This is a continuation of the Blog Post on Dirty Dealings in Chicago, from the post on December 10, 2012.

After a long public battle and weeks of protests, the janitorial  contract  at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport changed hands in late 2012. Some reports claimed the move was based on relationships between the  new contracted company and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel. But no matter the reason, the shift arguably displaced over 300 workers that were part of the Service Employees International
Union (SEIU).

In exchange for those SEIU employees, The Chicago Sun-Times
reports that the new custodial workers at the airport will now be
part of the  Teamsters. The move raises eyebrows once again, since the Teamsters were one of the few unions that supported Emanuel’s 2011 mayoral campaign.

As reported the Sun-Times, SEIU leaders — who were neutral
in the  2011 mayor’s race and have since criticized Emanuel frequently — filed a complaint Thursday with the National Labor Relations Board.
 
They say  the city’s new airport janitorial contractor, United Maintenance Cos.  Inc., “unlawfully coerced” its airport employees to become Teamsters.

Nora Kelley, chief of staff at SEIU Local 1, said United Maintenance and city officials refused to arrange access to the workers for SEIU to try to organize them. “Instead, they granted preferential access” to the  Teamsters, Kelley said.

A representative for United Maintenance did say that the company’s  O’Hare workers voted last week to join Teamsters Local 727 and that city officials played no role in the negotiations.

Asked about charges that City Hall favored the Teamsters, Emanuel  spokeswoman Sarah Hamilton replied in an email that the matter is “a  dispute between two labor organizations.” She added that the city 
“supports the rights of the employees of United Maintenance to bargain collectively.”

This article is from CleanLink News on 04/15/2013

Green and sustainable cleaning practices are among the key drivers in the commercial cleaning industry, and show no signs of slowing down. Customer demand and the accompanying surge in environmentally preferable products and services is impacting the way facility managers think and approach the cleaning and maintenance of their buildings. But, does this focus on sustainability come at the expense of the bottom line?

The past ten years have brought tremendous growth in the awareness of green cleaning, and the widespread adoption of green cleaning programs and practices. A recent survey by ISSA, the worldwide cleaning industry association, and Sanitary Maintenance Magazine of commercial cleaning product distributors reported that almost one-third of total sales were for “green cleaning products,” including a wide variety of products such as chemical cleaners, powered cleaning equipment, paper and plastics, supplies and other janitorial tools. In addition, a recent Contracting Profits Magazine report indicated that 83% of contract cleaning service providers had or will soon offer green cleaning services and that 43% of customers are specifically requesting sustainable cleaning practices be used in their facilities. The push for sustainable cleaning has even led to 22 state governments instituting some type of green cleaning procurement program.

 ”Green” products and practices have clearly helped facilities lower their impact on the environment. For example, facility managers have been able to reduce the health impact on both cleaning service workers and building occupants, reduce waste by incorporating a comprehensive recycling program, lower energy consumption and conserve water by investing in a variety of new technologies, including low-flow toilets and sinks, innovative cleaning equipment, and new plumbing systems that are capable of recycling water.

While the environmental benefits are clear, there is often the notion that sustainable cleaning and green products come with a high cost. However, a growing body of evidence has documented that comprehensive green cleaning programs, in addition to sustainable building practices, have led to significant savings on energy, water, chemi­cals and waste, while reducing illness and injuries to custodial staff as well as workers’ compensation costs.

The University of Georgia’s (UGA) Physical Plant Division - Services Department is a shining example. UGA has successfully implemented an innovative process improvement focused on green cleaning, environmental purchasing, and workplace safety, using the Cleaning Industry Management Standard-Green Building program (CIMS-GB) as a road map. The quantifiable benefits have been documented by the University:

• After the implementation of these programs, UGA found that the number of cleaning service worker injuries decreased from 39 in 2006 to only 17 in 2009, while lost worker hours decreased from 4,474 to 386 over the same time period.
• The University was able to decrease its expenditure on chemical products from $1.5 million to $110,000 annually, due to its new environmental purchasing policy.
• Ultimately, the university estimates a total savings of $850,000 during the 2008 and 2009 fiscal years.

Other facility managers have enjoyed a cost benefit when switching to “day cleaning” – where cleaning activities are performed during the daylight hours rather than at night – a cost benefit specifically resulting from reduced energy use. By choosing less hazardous cleaning products, facility managers can reduce exposure, minimize the potential impact to custodial workers and building occupants, improve indoor air quality and reduce water and ambient air pollution. Since many green cleaning practices call for greater dilution of cleaning products, there may be a reduction in packaging waste and disposal costs of hazardous cleaners. Many facility managers have also found green cleaning practices reduce wear and tear on facility assets, increasing their lifespan.

Sustainable and effective cleaning processes can be a critical component to helping buildings function with greater operational and financial efficiency. By better understanding the value of green cleaning, operations and maintenance teams can leverage sustainability to improve overall health and cleaning efforts, reduce costs, extend buildings’ longevity, and, ultimately, have a positive impact on the bottom line.

By Dan Wagner

Dan Wagner is Director of Facility Services Programs for ISSA. Dan can be reached at [email protected]

 

Jim Jones, assistant administrator for chemical safety and  pollution prevention at EPA, described some of changes the agency plans to implement within its Design for the Environment Program (DfE) to help companies trying to use safer chemicals in products.

 EPA intends to expand the list of 457 chemicals that can be used in cleaning
products qualifying for the DfE Safer Product labeling program, Jones said. The list, released in September 2012, includes colorants, defoamers, enzymes, and other compounds that have characteristics such as not being carcinogenic, harmful to reproduction, or a cause of allergies, or being persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic.

 In addition, EPA is also in the process of redesigning the DfE logo to
improve its effectiveness in messaging.   Over the next couple of months, EPA intends to develop a more modern, compelling label to better communicate the program’s scientific expertise and stringent health and environmental criteria. 

The primary goals are to make the label: more appealing and accessible to partners; easily displayed on the packaging of qualifying products; and more meaningful and memorable to consumers.  EPA also intends to enhance the value of the label for institutional product manufacturers and purchasers of those products.

 With an updated program label, EPA believes that the program will be poised to become a widely recognized and trusted symbol for safer, effective chemical-based products that help protect the health of people and the planet.

By Bill Balek 
ISSA Director of Legislative Affairs