The first drive in 1974 was characterized by unity amongst the workers involved, including members of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Local 77, and a strong spirit of activism, but failed due to political infighting and resistance by the University.
[1] The second drive, organized by a representative of the national American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) in 1978, was formed on the ideals of inclusion and keeping the union free of politics.
Suppressing workers’ voices in the formation of workplace policies, Duke encouraged unskilled employees to simply make complaints, which their superiors then ignored.
[8] Thus, the poor working conditions, low wages, racism, and desire to secure more authority and control in the workplace provided sufficient fuel for Duke workers to consider forming a union.
Harvey, a veteran supporter of civil rights, spent a significant portion of his life striving to improve working conditions at Duke.
[11] Aiming to receive acknowledgement from the University, he organized the Duke Employees Benevolent Society in February 1965 and initiated a shift in the way his coworkers thought about unionizing.
Considering issues in more collective terms under Harvey’s leadership, the Society affiliated with the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) on September 1, 1965 as the Local 77.
[14] After two weeks of employee strikes and student boycotts of classes and on-campus dining, Duke Trustees finally agreed to address the grievances of the unskilled workers, but did not grant any wage increases or implement any policy changes in the end.
[15] Split shifts ended as a result of collective bargaining, and when campus dining halls closed for summer, workers were no longer automatically fired.
[17] In addition to activist initiatives from individuals, the amendment inspired a Local 77 drive to unionize all service workers in the Duke Medical Center.
[21][22] The walkout proved extremely effective and marked the first instance of collective action supporting the rights of hospital workers at Duke Medical Center.
Upon this clear victory, Local 77 recruited Howard Fuller as an organizer, which reflected the inextricable ties between the civil rights movement and the drive to unionize.
Howard Fuller became a symbol of the fight for civil rights as he dedicated his life towards integrating schools, supporting nonviolence, and creating opportunity for blacks.
Bringing together employees from a vast array of departments and disciplines, the coalition, aided by the effective leadership of Fuller, shocked the University into halting pay schedule adjustment plans immediately.
"[29] Duke did not intimidate the grassroots-level drive, however, as by June 1975, Local 77 generated a substantial number of show-of-interest cards and petitioned the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for a union election.
[30] Their petition listed approximately 1000 employees from disciplines across all service sectors in the hospital, from DTOs to EKG technicians, revealing the growing specialization within the medical field.
Although the NLRB did not rule in Duke’s favor, the board gave the medical center the upper hand, quashing the unionizing spirit of the drive.
In November 1975, the regional hearing concluded that, while the bargaining unit proposed by the union was valid, Duke was correct in that 900-1000 clerical workers should be added.
[31] The review process caused a delay in the determination of the composition of the bargaining unit for another year, hampering union activity in a time when it had reached its apex.
[32] The CWC was accused of using the drive for the sole purpose of gathering political support, while the RWL faced allegations of propagating the false idea that unionization would solve all of the workers’ problems.
[37] Yet, by August 1978, Gattis had gathered over 900 show-of-interest cards, the AFSCME sent organizer Harold Sloan to Durham to aid the campaign, and the NLRB agreed to hold an election for a union vote on February 16, 1979.
3M aimed to maximize efficiency and improve overall management within the hospital, claiming to save Duke a significant sum of money while charging $500–$700 a day per consultant.
[42] Duke was, at the time, in the process of building a new hospital wing priced at $92 million—an addition that the corporation prioritized over improving working conditions for its employees.
As Duke worked against the drive, Sloan aimed to organize a union free of political influence and focused on the inclusion of a wide variety of employees.
As a result, while Sloan was able to gather support from a wide variety of individuals and avoid divisive politics, the urgency and motivation that characterized the 1974-1976 drive was absent in the second.
[48] While numbers regarding the racial composition of Duke Hospital’s service sector are publicly unavailable, it is clear that, as of 1997, the representation of minorities in management positions could be improved.
The NLRB held mixed opinions on whether the hospital was involved in unfair labor practices, but Duke was found guilty of trying to convince nurses that unionization would lead to a reduction of benefits.
[50] While a Durham judge reached a split decision regarding Donahue’s case,[50] the incident raises questions about Duke’s approach to dealing with unions.