Minutes 10-02-03 MI~NUTES OF THE COLLECTI~VE BARGAI~NING SESSION BETWEEN
THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF FIREMEN & OI~LERSf WHITE COLLAR
WORKERSf AND THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH~ HELD ON THURSDAY~
OCTOBER 2~ 2003 AT 9:30 A.M. IN CONFERENCE ROOM B~
CITY HALLf BOYNTON BEACH~ FLORIDA
Present
For NCF&O Sharon Munley, President, Local 1227
Debbie Lytle, Chief Steward, Utilities
Michael Ricard, Steward, Building Division
For the City: Wilfred Hawkins, Assistant City Manager
Arthur Lee, Director of Human Resources
Mr. Hawkins opened the meeting at 9:40 a.m. and a sign-up sheet was passed around.
A copy of the updated matrix/summary of activity was distributed to the participants.
Approval of Minutes of September :1.:1.~ 2003 Meeting
Both parties agreed that the minutes were satisfactory as presented.
Discussion
Ms. Munley expressed concern that the articles upon which Tentative Agreement (TA)
had been reached had been altered, and she did not think that was a good labor
practice. She did not feel that the City should have made changes to items upon which
TA had been reached. Mr. Lee stated that the City was aware that agreement would
have to be reached first. Ms. Munley stated that she had never gone to a meeting
where the Union's TAs came back to them as a new article. She felt that revisiting a
TA'd item should be a joint decision.
Ms. Munley stated that sections 2 and 3 were gone from the Recognition article. Mr.
Hawkins stated that they had become separate articles and there were no substantive
or drastic changes to the language. Ms. Munley felt that it was going to cause further,
unnecessary delay in reaching agreement on a new contract. Also, she asked the City
whether they had just given a 2% raise to the non-represented workers and the answer
was, "Yes." She said that when the Union membership heard about this, they would be
angry. Mr. Hawkins asked how he could help.
Ms. Munley and Ms. Lytle felt that changing the entire framework of the contract was
too drastic to do at this time and believed that a committee could work on this during
the new contract term, for example. The Union felt that if the City wanted to reidentify
each article and rewrite every page that it would have been better to reach agreement
Meeting Minutes
White Collar Collective Bargaining Session
Boynton Beach, Florida
October 2, 2003
on this with the Union first, before starting negotiations. Mr. Hawkins stated that this
would be interest-based bargaining. Ms. Munley was still concerned about not having
page numbers on the documents. The Union wished to negotiate based on their
original proposal and the City did not disagree with that approach.
Preamble
Both parties gave TA to the Preamble.
Rights of Employees
The City wanted to delete the language in this article because the information
contained in it was already in the Statutes. The Union's position was that people would
not read a lengthy legal document but might read the contract. The Union's language
was written so that the average person could understand it. Ms. Lytle noted that the
City wanted to strike the employee's right to "...have a Union representative present
when they believe a meeting with a supervisor may lead to discussions which could
form the basis of disciplinary action." She stated that deleting this was not acceptable
unless it was going to be inserted .elsewhere in the contract. The City and Union
caucused over this matter.
Mr. Hawkins stated that the language could remain the same (not deleting the section
referred to by Ms. Lytle.) Both parties gave TA to Rights of Employees.
Strikes
The Union wanted to retain the right to strike. Ms. Munley stated that periodically,
members talk to her about striking because they get frustrated. They do not realize that
the penalties would be quite severe for doing this. She believed the language was
necessary so that she would have something to refer the members to when the topic
came up. This is put in there so the membership will know the rules. Mr. Hawkins
agreed that this could be put back in.
Mutual TA was given to Strikes.
Non-Discrimination
Ms. Munley stated that this article was included because it represents a promise not to
do this to each other. Both parties agreed to add a Section 3 stating that the parties
agreed that the Article was not subject to grievance or arbitration.
TA was reached on Non-Discrimination, with one change as noted above.
Meeting Minutes
White Collar Collective Bargaining Session
Boynton Beach, Florida
October 2, 2003
Union Representation/Union Time Pool
These items were addressed simultaneously since they relate to each other.
The City would like to limit the number of stewards to four. The Union wants to expand
from the two stewards they have at present to an undetermined number. The City's
proposal cuts the time allowed for paid leave from 200 hours per group per year for
collective bargaining and arbitration preparation to 40 hours per year per group. The
Union does not feel that 40 hours is enough. M. Ricard noted that they were already
approaching the 40 hours.
Mr. Hawkins stated that the City would consider additional hours, but wanted the Union
to establish a Time Pool. Ms. Munley asked if the City would consider allowing the Union
to use sick time and comp time in the Union Time Pool since their proposal only listed
vacation time at present. Mr. Hawkins said he believed sick and comp time could be
used for this purpose. Ms. Munley inquired whether the City would supplement the rest
of the time that was needed (amount to be mutually agreed upon) if the Union made
an honest effort to get as much time donated as possible. Mr. Lee noted that the comp
time was mentioned in the Union Time Pool Article. The Union thought that the best
time to get the donations of time was at contract renewal/ratification. Ms. Lytle was
concerned about what would happen if additional time were to be needed during the
contract term. Mr. Hawkins suggested putting in a management process tool such as
saying, "but not limited to," to allow for donations during the contract term. Ms.'
Munley suggested that bargaining unit members may be allowed (may~ not shall as in
City's proposal) to donate up to 5 hours of accrued vacation, sick, or comp time for this
purpose and that this would be subtracted from whatever "bank" they tell us in the
month of .lanuary during the term of the collective bargaining agreement. After
discussion this was changed to i to 5 hours. Ms. Munley stated that the donation would
be a voluntary. Mr. Hawkins agreed to replace "shall" with "may." Ns. Munley stated,
":If we get the 65 or so dues-paying members to give 2 hours each for a total of 130
hours, would you supplement the time up to the 200 hours?" Ms. Munley asked Ms.
Lytle if she had used 200 hours in the last year and she answered that she had
probably used about 30 to 40 hours.
The City caucused about this issue. Mr. Hawkins stated that the City would donate up
to one half of whatever hours the Union Time Pool had booked on February 1 of each
year. Ms. Munley felt it would be too difficult from an administrative point of view to do
this each year. She preferred doing this at the time the new contract is ratified by the
members, letting the membership know that the donation would be deducted from their
individual "bank" of vacation, sick, or comp time once a year in January during the term
of the contract." :If an individual drops out, resigns from the Union, and wants their
donated time back, the issue could be addressed individually, administratively. Ms.
Munley stated that they should attempt to get a good response on the voluntary opt-in
Meeting Minutes
White Collar Collective Bargaining Session
Boynton Beach, Florida
October 2, 2003
and assume that nobody would want to take his or her hours back. Mr. Hawkins noted
that in the Fire contract, once time is put in, it may not be retracted. A person can
decide not to do it for a given year, during the "opt-in", ratification phase, but that
decision cannot be made during the year after that opt-in period. Mr. Hawkins did not
disagree with this approach. Ms. Munley read the Union's response as follows:
"Bargaining unit members may donate from 1 to 5 hours of accrued vacation leave, sick
leave, or comp t/me to be banked and subsequently used to permit designated Union
stewards to engage in representative actMt/es. The donation wi//be deducted once
each year of the agreement in January of each year. And the rest would remain the
same. Ns. I~un/ey added, "The City w/ii match up to 50~ of the amount of hours that
are booked by the Union at the end of the enrollment period each year. "Ms. Munley
wanted to enroll the members who wish to donate time only during the ratification
phase of the contract, advising the members that the donation would be deducted in
January, annually, for the term of the agreement. This is because each year, the time
could conceivably be "used up" and would have to be "refreshed. "It was agreed that
there would be a one-time opt-in period at the time of contract ratification, with a
deduction to be made of the donated amount annually in January for the duration of
the contract, un/ess someone resigned from the Union. Ns. Lyt/e asked if the surplus
hours could be roi/ed over to the next year, but the City wanted it on an annual basis
with no roi/over.
Representative activity was discussed and Ms. Munley inquired whether Union-related
training could be added to the list of representative activities. Mr. Hawkins agreed that
it could./~s. I~lun/ey then added "and training" fo/lowing "representative act/v/ty"/n the
Un/on 77me Pool art/de. She continued, saying "The deductions w/ii be made from the
emp/oyee'~ appropriate leave bank once each year in January during each year of the
Agreement. Ail donated t/me w/ii be calculated, banked, and d/~r/buted on an hour-to-
hour basis. A list of those employees donating to this time bank shall be maintained by
the Union, a copy of which wi//be provided to the City Nanager and Finance Director.
The City wi//match the number of hours at a rate of 50% each year of the Agreement
based on the number of hours accumulated by the Union." Mr. Hawkins suggested that
each party work on a version of this item and hold off on TA until the next meeting
when the parties would compare notes. Everyone agreed that they were all on the
same page concerning this portion of the Union Representation and Time Pool articles.
Ns. I~lunley suggested putting Section 6 concerning time-out slips from the City's Union
Representation art/cie into the Un/on 17me Pool art/cie. I~r. Hawk/ns agreed.
Ms. Munley stated that the current contract allows leave without pay for up to two
Union stewards to attend conferences, seminars, and/or similar events or other union
activities related to their representative function, provided the leave does not adversely
effect the on-going day to day operations in the department. The City's proposal offers
4
Meeting Minutes
White Collar Collective Bargaining Session
Boynton Beach, Florida
October 2, 2003
to allow leave without pay for Union stewards, combined, a total of 10 days per year to
attend conferences, seminars, etc. as above. This has to have further discussion.
Ms. Munley mentioned Section 2 of the City's Union Representation article pertaining to
Union officials coming onto City property. She took exception to "Non-employee
officials shall discontinue any meeting and leave the premises of the City when directed
to do so by the City Manager or any management level employee acting on behalf of
the City Manager. She suggested that the last two sentences be deleted, the one just
mentioned and "Nothing in this section shall preclude or interfere with the City's right to
control access to City facilities for safety and/or security purposes." Ms. Munley stated
that it already said, "with prior notification and approved by City Manager." She did not
want just any supervisory person, who may or may not be informed as to the Union's
rights under the law, to evict them from the property if they were acting under the
terms of the agreement and within their rights as a Union. After discussion, it was
agreed on both sides that it would be preferable to obtain perm/ss/on of a department
head where a meeting might take p/ace rather than the City Manager,
Mr. Lee commented that prior to the events of September 11, the level of security was
not what it is now and this is where the approval issue came in. Anyone who is not an
employee of the company is subject to a security protocol. Mr. Hawkins said the City
wants to know the Union is on the property and wants them to follow the City's security
protocol. Ms. Munley stated that the Union was willing to do that. Mr. Hawkins stated
that if the Union planned to meet with the employees at 6:00 a.m., prior to when the
City lobby opened, that someone would have to be aware of it and on the scene to see
that the City's security protocol was adhered to. He commented that if one were in the
building they would automatically be subjected to the security protocol of leaving their
driver's license and so forth. When on the parking lot outside, though, the City wants
to know that the Union is going to be there. Ms. Munley wanted to provide the City with
a list of the drivers' licenses of each of her staff and herself. She did not see why they
had to notify the City if they were outside of the building. Mr. Hawkins stated that if
they were outside and a police officer came by and challenged them, they could be
asked to leave the property. Once the City is notified, it becomes the City's
responsibility to make certain that the Union representatives are not harassed or
questioned by the authorities.
Pis. Piunley asked the City to remove the words "approved by the" in the second line of
Section 2 of the City's Union Representation arb'cie and also remove "Non-employee
officials shall discontinue any meeting and leave the premises of the City when directed
to do so by the City Pianager or any management level employee acting on behalf of
the City Pianager." The City agreed. The fo/lowing sentence, "Nothing in this section
shall preclude .... "w#/remain. Ms. Munley stated that she understood this as meaning
that the Union would abide by the City's security procedures and the City would not
Meeting Minutes
White Collar Collective Bargaining Session
Boynton Beach, Florida
October 2, 2003
treat the Union any differently than any other member of the public. Mr. Hawkins
agreed.
In Section 3 of the City's Union Representation article, Ms. Munley noted that the City
would provide paid leave to the Union stewards for collective bargaining and grievance
hearings. B1 and B2 seemed redundant to the Union. Mr. Hawkins suggested adding
the words "presenting or responding to a disciplinary action/investigation," striking the
word grievance in B2. Ms. Munley suggested that the word "arbitration" be added after
the word grievance in B1. Mr. Hawkins agreed. Mr. Lee suggested saying "and/or
arbitration." Ms. Munley agreed.
Ms. Munley commented that the last paragraph on the City's Union Representation
article had to be redone because they had just discussed the number of hours and the
matching by the City and so forth. There was some question as to whether this should
be in the Union Representation article or the Time Pool article. Mr. Hawkins thought
that it would have to stay in the Union Representation article since it spoke of how time
was applied to the specified actions. Each party can work out the wording and come
back to discuss at the next meeting. Ms. Munley did not understand the reference to
the Union Time Pool because they were talking about paid hours. Mr. Hawkins pointed
out that in the last sentence of the paragraph they were talking about additional hours
(over and above the number of hours granted by the City). He thought it would be a
good idea to study this and decide where it should go in the contract. Mr. Hawkins
understood why the Union would not want to include Section 3 in connection with the
Time Pool but it had to be understood how the time would be applied. He commented
that someone had asked whose time would be used first, the City's time or Pool time.
He thought that this needed to be discerned. Ms. Munley disagreed, saying that they
were talking about having the City match the Union Time Pool hours. Both parties
agreed that the 40 hours mentioned under Section 3 had to come out since the number
was to-be-determined (TBD). Mr. Ricard stated that in the Union Time Pool article it
states that any hours used with pay would be funded by the Time Pool and the Time
Pool tells you how you get those hours (the additional hours referred to at the. end of
Section 3). Ms. Munley agreed but stated that the Union wanted to discuss this.
Ms. Munley stated that on the second page of the City's Union Representation article, it
appeared that someone had complained about people taking too much time off for
Union business. Ms. Munley commented that the "as referenced in Section 4" should be
Section 3. She asked if the City was aware that free speech could not be limited and
that it was possible that people would talk about Union issues around the water cooler,
so to speak. Mr. Hawkins understood that.
Ms. Munley referred to the paragraph at the top of the second page of the City's Union
Representation article, saying that she did not know why this article was needed since
the Union had always had the right to take time off for Union business when it did not
6
Meeting Minutes
White Collar Collective Bargaining Session
Boynton Beach, Florida
October 2, 2003
interfere with the operation of the business. Ms. Munley asked if the first paragraph
could be deleted. Mr. Hawkins said that it did appear to be redundant. He said the City
needed to rework the language on the bottom of the first page and the top of the
second page. Ms. Munley wanted to talk in caucus with the Union about the number of
hours of paid time offered by the City, and the Union would probably request something
more than 40. She suggested moving Section 6 to the Union Time Pool article or at
least repeat it in that article. Mr. Hawkins thought this might be the better thing to do.
Ms. Munley inquired about the 10 days per year in Section 5 and whether anyone had
ever done that (take 10 days off a year without pay to attend conferences, seminars, or
other Union activities). She asked why the City wanted to take away 10 of the 20 days
that was granted in the previous contract (the one that just expired). Even though this
was not used, people will experience this as a loss. Ms. Lytle stated that allowing the 20
days off without pay did not create any kind of adverse effect. Ms. Munley thought this
was a non-issue and should be left off. The City wanted to discuss this item in caucus.
Collective Bargaining
Mr. Lee advised that the City's article on Collective Bargaining relates to the just-expired
Union Contract Article 7, Union Representation, Section 1. Ms. Munley asked if the
paragraph had been kept verbatim in its entirety and Mr. Lee and Mr. Hawkins agreed
that it had been.
Ms. Munley commented on Section 3 of the City's article, which says, "Nothing in this
Agreement, nor any past practice, requires that bargaining sessions be conducted
during normal working hours (8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.)" She said, "Why would you say
that? !t's a business thing that we are doing and if it is after 5:00 p.m., the bargaining
unit membership will want to come to it - that's how it always happens. ! don't think
we need this language. ! think we could agree if we get down to the wire and want to
go to midnight we can. !'ve done that to get a contract. !s this for a reason?"
Mr.' Hawkins stated that it was a matter of being clear. Mr. Lee said there was always
the issue of whether the business could be conducted after hours. Ms. Munley said that
they could do anything they agreed to do. Mr. Hawkins said that if the schedules did
not allow it to be done during the day, it would have to be done after hours. Ns.
I~unley believed that this was something that could be agreed upon that did not have
to be put in the contract. I~lr. Hawkins agreed because '~f you can't meet, you can't
meet."
Ms. rvlunley noted that in Section 2 it referred to no more than two stewards being able
to attend collective bargaining. Their Constitution says that the bargaining unit
determines the bargaining team. She assumed they could limit it to "X" number of
people and still be within their guidelines. But, it had always been that stewards could
participate in the bargaining because they were the people that were "in the trenches"
Meeting Minutes
White Collar Collective Bargaining Session
Boynton Beach, Florida
October 2, 2003
all year and knew what was working and what was not working. That is why they
would do that. Mr. Lee said that their concern was when all the stewards or most of
the stewards show up. Ms. Munley reminded them that they were talking about the
blue collar (which has numerous stewards) and not the white collar, which only has
two. Ms. Lytle's understanding was that collective bargaining was open to everyone so
they would not limit who was going to attend. She said they might want to limit the
number of participants at the table. Mr. Hawkins said this might be the word they want
to insert (participates). He agreed that they could not limit the number of people who
were going to come to listen.
The Union suggested saying, "No more than two Union stewards may participate at the
bargaining table etc." Mr. Hawkins said that would be fine. Ms. Munley said it would be
more consistent to say 4 stewards since that is the number the parties were talking
about. The Union wants to talk about this Section further. Ms. Lytle spoke of bringing
in expert witnesses on either side. Mr. Hawkins said that there had to be some
flexibility. He said they had already established that either side could bring in other
parties with due notice as they go through the process. Mr. Ricard stated that if there
were 4 stewards they would have to look at how that would work in the Time Pool. Ms.
Munley thought that collective bargaining was a "freebie".
Ms. Munley asked if Section 3 was being eliminated as discussed, and Mr. Hawkins said
that he thought this could be handled.
Progressive Discipline
Ms. Munley inquired whether the City's article represented a new discipline policy. Mr.
Hawkins stated that it was the same thing. Ms. Munley stated that she had not looked
at it yet. Mr. Hawkins said they captured the PPM language and inserted it. Mr. Lee
says it was pretty much what the Union had although some of it was a little different.
Ms. Munley asked the City to bring to her attention the differences. Mr. Lee said it was
not different from what was in the contract but in the last contract everything that was
in the PPM was not totally agreed to and the City put that in this version. Mr. Lee said
that they had put in what was in the contract verbatim.
Ms. Munley asked for verification that the Procedure for Disciplinary Action was a part
of the Progressive Discipline article and Mr. Lee replied that it was.
Grievance Procedures
The Union referred to their proposal for this article. Ms. Munley asked who Mediation,
Inc. was. She said they never figured this out because they never did it. The Union's
proposal had struck out Mediation, Inc. and inserted, "the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service (FMCS)." Mr. Lee said that the Mediation, Inc. was what the City
8
Meeting Minutes
White Collar Collective Bargaining Session
Boynton Beach, Florida
October 2, 2003
Attorney had recommended the last time. It is supposed to be a group of retired
judges and that is what they do. Ms. Munley said, "they mediate but they don't
arbitrate." Ms. Munley said they never used them but someone told her that the City
had never had an arbitration, and she asked if that was true. Mr. Lee said the City had
experienced arbitrations with the Police and Fire Units, but not this one. Ms. Munley
asked if there had ever been an arbitration action with any NCF&O unit and IVlr. Lee
responded, "Not since I've been here." She said this was a good thing if they were able
to settle things. Mr. Lee said there were several issues that were up for arbitration but
the City Manager was able to work it out and so it never went to arbitration although an
arbitrator had been selected.
Ms. Munley said that 99.9% of the time the Union would not grieve a verbal warning, a
written warning. Usually they start talking serious arbitration when they start talking
about suspensions, but they would still need to have the ability to do that for any kind
of discipline that goes in the file. Mr. Hawkins said there was such a thing as a verbal
written. Ms. Munley asked if that was a verbal written waming and he responded that it
was. Ms. Munley said that after 3 warnings, there might be a disciplinary notice. Then
the Union needed the ability to act on it by saying, "Wait a minute. Did that actually
happen? If it did, is the penalty you're giving out to that person matching what actually
happened? That's where we need the ability to make sure that the file doesn't get filled
up with junk. And that's the grievance process. Because if we can only arbitrate at the
suspension level and the file is full of all this discipline, the arbitrator would regard it
negatively.
Mr. Hawkins said, "Let's qualify that. A person can get verbal, verbal written, and then
move to a "counseling memo" and ! think there's already language that talks about how
long a counseling memo can stay in a person's file. Ms. Hunley thought it was 18
months. Mr. Lee said "or how long it can be applied - it stays in the file." Mr. Hawkins
said that those things technically go away after a certain period of time and the only
thing that can be applied is when you get to the suspension level. Mr. Lee said that Ns.
Munley was expressing interest in arbitration ability from that level and in the current
Grievance and Disciplinary Process, it does not exist at that level. !t is only after the
person gets a 3-day suspension or more. Ms. Munley did not agree exactly. She
thought they could put something in our file if we receive a verbal or written warning.
Discipline that is more severe than a written or verbal, but less than a four-day
suspension, shall be applied through the expedited grievance. !t does not really say
that she cannot arbitrate other things. She would just go back and arbitrate them the
old way. Ms. Munley then agreed that the City was right - it had to be a 3-day
suspension. She felt that this could be a problem because it allowed the City to pack
the file with all these disciplinary notices and yet the Union cannot arbitrate it and
grieve it unless it is 3 days or more.
9
Meeting Minutes
White Collar Collective Bargaining Session
Boynton Beach, Florida
October 2, 2003
Mr. Hawkins said the Union could grieve a 3-day suspension. Mr. Lee noted that in the
City's Grievance Procedure, it stated in Section 4B that, "Discipline which is more severe
than a written or verbal warning but less severe than a four-day suspension shall be
appealed through the expedited grievance and arbitration process, or by appeal to the
Human Resources Director, at the employees' option." Ms. Munley realized that she had
been wrong.
Ns. I~lunley said they did not like the I~lediation, Inc. and wanted FI~IC~ instead and I~lr.
Hawkins agreed to that.
The parties will come back with written proposals on the articles on which they are
close to agreement - Union Representation and Union Time Pool.
Next Meeting
The White Collar bargaining unit agreed to have a session on Thursday, October 9,
from 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. The Blue Collar bargaining unit will meet on Friday,
October 10, from 11:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. On Friday, the parties will have lunch before
starting the meeting. There will be a break for lunch in the White Collar session on
Thursday, October 9.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 11:39 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Susan Collins
Recording Secretary
(100203)
10