Toledo Museum of Art worker says his union support got him fired

A former Toledo Museum of Art glassworker says the museum fired him in retaliation for his role in organizing its staff union. The museum says he was fired for cause and that his union support was “completely irrelevant” to the decision.

Timothy Spurchise worked in the museum’s Glass Pavilion from May 2022 until June 25, 2025, records provided to Urgent Matter show. He helped organize the campaign that unionized museum staff with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

Workers voted to unionize on April 9, 2025, backing the union 53 to 11 in a unit of 73 eligible voters, records from the National Labor Relations Board show. The NLRB certified the result on April 24, 2025.

Two days after the vote, on April 11, 2025, the museum issued Spurchise a written warning, both he and the museum said.

“I was written up by the museum for ‘violating’ a social media policy, which did not exist,” Spurchise wrote in an email to Urgent Matter.

He said the post that drew the discipline showed a visiting artist working in the museum’s public studio.

“The museum’s official Instagram page even re-shared my post, so I was quite surprised to be written up for this,” he wrote in a filing to the EEOC. By email, he added that “although this was a clear retaliatory act by the museum, I calmly stated that there was no social media policy, and that I have never shared anything different than my immediate supervisor, Alan Iwamura, has promoted.”

The museum told Urgent Matter the policy was real. A spokesperson for the museum said it “had been in place long before his violation and write-up,” and that the matter was “unrelated to his subsequent termination.” Urgent Matter has not independently reviewed the policy.

"I personally find this very suspicious that all of this happened immediately after the union vote passed."

When asked whether other employees who posted similar content to social media were disciplined, the museum responded that it “does not comment on confidential personnel matters involving other employees.” Urgent Matter has not seen the post in question.

Spurchise said he asked for a union representative at that April meeting and was told no. The museum said an AFSCME business agent represented him during all investigatory interviews and his termination meeting.

In his EEOC filing, Spurchise wrote that he received a notice on June 4, 2025, that the museum’s human resources wanted to speak with him about retaliation he allegedly carried out against two other former workers.

Allegations of harassment and stalking

The dispute centers on competing allegations of retaliation. Spurchise says the museum retaliated against him for his union activity; the museum says he retaliated against two former workers who he had accused of harassing him and his wife.

Spurchise said that, in November 2023, two part-time museum workers began harassing him and his wife, Chuchen Song, who also worked for the museum.

“Two part-time employees were sadistically spreading slander against us, making false accusations in an attempt to ruin our careers, stalked me, vandalized equipment I had built at a previous job, lied about me to get me fired from a previous job, stole several of my personal belongings, made inappropriate
gestures and comments towards my wife while at work,” Spurchise said by email.

He said that alleged conduct made them both “terribly uncomfortable to even be present in the building at the same time as these people,” and alleged that they would purposely interrupt her classes while she was teaching.

In his EEOC letter, Spurchise said he and Song reported the alleged behavior of the two other workers—whom Urgent Matter is not naming because they were minors at the time—to their supervisor, Alan Iwamura, as well as human resources representatives.

“Not a single thing was done to aid us. My wife was still forced to work with the girl that harassed her, and instead we were told that because some of this happened outside of the museum work hours, they had no ability to say anything to these people,” Spurchise said.

Spurchise said the two workers eventually left the museum but that he and Song continued to experience what he described as harassment for two years. The museum called statements Spurchise made about the two workers "false."

Records show that Spurchise received a written warning in November 2023, for “an off-duty incident” while employed at Bowling Green State University. The records show that the incident “involved minors imbibing alcohol while at an out-of-state glass competition.” Two of those students were the part-time employees of the museum who he alleges harassed him and his wife.

Spurchise is fired

The museum fired Spurchise on June 25, 2025. He described the firing meeting to Urgent Matter. He said that when he challenged director of people and talent Debra Ball, she cut him off.

“I don’t need to hear any more from you, my decision is made,” Spurchise said Ball told him.

“Well, I need to hear more from you because this doesn’t make any sense to me,” he said he replied. “And I was met with nothing but silence.”

In his EEOC filing, Spurchise said Ball told him his personnel file showed “all these policy violations” and that she had built “a case of ‘just cause’” against him.

“I replied by asking if when she looks in my file from the last two and a half years that she also sees my dozens of incredibly positive student reviews, my above and beyond work ethic and projects, and my perfect performance review,” he wrote. “Her only response was that she made up her mind and that this discussion was over.”

“I personally find this very suspicious that all of this happened immediately after the union vote passed,” he wrote.

The museum rejected the account.

“While it is the museum’s practice not to comment on employment matters, in this instance we adamantly disagree with this former employee’s account of his dismissal,” the museum spokesperson said.

“The former employee was dismissed for cause for violating the Museum’s policies, including no retaliation and anti-harassment policies,” the spokesperson said. “Whether he was a supporter of a union or not is completely irrelevant to his termination.”

The spokesperson said the museum “does not make employment decisions based on an employee’s union membership, support, or protected union activities.”

Allegations of Spurchise’s conduct

The termination letter—provided to Urgent Matter by Spurchise—was signed by Ball. In it, she said the museum concluded Spurchise had emailed gallery and studio professionals about former students and made “unsubstantiated and serious accusations,” and that he gave a false account when asked how many people he had contacted.

“The emails were unsolicited, emotionally charged, and appeared intended to dissuade members of the glass community from working with the individuals you named,” the termination letter said.

“Your conduct constitutes retaliation, violates the Museum’s Code of Ethics and Business Conduct, and represents a significant breakdown in trust and professionalism,” it continues. “It also exposes the Museum to reputational risk.”

Spurchise and his union representative, Jason Bogel, refused to sign it, the document shows. It lists two earlier warnings, one on April 11, 2025, over the social media post, and one in November 2023.

Asked whether the letter cited reputational risk, the museum’s spokesperson restated the reasons for the firing without addressing the phrase. Asked how many union supporters had been disciplined since the vote, the spokesperson said the museum does not comment on confidential personnel matters. The museum declined to release the termination letter or write-up.

After his termination, Spurchise filed an application for a determination of his benefit rights, seeking to be allowed unemployment benefits. The State of Ohio Unemployment Compensation Review Commission held a hearing in November 2025 and ruled in his favor the following month, records show.

But the Toledo Museum appealed on December 23, 2025, and Spurchise received a notice that the determination was reversed in the museum's favor on April 8, 2026, following a re-hearing with the unemployment office in March.

“Claimant was discharged by The Toledo Museum of Art with just cause in connection with work,” the commission said in April.

The unemployment commission's decision concerned Spurchise's eligibility for unemployment benefits and did not determine whether the museum unlawfully retaliated against him for protected union activity.

In its reversal, the commission said that Spurchise, while off duty, sent an email to Ryan Thompson, owner of a glass company, in which “he disparaged the four students involved in the 2023 incident.”

“He made inaccurate statements in the message about why one of the employees no longer worked for the employer and made statements about how they had ruined his reputation and would be graduating soon,” the commission said. “He stated in the message that he was providing Mr. Thompson a moral warning about the students.”

Thompson forwarded the message to the museum, stating that it did not sit well with him that Spurchise “would attempt to blacklist the students before their careers had a chance to begin.” Thompson did not respond to Urgent Matter’s request for comment by press time.

The museum told the commission that its investigation found Spurchise had sent a similar message to another business in 2024, after he told investigators only Thompson had received one, records show.

Asked whether it was aware of any EEOC or NLRB matters involving employees beyond the guards, the spokesperson said there were “no known current or active” ones. Spurchise filed his EEOC retaliation charge in January 2026.

Other union supporters

Spurchise’s wife, Song, worked in the same glass studio and was quoted as a union organizer in a Hyperallergic article about the campaign. The museum gave her a written warning the same day it fired him.

The warning, also signed by Ball, says Song showed “complicity in retaliatory behavior” and cites her “involvement in the drafting of a retaliatory email.” The museum said it was for violating the non-retaliation policy. Song and Bogel refused to sign it.

Song resigned effective October 2025. In her resignation letter, she wrote that she could not return to “such a toxic environment that is, in my view, clearly targeting and retaliating against us following our public union support.”

Spurchise said other union supporters faced discipline, schedule changes and lost benefits after the vote. He identified Duffee Maddox, a museum employee, as another worker he said the museum retaliated against for union support.

Maddox and Skye Sloane, another union organizer, did not respond to requests for comment.

Spurchise said he came to Urgent Matter after reading its reporting on an unfair labor practice charge that accuses the museum of firing its security guards over union activity. That charge, filed with the National Labor Relations Board in May 2026, remains open.

“What management has done to the lives of many good, hardworking people at the museum is unacceptable,” Spurchise said. “I hope this information can help in any way possible, because I cannot stand by and continue watching their blatantly illegal retaliatory actions any longer.”

The guards case involves a separate group of workers. Urgent Matter could not confirm whether any labor board charge covers Spurchise or the Art Workers United unit.

Urgent Matter is reader-supported. Please consider subscribing to support independent arts journalism.