 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Negotiations
Updates
|  |
| As updates are provided by the Negotiations Committee, they will be posted here. Most current updates will appear at the top. Negotiations Update Number 7
The Union and the Employer met for another bargaining session January 31, where the discussion of compensation and related salary survey data continued. The Employer presented background information related to the job market and compensation, from both public- and private-sector sources. There was a significant discussion about the information presented. The Union will analyze and evaluate the information over the next week and continue the discussion at our next meeting. The group discussed a modified grievance procedure at the meeting and may be close to a possible agreement on this issue. The Employer will follow-up with managers and bring a response to the next meeting. The Employer presented draft language to clarify work schedules surrounding holidays, particularly for those who don’t work the non-traditional Monday through Friday work week. We may be close to an agreement on this issue. The Union will review and respond at the next meeting.
The group discussed issues related to comp time. The Union’s interest is allowing greater flexibility with use of comp time, and has proposed to allow staff to bank more time. The shared interest between the Union and the Employer is that staff be encouraged to use banked leave time, including comp time, to recharge and be more productive. The group may have reached agreement on increasing the amount of time staff may carry over. The group also had extensive discussions regarding the annual leave procedures and banks, the use of an income protection/salary continuance plan instead of supplemental sick leave, and application of the post-retirement employment options program (PRO). No agreement was reached on any of these items at the January 31 meeting. There are several issues both the Union and the Employer will follow-up on at the next meeting. Our next negotiations
session is scheduled for February 9, and there are several other sessions scheduled
for the month of February. The Union is anxious to make progress on these discussions
and tackle the more complex issues related to compensation. Negotiations Update Number 6 Discussions concerning compensation continued in the January 18th bargaining session. The Employer presented a summary of its salary survey data they compiled from various sources, which they use as a tool to inform them on compensation issues. The Union requested the sources of the surveys and the raw data which we intend to verify. The Employer committed to providing its response at the next meeting. They said they will explain the data, which they say shows that in general the Council pays higher-than-market wages for our lower pay grades, and lower-than-market wages for the higher grades. Both the Union and the Employer are interested in clarifying and simplifying the grievance procedure. There was significant discussion around this issue. The Employer requested more time to review the proposal with Council decision makers. The Employer is still waiting for information on mutable language issues from Council decision makers before we can continue discussions on those issues. The Employer’s representatives have indicated that they will be updating us on several of the outstanding language issues at our next meeting. Our next negotiations session is scheduled for January 31st, and there are several sessions scheduled for the month of February. The Union is ready and eager to deal with the issues before us. Negotiations Update Number 5 The union and employer met on Thursday January 5, 2012 to continue our discussions on contract bargaining. Shift Differential Issue: The employer wanted to clarify language to understand both the intent and current business practice, related to who is eligible. Current language appeared contradictory. Plus the Metering and Alarm language when reviewed is outdated and no longer reflexes current practice. Update: The group had a very detailed and long discussion of how the shift differential is presently applied and agreed to revise the language to reflect current business practices (for both Metering and Alarm staff and all other employees). A few additional details need to be worked out before finalizing the language. Floating Holidays Issue: The employer wanted to clarify that use of floating holidays must be scheduled ahead of time and approved by managers. Update: The group agreed to revise language to clarify that this is the intent of the contract. The group also discussed ways (not included in contract language) to encourage staff to use floating holidays earlier in the year and not wait to use them when scheduling and work responsibilities may make it difficult to use them before they lose them. Tentative Agreement was reached on Article 13, Section 13.01 On-Call Pay Employer agreed to drop issue related to On-call pay (found in 12.07). Other Issues Previously Discussed 1. Compensation - Wages and Step System: No progress was made on these issues Jan. 5. The employer plans to make a presentation regarding a potential step system at the Jan. 18 session. - Health Insurance: As reported in Update 4, the employer reported they could not agree to freeze rates at 2011 levels on an interim basis until the contract discussions are resolved. In addition, the union awaits additional information on health insurance, which is part of the overall compensation package being negotiated. Reminder: Compensation is a large and very complicated issue to work though for both parties. Health insurance, general increases and step systems all carry costs, which are all calculated into the total cost of the negotiated contract package. It’s anticipated that that future health insurance rates, general wage increases and any potential step system will take multiple meetings to reach agreement. We ask for your patience as we work though these very important, yet difficult issues. 2. Anti-Bullying: No progress was made on this issue Jan. 5. The union is still waiting for information regarding this issue from the employer. Next Scheduled
Negotiation Session: January 18, 2012 Negotiations Update Number 4 The union was contacted on Wednesday December 28, 2011 by Sandi Blaeser, Director of Labor Relations for the Met Council and chair of the Employers Negotiations Team. She called to discuss the following two issues: Health Insurance rates for 2012 During the last round of contract bargaining the union’s requested that the employer freeze health insurance premiums at the 2011 rates until the new contract is ratified. Ms Blaeser responded that the Regional Administrator and Executive Team decided they would not be able to agree to the request. Therefore the health insurance interim rates will take effect on 1/1/12. Teleworking Ms Blaeser informed the union that a draft of the proposed Teleworking policy would be made available to the unions for review and comments in the next few days. Once the draft policy is received President McGrane will convene the AFSCME Telework Committee to review it and draft the union’s comments to the employer. Negotiations Update Number 3 The union and employer met on Friday, Dec. 16, to continue our discussions on contract bargaining. The union’s negotiations team thought the meeting was very positive and productive. Compensatory Time Issue: The union would like employees to be able to choose overtime or time off for compensatory time, and the comp time bank increased bank to 80 hours. Proposal also includes automatic payout of comp time bank at the end of the year. Update: Group discussed a number of ways to approach these issues. The employer is waiting to discuss this issue with the Payroll Manager who in not presently in the office. He is expected to be return to work before our next meeting on Jan. 5, 2012. Tentative Agreement was reached on Article 11, Section 11.03 This was a housekeeping item. We clarified and eliminated duplicate language. Bullying in the Workplace The union and employer had very candid discussion on this issue. The employer does have several policies concerning harassment and discrimination in the workplace. The union believes the employer’s policies are inadequate when dealing with bullying in the workplace. The employer asked for some time to discuss the issue with other managers. The issue is parked for now and will be revisited at a meeting in the near future. Compensation The union and employer had very open and frank discussions concerning the following issues. · Health Insurance: The union and employer briefly discussed health insurance premiums. The union expressed its concern about the high cost of our member’s premiums as related to other Metropolitan Council bargaining units and the hardship that presents to our members. The union once again requested that all health insurance premiums be frozen at the 2011 rates until the contract is signed. The employer representatives made a commitment that they would relay this request to Regional Administrator Pat Born and respond to us in a few days with his reply. · General Increase: The union and employer briefly discussed general annual salary increases. These discussions have not yet been detailed, but the employer indicated that wage increases will be on the table for discussion. · Step System: We had a very in-depth discussion concerning a Step System. Both the union and employer have expressed an interest the concept of a Step System. Both sides discussed what would need to be included in a Step System to make it affordable and viable. Compensation is a large and very complicated issue to work though for both parties. Health insurance, general increases and step systems all carry costs, which are all calculated into the total cost of the negotiated contract package. It’s anticipated that that future health insurance rates, general wage increases and any potential step system will take multiple meetings to reach agreement. We ask for your patience as we work though these very important, yet difficult issues plus all the other issues listed in the first negotiations update. Next Scheduled Negotiation Session: Jan. 5, 2012 Negotiations Update Number 2 The Union and Employer met on Monday, Dec. 5, to continue discussions on contract bargaining. The group met and discussed six issues during the session, and a summary of those discussions is below.
Reminder: The Union and the Employer is striving to try “Interest-Based Negotiations.” A basic list of principles and process items related to this style of negotiations will be included at the end of each update for your reference.
The union team was in general agreement on this date that the tone of contract bargaining was positive and that the employer representatives are much more open to discussing issue in depth and working to resolve issues.
Issues Discussed: · Labor Management Partnership · Union Rights · Probationary Employees · Range of Work Hours/Optional Work Schedule · Rest and Meal Periods · Compensatory Time Negotiations Update · Labor-Management Partnership Issue: Though the contract provides for more regular meetings between the Union and Management, to discuss issues that are coming up, there has been limited commitment on behalf of the Employer in the past eight years. Is there a commitment to this relationship on behalf of both parties? What are next steps? Update: The groups agreed to renew their commitment to enhancing the relationship between the Union and Management in an effort to strengthen the Labor-Management Partnership. Additional research is necessary to determine the most appropriate roles for this group, any sub-committees, etc.
· Union Rights Issue 1: The Union would like to have dedicated time to meet with new employees to discuss information about union membership and answer questions. The initial proposal was to have this time occur within the new employee training. Update 1: The group discussed whether there is room in the new employee training agenda and who would be responsible to pay for the time used to present information and answer questions. The employer said that additional research is necessary for this item and get back to us at the next meeting.
Issue 2: Change language in the contract related to membership – change “fair share” to “fee payer.” Update 2: The Employer had no objection to this change.
· Probationary Employees Issue: Issues related to probationary periods have come up. Should contract clarify whether the employer can request an extension of a probationary period and other related issues? Update: After lengthy discussion on the range of issues related to this topic, the group was unable to determine answers to the questions raised. Issue was parked for now.
· Range of Work Hours/Optional Work Schedule Issue: Concerns were raised about inflexibility regarding work hours, particularly when employees and managers do not work the same schedule. Update: Group discussed that the contract already allows for flexibility and there are other ways for managers to assess performance that don’t require the schedules to overlap exactly. The group agreed that if there are performance issues, a manager has the ability to be less flexible with work schedules. Issue was dropped.
· Rest and Meal Periods Issue: Need to clarify whether this means meal breaks must be taken or if employees can skip breaks during the day and use them at the beginning or end of the day. Update: Group agreed that the intent is that employees will take their breaks and lunches (not only because it’s good practice but because it’s a core working condition issue that unions have fought to uphold for generations). The union and employer agreed that employees, on occasion with the manager’s approval, will be able to use their break and or lunch to start or end their day early. This is not intended to be done on a daily basis.
· Compensatory Time Issue: The union would like employees to be able to choose to have overtime or time off for compensatory time and the bank increased bank to 80 hours. Proposal also includes automatic payout of comp time bank at the end of the year. Update: Group discussed a number of ways to approach these issues. The employer wants to do some additional research and will bring back the information at the next meeting.
About the Negotiations Teams The union’s team consists of the following people: · Art McGrane – President · JoAnn Fetsch – Vice President · Roger Janzig – Chief Steward · Peggy Bloomstrand – Secretary · Mike Ahlf – Executive Board Member at Large · Michelle Fure · Deb Jensen · John Witt · Cindy Nelsen – AFSCME Council 5 - Field Representative The employer’s negotiations team consists of the following people: · Sandi Blaeser – Manager, HR Labor Relations · Lynn Schneider – HR, Labor Relations · Tony Brown – HR, Labor Relations · Larry Rogacki – Director, MCES Support Services Business Unit Wastewater Treatment · Kim Burbank – Executive Secretary, HR Labor Relations
Our Next meeting is scheduled for December 16, 2011 The
Union and Employer met on Monday November 07, 2011 to open discussions on contract
bargaining. We mutually agreed to try “Interest Based Negotiations”
even though the Bureau of Mediation Services (BMS) was unable to provide a mediator
to help us though the process. Interest Based Negotiations works differently from
the traditional contract bargaining style that we have used for the last 3 contracts.
What is Interest Based Negotiations?
Assumptions:
Steps:
Techniques:
Hopefully this style of bargaining will help both sides proceed in a mutually productive manner. If we do reach an impasse, we will need to file for mediation through the BMS and resort to traditional contract bargaining. The union and employer have used interest-based negotiations several contracts ago. Both sides found this type of bargaining to be more productive and felt that it improved communication between the employer and the union. The employer’s negotiations team consists of the
following people:
The union and the employer
exchanged contract proposals. We agreed to combine the two lists and discuss each
item in the order listed. We also discussed making the 2012 health insurance rates
a priority for discussion during our next meeting. 2. Article 4 – term Fair Share: the statute uses the language “Fair Share fee payer;” we would prefer to have our contract use the term fee payer. 3. Article 7 – optional work schedules: our goal in making changes is to reflect the issue that optional work schedules are available, which removes the language that the employer determines these schedules ‘in its sole discretion.’ We want it clear that is an option and maybe it isn’t the immediate supervisor’s sole discretion. 4. Article 9 – would like to increase the balance cap on compensatory time. We proposed 80 hours. We understand the employer doesn’t like large comp time balances. We propose cashing out comp time balances at the end of the year. We do understand it’s an issue when employees carry over large balances. We’d like to see an increase in the cap with no carry-over. This also proposes a change so the employee has the choice of receiving overtime pay or comp time. 5. Article 10 – Bullying – we have an interest in adding some type of anti-bullying language. 6. Article 11 – job classifications - delete “most senior most.” 7. Article 12 – we would like a step system. Tight now there’s no guarantee of being able to move through the ranges. A majority of the proposed language deals with the initial increases involved with instituting a step system. This is just a starting point. There are so many morale issues over not being able to move through the ranges. Pay equity is also an issue here; for example, in the Technician III’s pay classification, all the males are at the top of the range and the only female is at the bottom of the range. Also a general wage increase needs to be discussed. 8. Article 12 – review the compensation for a few job classifications, as compared with how similar work is paid through the ATU contract, including the Drafters and Inventory Technicians and perhaps Payroll. Others may be added to the list as information comes to light. We can’t continue to have pay differences in bargaining units. We have a desire to even these out. 9. Article 12 – achievement awards – provide for the employer to be able to give an additional bump/step for outstanding performance. 10. Article 13 – non-traditional work schedules (Wednesday through Sunday, in the Lab): Not intended to change current practice, but to recognize current practice. 11. Article 14 – annual leave. We would like to increase annual leave and establish a conversion so that it mirrors the Executive practice of making available the entire annual balance on January 1. 12. We propose converting the current supplemental sick benefit to income protection and extend it to parents, spouses, partners or children and recovery from mental health and addiction, as do the MANA, Non-Rep, TMSA plans. 13. Leaves of absence for bereavement – increase to 5 days for child, parent, spouse or partner as a different tier. 14. Health insurance – would like to do health insurance first and get it done before the first of the year if possible. Before the Pawlenty administration , the employer paid the difference between existing and new health insurance rates and billed back the employees as necessary. Last time there were many bitter employees about this issue, because instead the employer billed the employee for the entire rate increase and then refunded any overpayment several months later. It was crippling for some employees and it’s something to be avoided. Additionally, the employer is all over the board for what the different bargaining units pay. We would like parity with other bargaining units – AFSCME pays the most. We’d like to see $0 for singles. To get that, we’re willing to drop Open Access as an option for our members. It’s a plan that doesn’t help the situation with people getting into that frame of mind thinking about health care costs. Those two things have to go hand in hand. People would make better choices. Set up individualized meetings to save employees and Employer some money. We would need a second open enrollment if we do this in 2012. 15. Life insurance – members have a life insurance plan while employed but afterwards they have only COBRA. If an employee is on long-term disability, we would like to see the employer continue its portion of the payment. 16. Dental insurance – we need parity with other units. 17. Long term care – find group rates for long-term care coverage for employees to purchase. The employer would facilitate making it available but would not pay any portion of it. This is in a current letter of agreement but has not been enacted. This would be a voluntary benefit. 18. Grievance procedure – need to fix the grievance procedure. We’re suggesting compressing the process by one step. The process is different in ES than in RA. 19. Retirement – needs rewording, but the goal is that persons terminated involuntarily should be able to cash out their annual leave bank. This allowable per federal law; we can create categories as long as they’re not discriminatory. 20. Post Retirement Option – only AFSCME members can take AFSCME PRO positions. Intent was for only for AFSCME members. 21. Remove grades 22 & 23 because we have no positions in those grades. Employer’s Initial Proposal 1. 1.01: Labor management partnership – we need to be looking at labor-management committee process at the Council. We have robust language in the contract but haven’t paid much attention to it. Need to reserve a place for us to talk about it and the commitment to he process and whether it needs rejuvenating or leave it the way it is. 2. Article 5 - Probationary employees – have had a couple issues recently about what happens with an employee’s probation and the ability to extend the period. Current contract language is silent on it. The employer’s position is that if the language is silent the employer can do what they like, but they would like to have a common understanding of what it means to fail to make the period. 3. Article 7 – work schedules: issues about the range of normal work hours and the impact of the range of hours. There is some concern by some managers that some folks have more flexibility than others, and how do we best address the differences in work areas. 4. 7.05 – rest and meal periods – think there is a practice of allowing a straight 8 hours (i.e. to work 8 hours without a meal period and then be allowed to leave). The current contract language is silent. It makes some sense to have some conversation about it. Also would like to discuss the ability to use the rest or meal periods at the beginning or end of the day to shorten the work day. 5. 9.03 – call back pay – 7th consecutive work day – common understanding of how it’s operationalized. 6. 11.03 filling vacant positions – this is a long section that has a variety of pieces. Should it be formatted in a way that makes it easier for the user to understand how the process works. Can it be broken up, add headings, re-order to make a little more sense. 7. 12.03/12.04 – general increase – this is a placeholder: At last 2 Management Committee meetings HR staff has been introducing Council members to compensation and insurance issues. Bargaining parameters will be discussed in a closed session later this week. The council has also addressed concerns about a couple of things we addressed (parity??). Ms. Blaeser expects the parameters to be very focused in terms of what the Council wants to see happen. 8. 12.05 – work out of class pay – a couple of grievances lately. Are the issues really in work out of class, or are they classification issues? 9. 12.07 – standby/on call pay – there are some issues about receiving on call pay and using annual leave at the same time. 10. 12.08 – shift differential – there are issues as to when the differential applies, what portions of shift hours apply to what situations, etc. We may not need changes, just understanding. 11. 13.01 – holidays – use of floating holidays – timing of using them was of concern (i.e., employees saving them until the end of the year and then too many members of a work unit taking them at the same time). 12. 14.02 – minimum balance annual leave requirement – is there a minimum balance of annual leave hours that employees should keep in case of getting into a bad place? Threw out 40 hours but not in a substantive way. 13. 14.05 – use of annual leave – concerns about calling in on short notice – frustrations of managers where they do not have the time to deal with the operational side of absences. 14. Insurance – broad placeholder – being all over the board is a difficult situation – would love to have a little more consistent benefit offerings and costs. Where is the right place that is fiscally responsible for all of us. How do we provide quality health care for everyone? Ripe for discussion. 15. Article 19 – grievance procedure – we’ve got some peculiarities in the process. How the process works has been stretched and pulled in places; if we can put form around that it will be helpful. 16. Article 28 – duration and pledge – have the ability up to a 3-year agreement – could be 1, 2 or 3 year agreement. 17. Letters of agreement – need to review each one of them to decide whether they still need to be there, whether they need some modification. 18. Job classes – will update as needed. 19. Job families – update as needed. 20. Interceptor system – taking a look at that appendix; there may be something that we bring forward. The employer noted that they
had not received their parameters for wages and benefits as of this date. They
expected to receive this information from the management committee on November
09, 2011. They informed us they would share this information with us at the next
meeting. | |
