No, he is not in violation of any union rules because, there is no such "union rules" saying where a super should live.
Pg

The Housing Maintenance Code of Union 32B/J, the union that covers building workers such as superintendents, clearly states that in residential buildings of ten or more units, the super must live either on-site or within 200 feet of the building and he should be able to effectively manage the handymen, the porters and all other building staff members.

If the super is not responding in a manner that is effective to service requests or emergencies, or if you can prove that his apartment with the coop is merely a second apartment, you can require him to make the adjustment or fire him for insubordination.

In both non-union and union situations, when a superintendent commits a criminal act or poses a demonstrable danger by his presence, OR ABSENCE, he can be fired immediately.

And in any disciplinary situation, it is imperative that both the board and management maintain accurate and ongoing documentation of the disciplinary actions taken for their own purposes and also for their protection in the event the super brings suit against them or initiates an arbitration proceeding.

~AR

The question asked was is the super in voilation of UNION RULES. The answer is NO.
AR, The housing Maintenance Code is a New York City Code and not a union code.
Secondly the code states 9 units or more and not 10.
I try to answer the question asked, and I did.


Pgrech

While you may have answered the question exactly as it was written, you failed to address the concern.

Consequently, I will spell it out even clearer since you seem to have an unwarranted inhospitable attitude:

Under NYC rules, buildings with nine (correct, not 10) or more apartments must have 24-hour janitorial services. The owner or super must live in the building or at least the same block, or live within 200 feet of it.

Management makes the rules; the union follows them, within the guidelines of the RAB / Union agreement. (which may be downloaded in PDF and entirety here: http://www.seiu32bj.org/cd/pdf/RAB_res_2006.pdf ) Article IV p1&2 , and others, of the union/employee handbook and RAB agreement show that if the super is insubordinate to the rules and systems set in place by management, he can be fired for such insubordination.

The reason so many supers get away with so much is because owners/boards and others are not fully understanding the duties, tasks and relationships between the owner/employer, the union, the city and the employee.

More can be found on these subjects here:

http://www.cooperator.com/articles/600/1/In-a-Class-of-Thier-Own/Page1.html

http://www.cooperator.com/articles/61/1/Your-Buildings-Superintendent/Page1.html


Pgrech: There is no need for animosity and attitudes on this board, we are all here to ask questions and provide opinions based on our experiences.

~AR

All i did was answer the question asked and corrected your mis-information.

Pgrech

AR

I just wanted to know what "Supers get away with so much" mean? Can you explain that alittle more, I like to know just what they are geting away with.

Thanks

Mike

I agree with PGrech on this one. I have not come across anything in the union contract that states you must reside in the building. You may want to review what is the protocol in the event of an emergency.

Many superintendents that are away from their building have a very good back up plan until they return back to the property, such as, the super across the street is familiar with the property, the staff on duty are aware of the protocol when there is an emergency, where the shut off valves are etc. I am aware of buildings where the super has an apartment in the building he manages and has a house elsewhere where he commutes from.

FN

Might be something in the PL, though. And if you still have a sponsor involved in your co-op, I'm sure it's part of their agreement that service levels (including a resident super) must be maintained.

If your super is legally domiciled in other place, when why not ask him to surrender the apartment and why not transform the space into another facility or living quarters for another employee?

AdC

Adc, not sure what you mean by letting another employee use the living quarters. This may be interpretated many different ways?

FN

You read it right! Obviously, if your superintendent is legally domiciled in another location and insists to be 20 minutes away from the building, i.e., he is not willing to live in the apartment at the building, then why not have the co-op use the apartment premises for other purposes including providing living quarters to another employee?

Obviously, this is an issue that requires frank discussion with the union. After all, you are allowing the freedom to the super to be legally domiciled somewhere else!

AdC

AdC, you and I do not even know if llPrime had a frank discussion with the super about the apt. It is worth bearing in mind, if you use the apt for another purpose how will you attract a super later if there will be no apt available.(I see your point)

FN

FN,

I know you did not post the question. My answer was another spin for ILPRIME, i.e., it differed from the other two respondents. Again, I see this forum as a way of thinking "out the box." If an idea triggers some other thoughts, then take it and run with it. No need to argue.

In regards to your question, my answer was use the space to the best of your discretion. If it is convenient to leave it empty, then leave it empty. If you can use it as a board meeting place, then use it. If it can be rented out, do it. If it is to have an employee use it as living quarters.

AdC

No, I did not post the original question. When answering I try to view it from all angles. My fear? is that if you were to turn that apt into lets say a gym, how would you attract a good superintendent down the road without an apt to offer him/her.

FN.

What makes you think the super is not living in the union building. Before you make accusations of any TYPE, make sure your facts are correct!

Because people have been watching him come into the building
with his wife before the start of his work day. I do not
make comments or accusations without proof it is on tape.

Is it on tape that he comes in every single day to start his work with his wife from his home?

two/three days a week, he is not available for emergency
since he is 30-40 minutes away, etc.

he is being paid to be a live in super, we give him
an apt, pay utilites, etc. and he is not around when
needed.