Rhode Island Blood Center workers seek union election over staffing and pay concerns
Posted
By Alexander Castro
An employee at the Rhode Island Blood Center in Providence checks the IV line in the arm of a donor on Monday, Dec. 15, 2025. (Photo by Michael Salerno/Rhode Island Current)
Justin Madden works as a driver for the Rhode Island Blood Center, helping to set up, operate and take down the mobile blood drives that pop up across the Ocean State.
“We have a very important job,” Madden said in a recent phone interview.
Madden wishes there were a few more people in his department doing that important work with him. The longtime driver believes better starting wages at the blood center would help fill those vacancies — something which a union could help achieve, Madden said.
On Oct. 30, Teamsters Local 251 formally petitioned for a union election to represent a proposed unit of 175 workers at the Blood Center.
The Blood Center’s leaders and some of its workers, however, have different interpretations about how the campaign has played out thus far.
“Our employees are essential to our mission, and we recognize and respect their rights under federal labor law,” a Blood Center spokesperson said in an unsigned Nov. 5 statement. “It is up to employees to decide whether they want to be represented by a union, and we have encouraged them to ask questions and make their own informed decisions.”
The nonprofit Rhode Island Blood Center was founded in 1979, and collects and supplies blood and blood products to more than 60 hospitals in Rhode Island and Connecticut, according to its website.
The petition describes the proposed bargaining unit as including full-time, part-time and per diem employees in roles ranging from donor technicians and drivers to laboratory, administrative and maintenance staff.
Two employee groups — those who work in hospital services and the call center — are currently excluded from the union’s proposal, Teamsters organizer Virginia Tavares said in a Nov. 5 phone interview and follow-up email. Tavares said management wants those groups included and the union is disputing their inclusion.
Local 251 has requested an in-person election Nov. 18. In a Nov. 5 follow-up email, Tavares said the date “is now being disputed because the attorney is unavailable until after Thanksgiving.”
The Blood Center statement said it has received the petition and is working with the National Labor Relations Board on “the logistics and details of that election.”
Madden described subpar staffing and compensation as the underlying reasons to organize.
He’s worked with the Blood Center for more than a decade, and his schedule is inherently a liquid one. His hours follow the needs of blood drive sponsors, whose own timetables dictate when Madden’s shifts begin and end.
Madden said his department is missing four full-time, 40-hour employees and one part-timer who works 20 hours weekly. Better starting pay would help keep staff on board and relieve some of the pressure on workers like him, Madden argued.
“You raise the floor, then you can have people stay longer,” Madden said. “That would alleviate a lot of this pressure that’s on people [who are] overworked. That would be the biggest thing.”
Madden said just talking about organizing has led to some improvements. Before, if someone called out, the mobile unit might be down a worker for the day. Now, he said, replacements show up much faster.
“Ever since we started this whole union talk….[that] replacement shows up within the hour, which is kind of interesting because that’s something they could have been doing the entire time,” Madden said.
Madden cited improved health plan options and time-and-a-half policies as an additional benefit of unionization. He was also concerned about the presence of outside consultants he and organizers say were brought in to discuss unionization with employees.
“They cross paths with somebody from my department daily,” Madden said. “It’s aggravating too because people can see the writing on the wall and know these people are getting paid, and this is money that potentially could have went to us.”
Blood Center leaders have also held meetings and town hall-type events meant to supply information on unionization. Madden described the meetings as voluntary.
The Blood Center spokesperson did not include information in its email addressing questions about which consultants the Blood Center had retained, what services they performed or how much they were paid.
A Sept. 30 email reviewed by Rhode Island Current showed Blood Center leadership instructing managers to inform employees that they may be required to sign a union authorization card to attend an informational union meeting during the first weekend of October.
The Blood Center confirmed in an earlier Oct. 6 statement to Rhode Island Current that an email had been sent to employees.
“We had received information that employees may be required to sign a union authorization card to attend, and we wanted to inform our employees that they should be able to gather information without feeling pressured to sign anything,” the statement read.
Teamsters organizer Tavares denied that signing a card was required to attend, and said it was “false information spread by management and the anti-union consultants to intimidate workers into attending their meetings.”
“Workers are not required to sign authorization cards before attending any of our meetings,” she wrote in her Nov. 5 email. “These meetings are simply an opportunity to educate employees about our union, answer their questions, and explain the organizing process.”
