Debra Lenentine, a Red Cross phlebotomist, worries about blood-collection quotas.

It would be hard to think of a not-for-profit organization with a better public image than the Red Cross — coming to the aid of disaster victims and collecting nearly half the blood supply our hospitals need to function. But a group of unionized frontline workers on the blood-donation side of the organization, embroiled in contract negotiations since February, paint a very different picture of their employer. They say the Red Cross is a Scrooge-like entity interested in squeezing out every dollar of profit to be made from selling blood.

"They're like any other corporation. They pay out blood bonus incentives to managers. Everything with them is about churning product at the expense of work and care," says Larry Dorman, spokesman for Council 4 AFSCME, the New Britain-based union that represents the workers.

The Red Cross collects about 155,000 units of blood annually for Connecticut hospitals, according to Donna M. Morrissey, spokeswoman for American Red Cross Blood Services in the Connecticut region. Morrissey says hospitals do pay a "recovery fee" to cover the costs of collecting the blood, but that the Red Cross tries to keep those costs as low as possible.

Not so, responds Debra Lenentine, a phlebotomist trained to draw blood, and one of the negotiators for union employees. Lenentine says a drive by the Red Cross to maximize profits is jeopardizing the safety of the state's blood supply.

"They don't have a good business boundary between what you can do to make money and what you can't do to keep the public safe," says Lenentine. "You have to have clear boundaries of what your priorities are."

Lenentine gives the example of a high school student at a recent blood drive who couldn't remember what acne medication he was on. Lenentine says the supervisor at the drive — a non-union employee — was pushing her to accept the student's blood. But she refused because if the student was taking Accutane his blood could cause a "serious situation" if transmitted to a pregnant woman.

"If you don't understand the guidelines [for accepting blood] and don't apply them correctly then people are getting through who shouldn't be getting through," says Lenentine.

Lenentine worries that other phlebotomists, without her 12 years of experience, might give in to the pressure of a supervisor trying to meet blood-collection quotas.

Morrissey rejects Lenentine's contention that the nonprofit has lost sight of its responsibility for safety.

"The Red Cross blood supply has never been safer," says Morrissey. "We are committed to the health and safety of every donor who volunteers to roll up their sleeve and every recipient of the blood we collect. Red Cross extensively trains its workers to assure compliance with the regulatory requirements of the FDA as well as our own high standards."

However, Lenentine points out the Red Cross has been under an FDA consent decree since 2003 and that they were fined $4.2 million in 2006 for violating FDA regulations relating to the collection of blood products.

As for Dorman's contention that the Red Cross is like any other corporation, Morrissey says the organization is simply doing what it has to do to remain financially viable. She says the Red Cross faced a $200 million deficit in 2008 and that more than 1,000 employees nationally lost their jobs.

"We have had to take tough steps to control costs," says Morrissey. "We suspended [Fiscal Year 2010] merit increases for national headquarters and also biomedical services nonunion employees and we also suspended 401K matching contributions. Those measures have been put in place."

Red Cross and union negotiators will next meet on Aug. 30 to try to resolve their contract dispute.