Dignity
Fast-food
workers and a new form of labor activism.
William Finnegan has
been a contributor to The New Yorker since 1984 and a staff writer since
1987.
A
demonstration by fast-food workers last week in Manhattan. One recent study
found that fifty-two per cent of fast-food workers require some form of public
assistance.
Credit Photograph by Mark Peterson / Redux
For the customers, nothing has
changed in the big, busy McDonald’s on Broadway at West 181st Street, in
Washington Heights. Promotions come and go—during the World Cup, the French-fry
package was suddenly not red but decorated with soccer-related “street art,”
and, if you held your phone up to the box, it would download an Augmented
Reality app that let you kick goals with the flick of a finger. New menu items
appear—recently, the Jalapeño Double and the Bacon Clubhouse, or, a while back,
the Fruit and Maple Oatmeal. But a McDonald’s is a McDonald’s. This one is open
twenty-four hours. It has its regulars, including a panel of older gentlemen
who convene at a row of tables near the main door, generally wear guayaberas,
and deliberate matters large and small in Spanish. The restaurant doesn’t suffer
as much staff turnover as you might think. Mostly the same employees, mostly
women, in black uniforms and gold-trimmed black visors, toil and serve and
banter with the customers year after year. The longtime manager, Dominga de
Jesus, bustles about, wearing a bright-pink shirt and a worried look, barking
at her workers, “La linea! La linea! ”
Behind the counter, though, a great
deal has changed in the past two years. Among the thirty-five or so
non-salaried employees, fourteen, at last count, have thrown in their lot with
Fast Food Forward, the New York branch of a growing campaign to unionize
fast-food workers. Underneath the lighted images of Big Macs and Chicken
McNuggets, back between the deep fryer and the meat freezer, the clamshell
grill and the egg station, the order screens and the endless, hospital-like
beeping of timers, there have been sharp and difficult debates about the wisdom
of demanding better pay and forming a union.
Most of the workers here make
minimum wage, which is eight dollars an hour in New York City, and receive no
benefits. Rosa Rivera, a grandmother of four who has worked at McDonald’s for
fourteen years, makes eight dollars and fifty cents. Exacerbating the problem
of low pay in an expensive city, nearly everyone is effectively part time,
getting fewer than forty hours of work a week. And none of the employees seem
to know, from week to week, when, exactly, they will work. The crew-scheduling
software used by McDonald’s is reputed to be sophisticated, but to the workers
it seems mindless and opaque. The coming week’s schedule is posted on Saturday
evenings. Most of those who, like Rivera, have sided with the union
movement—going out on one-day wildcat strikes, marching in midtown
protests—suspect that they have been penalized by managers with reductions in
their hours. But just-in-time scheduling is not easy to analyze.
Arisleyda Tapia, who has been
working here for eight years, and makes eight dollars and thirty-five cents an
hour, says she was fired last year by a supervisor for participating, on her
own time, in a protest. She was reinstated three days later by cooler
management heads, but Tapia, a single mother with a five-year-old daughter,
says that she now gets only thirty hours a week. She used to average forty.
“And they don’t really post the schedule anymore,” she told me. “They just give
you these.”
She waved a thin strip of paper in
the air. It was like the stuff that comes out of a shredder. Tapia laughed, and
mimicked a manager frantically snipping each line out of a printed schedule,
for individual distribution. “This way, it’s harder for us to see what’s going
on at the store. You see only your own hours.”
Tapia was a nurse in Santiago de los
Caballeros, the second city of the Dominican Republic. She had two children, Scarlet
and Steven. Her husband drove a taxi. Her mother, also a nurse, raised orchids.
When Tapia’s marriage fell apart, she felt her hopes for her children dimming.
It was 2003; a banking crisis had cratered the Dominican economy. With her
mother’s blessing, she left her job at a big university hospital where she had
worked for twelve years and moved, alone, to New York. She rented a shared room
in Inwood, a working-class neighborhood in upper Manhattan, for fifty dollars a
week, got a job at a McDonald’s in Inwood, and then a second job, at the 181st
Street McDonald’s. She made minimum wage. Still, she was able to send most of
her paychecks home. “I made more in a week here than I did in a month as a
nurse there,” she said. Her children were provided for. College remained a
possibility. Her Facebook cover photo has a woman’s closed eye with long lashes
and a big tear trickling down. “That’s for missing my kids,” she told me.
Tapia struggled with depression. Her
immigration status was work-authorized, letting her obtain a Social Security
number, and then it wasn’t. She got scammed by a lawyer. She feared she would
be deported. Tapia makes friends easily—if you walk the streets of Inwood with
her, you will see her merrily accosted by neighbors—but she felt isolated. The sueño
americano—the reason she still gives, half-ruefully, for emigrating—had
taken on nightmarish colors. She felt trapped in a cold, foreign, overwhelming
place. She felt that people were following her. She went for therapy at public
clinics. Tapia, who is deeply religious, found herself looking for a sign from
God. One night, in church, she got it. Her anxiety receded. She talks about the
experience in awed, fierce tones.
She took up with a man—a
taxi-driver—and on New Year’s Day, 2009, she gave birth to a daughter, Ashley.
The relationship with the taxi-driver did not last. Tapia was thirty-seven. She
found an apartment on Sherman Avenue, in Inwood, across from the 207th Street
Subway Yard. The apartment was small and dark, partitioned to create more
rooms, and Tapia shared it with other renters. She and Ashley slept in a single
bed in a closet-size alcove. They still sleep there. Tapia had already bought,
sight unseen, a small rental house in Santiago; her mother manages it, and the
rent helps support Scarlet and Steven.
“Take
your pick—those people are talking schools. Next to them is real estate, and
over by the stairs is money."
With an infant, Tapia had to quit
one of her jobs. Money got tighter. She and Ashley received food stamps—a
hundred and eighty-nine dollars a month—and, crucially, an earned-income
tax-credit refund. But day care was expensive, and Tapia could never get enough
hours at work. Wary of the courts, she received no child support. Still, her
spirits were strong. Now she lived for Ashley, who was bright and mischievous.
Friends and co-workers deluged the child with love and toys. Somebody gave her
a little plastic cash register. She banged away on it, piping, “Welcome to
McDonald’s. How may I help you?”
One of Tapia’s closest friends was
Dominga de Jesus, her manager. La Dominga, as everybody calls her, is also
Dominican. She lives in the Bronx, started at the bottom herself at McDonald’s,
and has a daughter slightly older than Ashley. The little girls are friends. La
Dominga was kind to Tapia in her despair. In turn, Tapia helped Dominga when
she had housing troubles. Between crises, the two women loved to party
together. Tapia was delighted for Dominga when she went off to Hamburger
University, the McDonald’s training center, in Oak Brook, Illinois, where she
earned a degree in Hamburgerology. The course there “sounded like a good party,”
Tapia told me, grinning.
In 2012, community organizers from
New York Communities for Change, a Brooklyn-based descendant of ACORN, started sniffing around the
McDonald’s in Washington Heights. La Dominga—perhaps forewarned, or simply
aware of the long-standing vigilance at McDonald’s against any stirrings of
union sentiment—spotted a suspected organizer on one of her closed-circuit
cameras. His name was Alfredo Miase. He was Dominican. Tapia recalled, “She
told me, ‘Don’t talk to him.’ ”
But Tapia had recently had a run-in
with another manager, who kept her working, even though she had a fever, for
hours. “Finally, I couldn’t take it,” she told me. “I just couldn’t stand up
anymore, and I went home. She suspended me for a week for that. She’s gone now,
but she was abusive. That experience left me ready to do something.” So Tapia
met with Miase, down the block, beyond the closed-circuit cameras, skulking,
scared. And she was not the only one. “He was a very thoughtful, sympathetic
guy,” she said.
A small group of workers, nearly all
women, started meeting with Miase and another organizer, Marisol Vasquez, at a
nearby Chinese restaurant called Jimmy’s. They discussed their problems and
what might be done. Tapia, unlike some American workers, already had a solid
grasp of what a union is. In the D.R., she had been a member of the national
nurses’ union during a major dispute with the ministry of health. That fight
culminated in strikes that caused a national furor. Doctors had also walked
out. “Patients were dying,” she remembered. In the end, the government agreed
to meet with the strikers and address their demands.
The Service Employees International
Union, the second-largest union in the United States, was quietly funding the
fast-food campaign. The first public act was a one-day strike on November 29,
2012. Some two hundred workers, from around forty fast-food outlets in New York
City, gathered at dawn outside a McDonald’s on Madison Avenue in midtown,
chanting, “Hey, hey, what do you say, we demand fair pay.” They had walked off
jobs at Burger King, Wendy’s, Taco Bell, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Domino’s
Pizza, and McDonald’s. Their goals, they told reporters, were an industry-wide
raise to fifteen dollars an hour and the right to form a union without
retaliation. It was a day of rallies, walkouts, and a march through Times
Square. The Times called it “the biggest wave of job actions in the
history of America’s fast-food industry.” Tapia and several co-workers from
Washington Heights were in the thick of it. La Dominga was shocked to see her
friend’s face in the crowd in a photograph on her Facebook news feed.
The protests spread to the Midwest,
with hundreds of fast-food workers demonstrating in Chicago, St. Louis, Kansas
City, and Detroit. By the summer of 2013, workers in sixty cities across the
United States, even in the traditionally anti-union South, were staging
coördinated one-day walkouts and marches with a single message: fifteen and a
union. In December, it was more than a hundred cities. The movement picked up
political support. President Obama renewed a long-neglected pledge to raise the
federal minimum wage, which is $7.25 an hour—it should be nine dollars, he
first suggested, and then lifted his sights, in early 2014, to $10.10. That’s a
modest proposal; in 1968, the minimum wage, in current dollars, was $10.95.
Even so, minimum-wage legislation has no chance of passing in this Congress.
But opinion polls show wide public support for a hike. Some cities and states
have been bidding up their own minimum-wage laws. In June, Seattle decided to
raise its minimum wage to fifteen dollars. Fast-food workers rightly took
credit for having made plausible a minimum wage that, less than two years ago,
sounded outlandish.
The fast-food giants have seemed
clumsy, and wrong-footed by the surge of protest. Their traditional defense of
miserable pay—that most of their employees are young, part time, just working
for gas money, really—has grown threadbare. Most of their employees today are adults—median
age twenty-eight. More than a quarter have children. Particularly since the
onset of the global recession of 2009, McJobs are often the only jobs
available. And seventy per cent of fast-food workers are indeed part time,
working fewer than forty hours a week.
McDonald’s has tried to acknowledge
the real lives of its workforce by providing counselling through a Web site
(since taken down) and a help line called McResource. A sample personal budget
was offered online last year. The budget was full of odd assumptions: that
employees worked two full-time jobs, for instance, and that health insurance
could be bought for twenty dollars a month. The gesture made the corporation
look painfully out of touch. The same thing happened with a health-advice page.
Workers were advised to break food into pieces to make it go farther, sing to
relieve stress, and take at least two vacations a year, since vacations are
known to “cut heart attack risk by 50%.” Swimming, one learned, is great
exercise. Fresh fruit and vegetables are good for you, McDonald’s declared. A
mother of two in Chicago, who had worked at McDonald’s for ten years, called
the help line and found herself counselled to apply for food stamps and
Medicaid. This was, at least, realistic. A recent study by researchers at the
University of California-Berkeley and the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign found that fifty-two per cent of fast-food workers are on some
form of public assistance.
“Look,
I know you think you’ve got the stuff, but I’m telling you: walk God.”
Sensitive to the beating that their
brands are taking in the escalating confrontation with employees, the fast-food
giants have been leaving the hardball response to their lobby, the National
Restaurant Association. “The other N.R.A.,” as it is known, is an enormous
organization, with nearly half a million member businesses, but its strategic
thinking seems to be dominated by the major chains. It has fought minimum-wage
legislation, at every level of government, for decades. It has fought
paid-sick-leave laws, the Affordable Care Act, worker-safety regulations,
restrictions on the marketing of junk food to children, menu-labelling
requirements, and a variety of public-health measures, such as limits on sugar,
sodium, and trans fats. Its press releases now deride the demands of fast-food
workers as “nothing more than big labor’s attempt to push their own agenda.”
But internal N.R.A. documents, leaked this spring to Salon, show the group’s
concern about the “reputational attacks on our industry.” They say that N.R.A.
agents are “closely monitoring social media for any plans or signs of
activity,” and are even tracking the movements of one activist. Scott DeFife,
the chief N.R.A. spokesman, told me that the crowds at the protests actually
consist of organizers: “There’s often not one restaurant worker to be found
among the crowds of organizers.”
McDonald’s has rarely hesitated to
act aggressively on labor issues. In 1990, it sued a tiny group called London
Greenpeace for libel, because of leaflets the group had distributed attacking
the company. According to Eric Schlosser’s book “Fast Food Nation” (2001),
McDonald’s had been successfully using Britain’s plaintiff-friendly libel laws
to intimidate British mass media for many years. Two members of London
Greenpeace fought back. Although they could not afford a lawyer, the court
proceedings went on for more than a decade, revealing, among other things, the
extensive use by McDonald’s of spies—some meetings of London Greenpeace
apparently had as many spies in attendance as real members. The “McLibel trial”
was, from start to finish, a public-relations fiasco. For the second-largest
private employer in the world (after Walmart), with more than thirty-five
thousand restaurants in a hundred and nineteen countries, McDonald’s can be, in
the court of public opinion, remarkably inept.
In recent months, Fast Food Forward
and its many partners—Fight for 15 (Chicago), Stand Up KC (Kansas City), STL
Can’t Survive on $7.35 (St. Louis)—have been rhetorically thrashing their
corporate opponents. The Berkeley-University of Illinois study, commissioned by
Fast Food Forward, found that American fast-food workers receive almost seven
billion dollars a year in public assistance. That’s a direct taxpayer subsidy,
the activists argue, for the fast-food industry. Taxpayers are also, by that
logic, grossly overpaying the industry’s top management. According to the
progressive think tank Demos, fast-food executives’ compensation packages
quadrupled, in constant dollars, between 2000 and 2013. They now take home, on
average, nearly twenty-four million dollars a year. Their front-line workers’
wages have barely risen in that time, and remain among the worst in U.S.
industry. The differential between C.E.O. and worker pay in fast food is higher
than in any other domestic economic sector—twelve hundred to one. In
construction, by comparison, the differential is ninety-three to one.
The fast-food chains insist that if
they were to pay their employees more they would have to raise menu prices.
Their wages are “competitive.” But in Denmark McDonald’s workers over the age
of eighteen earn more than twenty dollars an hour—they are also unionized—and
the price of a Big Mac is only thirty-five cents more than it is in the United
States. There are regional American fast-food chains that take the high road
with their employees. The starting wage at In-N-Out Burger, which is based in
Southern California, and has two hundred and ninety-five restaurants in
California and the Southwest, is eleven dollars. Full-time workers receive a
complete benefits package, including life insurance—and the burgers are cheap
and good.
McDonald’s, throughout its history,
has denied responsibility for the labor practices of its franchisees, who own
and operate nearly ninety per cent of its more than fourteen thousand outlets
in the United States. In March, seven class-action lawsuits were filed against
the company in three states—California, Michigan, and New York—alleging wage
theft and other violations of labor law. In late July, the general counsel of
the National Labor Relations Board ruled, in connection with another set of
complaints, that McDonald’s is a “joint employer” with its franchisees. The
corporation exercises, through its standard contract, the most elaborate
possible control over virtually every aspect of its franchisees’ operations,
and the pay and the treatment of workers are very largely determined by that
control. Indeed, the lawsuits allege that the crew-scheduling software that
McDonald’s franchisees are required to use leads directly to the cost-cutting
practices that amount to wage theft.
McDonald’s will fight the ruling and
its implementation, both on its own behalf and on behalf of other major
franchisors. The implications of the ruling, if it is upheld, are profound. Not
only will the responsibility of corporations for millions of workers be
increased sharply but the prospects for fast-food unionization will brighten. Shop-by-shop
organizing in what the economist David Weil calls “the fissured workplace” is a
Sisyphean chore. Having the legally chosen representatives of the industry’s
workforce sit down with the leaders of McDonald’s, Burger King, and Wendy’s,
all of whom are capable of a cost-benefit analysis of their business model,
makes more sense.
I asked Arisleyda Tapia who she
thought could raise her pay. “Bruce,” she said immediately. “He’s rich.”
She meant Bruce Colley, the owner of
the McDonald’s where she works. Colley owns twenty-nine McDonald’s franchises,
including nineteen in Manhattan. He grew up in Westchester County, and
graduated from the Trinity Pawling School and Cornell. When he joined the
family business, in 1980, his father, Dean, owned more than a hundred
McDonald’s franchises in the Northeast. Dean was master of foxhounds of the
Golden’s Bridge (New York) Hounds. Bruce is a polo player. His net worth is not
a matter of public record. Still, you can see where Tapia got her impression.
Colley found himself in the news
when, in 2003, he was reported to be having an affair with Kerry Kennedy Cuomo,
triggering her divorce from Andrew Cuomo. According to the Post, Kerry
was “crushed” when Bruce decided not to leave his then wife for her. Otherwise,
Colley does a good job of staying out of the papers. (He declined to comment
for this article.) In July, 2013, during a heat wave, Sheliz Mendez, one of
Colley’s employees at the McDonald’s in Washington Heights, fainted in the
kitchen and had to be hospitalized. Some of her co-workers walked off the job,
protesting the lack of air-conditioning, and began chanting on the sidewalk
outside. Reporters showed up. So did Colley. CBS New York described him as a
“McDonald’s spokesman.” He apologized for the inconvenience to customers and
employees and said that two of the store’s three air-conditioning units were
already repaired. His workers said that they had been complaining about the
heat for months and that the units were turned on only because camera crews had
appeared. Jamne Izquierdo, who has worked at the Washington Heights outlet for
nine years, said she had never seen the air-conditioning on before.
“As
my stunt double, you’ll be doing all of my press conferences, court appearances,
and family reunions.
A year later, on another hot July
day, I stopped in the store and found it stifling. Managers were setting up big
portable fans near the counter. Colley did not want another labor incident. I
was waiting for Tapia to finish her shift. There was a new freestanding sign,
touting the Bacon Clubhouse with a cryptic boast: “Artisan is how this club
rolls.” On the workers’ uniform caps, multicolored stitching declared “FAMOUS CRISPY FUN LOVEABLE.”
Was William Burroughs writing ad copy from the next world? Having clocked out,
Tapia emerged, looking drained, and eating Fruit and Maple Oatmeal from a paper
cup.
We walked
south on Broadway. A rainstorm had broken the heat. We passed through the
spooky, puddled maw of the George Washington Bridge Bus Station, its concrete arms
hulking overhead like a Soviet brutalist ruin. Tapia had sent Ashley, her
five-year-old, to visit her grandmother in the Dominican Republic. She couldn’t
afford to go. It had been eleven years. She Skyped with her kids and her mother
several times a day, but it was strange, this free time that she suddenly had.
There was a national conference of the fast-food workers’ movement coming up,
in Chicago. The union was sending a couple of buses from New York. Maybe she
could go. We found a Dominican restaurant down Broadway.
Did she really believe that Bruce
Colley could unilaterally raise the pay of all his employees to fifteen dollars
an hour?
Tapia looked down. “He used to give
us just one shirt,” she said, finally. “We tried to give a petition to La Dominga
about people getting their hours reduced, but she wouldn’t accept it. Then
Bruce came and had a meeting with us. He came because we have a strong union
committee. He didn’t go to any of his other stores. He listened to us. Then
they gave us each a box with four uniforms. That was a real strike victory.”
She sighed. “But we know who our real opponent is. It’s the corporation.
McDonald’s.”
The space between franchisees and a
parent company is nowhere more opaque than at McDonald’s, where the price of admission
is exceptionally high: applicants must show at least seven hundred and fifty
thousand dollars of unborrowed money even to be considered for a franchise, and
the investment costs go up from there. Very few franchisees fail to observe the
code of omertà that governs their relationship with the corporation. One
disgruntled franchisee in California recently broke the silence, telling the
Washington Post that McDonald’s executives had advised her to “pay your
employees less” if she wanted to take home more herself. Two former McDonald’s
managers recently went public with confessions of systematic wage theft,
claiming that pressure from both franchisees and the corporation forced them to
alter time sheets and compel employees to work off the clock.
Having a union will put a stop to
this type of injustice, Tapia believes. And she was not wrong, I thought, about
the importance of tangible victories, however small. Building confidence was
crucial, even in the fissured workplace—showing doubters that standing up for
yourself need not always bring down the wrath of the bosses on your head and
could actually achieve benefits. “Some people are too scared to say anything,”
she said. “They’re scared to talk to you, for instance—the media.” I could
confirm that. “It’s not that everybody working there supports the union. But
they all want us to keep fighting. They’re afraid to fight themselves, but they
know they’ll benefit when we win.”
But
would the boat parties be reinstated?
Tapia laughed. Bruce Colley was
famous for taking his employees on an annual summertime cruise on the Hudson.
Tapia had to admit that they were a blast. Colley danced with all the women.
But last year, she said, she had not been invited. She blamed her activism. And
this year there had been no boat party at all, as far as she knew.
More important to Tapia—far more
important—was her friendship with La Dominga. Things between them had cooled
lately, she said, but not really, not in her heart. It was only this situation
at work. On Dominga’s birthday, Tapia and some of her co-workers had given her
a big bunch of flowers. Dominga understood the message: none of this conflict
was personal. When the fight for a union was over—after the workers had won
their rights—“things between me and Dominga will be just like they were
before.”
The modern American labor movement
rose out of the struggle over the eight-hour day. Mary Kay Henry, the president
of the Service Employees International Union, told me, “This fight for fifteen
is growing way beyond fast food. It’s getting to be what the eight-hour day was
in the twentieth century.” That may be so (or it may be a stretch), but labor
unions, the centerpiece of the movement to improve working conditions in the
last century, have definitely shrunk to the margins. Fewer than seven per cent
of private-sector workers are union members today—that’s the lowest density in
nearly a century. The landscape of American business has changed, reflecting
the shift from a manufacturing to a service economy, but unions have not changed
with it. The S.E.I.U., with more than two million members, has probably done
the best job among large unions of adapting to the new workplace, organizing
health-care workers and janitors, for instance, in circumstances that did not
allow for traditional industrial organizing.
The Justice for Janitors campaign of
the nineteen-nineties offers a good precedent for the current fast-food
campaign, Henry said. The janitors were fissured by the broad move of
commercial property owners to subcontracting, much as fast-food workplaces are
fissured by franchising. Their nominal employers, small cleaning companies, had
no power and thin profit margins. The tactics of the janitors were unorthodox,
and included mass civil disobedience: closing freeways in Los Angeles; blocking
bridges into Washington, D.C. Their goal was to get building owners to the
table, and in time they succeeded, in some cases nearly doubling with their
first contract the compensation they had been earning. The movement was largely
Latino, and crucially strengthened by undocumented immigrants who stepped up,
risking deportation. But big-city janitors had been unionized, historically—and
in some cities, like New York, still were—so the fight was really to reorganize
and rebuild. There is no comparable history in fast food. More important, the
fast-food workforce is just under four million and growing, and the main
companies are so rich and powerful that the stakes are higher than in any labor
struggle in recent memory.
October
14, 2014
issue The New Yorker
To date, it’s been “more air war
than ground war,” as Ruth Milkman, a sociologist of labor movements at the City
University of New York Graduate Center, puts it. The one-day strikes, which
aren’t really strikes, since they don’t usually close shops or try to shame
(nonexistent) strikebreakers, get larger each time. This May, the fast-food
workers staged simultaneous protests in two hundred and thirty cities
worldwide. They have gathered endorsements from a very long list of labor
groups and others, including the seventy-six-member Progressive Caucus in the
United States Congress and the Boston Wobblies. For the fiftieth anniversary of
the March on Washington, an editorial in the Times declared, “The
marchers had it right 50 years ago. The fast-food strikers have it right
today.” The percentage of the workforce actually committed to the movement
still seems quite small, however, and the organizing tactics still decidedly
nontraditional. None of this acclaim will translate anytime soon into a
shop-floor union vote presided over by the National Labor Relations Board.
The S.E.I.U. leadership sometimes
suggests that it is merely following the lead of a spontaneous workers’
movement, but it invested about two million dollars in organizing in New York
before the first public protest, in November, 2012, and it has continued to
fund organizing nationwide—to the tune of more than ten million dollars. It has
retained the services of BerlinRosen, a progressive political-consulting firm
that helped propel Bill de Blasio from dark-horsedom into the mayor’s office.
In the vacuum left by the subsidence
of labor unions, a rough movement sometimes known as Alt-Labor—community
groups, “worker centers”—has emerged. New York has an abundance of such groups,
including the New York Taxi Workers Alliance, launched in 1998, which has
successfully defended drivers against exploitation by medallion owners, and the
Restaurant Opportunities Center, or ROC, which was originally founded as a help center for
displaced restaurant workers after the September 11th terrorist attacks and has
since grown into an all-purpose resource for food-sector employees, offering
training, conducting research, and filing complaints and lawsuits. Thirty-two
cities now have their own ROC. The group has thrown its energy behind the fast-food
movement. The National Restaurant Association has targeted ROC, apparently considering it a
serious threat.
Alt-Labor groups, by legal
definition not unions, will never be bargaining units. Fast Food Forward and
its numerous allies in the fast-food campaign, though all closely tied to their
funding source, S.E.I.U., are in many ways Alt-Labor, which makes the
movement’s path forward rather difficult to picture. Mary Kay Henry told me
that the S.E.I.U. is supporting the movement “because it helps our members.”
She said that “6.5 million workers have already had their wages increased owing
to minimum-wage increases” driven by fast-food activism. Minimum-wage
legislation is great, she said, but “collective bargaining can set a standard
that obviates legislation.”
So
is she hoping to sign up millions of new members from the food industry?
“Membership is not our foremost
question,” she said. “Our first concern is winning fifteen dollars and a union.
The workers will then choose whom they want to represent them.” That answer
seems to dodge the question. Henry, like other labor leaders, likes to sketch a
climactic meeting with the big fast-food employers: “The Big Three”—McDonald’s,
Burger King, Wendy’s—“are going to have to see the union part, and not just the
minimum-wage part, and get their heads around that, before they come to the
table.”
The golden arches glowed at dawn
above Danville, Pennsylvania, and, later, above other towns—Sharon, Mercer. For
Tapia, they were a familiar touch in an unfamiliar land. Also Burger King,
Dunkin’ Donuts. Tapia napped on and off all morning. She was near the front of
the charter bus. It had departed from downtown Brooklyn at 2 A.M., in a convoy with another bus. It
got stuck in 3 A.M.
traffic on Canal Street, but now they were flying westward. The driver and his
alternate were chatting in Chinese. Tapia was the only person from her
McDonald’s going to the conference. Across the aisle was Corina Garcia. She
worked at another McDonald’s—at Broadway and 145th—that was owned by Bruce
Colley. Garcia, who is fifty-six, looked very put-together, with a sweet smile
and a sharp little travel bag. She had been an executive secretary for ten
years in the Dominican Republic, she said. Stacked on the seat next to her were
cases of water, bags of apples, and a box full of small cans of Pringles.
People from farther back in the bus, which was packed, made occasional raids on
the supplies.
Tapia was excited about going to
Chicago. She had never been west of New York. The cornfields of Ohio seemed to
go on forever. It was so different from el campo back home. No
grasslands, rain forest, cane fields, coffee farms. She wondered about the cost
of living out here. It was surely cheaper than New York. But you would probably
need a car, which was expensive. Hearing that South Bend, Indiana, had a famous
Catholic university, she made a mental note—possible college for Ashley. At the
rest stops, the younger men sauntered across the strangely wide Midwestern
forecourts, wearing baggy basketball shorts, neck pillows still in place. But
most of the conferencegoers were older. Alvin Major, the father of four
teen-agers, was from Guyana and worked at a K.F.C. in Brooklyn. His oldest was
going to college upstate this fall. He sometimes worked three jobs, collecting
three paychecks, all from K.F.C.—but no overtime, which wasn’t right. Jorel
Ware worked at a McDonald’s in midtown. He was thirty-one. He still made
minimum wage, after two years. “They say the franchisee is just a small man in the
middle,” he said. “If that’s true, then who am I? I’m just a dot on the wall. I
just want to be able to get an unlimited MetroCard. I can’t afford nothing.”
Shantel
Walker, who works at a Papa John’s in Brooklyn, jumped up as the bus approached
Chicago. She wore a gold-billed cap and a big crucifix. She had a microphone.
“I work too hard,” she chanted, “for a little income.” The bus erupted, workers
chanting the lyrics after her. “Your story is an inspiration / People
are with you / New York is proud of you, Hey.”
Tapia, who speaks little English,
chanted softly: “People are with you / New York is proud of you,
hey.” She was looking pretty sharp herself, in form-fitting jeans, black suède
loafers, a black shirt with a cheetah-print panel, long gold earrings.
Walker: “You got to work hard, Hey / To get a union and
fifteen.”
Tapia: “You got to work hard,
hey / To get a union and fifteen.”
Walker: “Detroit’s gonna be there,
remember. Chicago. We gotta represent. We the original starter of this
movement.”
Cheers, shouts,whistles.
Chicago, to Tapia’s disappointment,
never appeared. Was it a very small city, then? No, the conference was in a
convention center out in a western suburb, Villa Park, and the bus took a route
that never went near Chicago proper.
October
18, 2010“Looks like someone’s eyes are bigger than his liver.
The conference, however, did not
disappoint. Buses pulled in from every direction—St. Louis, Detroit,
Greenville, North Carolina. Delegates in red T-shirts practiced their chants in
the late-afternoon sun. Inside the convention center, twelve hundred workers
filled one end of a vast space. There were elaborate shout-outs from each
delegation, a ritual that seemed to go on for hours. But the energy stayed
high. There were videos, rappers, a driving beat. The proceedings were directed
by an organizing committee of a dozen-plus people on a stage. They never seemed
to call for order. They just drove the thing forward. The New York rep,
Naquasia LeGrand, a twenty-two-year-old K.F.C. employee from Canarsie, said, “I
got to be on my feet all day, and you don’t want me to go to the foot doctor?
You want me to smile at customers, but you won’t give me a dental plan?” Mary
Kay Henry gave a passionate speech, declaring, “I am proud to bring into this
room two million workers who are in this with you to win it!” After Henry’s
speech, Tapia was on her feet, along with the rest of the crowd, chanting, “We
believe that we can win!” She was rocking, clapping, smiling excitedly.
On the second day, delegates were
directed to sit at tables with people from other cities. Tapia found herself at
a Spanish-speaking table with workers from Denver and Chicago. The best part of
the conference, she told me later, was sharing stories with Martina Ortega, who
was originally from Guerrero State, in Mexico, and Otilia Sanchez, from Denver,
about raising families on minimum wage in El Norte, and what their respective
union committees were doing. Tapia filled a notebook with names and contact information.
Each table was asked to report to the conference as a whole, and Otilia Sanchez
rose and delivered a forceful speech, in Spanish, about how this would be not
an armed struggle but a political fight waged by peaceful means—strikes,
boycotts, media—and how if the workers stayed strong they would make history.
Tapia
said afterward that she was surprised to see that the movement was
predominantly African-American. “That’s good,” she told me. “Because they’re
not afraid. They have nothing to lose. We’re all afraid of getting deported.
They’re not.”
The history of the civil-rights
struggle was constantly invoked. The N.A.A.C.P. had just formally endorsed the
fast-food workers’ movement at its national convention (without mentioning the
central demand for fifteen dollars an hour, possibly to spare the fast-food
franchisees among its leadership the shock of that stark figure). The Reverend
William Barber II, the head of the North Carolina N.A.A.C.P., gave a
stand-up-and-shout sermon after lunch. Barber talked about President Franklin
Roosevelt’s belief that a minimum wage should allow American workers to “live
decently,” then offered his own gloss on that idea. “I want to be able to
live,” Barber said. “I want to be able to pay my rent, feed my kids, put gas in
my car, maybe buy a house—and every now and then fix my hair!”
Representative Keith Ellison, co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus,
was on hand. “Income inequality is an existential threat to the American
Dream,” he told me. “And these people are doing something about it.” In his
conference speech, he said, “In the richest country in the world, you should
not be working full time and still be on food stamps.”
I noticed Tapia nodding seriously
when this was said, as she did when Terrence Wise, a Burger King worker from
Kansas City with three children, said, “Most of us are doing this for our kids.
For the next generation. If somebody was hurting your kid, you would crush
them. And that’s how we need to think about these corporations. They’re trying
to destroy our families, hurt our kids.”
The return bus left that afternoon,
arriving in New York at nine the next morning. Tapia took the subway directly
to work. She stashed her travelling bag under a storage bin, where the manager
was unlikely to see it and ask questions. Fortunately, it was Sunday, La
Dominga’s day off.
Tapia applied to ten charter schools
for kindergarten for Ashley. She got into none. She was wait-listed at three,
though, including at Tapia’s first choice, a new Success Academy school opening
on Fort Washington Avenue, in Washington Heights. The school’s Web page
wouldn’t load on Tapia’s phone. “I need to get Internet,” she said. We were in
her apartment, and she pointed out an old Dell desktop wedged among other
appliances on the dresser she shares with Ashley. Internet access is about
twenty dollars a month. Something would have to give. It could not be her
unlimited-ride MetroCard. That was a hundred and twelve dollars a month—a giant
bite out of her paycheck, and a purchase that many people couldn’t manage, but
it was indispensable. If she rode the train or the bus (she preferred the guagua,
as everybody in her neighborhood calls the bus) eighty times a month, it cost
less than half what it would for individual rides.
If she got
a raise to fifteen dollars an hour, she could buy new work shoes, help her
mother, get Ashley a good winter coat. Even so, fifteen dollars an hour is not
considered adequate for a basic household budget by economists who study the
matter. Not in New York City, anyway. A recent study found that, assuming you
get forty hours a week, which Tapia never does now, it might be enough for a
single person living in Montana. In New York, the bare minimum comes to $22.66.
For a single parent with a child, it’s $30.02. I didn’t mention these figures
to Tapia. We were sitting in her tiny railroad kitchen, talking in whispers,
because the other renters might be asleep. A message came in on Tapia’s phone.
It was a photograph of her son, Steven, now a strapping fifteen-year-old and a
serious baseball player. He was a lefty, looking snappy at bat, in full
uniform. “I could not live without Facebook,” Tapia said. “I’ll get a photo of
Steven when I’m at work, and McDonald’s cannot bother me.”
She had told La Dominga about Chicago,
after all. “She understands,” Tapia said. “We’re not fighting her. But she’s
getting all this pressure.”
I had asked La Dominga for an
interview. When we spoke, on a busy Saturday afternoon at the store, she had
agreed that her own story was a good one for McDonald’s. But she needed Mr.
Colley’s permission to talk, and that had not come.
Tapia pointed to the light switch on
the kitchen wall. It wasn’t a sign from God, but it was, in her opinion, close.
Under many layers of paint, there was, still discernible, a raised plaster
decoration around the switch which, after a moment’s study, revealed itself as
a traditional depiction of Christ. Tapia carried a photograph of this odd
little miracle in her phone.
August
3, 1998“It’s not enough that I succeed. My friends must also be drawn and
quartered.
We took a walk through Inwood. Her
church, the Church of the Good Shepherd, stands above Broadway. It is big,
imposing yet sedate, Romanesque Revival, beautifully maintained. Wooden
confessionals are built into the walls, along with a poor box with a brass
door. Many of the Masses are in Spanish. Tapia tries to come every Tuesday
evening. “They welcome you especially, and individually,” she whispered. “It’s
a community of brothers.” She has done a great deal of crying here. “I had so
much rancor toward my ex-husband,” she said. “It has finally left me now.” One
of the best things about Good Shepherd was the number of young people it
attracts. “I came here to pray when my mother said that my kids were becoming
impossible teen-agers. I prayed for help. Now my mother says they are acting
better.”
We stopped
at a McDonald’s on 207th Street. Tapia had worked here, long ago. We started
talking about local politicians who now reliably show up at fast-food protests,
and also at the next-morning “walk-backs,” when strikers are escorted by
sympathetic crowds back to their restaurants. Some of the politicians are
sincere; all want the media attention. Then Tapia shushed me. She texted me
from across the table: Don’t talk union—the store manager had spotted her, and
he was eavesdropping on us. I saw that she was right. Her expression was
strangely mixed: fear, paranoia, mischief, pride. What could this manager
possibly do to her? Her activism wasn’t a secret. But struggles for dignity are
complex. We talked about Ashley. Tapia was praying hard for that charter
school.
Speaking at a Laborfest rally in
Milwaukee on Labor Day, President Obama declared, “All across the country right
now, there’s a national movement going on made up of fast-food workers
organizing to lift wages, so they can provide for their families with pride and
dignity.” The President was blunt about the central issue. “You know what?” he
said. “If I were looking for a good job that lets me build some security for my
family, I’d join a union. If I were busting my butt in the service industry and
wanted an honest day’s pay for an honest day’s work, I’d join a union.”
A few days later, the fast-food
campaign mounted actions in a hundred and fifty cities. In New York, there was
an early-morning sit-in outside a McDonald’s in Times Square. Nineteen strikers
were arrested for blocking traffic. Tapia missed it, because she was busy
taking Ashley to school. (Her prayers had been answered. Ashley was admitted to
Success Academy—a high-powered bête noire of New York’s teachers’ union.) Among
the several hundred protesters, there were a fair number of labor organizers,
but many more fast-food workers. I noticed Jorel Ware, Naquasia LeGrand,
Shantel Walker, and other activists from the conference in Chicago, and an
all-female delegation from the Washington Heights McDonald’s. Workers were also
being arrested in Detroit, Chicago, Little Rock, and Las Vegas. Among those
arrested in Times Square was an eighty-one-year-old McDonald’s janitor named
Jose Carrillo.
Tapia made it to the day’s second
sit-in, a few hours later, outside a McDonald’s at Eighth Avenue and
Fifty-sixth Street. The protesters first marched up Eighth, beating on drums,
blowing vuvuzelas and kazoos, and chanting, “What do we want? Fifteen and a
union!” There were rabbis, priests, preachers, a Buddhist monk, and a full
complement of local politicians. Some of the marchers wore their McDonald’s
uniforms. Tapia was in civilian clothes. It was midday, hot. She and the rest
of the protesters were steered by police into a containment pen, built of
interlocking metal barricades, on the east side of Eighth. Diners on the second
floor of the adjacent McDonald’s looked out on the scene, chewing distractedly,
and returned to their phones. Cars honked. Then fifteen protesters, quietly
avoiding the pen, made their way into the center of the intersection, which was
in full blazing sun, and sat down in a circle on the asphalt. Most were dressed
in black. Most were women. Nearly all looked to be African-American. Shantel
Walker was among them.
Tapia, at the front of the pen,
watched closely, her face full of anger and admiration, as the demonstrators
were brought to their feet one by one, not roughly, by police, and had their
hands cuffed behind them. The police used disposable restraints—white plastic
“flexicuffs.” They led their captives toward two large white vans, herded them
inside, and shut the doors. The energy level of the protest dropped. Tapia and
the other women from the Washington Heights McDonald’s checked their phones.
Some had shifts to work. Tapia had to pick up Ashley from school. ♦
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home