03/20/2015 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

In 1119.01, the County proposes to limit shift exchanges to 10 full and 4 partial shifts each year. While the County appreciates the Special Magistrate's efforts to craft a compromise of a maximum of 12 full shifts and 6 partial shifts per fiscal year, the County believes its proposal is more than reasonable; besides, Local 2201 is unwilling to accept this compromise anyway. The County's proposal would still provide bargaining unit employees with more than a month of shift exchanges each year. Had this limitation existed in Fiscal Year 2013-14, only 23 bargaining unit employees would have been impacted; 188 bargaining unit employees would not have been impacted by the change. The only objection to this proposal raised by Local 2201 at the Special Magistrate hearing to the County's proposed limitation was that it would not allow Local 2201's 4 officials sufficient time to conduct union business. In fact, Local 2201's officials are already allowed to attend negotiations and address discipline on duty, can handle union matters on their days off (they only work 10 shifts each month), and the County's proposal still gives them plenty of time to conduct union business. Local 2201, however, is presumably sticking by its position that Local 2201's 4 officials have the ability to work or not work as they please. Such a position is simply unacceptable — as long as they are being paid by the County, Local 2201's 4 officials have to be accountable. In 719.02 through 19.05, the County has proposed reasonable controls on shift exchanges necessary to address the issues discussed above, such as requiring that shift exchanges be rank -for -rank to avoid any chance that the exchange will create overtime, requiring shift exchanges to be paid back in the same fiscal year to ensure that shift exchanges are not being paid off in cash and allowing the Division to monitor them, and creating disincentives such as disqualification and double charges to sick leave for employees who do not work a scheduled shift exchange (which causes the Division overtime). The Special Magistrate has found these controls to be reasonable and has recommended them. Local 2201 has not offered any justification for opposing any of these reasonable measures. Accordingly, 1 recommend that the BCC adopt the County's proposal on 719.01, 19.02, 19.03, 19.04, and 19.05, attached hereto as Exhibit L. 7. ARTICLE 26 — MEDICAL LEAVE AND DISABILITY LEAVE Issue: The only paragraphs of this Article that remain in dispute are 726.01, 26.03 (existing numbered), 26.03 (newly numbered), 26.05 (newly numbered), 26.06 (newly numbered), and 26.09. More specifically, the remaining areas of dispute center on changes proposed by the County to reduce accrued leave and payouts on separation from employment consistent with reductions that have occurred County -wide, and to bring the usage of medical (a/k/a sick leave) under control. Local 2201 opposes these changes. 15 15