Site Navigation

Saturday, April 22, 2017

Small rant and scheduling...

We have a small union. That is a fact. This is due to a variety of factors – lack of education, unmotivational leader, lack of unification, optimism on how nice the management council would be if we didn’t have a union (short term memory of other departments getting screwed), the fact people get to leech benefits for no cost. I can tell you that I have prevented an employee of getting fired. I can tell you that punishments are more level and documented when a union rep is there. I can tell you that management didn’t want to pay us for on-call, and there first official offer was $1 for the entire period of 4 hours - not $1 an hour, but $1 for the whole 4 hours. I can tell you that our sick policy would be chaos if we didn’t have a union, that it would only be applied based on favoritism. I can tell you we got more vacation for 2018 only because we have a union... But everyone at Metro gets that. Whether it is fair that Union members and charity receivers is a different debate, and doesn’t change the reality. I often say if Union membership goes 8 or below I am stepping down, or I am moving to dissolve it. Then we will see how nice Mayor Huether (or the next mayor who has to write a budget) is to employees under his care, without protections. If any of you have any ideas to get this wheel spinning more let me know. I don’t want people to feel that the union is pointless, because it isn’t.

So there is my small rant… but why? So after emphasizing the abstractness of the union that you have to trust me on, I have something concrete. The Union has direct member influence on the schedule.

Hopefully your shift representatives have spoken to you about the new schedule proposals. I have emphasized that a majority want to stay the same but move it back 1 hour. (If there something that has an obvious majority I have found it is go back to 0600-1400  1400-2200   2200-0600)

The schedules presented have a lot of contingency on having to have the contract change.

Article 5 Section 2 – Workweek – Our contract has 40 hour workweek for overtime computation, which is law. It also establishes are work week Monday through Sunday. This is something that an admin person wants to look at to lower amount of built in overtime in the schedule.

Definitions – On-Call… We have it defined as the period prior to the start of a regularly scheduled shift. All the proposed schedules want to change the time an employee is on call.

Article 4 Section 9 – On-Call Pay – Compensation for on-call right now is $2.50 an hour on call. There are talks of wanting to change that to .5-1 hour of ETO for a 4 hour period. Right now when we are called in for on-call we have guaranteed overtime. Management did not want that… and they still don’t. If we have a new schedule that has more people on-call one of the conditions given was they want to get rid of the guaranteed overtime. In order not stop all conversation I said the neutral “We will see what the members want” “That can possibly be arranged.”

So what it comes down to is… In order to directly change the contract the union decides. I feel the best way to handle it is a vote… but do we want a run-off vote where each options get points, do we want to flip a coin. Know that when a schedule is changed it is hard to change back.


Let me know people, I am not alone here.

17 comments:

  1. For me personally what we have now works really good. I would not want to see it change. Moving it up an hour would not be a big deal. As for the on call pay they better give the ETO even if you get called in to work. Otherwise the ETO is worth more money than $10. I would like that option. I guess a vote is probably the best way, but I don't really want a change.

    ReplyDelete
  2. When it comes to the workweek, other than a 1100-1900 power shift, there is not really anything I would like to see changed. For the on call, would we still get the ETO weather we were called in or not? Kind of like the $10.00? And no overtime if we do come in? If we still get the ETO regardless, I would like to see the 1 hour. Not the half hour.

    The hour shift would be ok, but to be honest I have grown used to the 1500-2300. I am sure I'm not the only one, and it might just be better to stick with what we have as to not push to much change across at once.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The On-Call compensation would be ETO instead of $10 an hour, and they want to make it so it is not guaranteed 1 1/2 time. So you would get ETO whether called in or not. Maybe the schedule commitee should send out a survey 0600 or 0700 for simple answer - Jared

      Delete
    2. 2.50 an hour $10 total D'OH! - Jared

      Delete
  3. I do NOT want ETO, I want money. Some of us can remember a time where there was no vacation allowed due to staffing. I don't want to run into this with ETO. If we get ETO, I want to be able to use it whether it creates a vacancy or not. And, I think it should be 1 to 1 (1 hour ETO per hour on call. We should get the ETO/money whether we are called in or not. On call should be guaranteed over time.. especially during a holiday week. There are more frequent sick calls during a holiday week and they just hour adjust the holiday pay... where I get NO additional pay because I worked the holiday and now have to come in for on call time. Maybe that is what we address? If one calls out sick during a holiday week (fmla or regular) you must use sick time and not hour adjust the holiday time. As for a vote, I think the only ones that would participate are the ones providing information. slk

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You bring up a good point about being able to use ETO. Even if they gave 1 hr ETO to 1 hr on-call if there is no guarantee to use it then it means nothing. The holiday week is something to keep in consideration of giving up guaranteed OT - Jared

      Delete
    2. one thing that was brought up in conversation is to change the wording of "holiday pay" to something that does not make it "over time pay" so that we can get guaranteed OT in a holiday week... that's the only week that matters to me.. if I work a holiday I am actually penalized for working the holiday if later in the week I come in for on call time.. that's not "fair".. some would argue that they've already given up being with their family on the holiday, they shouldn't be penalized later in the week for being required to work

      Delete
  4. I think that one of the biggest things is people are wondering where the money goes when we pay the union dues. Besides NTW, what do we use the money for? I think having a breakdown for current and possible union members would be good. I also think that some think that they get all the benefits of the union right now without paying for it so why join. Maybe having a push out of info on the board would be good to maybe draw in more people?

    As for the schedules, I think that moving back to the old times would be good. I also like the idea that there are multiple different types of schedules that are being presented. I did see a few of them and think that doing something where you can bid 1/3 of the year would be cool compared to the current ½ that is being looked at. I think it would be nice also to be able to change from 8’s to 12’s (if they get presented) during the different parts of the year would also make it more attractive for many.

    As for on-call, I wish that any hours that you work outside of your scheduled would be OT (with the exception of training and meetings) as it isn’t right as Stephanie said that on some weeks you might have to work and not get paid the OT, or you might have scheduled vacation already and you get forced a day prior or after. I am ok with getting ETO over pay but I think it needs to be used at any time (even if we are short, which we will be at times), as long no one else is off vacation/eto that day. I, however, think that we NEED to be getting the guaranteed OT for getting called in, otherwise, let’s just do away with On-Call!

    As for voting, I think we need to do an actual vote for any changes in the contract.

    Luke

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. General answer is 10% goes to local (us), 70% Council (region) and 30% International. The money that goes up pays for - salary for reps (2 in Sioux Falls), labor insurance (strike, severance dispute) and lawyers if there are unfair labor practices (all contracts are reviewed by a lawyer, as well if we go to arbitration) - Jared

      Delete
  5. Is there a way to give a benefit to being in the union that no members wouldn't receive? We are paying into it, should be able to get some kind of benefit over those who do not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree and have often thought that! but I think if we get any "benefit" without sharing it's considered "favoritism" which would not go over well.. but what do we get more of? vacation time? sick time? pay?

      Delete
    2. In regard to the question on getting benefits nonmembers receive, we have all the AFSCME advantage perks plus the free associates degree https://www.afscme.org/members/advantage which I am going to arrange having Kooper come talk about. As far as contractual benefits, SD law prevents this in order to weaken the union. - Jared

      Delete
  6. Keep in mind the only reason Metro negotiates with us is they are required by law to. If they don’t, or if they negotiate in bad-faith, they risk legal liability. As a union gets smaller in membership, Metro no longer considers it a risk and stop taking it seriously. Once it gets small enough they can either go after the membership or launch a decertification campaign to remove the union. The latter is usually what happens, especially in South Dakota. A lot of small locals aren’t taken seriously by the employer and are too afraid to take any action when negotiations are done in bad-faith. If the employer knows your union isn’t affiliated with the AFL-CIO (or other major union force), i.e. just an association, they know there is less liability because a lawsuit would bankrupt the local (lawyers cost $100 an hour or more, plus file fees that possibly won't get recovered.) I know we live in a RTW state with some really questionable labor laws and its tough on our members here. - Jared

    ReplyDelete
  7. Go back to 0600, keep the rotation like we have it now, and do NOT go to 12s - Tim Rust

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If they went to 12s, there would still be enough slots for people to stay 8's. I want to go to 12's just so I have a better chance to get A shift working 8 hours.

      Delete
    2. How would you feel about getting bumped to PM 12s Sanchez? - Jared

      Delete
    3. If there was even a remote chance of me getting stuck on 12's I wouldn't vote for it. I wish I could, but I just cant handle working that many hours in one day.

      Delete