Presses Council
DC 37 Turning Up Heat on Residency

By MEREDITH KOLODNER

A wide swath of labor leaders and District Council 37 local presidents turned out on the steps of City Hall last week to press the City Council to pass a bill that would lift residency requirements for 45,000 city workers.

LILLIAN ROBERTS: Has other leaders' backing.

The public call was part of an "educational" campaign launched by the union to get the Council to turn into law an agreement the union reached with the Mayor in the last round of contract negotiations 16 months ago. Several labor leaders backed DC 37's call for equity with 240,000 other city workers who can live in six state counties that surround the city. Holding signs that read "Set Us Free," members also spoke about why the change was important to them.

'Second-Class Citizenship'

Speakers emphasized they were not "threatening" the Council Members, but some used strong language to condemn the legislators' opposition.

"They're willing to offer us a second-class version of citizenship," said DC 37 Associate Director Oliver Gray. "We feel that this is just a replay of a version of the civil rights movement when people were restricted in terms of where they could live and what they could do."

The Chief-Leader/Michel Friang 'SET US FREE': Human Resources Administration employee and Local 1549 member Carmen Flores told a crowd of labor leaders gathered on the steps of City Hall last week that she wanted the same right as other public-sector workers to move out of the city. District Council 37 has been pressing the City Council to pass a law to lift residency requirements for 45,000 of its members. 'I want to be able to create a better quality of life for my children and my grandchildren,' she said.

Speaker Christine Quinn has refused to support the current version of the bill, in part due to opposition by members of the Black, Latino and Asian Caucus. Many of those Council Members favor an amended version that would require residency initially and allow city workers to relocate after one to five years on the job. Concerned primarily that city residents should have preference for city jobs, they have offered to make the measure retroactive so that veteran employees could move out immediately.

'Entitled to the Choice'

But union leaders have refused to compromise and argue that it is an issue of equity. They also dismiss concerns that people will move en masse out of the city. "Whenever the residency rule has been extended, there has been very little change," said District Council 37 Executive Director Lillian Roberts. "This is especially true at a time of crisis in affordable housing. Maybe they'll find it, maybe they won't. But they are entitled to the choice."

Carmen Flores, a Human Resources Administration employee who lives in Manhattan, said that she was angry that the four temp workers in her office employed by a private agency are allowed to live anywhere they want but she isn't. She said she was not ready to move out of the city yet, but wanted the option in the future. "Why not let me have a chance when I'm ready to move?" she said.

'Should Honor Contract'

Her brother is a cop with the Port Authority and has a house upstate with a yard. "I go to their house on the weekends and it's beautiful; their kids are running around," she said. "I want that chance for my kids and my grandchildren."

One local president admitted that he had members living outside the city and that they were careful to maintain two residences. "But not everyone can do that," he said. "And if you get caught, you can be fired."

United Federation of Teachers President and Municipal Labor Committee chair Randi Weingarten said that affordable housing was a crisis for all of the city's union members. "This is a contract that's been done and it should be honored," she said. "I know this can be worked out. I'm calling on the Council to roll up its sleeves for fairness and for justice."

Local 436 President Judith Arroyo represents Nurses who can live in New Jersey, as well as Epidemiologists who are restricted to the five boroughs. The Nurses are exempt because of the local and national nursing shortage. "Every time I go to visit [the Epidemiologists], they tell me they can't afford to live in the city," she said. "Why should they be subjected to a double standard?"

Downplays Affordability

She noted that even with the residency requirement lifted, there are still openings for School Nurses. Although they have lower pay, she added, they do not work weekends and get all of the school holidays, which should make the job more attractive. "We still don't have hundreds of Nurses coming in here trying to get jobs," she said.

Eric Latson, the president of Custodial Assistant Employees Local 1597, said that for his members, having the option was the central issue. "It's more an issue of choice than affordability," he said. "Whatever side of the river you live on, you can find what they call cheap, but people should have the choice."

Other union leaders also emphasized the issue of choice. "We live in America," said Correction Officers' Benevolent Association President Norman Seabrook. "Every single man, woman and child should have the opportunity to live wherever they can live."

Some members said that they were looking for a larger or a nicer home that they would not be able to afford in the city. Jackie Rowe-Adams, a Parks Recreation Manager who has lived in Harlem for all of her 59 years, said the skyrocketing housing prices have made the issue more pressing. "Have you seen the condominiums they've built in Harlem?" the Local 299 member asked. "There is a penthouse on 145th St. going for $1 million."

Cheaper in Westchester?

She says she has seen rents rise to $1,500 for one-bedrooms in her neighborhood and believes it would be cheaper to live in Yonkers or Mount Vernon in Westchester. She said she is not ready to move immediately, but is worried that someday she will be priced out of the city. "Down the road, you don't know what would happen," she said. "God forbid something happened to my husband, I couldn't afford it here."

Ms. Rowe-Adams added that many of her colleagues were hoping to be able to move and that some members living in public housing projects want an improvement in their living situations. "It's been an issue, but now it's the main issue," she said. '''Why is it taking so long? It's not fair.' I'm hearing it all the time now."