Wolf too suspicious of Local 77

I was confused by Elliott Wolf's Feb. 21 column "Attention, Duke employees," where Wolf criticizes the contract Local 77-which represents more than 900 service workers in the Duke community-collectively negotiated with the University. Wolf is concerned the contract's sick leave provisions "mark a significant departure from the HR policies that apply" to other workers. In particular, based on Wolf's personal interpretation of the contract, a "Union employee wishing to maximize his or her time off" can be absent almost 101 days without missing a paycheck, which exceeds the paid sick leave allowed for non-Union workers, according to Wolf's reading of the Duke HR website.

Does Wolf believe Duke's service employees should not have the right to negotiate employment terms with the University? If so, he should just say that, instead of criticizing the Union for an agreement reached bilaterally with the administration.

Does Wolf have evidence that Union workers are "taking advantage" of their negotiated contract and placing "enormous financial strain" on students who must pay for the absences? If not, why even suggest it?

Does Wolf actually believe that Duke's service workers fake injuries and illnesses over and over and over again to achieve, based on his calculations, their 101 days of no work and full pay? I don't.

As students, we probably do contribute a portion of the salaries paid to Local 77's workers, as Wolf suggests. But in my experience, the workers pay us back much, much more in return. If Wolf has suspicions that the people who serve us food, clean our bathrooms, sweep our hallways and empty our trash are using a collectively bargained agreement as a cover to game the system-making students pay more for services in the process-I have a very simple suggestion for him: Invite a Local 77 member or two over for coffee and ask them. I think he'll be very impressed.

Michael Oswalt

Law, Divinity '08