Loading...
Minutes 11-23-04MINUTES OF THE BLUE COLLAR COLLECTIVE BARGAINING SESSION BETWEEN THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF FIREMEN & OILERS AND THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 2004 AT 2:00 P.M. IN CONFERENCE ROOM B, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA Present For NCF&O: Sharon Munley, Trustee, Local 1227 Bob Kruper, Union Steward Mike Osborn, Union Steward Don Roberts, Union Steward Rick Smith, Union Steward For the City: Wilfred Hawkins, Assistant City Manager Jeff Livergood, Public Works Director John Jordan, Assistant Director of Human Resources Call to Order Mr. Hawkins called the meeting to order at 2:15 p.m. A sign in sheet was circulated and Mr. Jordan distributed the City's newest counteroffer to the Union's proposal. City's Counterproposal Mr. Hawkins recommended that they review each Article that was changed from the City's original proposal. Mr. Kruper inquired if the language that had lines through it was being eliminated and language that was underlined was new language. Mr. Jordan stated that this was correct. Article 3 - Rights of Employees Mr. Jordan pointed out that the language that was Section 5 in this Article is now contained in Article 52. Section 2 and 3 will remain deleted. The City feels that State and Federal laws govern these issues. Article 5 - Management Rights This is now Article 4, but there were no changes in the context of the Article. Meeting Minutes NCFO/City of Boynton Beach Blue Collar Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida November 23, 2004 Article 5 - Strikes - No change Article 6 - Non-Discrimination Mr. Jordan stated that the language that was deleted is law and the City cannot discriminate. Ms. Munley inquired why the City struck all the Title 7 language. Mr. Jordan stated the language was stricken because it was law. Ms. Munley felt it was important that this language remain in the document so that employees were aware of this. No other changes have been made to this Article Article 7 - Representation of the City - No change. Article 8 - Union Representation The City is proposing no changes. Ms. Munley inquired why the City went back to this language after new language was used in the current contract. She inquired why the City no longer wished to contribute time for the Stewards to conduct Union business. The Union was opposed to giving up 200 hours that they previously had. Mr. Hawkins responded that management was not in favor of providing time for Stewards to conduct Union business. Mr. Osborn noted that people cannot be forced to donate time. Ms. Munley inquired if the City knew how much time was actually spent on Union business by the Stewards and requested to see this information. Mr. Hawkins stated that this information would be provided from the timeout sheets. Mr. Livergood inquired what the standard practice was with regard to Cities providing a contribution of time to the Union time pool, or was all the time employee donated. Ms. Munley responded that very few places have employee time pools. Mr. Livergood inquired if the Union would be amenable if the City matched the number of hours donated. Mr. Jordan pointed out that last year the City gave 200 hours, plus matching hours. Mr. Livergood stated that the goal should be to provide a mechanism that would allow Stewards to be away from their jobs. Ms. Munley did not think that employees would be agreeable to being required to donate time, and Mr. Livergood stated that it would be voluntary and not required. Ms. Munley stated that it was important that the Stewards have enough time to conduct Union business. Mr. Jordan felt that they needed to look at the number of hours spent on Union business by the Stewards and Mr. Hawkins said that the City would be willing to match one for one. Meeting Minutes NCFO/City of Boynton Beach Blue Collar Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida November 23, 2004 Article 9 - Collective Bar.qaininq Mr. Jordan noted that the second full sentence in Section 9.1 has been deleted. Ms. Munley inquired why the City deleted this language. She noted that it needed to state who would speak on behalf of the Union. Mr. Jordan stated that it would be the person who signs the contract, i.e. the President or designee of the Union, and that this language was deleted because it was redundant. Ms. Munley was opposed to the change in Section 9.2 that limited the number of Stewards that could participate in collective bargaining. Mr. Jordan stated that this should not be limited and the City is proposing language that would read, "Stewards may participate in collective bargaining while on duty, without loss of pay by using Union time pool hours." Mr. Livergood added that there would be no limit on the number of Stewards that could participate, as long as it was funded from the Union time pool. Article 10 - Union Time Pool In the first sentence of Section 10.1, the word "shall" will be changed to "may." Article 11 - Bulletin Boards No change Article 12 - Grievance and Arbitration Procedures Ms. Munley asked if there was something that the City did not like about the form that employees use when they have a grievance that is available on the Union's website. Mr. Hawkins stated that during the previous negotiations the parties were going to come up with a form that was more user friendly. It was determined that a new form was, in fact, prepared and Mr. Jordan had it in his office. A brief break was taken at 2:34 p.m. to allow Mr. Jordan to retrieve the form from his office. The meeting resumed at 2:42 p.m. and Mr. Jordan distributed the form. Ms. Munley inquired about the language that reads, "Issues or disputes which are not grievances as so defined shall not be subject to arbitration, but may be processed through the grievance procedure only after all attempts to resolve the dispute through labor management meetings has failed." Mr. Hawkins responded that the language was deleted upon the advice of Legal. Ms. Munley stated that this language has always been in the contracts. Mr. Hawkins further pointed out that the Union could only grieve something that was in violation of the contract. Ms. Munley stated that this was the reason that rights of employees cannot be stricken from the Rights of Employees Article, which is in violation of Title VII. Mr. Livergood stated that the language could be put back into the proposal. Meeting Minutes NCFO/City of Boynton Beach Blue Collar Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida November 23, 2004 Ms. Munley inquired if there ever was an occasion that something not covered under this contract was grieved. Mr. Jordan will check with Attorney Cherof on this. The parties reviewed the Grievance Submittal Form supplied by Mr. Jordan in depth. Mr. Livergood felt it was important that employees try to solve their grievances with their supervisors first. The Stewards pointed out that most supervisors do not have the authority to solve any grievances. If the grievance cannot be resolved, it would next go to the Human Resource Director. After it goes to the Human Resource's Director, if the Union determines that the results are not satisfactory, it would then go to arbitration. Mr. Osborn stated that time limits need to be established and Mr. Livergood stated that the procedure steps are included in Article 12 of the contract. Ms. Munley will have the Union attorney review the form. Mr. Osborn felt that more time was needed to initiate a grievance and Ms. Munley recommended increasing the time from five days to ten. Mr. Hawkins was agreeable with this change. Mr. Livergood felt that the Human Resource Director should also have ten days to respond. Ms. Munley requested that in Section 12.4.1, the words "8:00 AM to 5:00 PM" be stricken since it states "regular working hours." Mr. Jordan stated that the time was included because not all employees work the same hours and they needed to go by standard office hours. Mr. Livergood felt it would be confusing if the hours were not specified. Ms. Munley was opposed to stating the arbitrators' names in the contract. Mr. Hawkins stated that the City is flexible on this. Ms. Munley noted that if an arbitrator designated by one of the parties was no longer available, that party would select a new arbitrator. Ms. Munley thought that Section 12.5 incurred an unnecessary expense. She felt that either side should have the right to request arbitration from the beginning. Mr. Jordan thought that this was needed to avoid frivolous arbitrations. Mr. Livergood pointed out that the language states that if City questions whether an issue is arbitrable and the issue is found to be arbitrable, the City would be responsible for 100% of the costs of the arbitration. This would also apply to the Union under the same circumstances. The Union was of the opinion that management should not be the entity that would decide whether an issue was arbitrable or not. Further, the Union felt that this could result in double expense if an arbitrator had to hear an issue twice. Ms. Munley felt that the process in place was a good process and there was no need to change it. Article 13 - Disciplinary Appeal & Arbitration Procedure, Mr. Hawkins stated that the language added to this Article came from the City's PPM. Mr. Jordan stated that the City's initial proposal was to strike this language. Ms. Munley pointed out that they already discussed what the arbitrator would do in Section 12.4.3 that states, "The arbitrators shall set the hearing on the matter appealed to be heard Meeting Minutes NCFO/City of Boynton Beach Blue Collar Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida November 23, 2004 within ninety (90) days following appointment." Mr. Hawkins stated that they could address the timeframe. Ms. Munley also felt that Section 13.4 did not apply since a panel of arbitrators has been selected. She pointed out that Article 12 was titled "Grievance and Arbitration Procedures" and Article 13 was titled "Disciplinary Appeal and Arbitration Procedure." She was of the opinion that grievance and discipline were the same and saw no reason to have two Articles dealing with the same subject. Mr. Jordan pointed out that the City's initial proposal was to strike this Article and the Union was not agreeable with this. Ms. Munley was also opposed to the statement that "The Arbitrator may not modify the discipline," and noted that the Arbitrator could change the discipline. Ms. Munley did not see a need to split the Articles because discipline is a just cause issue that is part of the agreement. Mr. Livergood disagreed with Ms. Munley's statement and felt that discipline should be separate. Ms. Munley stated that there is already language in Article 12 that deals with this. Ms. Munley stated that the Union would be agreeable to include in the contract that an employee could choose between the negotiated Grievance and Arbitration Article or the PPM. Mr. Hawkins said that they would consider the Union's proposal. Article 14 - Basic Work Week and Overtime Mr. Jordan pointed out that in Section 14.2, language that Ms. Munley had omitted was added. The language reads that, "Overtime shall be offered to all employees qualified to perform the overtime work for a specified work function on a rotating basis based on seniority." Ms. Munley stated that this was not her language. Ms. Munley stated that the language she proposed read "Overtime shall be offered to those employees who normally perform a job function during their regular work hours." In the Task Article, the Union's proposal reads, "Daily overtime shall be offered to employees on a rotating basis, based on seniority among the employees who perform the job function. All other overtime shall be offered to employees who are qualified to perform the overtime work on a rotating basis, based on seniority." Mr. Kruper stated that if a person had been working roll-off all day and at the end of his shift a roll-off driver is needed for overtime, that same person should be given the overtime, not another employee who has more seniority. Mr. Livergood felt that employing this process would be difficult to administer. Ms. Munley inquired why this would not be considered a continuation of a person's shift and that person would receive the overtime. If that person did not want to work the overtime, then it could be offered to other drivers. Also, Ms. Munley stated that Holidays and Saturdays would be offered on a rotating basis to persons qualified to do the job. Meeting Minutes NCFO/City of Boynton Beach Blue Collar Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida November 23, 2004 Mr. Livergood did not think that this should apply to only one specific function. He felt that the bargaining agreement was to provide consistency in the application of the Articles of the contract to all employees. Ms. Munley stated that task was unique and did not apply anywhere else in the City. Mr. Jordan recommended adding language that read, "Overtime shaft be offered to those employees who normally perform the job function during the regular work hours, or then to employees qualified to perform the overtime work for a specific work function on a rotating basis, based on seniority." Mr. Jordan stated that this language would apply to task. Mr. Kruper felt that this language would not work in Sanitation because there are five roll-off drivers that would work all the overtime and no one else would be able to do the overtime. Mr. Hawkins inquired if this language would be acceptable to the Union, as it would apply to the basic workweek. Ms. Munley did not think it would work and felt that it should not matter to the City who does the job as long as they are qualified. Mr. Kruper felt that a person doing the job all day should be offered the overtime. With regard to weekends and Holidays, anyone that is qualified to do the job should be in the rotation. Mr. Livergood was agreeable if the words "qualified in the opinion of the supervisor" were added. Union members felt that this was a form of discrimination. Mr. Hawkins stated that "qualified" is not a subjective decision. "Qualified" is based upon validated job descriptions and supervisors must go by the job description. Ms. Munley stated that if the City wants the supervisor to have the authority to say who is qualified. In that event, the qualifications should be clearly "1 did it before and I know how to do it." Mr. Jordan stated that if this were the case, what is "1 did it before?" There needs to be a time period of experience involved. Mr. Livergood requested that it be clearly defined in the contract how overtime is assigned. Mr. Hawkins inquired if employees feel that there is favoritism when it comes to receiving overtime work. Mr. Livergood stated that because the roll-off drivers receive most of the overtime, other employees feel that there is favoritism. Mr. Kruper noted that he has driven roll-off in prior years and questioned why he was not eligible or ever asked to work overtime. Mr. Hawkins stated that the City is trying to rectify this through this negotiation process. Mr. Kruper pointed out that in the Utilities' Department most positions are offered overtime; however, in the Sanitation Department only one group gets overtime. Ms. Munley would bring some language to the next meeting. Mr. Osborne noted that Section 14.3 states "The City may adjust work hours in a work week to avoid overtime payment by reducing actual hours worked." Ms. Munley stated that this was out of the question. Meeting Minutes NCFO/City of Boynton Beach Blue Collar Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida November 23, 2004 Mr. Osborn noted that most of the overtime in the Utilities Department is due to the Department being shorthanded. If the vacant jobs were filled, this would greatly reduce the overtime. Last year the Department spent $154,000 in overtime. If the three unfilled positions were filled, it would cost a lot less than $154,000. Mr. Smith stated that many of the managers are earning overtime by working weekends and overtime. Ms. Munley reported that she made a public request for the records of all overtime paid during the last 6 months to any employee who was not in the bargaining unit. Ms. Munley requested that the language in Sections 14.3 and 14.6 remain status quo. The original language was in 13.3 of their proposal and is in every Union contract. Mr. Osborn noted that when he attends job training, the time is not included as time worked in the computation of overtime. Mr. Livergood noted that the language in Section 14.6 states "For purposes of overtime computation only hours actually worked count as hours worked." He pointed out that the City has a responsibility to its taxpayers to minimize overtime, while getting the work done. If overtime were necessary to get the work done, it would be assigned. Because supervisors must plan their work schedules, if an employee calls in sick, he should not have those hours count towards the computation of hours worked. He also felt that this would be a good way to avoid employees from abusing sick time. Mr. Smith did not think that employees should be penalized for being sick. Ms. Munley did not think that taking away this benefit would eliminate the abuse of sick time. People who abuse sick time should be placed on restrictive sick leave. It would not be fair to punish employees that do not abuse the sick policy by keeping them from receiving overtime. Mr. Livergood pointed out that last year holidays were added back in when computing overtime. He pointed out that there is a difference between planned sick time and a person who routinely calls in sick on a Friday or Monday. Article 15 - Task Assi,qnment - Solid Waste The City's original proposal has not changed. Article 16 - Work Breaks The City's original proposal has not changed. Article 19 - Promotions, Reclassifications, Transfers & Demotions The language in this Article was taken from the PPM and the City's Pay Plan. Mr. Hawkins noted that some additional language was also added. Article 20 - Standby & Call Back Pay The City's original proposal has not changed. Meeting Minutes NCFO/City of Boynton Beach Blue Collar Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida November 23, 2004 Article 21 - Working in a Higher Class The Union's proposal has been used. Article 22 - Employees Assigned to Training Dutie~ The City's initial proposal has been modified. Incidental training of co-workers with less experience is expected in all job classifications and is not compensable under this section. Article 23 - Emergency Pay Policy The City is waiting to hear from the attorney on this Article. Article 24 - Certification Pay The Union's proposal has been used. Section 24.2 includes the provision that employees who currently have or who earn EMT certificates shall receive a one-time 5% wage increase upon initially earning the certificate. Article 25 - Sick Leave Section 25,2 has changed. Mr. Livergood noted that the language would allow employees to cash in 90 hours of time in emergency situations, as opposed to 80 hours in the old contract. Employees must first use their vacation time. If sick time were used, it would be cashed in at 50%. Employees must use their vacation time before sick time so that sick time would be available to employees in the event of an emergency. Ms. Munley inquired if it has always been at 50% and Mr. Hawkins stated that this is a change. In Section 25.3 the language has been changed back to "Personal Leave," Section 25.7.2 requires an employee who had three or more consecutive sick days to furnish medical certification when returning to work. The language that Finance must confirm that hours are available if an employee wished to donate sick time has been deleted. Article 27 - Light Duty The City's original proposal has not changed. Meeting Minutes NCFO/City of Boynton Beach Blue Collar Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida November 23, 2004 Article 26 - Workers Compensation The language in Section 26.3 has been changed to read "After three (3), instead of six (6) months, from date of injury, the injured employee may elect to receive accrued sick leave and after exhausted, vacation leave, in accordance with his/her regular hourly wage, to the extent that his/her combined sick leave or vacation leave, and workers' compensation benefits equal his/her regular weekly net take home salary." Article 28 - Vacation The original Section 28.4 has been broken down into three sections: Sections 28.4, 28.5 and 28.6 for clarity. Ms. Munley felt that Section 28.5 needed clarification. Mr. Jordan suggested adding the word "advance" so that the language would read, "Advance vacation requests must be approved or denied within thirty (30) days of the date of the request." Members discussed various ways to differentiate between planned vacation requests and last-minute vacation requests. Ms. Munley suggested language that could state "vacation requests for time off within the same workweek, as opposed to a vacation request for future vacations. Mr. Hawkins suggested adding language in Section 28.4 that would state vacation requests of two days or less must be requested prior to the end of the work shift..." Ms. Munley also added that vacation requests of three days or more would have to be submitted forty-eight hours in advance. Mr. Livergood pointed out that in Section 28.4, it is the employee's responsibility to ask for vacation time in a timely manner. Section 28.5 is the supervisor's responsibility to respond to the employee's request within a timely manner. He suggested that the 30 days could be shortened to 10 days. Mr. Jordan stated that the City would work on providing better language for this Article. Section 28.8 provides employees with up to 16 hours of emergency vacation time. Employees must notify their supervisor within one hour of their normal shift start time. Mr. Livergood pointed out that Section 28.2 requires that vacation time must be taken in at least one-half day blocks. Ms. Munley felt that a half-day minimum was too much time. Mr. Jordan pointed out that under the emergency vacation time, an employee could take less time. Section 28.2 would apply to scheduled vacation time. Ms. Munley said that they would discuss this further. She thought that two hours would be better. Article 29 - Bonus Days and Bonus Increases The City's original proposal has not changed. Mr. Livergood pointed out that a work day was based upon an eight (8) hour day. Mr. Kruper stated that the Sanitation workers receive a ten (10) hour bonus day because they work 10 hours. Mr. Livergood Meeting Minutes NCFO/City of Boynton Beach Blue Collar Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida November 23, 2004 responded that this was not a sanitation issue. Ms. Munley did not think that this arrangement was fair to persons who worked 10-hour days. Mr. Kruper pointed out that if he took a vacation day, he was charged 10 hours. Article 30 - Holidays The City's original proposal has not changed. Ms. Munley inquired how this would apply to an employee's birthday. Mr. Hawkins pointed out that when an employee takes his birthday off, it is taken as a vacation day, not a holiday. Ms. Munley said that taking the old language out would leave employees to think they have lost this benefit. She recommended that the original language be left in the contract with the deletion of the words "without prior notice." Mr. Livergood recommended language that would state, "Employees may take their birthday off and the day shall be charged as a vacation day, subject to afl rules regarding vacation time in this Article." Mr. Hawkins did not think that this language was necessary. Article 31 - Compassionate Leave The language was put back into the contract and the Article has been changed from Funeral Leave to Compassionate Leave. Mr. Jordan stated that the language for this was taken from the PPM. The Union inquired if this leave was a paid leave and was informed that it was. Article 32 - Military Leave The language for this Article was taken from the PPM. Article 33 - Leave of Absence This language was also taken from the PPM. Article 35 - Jury Duty This language was also taken from the PPM and is in accordance with State law. Article 36 - Seniority & Layoff & Recall The City's original proposal has not changed. Article 37 - Recruitment and Selection This Article had been titled "Job Posting and Bidding." Language for this Article was taken from the PPM. Meeting Minutes NCFO/City of Boynton Beach Blue Collar Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida November 23, 2004 Ms. Munley inquired why the parameters for job testing were not included in the Article. Mr. Jordan responded that job testing is done in accordance with Civil Service procedures. Mr. Hawkins stated that each department sets the parameters for the interview process and Human Resources reviews it to make sure it complies with City standards and legality. If a department wants a test, Human Resources would assist that department in finding the appropriate test. Mr. Jordan stated that the City's process is not discriminatory and is a legal, valid recruiting process. Mr. Osborn inquired how the questions are scored. Mr. Jordan explained how the interview process worked and prior to conducting the interviews, the supervisor would determine how the questions are weighted. Mr. Hawkins explained that the interviews are designed with objective questions that have correct, specific answers that would determine a person's skills and ability. Ms. Munley inquired who sits on the interview panel. Mr. Hawkins stated that it would depend upon the position. A department would have experts on the panel that have knowledge of the specific job and the criteria for that job. On occasion, people from the outside have been brought in to sit on an interview panel. Ms. Munley inquired if Union representatives could sit on an interview panel and Mr. Jordan stated that there have been union members that have served in this capacity. These people were selected for their knowledge, not because they were a member of a collective bargaining unit. Ms. Munley would like to have a white collar and a blue collar representative sitting in on the interviews. She felt that if this process were in place, she could make sure that the process was fair. Mr. Hawkins noted that under law, a person has the right to challenge why they were not hired whether or not it was a position covered by a collective bargaining contract. Mr. Hawkins was amenable to discussing this further. Article 38 - Safety and Health The shoe stipend has been changed from $175 to $190. A new Section 37.3 (should be 38.3) has been added that states, "The Union may participate on the Safety Committee and the Incident Review Committee." Article 39 - Tool Replacement The City's original proposal has not changed. Article 40 - Uniforms Animal Control Officers are now included. ][ Meeting Minutes NCFO/City of Boynton Beach Blue Collar Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida November 23, 2004 Mr. Osborn noted that in the City's first proposal there was language that an employee cannot stop while traveling to and from work to engage in personal business or activities while wearing a City uniform. Mr. Hawkins stated that the language prohibited any employee from purchasing or consuming alcoholic beverages while wearing their uniform. Referring to Section 40.9, Ms. Munley inquired if there has been a problem with the doctor's notes that employees have furnished. Mr. Hawkins stated that there have been doctor's notes furnished that appeared suspicious. Ms. Munley inquired if the City planned to change the uniforms and Mr. Hawkins stated that there were no plans to do so. Ms. Munley felt that the uniforms were too hot, which Mr. Smith confirmed. Article 41- Insurance The insurance now includes vision care. Article 43 - Tuition Assistance Pro,qram The title of this Article has been changed from Tuition Reimbursement to Tuition Assistance Program. The language in this Article comes from the APM. Article 44 - General Provisions No Change Article 45 - Dues Deduction No change Article 46 - No Change No change Article 47 - Substance Abuse No change. Ms. Munley inquired about the language that the Union proposed that stated a person could come back to work if their counselor stated it was okay, as opposed to what the Ordinance stated. Mr. Jordan said that when the counselor released the employee, they could come back to work. Mr. Jordan will furnish Ms. Munley with a copy of the Ordinance. ]2 Meeting Minutes NCFO/City of Boynton Beach Blue Collar Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida November 23, 2004 Article 48 - Probationary Period No change Article 49 - Lon.clevitY Benefit No change Article 50 - Savings Clause No change Article 51 - Modification of Conditions This Article was originally titled "Maintenance." Ms. Munley requested that it be changed back to "Maintenance." Article 52 - Posting of A.qreement Two new sections have been added as follows: Section 52.2 - "The City will post a copy of this agreement, as ratified, on the City's Web page." Section 52.3 - "The City will provide the NCF&O with a copy of this agreement on compact disk." Ms. Munley responded that the City had previously provided copies to employees in booklet form and to the Union and questioned why the City no longer wanted to provide the agreement to employees. Article 54 - Duration The agreement would be for a period of one year ending September 30, 2005. Next Meeting Dates and Adiournment In addition to the meeting dates previously established, Ms. Munley requested another date be set for the end of December. After discussion it was determined to schedule a meeting for Thursday, December 30, 2004 beginning at 1:00 p.m. that would be in addition to the following meetings: · Wednesday, December 1, 2004 - 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. · Friday, December 3, 2004 - 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. · Tuesday, December 7, 2004 - 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. t3 Meeting Minutes NCFO/City of Boynton Beach Blue Collar Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida November 23, 2004 · Friday, December 10, 2004 - 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. · Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. There being no further business, the meeting properly adjourned at 5:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Barbara M. Madden Recording Secretary (November 28, 2004) 14