Update: At 11:15 a.m. on Friday, October 25, University of Vermont president Tom Sullivan sent an email to the school’s faculty and staff with the news that “Sodexo employees will not experience changes in the current definition of employment status and associated benefits until further notice in order for the University to complete its analysis based on a full review of all relevant data and facts.”

As reasons for the announcement, the president cited “a very tight timeframe” for affected employees to find health care; the “challenges” and “uncertainties” surrounding current health-care options; “The University’s obligation to complete its review of the proposed changes under the contract with Sodexo”; and the upcoming negotiations over a new contract with Sodexo ahead of the current one’s expiration in June 2015.

______

When Sodexo revealed last month that it was changing the definition of a full-time employee to someone who works an average of 30 hours per week — according to the rules of the Affordable Care Act — many cried foul at colleges around the state who subcontract their dining services to the multinational company.

Only full-timers are eligible for company benefits, so when the new policy takes effect on January 1, many seasonal employees stand to be stripped of their health and dental insurance, sick and vacation days, and retirement packages. On the campuses of the University of Vermont and the Vermont state colleges, two coalitions of staff, faculty, students and labor groups have sprung up demanding that the schools intervene.

When the UVM trustees convene this weekend, one of those groups will use a public comment period on Saturday morning to present a petition — directed at UVM president Tom Sullivan and vice president for finance Richard Cate, who negotiate the school’s dining services contract — with more than 1000 signatures.

Denise Youngblood, a history professor and president of United Academics, the school’s faculty union, will also address the trustees. In her talk, Youngblood says, she’ll ask the board to urge that Sullivan and Cate take advantage of a clause in the current contract that requires the school’s approval for any change Sodexo makes in its employees’ working conditions. The existing contract will expire after 2015. 

“We believe that UVM should live up to its proclaimed social justice values,” says Youngblood. “Every employee who works on this campus should have a fair benefits package. No UVM employees are being treated the way Sodexo employees are being treated.”

Got something to say?

Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!

Charles Eichacker was a staff writer for Seven Days.

3 replies on “Labor Groups Press Schools on Sodexo Benefits Cuts”

  1. The whole point of UVM bringing a contractor like Sodexo in is that Sodexo gets to do the dirty work of treating the working poor like shit.

  2. as an employee, i was informed not to speak of this to the public or we could face consequences as the result of our actions. the older employees were effectively silenced by this but i am not. i am pleased that uvm is stepping in on this situation. however, i still plan on switching my insurance. i would much rather support VT Health Connect than bonus packages for executives.

Comments are closed.