Working Together for Public Service:Chapt 1 Snap

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Working Together for Public Service

Snapshot: MASSHIGHWAY

W hat began as a union response to the contracting out of state highway maintenance work has evolved into a highly successful example of labor-management cooperation resulting in numerous improvements to the Massachusetts Highway Department (MassHighway) and benefits for the workers, motorists and taxpayers.

The catalyst came in 1993 when Governor William F. Weld announced he was expanding the contracting out of highway maintenance to include all of Eastern Massachusetts. Bids were solicited from private firms and from MassHighway employees for seven geographic areas. Faced with competition in the workplace and the possible loss of 424 maintenance worker jobs, three unions -- SEIU Local 285, AFSCME Local 1009 and the National Association of Government Employees (NAGE, SEIU Local 5000) -- formed a unique alliance to compete with the private contractors and ultimately were awarded three of the seven contracts in October 1993, saving 264 jobs.

Charles E. Kostro, chief policy analyst for the Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation and Construction, told the Task Force: "The public workers who were awarded these three contracts remained as state employees with full pay and benefits. These workers, however, were bound to fulfill the obligations of their contract just as if they were a private company. MassHighway managers met weekly with union and worker representatives to address operational issues for the one-year duration of the contract. During this time, the cooperation which developed between management and labor as a part of this process resulted in numerous improvements to MassHighway and benefits for the workers, motorists and taxpayers."

Following the first year of the new arrangements, dramatic improvements and changes were cited by Kostro, Frank Borges, secretary-treasurer, SEIU, Local 285, and other union representatives:

The state and taxpayers saved more than $7.8 million in operating from the overall efficiency program in the department of which this cooperative effort was a major component.
There was a 60 percent reduction in workers compensation claims.
On union-operated drawbridges, workers designed flexible work schedules to reduce overtime expenses by 70 percent and sick time usage by 49.5 percent when compared with a similar period prior to this program.
There was a renewed pride and interest in the work of the department.

Borges pointed out that road sweeping used to be done sporadically -- a few roads in an area were spot-cleaned. But in 1994, "for the first time in probably 25 years, [union-managed] areas were swept completely." Union workers also spent hundreds of hours washing bridges, he said. This previously neglected task involved clearing years of debris from gutters. "If gutters aren't free," he explained, "water accumulates on the road instead and makes winter travel unsafe."[2]

These efforts allowed the union workers to compete effectively with the private contractors and when the maintenance contracts were re-bid in the summer of 1994, the MassHighway workers retained their three contracts and were once again competitive bidders on much of the remaining work.

Kostro pointed out that as a result of the cooperation between management and labor in this area, several other aspects of MassHighway's operation were improved. Suggestions by the union workers for improved vehicle and equipment maintenance have been adopted by MassHighway, for example. This improvement in vehicle and equipment maintenance has provided management with the confidence to purchase and lease new vehicles and equipment, further improving MassHighway's efficiency andperformance.

"Finally," Borges said,"MassHighway's work force has been energized by their experience of the past year. The unions' membership happily sees the unions changing to meet the new conditions. They also are satisfied that it was their union which freed them from traditional job restrictions and allowed them to perform a more professional and respect-worthy job.

Kostro responded: "Management has been energized by this program as well. Public employee unions at MassHighway are no longer viewed as obstacles, but as partners in achieving the agency's productivity goals."

The roles of workers, their unions and management have all changed significantly as a result of this cooperative approach.

Since winning the bids, Borges told the Task Force, unions assumed the responsibility for organizing and managing highway jobs, just as their private-sector competitors. Union leaders have been engaged in virtually continual meetings with their membership. Officers have de-emphasized their role as "grievance handlers" in favor of becoming "motivators" who urge employees to work smarter to save their jobs. They act as liaison between workers and management in sharing concerns and solving service problems, including those that might develop because of poor managers or inefficient management policies or systems. Union leaders also have had the opportunity to become much more sophisticated in the use of operational and budget information. They have input into budget matters since they now share accountability for the bottom line. The union locals received moral and technical support from their national and international unions which supplied money, research materials, consultants, encouragement and suggestions.

For workers, morale is higher than ever. They exercise peer pressure to see that tasks are performed in a timely and effective fashion. The development of clearer and more measurable work standards has led to substantial self-management by workers (as well as more service and production leadership by union reps and more effective management by managers themselves).

Two maintenance workers, Steve Lowery and Lee Devereaux, liaisons between SEIU Local 285 and the Highway Department, told the Task Force that they attributed much of the success to teamwork and planning. They reported that they get two or three times the work done with half the workforce. The workers now take on things not in the contract. For example, although snow and ice removal was not in the bid or contract, the unionized workforce helped with snow and ice removal in the extraordinarily hard winter of 1994. Normally, snow and ice removal is contracted out. As a result of the efficiency, flexibility, and improved communication in the new relationship, the workers and team leaders rescheduled and readied the necessary equipment and teams. They were able, thereby, to contribute to the task, reducing the need for additional contracting out in those areas.

Management has become much more open to the sharing of information and to acknowledging that front-line workers have expertise that is of substantial and important value in determining how the work can be done better. Improved communications with workers has helped management to realize that real authority should be vested in the supervisors and workers who actually oversee the work. Management used to be reluctant to get the whole workforce together, union spokespersons testified, but now full staff meetings are held every two months. The increased sharing of information has improved both work processes and trust.

As a result of this experience, MassHighway indicated the cooperative and participative model is more likely to be used as the primary approach in other attempts to improve service and efficiency in the department.