My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03/20/2015 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2010's
>
2015
>
03/20/2015 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/16/2018 4:21:34 PM
Creation date
7/29/2015 12:01:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Impasse Hearing
Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Date
03/20/2015
Meeting Body
Emergency Services Board
Board of County Commissioners
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
293
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ARTICLE 6 - UNION ACTIVITY <br />The County Administrator is arguing erroneously that Article 6 - Union Activity was not at impasse <br />and was not negotiated. Both assertions are false. First, Rule 60CC-3.005, Florida Administrative <br />Code, requires each party to serve upon the special magistrate a written list issues at impasse. On <br />August 5, 2014, the attorney for the County specifically and unequivocally identified Article 6 - <br />Union Activity as an article at impasse. On August 29, 2014, Local 2201 agreed that Article 6 - <br />Union Activity was an article at impasse. <br />Second, at the hearing, the County Administrator changed his mind and argued that Article 6 - Union <br />Activity was not at issue. The County argued that the Union's proposal for a Union Business Bank <br />was not negotiated and could not be considered. The County relied on Port Orange Professional <br />Firefighters Association, IAFF, Local 3118 v. City of Port Orange, 37 FPER i 99 (2011). However, <br />it is undisputed that the Union Business Bank was raised at negotiations and the case cited by the <br />County supports the Union's position that a union business bank should have been considered: <br />We therefore hold, pursuant to Section 447.403, that parties are <br />allowed to change their positions during impasse, whether before a <br />special magistrate or before a legislative body, provided that the <br />amended proposals do not touch on a topic that has not been <br />previously negotiated at the bargaining table. <br />39 FPER at 149 (2011). <br />The Union was willing to entertain compromise and change with respect to Article 19 - Shift <br />Exchange as long as "standby arrangements" were excluded from the restrictions. Historically, for <br />decades, "standby arrangements" have been used to conduct Union business, various charitable <br />events, and education. None of the foregoing should be part of the restrictions on Exchange of Time <br />if adopted. <br />Local 2201 respectfully requests that a motion be made to adopt the Union's proposal for Article 6 - <br />Union Activity which immediately follows on the next page. <br />85 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.