BOSTON — At a meeting on Sunday, Republic employees voted to continue their five-week strike against Wakefield’s trash and recyclables collector in a 93-7 percent, according to a release.
Tom Mari, president of Teamsters Local Union No. 25, explained the process thus far in negotiations, and went over the open issues including wages, health insurance, lack of amnesty and other matters.
Mari told those who turned out for the vote, “Republic has refused to meet with us for more than 15 days and is disrespecting all of you because they refuse to bring your wages and benefits up to the standards that we established with Capitol and Star.”
Milton DePina, Field Representative for Local 25, went over the company’s July 18 offer in detail, and two representatives from the Negotiating Committee, Joe D’Angelo and Tonni Landaverde, expressed their strong feelings about Republic’s refusal to negotiate in good faith with Local 25. The Republic employees were then told about Republic’s repeated unsuccessful efforts to get an injunction from the federal courts. The Republic employees then voted by secret ballot to reject Republic’s last offer and to continue their strike.
“The decision to stay on strike carried by 93%. It was a fantastic display of commitment after five weeks of the strike. In fact, a larger percentage of employees voted to continue the strike today than voted to strike on July 1”, Mari said.
“Maybe now the company will realize that it’s not just the negotiating committee making these proposals for better wages and more comprehensive health insurance. The vote this morning of overwhelming support to continue the strike will be heard in Phoenix. As I promised the employees, Local 25 will continue the strike until Republic matches what our members already enjoy with Capitol and Star,” Mari said.
Republic Services said that their wage offer is better than the competitors’, and argued that the health care plan the union wants is significantly more expensive without significantly better benefits.
While bargaining has stalled, municipal, state and national leaders have urged the sides to sit down and come to an agreement.
Republic is the trash contractor in Gloucester, Danvers, Beverly, Canton, Ipswich, Lynnfield, Malden, Manchester-by-the-Sea, North Reading, Peabody, Swampscott, Wakefield and Watertown.
During the strike’s second week, Atty. Thomas A. Mullen, town counsel for both Wakefield and Lynnfield, sent Republic Services a formal notice of non-performance and demand for remedy on behalf of both towns.
In the letter from Wakefield, Mullen wrote, Mullen writes, “This letter constitutes (a) notice to you under the Agreement concerning serious, continuing non-performance by the Contractor since July 1, 2025, and (b) a demand for the immediate resumption of service and remedial action to make the Town whole for damages it has suffered and continues to suffer. Specifically, since Tuesday, July 1, 2025, the Contractor has wholly failed and refused to collect recyclables within Wakefield. It has also failed (and sometimes refused) to collect refuse at all in certain locations, and failed to collect it on schedule in others. These failures constitute a breach of the Agreement, which provides:
“ ‘The Contractor agrees that if at any time during the term of this contract the Director of Public Works determines that the Contractor is negligently or incompetently performing the work, or any part there[of], is unable to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works to perform the same, … or is otherwise failing to perform this contract in accordance with all of its terms and provisions, the Director of Public Works may, at his election at any time thereafter, terminate this contract by giving written notice thereof to the Contractor specifying the effective date of such notice of termination, [and] upon the date so specified this contract shall terminate, but such termination shall not prejudice or waive any rights of action which the Town may have against the Contractor because of any default or failure in performance of this contract up to the date of such termination, and the Contractor shall be liable to the Town for any amount which it may be required to pay for labor and equipment … during the remainder of the period covered by this contract over and above the amount that would have been paid to the Contractor for the performance of the work during said period.’ ”
According to Mullen, “Wakefield’s Director of Public Works, Mr. Joseph Conway, has determined that since July 1, 2025, the Contractor has failed to perform the scope of work set forth in the Agreement. He is not, at this time, exercising his right to terminate the Agreement, but reserves that and all other rights under the Agreement, at law, in equity and otherwise.
“The Town intends to apply the liquidated damages provision of the Agreement. It also reserves its right to seek other remedies as well, including termination, a suit for damages and the application of the performance bond required by Article 3 of the Agreement. The Town’s damages, which have been accruing since July 1, 2025 and continue to grow, include the cost of renting trucks and other equipment to collect and transport refuse and recyclables, paying Town employees and independent contractors to fill in for the Contractor, and the cost of overtime which your non-performance has precipitated. Please note that the Agreement calls for payment by the Contractor of liquidated damages of $2,500 per day if “the contractor fails to report for daily collection services,” and provides that all such damages ‘may be deducted by the Town from Contractor’s payment.’ Agreement, Article 13(R). It is premature to do the math, but it is clear that the liquidated damages which the Town is entitled to withhold from its payments to the Contractor and pursue through legal action have already achieved a substantial level. Further, resort to liquidated damages does not preclude the Town from seeking other, additional remedies for its losses. ‘In addition to all of its other rights and remedies under the Contract, at law or in equity, the Town shall be entitled to assess liquidated damages.’ Agreement, Article 12 (emphasis added).
“If, as I understand, a pending labor dispute has affected your ability to meet your obligations under the Agreement, I must point out that the same cannot constitute an excuse for non-performance. The Agreement permits the Contractor ‘additional time wherein to perform and complete this contract as the Director of Public Works shall certify in writing to be just’ if delays ‘are caused by acts of God, acts of Government or State, extra work or other contingencies clearly beyond the control or responsibility of the Contractor.’ Agreement, Article 5. It is by no means clear that any disagreement between you and your laborers is ‘beyond [your] control or responsibility,’ and Mr. Conway is not prepared at this time to so certify. Moreover, separate language in the Agreement specifically addresses “delays … caused by a strike of the Contractor’s employees,” and it requires you to “diligently and in good faith take all action necessary in order … to resume operations”, without excusing your nonperformance if such action proves inadequate. (Emphasis added.)
“My client has been generally pleased with the Contractor’s performance under the Agreement until this month. It would be the Town’s strong preference to avoid having to terminate the Agreement. It is important, however, that you understand that (a) the Town has suffered and continues to suffer substantial damages as a result of the Contractor’s non-performance; (b) it will commence withholding liquidated damages and other costs so incurred from amounts otherwise due the Contractor, starting with the next scheduled payment; and (c) it reserves all other rights and remedies,” Mullen’s letter to Republic continues.