Scandal surrounds Aramark

Across the nation, coalitions of students, workers, and their allies have been protesting large-scale food service company, Aramark, over allegations that it has been mistreating workers committing fraud and providing low quality food. The protestors' primary concerns are borne of a string of incidents that suggest that Aramark has been less-than-vigorous in meeting service goals.

As an example of the types of allegations that have been brought against the company, an investigation found that, at the Los Alamos National Laboratory's cafeteria, Aramark had withheld back-pay and fringe wages, and had failed to pay some workers for lunch hours. As a result of the investigation, Aramark was forced to pay out over $100,000.

A food service worker in Michigan was apparently fired for reporting on unsanitary conditions, including rat droppings and mice in refrigerators. There were no other indications of misconduct or discipline on the part of the worker.

Besides specific examples, jobs with Aramark constitute more than half of Forbes' 2007 listing of the 25 lowest paying jobs in the country. Because of these incidents, as well as allegations that Aramark is guilty of age and gender discrimination and complaints brought by the National Labor Committee from many regions of the country, a rally was held last November in front of Aramark headquarters in Philadelphia. Since then, at least 25 of workers involved with the rally have been disciplined, demoted or fired.

Aside from worker mistreatment, many claim that Aramark is guilty of fraud, overbilling and driving up the deficits of the organizations with which Aramark works. In 2004, Aramark was forced to pay more than $3 million over allegations that they had accepted donations from the USDA without reducing the amount that the school district was charged. Even after paying such an exorbitant amount to settle, Aramark still claims that no laws were broken.

According to the Houston Chronicle, Aramark had inflated the number of free meals offered to children within the Houston Independent School District, which meant that the district was forced to pay over $200,000 as a penalty to the state.

Philadelphia's school districts terminated their contract with Aramark only two years into a five year contract. Aramark had promised to help eliminate the deficit that the school district was running. Instead, after one year, the deficit jumped to $4 million and $7 million after two years - an increase of 72 percent. Furthermore, students from across the country have complained of exorbitant prices. Arizona State University recently signed a contract with Aramark, who will increase the price that students must pay for the least expensive meal plan by $650 to $1500 and is not giving the university the opportunity to opt-out.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported in 2005 that over 80 students fell ill at once from food poisoning in Illinois. The Center for Disease Control later linked the sickness to taco shells, provided by Aramark, which contained too much of a certain preservative. Early in 2004, a student in St. Louis found a worm in her food. A week later, at a nearby school, 45 students fell ill and 29 of those 45 were taken to the emergency room due to excessive vomiting. The source of the illness was later determined to be old turkey meat provided by Aramark.

An Aramark representative contends that the majority of the charges brought against their company are the result of misinformation. They argue, instead, that the campaign is a result of the union UNITE HERE's - which represents many Aramark workers - use of what is known as card check/neutrality. Under normal conditions, unionization begins when the National Labor Relations Board receives authorization cards from 30 percent of employees eligible to join a union. After receiving these, the process then moves to debate and election. Unions such as SEIU and UNITE HERE are now implementing card check/neutrality, where employers are required to stay out of the unionization process, during which the union attempts to persuade over 50 percent of eligible employees to sign union cards without an election. Employers such as Aramark charge that such a process may open the door to union intimidation, and that it is Aramark's opposition to card check/neutrality that has spurred the campaign.

However, a representative of the union UNITE HERE rebuts that "the argument that Aramark's opposition to card check/neutrality is the source of the campaign is a diversion technique, meant to sway attention away from the real issue. Ultimately, the issues have been, and continue to be, raised by students and workers who have no vested interest in card check/neutrality. It is very telling that while students are speaking out against mistreatment of workers, Aramark is focusing on labor laws."