Loading...
Minutes 04-15-05 MINUTES OF THE RESOLUTION MEETING BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AND THE PALM BEACH COUNTY POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION HELD IN CONFERENCE ROOM B, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, HELD ON FRIDAY APRIL 15, 2005, AT 11:30 A.M. Present For the City: For the Union: Jim Cherof, City Attorney Kurt Bressner, City Manager Bill Mummert, Financial Services Marshall Gage, Police Department Lynn Swanson, Paralegal Jill Hanson. PBA Attorney Det. Toby Athol Sgt. Gary Chapman Lt. Kelly Harris Sgt. Stewart Steele Lt. Richard Root The meeting commenced at 11 :46 a.m. A sign-in sheet was distributed to determine who was present. Article 8 - Vacancies Attorney Hanson had concerns there was language in this Article that was not part of the Agreement at the impasse meeting. Det. Athol did not think a Boynton Beach Officer who had been employed for three years should be making less than a new Officer hired who has three years from another department. He thought there should be some language to reflect that point. Attorney Cherof suggested the following language: "The Chief's discretion shall not be exercised to allow a new hire's base pay to exceed the base pay of a member of the department for the same years of service. " The Union agreed to this language. Article 11 - Hours of Work And Overtime Section 1 Attorney Hanson stated they had agreed bargaining unit members would be paid overtime for all hours worked in excess of 171 hours, but the language on the Meeting Minutes Resolution Meeting PBA/ City of Boynton Beach Boynton Beach, Florida April 15,2005 document still had 170 hours. She asked that they change the language to reflect the following: "For the purpose of calculating overtime, bargaining unit members assigned to the 11.5 hour shift will be paid overtime for all hours worked in excess of 171 hours in a 28 day work cycle." Article 12 - Wages Section 4 Attorney Hanson requested the wording regarding the payment of the lump sum should read: "Shall be treated as wages for pension calculation when approved by the Pension Board." Section 1 Det. Athol asked if "effective on ratification" meant the salary of people who were hired in November or December would be adjusted to $40K, or if it meant a person who is hired next week starts at $40K; whereas everyone else who started before would have missed out. Attorney Hanson felt this would create disparity among the employees. There are current employees who would get 2% on $36K, and new hires would make $40K. Sgt. Chapman questioned the word "starting". He said if someone were eligible for an increase based on an evaluation, they would go to the "starting" salary as the minimum. If that new hire got an increase and another person was then hired, they would then go to the new starting salary without an evaluation. Attorney Cherof understood their position, and said this would be discussed during their first break. Section 3 Item B Attorney Hanson addressed the next issue relating to the retroactivity of the 5% performance evaluation increase for the year October 1, 2004 through October 30, 2005. They thought this had been discussed at the impasse meeting where everyone had their evaluations done. Sgt. Chapman gave an example of what they thought this was. Attorney Cherof asked to use a different example. 2 Meeting Minutes Resolution Meeting PBA/ City of Boynton Beach Boynton Beach, Florida April 15,2005 Det. Athol stated as far as they understood, the evaluation process was not going to be changed. The evaluation process as stated, took place once a year beginning on August 1st and was paid on October 1. He thought the first year of the contract would be the only date they could go back to. Section 5 Attorney Hanson stated this section relates to the phase in of the new dates of the evaluation cycles. She clarified that the members are evaluated once a year in August and their increase, based on the evaluation, was October 1. Section 6 Attorney Hanson referred to the last two sentences, which stated, "If the employee does not receive a satisfactory or greater evaluation, an additional and final ninety (90) days' re-review period shall begin. Failure to achieve a satisfactory or greater evaluation at the end of the second ninety (90) day period shall result in a non-disciplinary termination, not subject to grievance". She stated they did agree it could result in a non-disciplinary termination, but they did not agree that the employee might not be subject to grievance. Det Athol suggested eliminating the word "shall" and the phrase "not subject to grievance". Section 8 Attorney Hanson thought this language was taken from the Firefighters' contract, regarding an employee has five (5) or more occasions for use of sick leave during any annual evaluation period. The Firefighters' five occasions are 120 hours, whereas the Police Officers' five occasions are 40 hours. Det. Athol felt that the number of hours should be higher, because an officer who works a 40-hour week could call in sick one day every other month. Attorney Hanson suggested using language that if an employee had been placed on restrictive sick leave because there is a policy in the department if an employee had ten instances, they would be placed on restricted sick leave. Mr. Bressner asked if they wanted the language to reflect if an employee has been placed on restricted sick leave during the course of their annual evaluation at any time, they would be subject to Section 8. Attorney Hanson agreed and Attorney Cherof clarified that this language would eliminate the reference to the number of occasions. 3 Meeting Minutes Resolution Meeting PBA/ City of Boynton Beach Boynton Beach, Florida April 15,2005 Mr. Bressner suggested they put this language in as an Exhibit to the Agreement and everyone present was in agreement. Section 10 Attorney Hanson was concerned how the shift assignment pay for the 11 Y2-hour shift would be calculated. Det Athol wanted to know if it would go to 5% upon ratification, or if the 81/2% would be retroactive to October 1, 2004? They want to make sure the 5% is calculated on the new base salary and then recalculated for the remainder of the year. Attorney Cherof said that was the way they were going to do it. Det. Athol wanted to know if vacation was also a retroactive item in the contract. Attorney Cherof said no; he thought the clause at the end explained what was retroactive. Attorney Hanson said they did not understand that, and it was agreed they would discuss it when they got to that Article. Article 14 - Additional Monetary Benefits Section 8 Attorney Hanson inquired if there was a typographical error in the last sentence, which read, "There will be no regular or overtime compensation." Det. Athol thought it should read, "There will be no overtime compensation." Article 22 - Training College Tuition Reimbursement Det. Athol stated the language in the contract was the old language. They had agreed upon new language that anyone in the program would be grandfathered in, but from this point on they would be subject to State guidelines. He thought the issue was skipped over because the contract still contained the old language and Attorney Cherof agreed. Article 26 - Grievance Procedures Section 2 Attorney Cherof pointed out the grammar change in this section should read, "The process of handling appeals of disciplinary action is set forth in Article 27 - Disciplinary Appeals of this Agreement." 4 Meeting Minutes Resolution Meeting PBA/ City of Boynton Beach Boynton Beach, Florida April 15,2005 Article 36 - Duration Det. Athol questioned the first paragraph concerning the retroactivity of wages, and the language that was used. Attorney Cherof said they would think about the language and address it later. Attorney Hanson referred to the second paragraph and thought at the last impasse meeting the City did not want to reopen negotiations. Det. Athol thought the reopen negotiations were for the Lieutenants. Attorney Cherof agreed it was just for the Lieutenants. Attorney Hanson needed clarification on the language used for the last clause of the first paragraph, "shall not continue beyond September 30, 2007, unless otherwise extended by written agreement of the parties." Attorney Cherof said the intent was to fix the "status clock" in the event bargaining continues beyond the term of the contract. Attorney Hanson recommended putting a period after 2007. Attorney Cherof had an opposite opinion. Article 37 - Take Home Vehicles Attorney Hanson said they thought it would be easier if both the Patrol and Sergeant's contract said 40 take home vehicles will be provided to Members of the Patrol and Sergeant's bargaining units during the term of this Agreement. Sgt. Chapman stated all units agreed the distribution should be based on term of employment, which is seniority. Mr. Bressner stated from a management point of view, he would prefer to have a certain number of cars allocated to sergeants by virtue of their rank. Sgt. Chapman thought this penalizes them, because most Sergeants have seniority. If they were to assign vehicles the way the City has proposed, there would be Officers with less seniority who would have an opportunity to have a vehicle than Sergeants with more seniority. If they were distributed by seniority, when you go down the list, there would not be a Sergeant who would be affected. Chief Gage asked how many Sergeants live out of the 15-mile radius and Sgt. Chapman confirmed two. Attorney Hanson thought the $22.50 gasoline charge would permit the members to use the vehicles for personal purposes. She thought the Lieutenants were 5 Meeting Minutes Resolution Meeting PBA/ City of Boynton Beach Boynton Beach, Florida April 15,2005 allowed to use the vehicles for personal use. Det. Athol thought there should be a clause put in the agreement to coincide with the $22.50. Mr. Bressner said when the City put in personal use; the City acknowledged that it would be paying in excess of $1.90 for a gallon of gasoline. The City is requesting that Officers defray some of the costs of the commute since personnel does not pay taxes for the use of the vehicle to and from work. Article 38 - Longevity Pay Attorney Hanson said the City policy for employees is to receive a cash Lump Sum Bonus up to 40 years, and she thought they had agreed on that policy. She pointed out that even though it was not discussed, they did agree it would apply to people in the DROP plan. Det. Athol stated they thought October 1, 2005 would be implemented for patrol, and everybody that year would be plugged in. No language was in the contract to reflect this. He suggested some language to the effect that upon implementation of the contract, eligible employees would be given their last bonus, as a one-time adjustment to implement the system. All subsequent payments, starting October 1, 2005, would be paid according to the employee's anniversary date. Attorney Hanson stated those were all the issues on the Patrol contract. The issues in the Lieutenant's contract are: Article 14 - Rate of Pay Attorney Hanson stated they did not agree to the language. They understood the 3% base wage increase in salary was not contingent upon satisfactory performance evaluation. Det Athol read from the written proposal of the Lieutenant's pay, which stated "...adjustment of the Lieutenant base salary by 3% each year of the three year contract. The members of the Lieutenant Bargaining Unit would be eligible for performance pay increases over and above the base adjustment using the current evaluation system. The current evaluation system for Lieutenants is a past pay of 5%". 6 Meeting Minutes Resolution Meeting PBA/ City of Boynton Beach Boynton Beach, Florida April 15,2005 He stated the written proposal they agreed upon on at the impasse meeting on April 1, 2005 was the Lieutenants would get a 3% bonus each year. Depending upon their evaluation, they get an additional 0% or 5%. Attorney Cherof said the 3% in the current language of the contract came from the Magistrate's recommendation based on their proposal at the impasse meeting. He said they would discuss it during the break. Attorney Cherof stated there was no longevity issue on the Lieutenant's contract. Article 46 & 47 - Reopener & Starting Salary Lt. Root said they would like those two new Articles to be included in Article 14 as Section 4 and Section 5, because they all pertain to rates of pay and the reopener. Attorney Cherof asked the purpose of moving the items and Attorney Hanson said it would be more convenient for the Members. The meeting recessed at 12:27 p.m., and resumed at 1:07 p.m. Attorney Cherof referred to the Lieutenants and the discussions about longevity. He stated there would be no longevity payment for Lieutenants for the following reasons: 1. The last time they bargained with the Lieutenants to get to a lump sum amount for them, this put them into an exempt status. The value of this was worked into that equation. 2. Longevity is usually discussed in the context of employees who are topped out and Lieutenants have no top out pay. He noted they would do the 3% market adjustment for Lieutenants back to October 1st, instead of April as stated in their proposal. The 0% or 5% based on their evaluations would be as of April 1st. Attorney Cherof pointed out the Union referred to the IAFF contract as a target contract on a number of issues. The longevity package, which he worked from, was from the IAFF contract, which caps at 20 years. Det. Athol was concerned with the current language that an employee working for 12 years would have to wait until their 15th year to be eligible for a lump sum payment; whereas they had agreed that an employee gets plugged into the program on their first year. 7 Meeting Minutes Resolution Meeting PBA/ City of Boynton Beach Boynton Beach, Florida April 15,2005 Attorney Cherof said they wanted to do it the way Det. Athol described, but it did not occur to them they would need language to reflect it. He stated those who are in the DROP plan would not be eligible under their proposal. Attorney Cherof stated they did not want to change their target on the performance cycle. They would roll back the April 1, 2005 pay for performance to January 2005, but the next cycle would be the April cycle. The remainder of the language in the contract would remain as it is. Attorney Cherof said the City was firm on the take home car language. There would be two separate contracts with the 30 and 10 vehicles. Mr. Bressner asked if the Union was assuming the City would not be putting this into effect for this fiscal year. If the parties could come to agreement by the end of the month, the City would order the vehicles. It appeared to him, however, that the Union was holding out until the second and third year. Det. Athol thought that the contract had to be posted for seven days before it could be voted upon. Further, Mr. Bressner pointed out that by treating seniority as a whole, the Sergeants would receive the vehicles faster and Det. Athol confirmed this. Sgt. Chapman pointed out from his breakdown who would be receiving cars: nine (9) Sergeants would receive cars the first year, six (6) Sergeants the second year, eleven (11) Officers the first year, and fourteen (14) Officers the second year for a total of 40. Attorney Cherof stated they were firm on the split of 30 and 10 vehicles. Attorney Hanson asked if they were also firm on the decision that Members assigned to take home vehicles will be assessed by payroll deduction, a gasoline charge of $22.50 per pay period. Attorney Cherof said they were firm on that. From an Officer's point of view, Sgt. Chapman thought if they were not sworn to take action off duty as part of their requirements for their job, he would probably agree with the City. However, if an Officer is on their way to work and something happens, they would take action, and he thought that was the difference between a civilian employee and a police employee. He also thought the reason the Sheriff's office did it was for tax purposes, and their Officers are allowed to use the cars personally. Mr. Bressner understood the Sheriff's office allows their vehicles to be used for personal use, and he also pointed out the geographic area from which they choose their officers is widely disbursed. The City is faced with gas prices right now, and it is very expensive to provide the fuel for commuting purposes. 8 Meeting Minutes Resolution Meeting PBA/ City of Boynton Beach Boynton Beach, Florida April 15,2005 Attorney Cherof said they provided a very generous benefit, which was not addressed in this year's annual budget. Attorney Cherof said with regards to Wages, Section 6, they were rejecting the proposed change in the last sentence. The City thought it was very important to leave the language the way it was because they have invested a lot of time in getting the officer that flunked the first evaluation through the second and third evaluations. The City feels that this officer should be subject to non-disciplinary termination and not grievance. Attorney Hanson stated she was concerned that this could be arbitrary. The Union would be giving up that member's right to grieve the situation, and the City might possibly be taken to court. Attorney Cherof responded the City would rather defend a wrongful termination, than go through the mechanics. An officer that cannot make the grade should be terminated because they could be a potential risk to their co-workers and the City. Attorney Hanson did not know if they could agree to this. Attorney Cherof stated they still hold to their last sentence of the first paragraph regarding Duration, which states, "the adjustments set forth in Article 12 Section 3A concerning base wage are retroactive to October 1, 2004 but shall not continue beyond September 30, 2007, unless otherwise extended by written agreement of the parties". The City felt very strongly about that point. The meeting caucused at 1:26 p.m., and resumed at 2:40 p.m. Attorney Hanson stated they had four problems, and if they were not resolved they could not take the contract to any of the bargaining groups with a recommendation for ratification. The issues were: 1. With regard to Wages, the first year must be retroactive to October 1, 2004 and not April 1, 2005 as they have in the contract. Det. Athol pointed out that at the impasse meeting, they understood the pay for performance would be good for at least three years, and at least the first year should go back to October 1, 2004. 2. Lieutenant's Longevity Lt. Root stated they took what was proposed to them in writing at the April 1, 2005 impasse meeting in good faith. In that proposal, when he said it was missing a Lieutenant's contract for longevity pay, the City said it must have been an oversight. He was concerned it is no longer an issue because of the 2002 - 9 Meeting Minutes Resolution Meeting PBA/ City of Boynton Beach Boynton Beach, Florida April 15,2005 2003 contract, which was negotiated before he was a Lieutenant, where they were paid for their tenure and rank and not for their longevity. It stated in the proposal that the Lieutenants received longevity pay to include the estimated cost of $7500, which includes Lieutenant Yanuzzi. He asked the City to honor that in good faith. Attorney Hanson said the City put out the written proposal, which was available to the entire Police Department, and therefore the members saw it and know what was written. Mr. Bressner pointed out that things have been changed from that proposal. 3. Take Home Cars. Attorney Hanson did not think they could sell the issue to the members, unless the distribution of the cars is based on seniority across the Sergeants and Patrol Bargaining Unit, and she did not think they could agree to the $22.50 gasoline charge. Sgt. Chapman stated the numbers they proposed are not much different from City's. Instead of four cars to the Sergeants the first year, it would be six cars, and eight cars to the Officers instead of 10. The remainder remains the same, going down the seniority list. Attorney Cherof clarified the Union is proposing twelve (12) take home cars for the Sergeants, six (6) in the first year. Sgt. Chapman said ten (10) Sergeants are currently eligible. Det. Athol pointed out that both parties were trying to get to the same end. Attorney Cherof clarified the Union was just changing the number of the Sergeants to six (6) in the first year. Sgt. Chapman reiterated if they were to strictly go by seniority, it would be fair for everyone. Mr. Bressner asked whether Officers who live outside the lS-mile radius will be given a vehicle, but would have to leave it at the office at the end of the day. He also questioned if any research was done on how other organizations distribute their cars. 4. Wages, Section 6, if an employee is terminated for unsatisfactory performance, he or she is not subject to grievance. Attorney Hanson stated she tried to contact Ernest George on the matter because she had concerns he would not sign off on that, but was unsuccessful. However, she could not agree with this issue. Sgt. Chapman proposed if an individual being evaluated were not making the grade and that is the only reason they are being terminated, they would receive a grievance. 10 Meeting Minutes Resolution Meeting PBA/ City of Boynton Beach Boynton Beach, Florida April 15,2005 Attorney Cherof said he would change the language to state that if an employee does not make it through their second evaluation period, the City has the right to terminate them and their failure to do so constitutes good cause. Attorney Hanson thought that might work. Sgt. Chapman pointed out some agencies have mentoring for officers, which will help an employee who is having a problem with a supervisor. Attorney Cherof proposed changing the last clause to read: "Failure to achieve a satisfactory or greater evaluation at the end of the second ninety (90) day period constitutes just cause for termination." Attorney Hanson addressed the sentence before that which had a typo and clarified that it should read: "If the employee does not receive a satisfactory or greater evaluation, an additional and final ninety (90) days re-review period shall begin." Det. Athol stated the only other thing would be to change everywhere the word "satisfactory" appears to "meets requirements". Both parties agreed to the changes to this issue. Lt. Root said the Lieutenants would like to see how the 3-year contract works out and what their salaries would be for each of the 3 years. Mr. Mummert explained that all that is required is to multiply the current salary by 3% or 5% each year. Lt. Root asked for clarification of base salary. Mr. Mummert stated apparently the starting range has increased enough that there are a few people that can take their earnings now times the 3% and 5% and it still does not take them to the minimum. His answer to that question would be to move those individuals to the minimum. Det. Athol questioned if the minimum comes first or the raise. Mr. Bressner stated they would have to caucus on that matter, and clarified that they were only referring to the Lieutenants. Mr. Bressner had a question pertaining to the longevity for the Patrol and Sergeants for 2005-2006. He wanted to know if it was understood that it does 11 Meeting Minutes Resolution Meeting PBA/ City of Boynton Beach Boynton Beach, Florida April 15,2005 not include participants in the DROP plan. However, for the Lieutenants the expectation is that it would include some of the participants in the DROP plan. Attorney Cherof stated he pulled the longevity benefit clause from the blue and white contracts, which the Union had referred to at one point, and it was not retroactive, so there is no tie in. The meeting recessed at 2:58 p.m. and restarted at 3:34 p.m. Attorney Cherof stated the following represents their best and final offer: · With regard to Wages, they agree with the Union's proposal that the first year must be retroactive to October 1, 2004. · They agree on longevity for Lieutenants for everyone, except those in the DROP plan. · With respect to wage adjustments for the Lieutenants, they proposed the current base pay, 3% retroactive to October 1, plus 5% retroactive to April 1. The starting pay for Lieutenants would be $77,250. · Regarding the take home car issue, they would drop the $22.50. All Sergeants would be assigned a vehicle first, the remaining vehicles, which are 14, this year, 13 next year and 13 the following year, would be assigned based on seniority. Those who live outside the lS-mile radius will not take the cars home. The meeting recessed at 3:36 p.m., and resumed at 3:53 p.m. Attorney Hanson stated contingent on receiving a re-draft that incorporates the issues that have been agreed to, they would take them back to the bargaining units with a recommendation for ratification. However there was one question that the Lieutenants had. Lt. Root asked if there was a reason why the 5% for Lieutenants was only retroactive to April 1 and not October 1. Mr. Bressner said because the current cycle in their current contract is April 1. Det. Athol was under the impression they had to post the contract for a certain number of days. He would post it today and seven days would take them to Friday April 22, 2005, which is a payday. Attorney Hanson stated Ernest George has to sign and Attorney Cherof said it has to be signed before it is ratified. 12 Meeting Minutes Resolution Meeting PBA/ City of Boynton Beach Boynton Beach, Florida April 15,2005 Chief Gage pointed out he had until April 28, 2005 to put the order in for cars this year. If they miss the deadline, they will not be able to order the cars this year. Attorney Hanson stated they were aiming for a ratification meeting and vote on Friday, April 22, 2005, and should know the results by Monday April 25, 2005. Lt. Root asked if the Lieutenants would have to negotiate their salaries each year. Mr. Bressner said the way they worded it, they had the first year as the reopener, but they could put the formula back in based on the rate they have if they wanted them to. Lt. Root suggested leaving the formula in based on the rate and take out the reopener, and it was agreed. There being no further business, the meeting properly adjourned at 4:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted Cl~ . / (ku ~rtt~) Catherine Wharton Recording Secretary (April 19, 2005) 13