Charlie Hall keeps a laminated map of his trash pickup route through Bryn Mawr in the front of his truck — driveways in red, alleys in yellow — but he knows the city's streets so well that he hardly needs it.
After all, collecting Minneapolis trash has been the family business for three generations. Hall drives five days a week before sunrise to a lot in Northeast to meet his son and another worker to go out on a garbage truck, much as he once did with his own father decades ago.
It's one of a dozen small businesses that makes up the Minneapolis Refuse Inc. consortium of haulers that has essentially held a monopoly on picking up half the city's residential trash through a series of five-year contracts since the early 1970s (municipal crews do the other half). And if all goes as they hope, they'll soon win another such agreement with the city.
Minneapolis opened bidding Monday for the next multimillion-dollar trash contract, a process that last time around included a lawsuit, the threat of a rival trash company and a heated debate about whether the city had been getting the best deal by staying with the same company year after year. Some observers say this latest request for proposals to pick up city garbage continues to favor MRI and shuts out competition by including a pro-labor provision that other companies have said they cannot meet.
"If the city is hoping to get the largest amount of competition, labor peace will hinder that," said Susan Young, the city's former longtime solid waste director, though she added that it could help the city achieve other goals.
Young was referring to what's known as a labor peace provision, requiring companies that bid on projects to agree to be part of a collective bargaining agreement with any union seeking to represent their employees if a majority of them signs union recognition cards. Workers join the union only if they wish and must agree either way not to strike.
The requirement in the previous round of bidding five years ago — the first big test of competitive bidding — led the only other competitor vying for the contract to back out. That contractor, Aspen Waste, had submitted a proposal that would have cost the city $800,000 less over five years than MRI's.
One Aspen executive said the firm is hesitant to submit a proposal for the job, though no final decision has been made.