvin and Mayers’ claims that Electchester Management created a hostile work environment, despite the perceived lack of support from their union representation. However, according to court documents, the suit’s claims did not do enough to support a judgment of discrimination or retaliation.
Mayer’s claims of retaliation appeared stronger in court documents. Electchester Management terminated Mayer’s employment after he took a period of time off on disability to seek treatment for leukemia. However, management miscalculated the time Mayers was out of work under the union’s collective bargaining agreement.
Electchester Management fired Mayer in 2015 because the company incorrectly assumed that Mayers used more than the allotted time for a leave of absence to get treatment for his cancer. In reality, Mayers used PTO in addition to his protected leave of absence and was subsequently reinstated.
But Mayers told amNewYork that he was encouraged to give up when he spoke with 32BJ SEIU representatives about his wrongful termination — which happened around two months after he filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).
“The union told me, ‘Oh no, Mike, they got you. You’re fired. You’re fired,’” Mayers said.
He told amNewYork that he believed it was retaliation for the discrimination complaint he brought against his employer.
“ They were eager to fire me because I had a case in there against them,” he said.
Mayers said that the entire ordeal took him to a dark place.
“ I ain’t gonna lie, I thought it was the end,” Mayers said. “I mean, I’m contemplating like, I need to end it man —this is gonna be a slow death. This is how I felt, you know, I got kids and grandkids. I mean, I have something to live for. But that was just a thought.”
Online, members have also been outspoken, with many venting their grievances against the union in the comments sections of building service workers’ posts.
“It’s unfortunate because the union representation is lacking,” one user wrote on TikTok. “For the OGs we see every contract the same ole song. Shame on them, living it up with better pensions than the ones who built this union.”
Another commenter spoke directly about raises disappearing into increased union dues.
“The union doesn’t give a blank about us as long as their pocket is full!” one commenter said. “Honestly, that’s why I really don’t even go to the meetings, they never show up for us. And let’s be real, our raises go up and our union dues go up, for what? They never show up or even pick up the phone when needed.”
These accounts point to a deeper, unresolved tension within one of the city’s most powerful labor organizations. For some members, the issue is no longer just about wages or benefits, but about trust—whether the union tasked with protecting them is willing to stand firmly in their corner when it matters most.