Security Labor Management

 Meeting Minutes

January 25, 2002, 6:15 am

Attending:      Frank Thompson, Ted Long, Mike Malizio, Brad Heath, Jim Steiner, Scott Campbell, Elizabeth Mancino, Sally Neal, Harvey Smath, William Trumbull, and Joseph Yeaney

Question:       Frank Thompson asked if AFSCME would agree to sharing the responsibility of chairing these meetings.  Scott Campbell replied that AFSCME does not have the resources to do the minutes.  A decision was made to alternate chairing these meetings, and management would continue to do the minutes. 

            ******************************************************************

Issue:                          Review of previous minutes.

Discussion:    The minutes of the November 16, 2001 meeting were distributed.  Scott Campbell stated he had made some suggested changes that were not incorporated into the distributed minutes, and would need more time to review the minutes.  Jim Steiner asked that meeting minutes be sent out for review, and after any suggested changes had been made the minutes be forwarded again so the final minutes would be available at these meetings.  Mike Malizio agreed to have the initial minutes forwarded within two working days, and he would again forward the proposed minutes after suggested changes had been incorporated at least two weeks prior to each meeting.  If suggested changes were not adopted, this would allow time for labor and management to dialogue on the issue.

Action:            As above.  Scott Campbell will review the November 16, 2001 minutes and any suggested changes will be returned to Mike Malizio.

  Remain on Agenda

******************************************************************

Issue:                          Security Staffing:  How many security staff (FTE’s) are budgeted at CRCI?  What is the current number of security staff vacancies?  How many temporary hires are employed now as security staff?  How Many security staff are currently on long term leave or otherwise unavailable for work?  How many security staff have yet to attend DPSST?

Discussion:     Report of staffing presented to local union (see enclosure (1)). 

Remain on Agenda.

            *****************************************************************

Issue:                         Overtime Assignment Procedure 

Discussion:    Brad Heath stated that he had a couple of meetings with AFSCME to redraft this procedure, but there was disagreement on the equity issue.  Brad stated he would continue to operate on the current procedure.  Ted Long stated there were internal discussions advising management not to change the procedure.  Jim Steiner stated that management had wanted to unilaterally change this procedure.  AFSCME and management had agreed to work on this issue, but no progress was being made.  He also stated he did not want any mandatory subjects changed while the procedure was being worked on.  Frank Thompson asked about the suggested changes that Scott Campbell had submitted.  Were they doable?  Brad responded they were minor changes, and could be incorporated into the procedure. 

Action:            Frank Thompson stated for the record:  It is agreed we will use the current procedure for now.  Brad Heath will implement cosmetic language changes that do not change a mandatory subject of bargaining.  Management will present the proposal before the next meeting.

Remain on Agenda.

******************************************************************  

Issue:  Other Funded Positions:  Because of the funding volatilities of OF positions, and the potentials of having to release someone from employment when the OF sources are not available (and an inability to absorb staff into GF positions), we may need to exempt other fund positions from the weekends and days off bidding process.  Labor needs to be informed of these issues and given an opportunity (per CBA) to provide input.

Discussion:    Frank Thompson said this issue remains a policy decision to be made by the DOC Executive Management Team.  When guidance is received, we will present this issue at the next regularly scheduled meeting.  Scott Campbell said there was some confusion over Other-Funded staff being deployed into the institution.  Can other funded staff be utilized to fill positions within the institution?  Management replied that there is no clear answer.  In the meeting minutes dated November 16, 2001 Frank Thompson stated that this should not occur from either direction.  Management needs to get clarification from the EMT.

Action:            Defer until guidance from DOC EMT is received.

Remain on Agenda

            *****************************************************************

Issue:  First Step Grievance Contact Form:  Immediate Supervisor Grievance Work Sheet discussion.

Discussion:    Ted Long stated the training as mentioned in the November 16, 2001 minutes would not be conducted today.  The training would be completed by Kevin Dull and Jonathan Herman at the next OIC Meeting on February 12, 2002.  Scott Campbell stated he had no desire to attend if the training was dealing with the management form.  There is no reason AFSCME needs to be trained on how a manager uses a form.  Frank Thompson then said he encouraged AFSCME to attend.  Jim Steiner stated the form is a management tool only.  Holding both line and management staff accountable for the first-step of the grievance process has value.  He felt there was merit in clarifying process.  Brad Heath said the training was part of the DOC effort to empower first line supervisors to solve problems at the lowest level.  Frank added the form would encourage dialogue at that level as well.  Scott then stated the form was the problem, not the training.  William Trumbull asked if the employee would be provided a copy of the document.  Mr. Thompson answered that it would be available on request.

Action:            The training will be split into First Step Grievance training, which would include training on Weingarten, and training on the form itself.  Jim Steiner accepted the training for AFSCME.  He will encourage represented staff to be present.  

Remove from Agenda

             *****************************************************************

Issue:  Control of Unscheduled Leave:  DOC does not have a written policy/practice on controlling unscheduled leave.  We have used the language in the CBA.  Management suggests a joint examination by security and non-security representatives, and management, of current unscheduled leave information to determine if CRCI can reduce the use of unscheduled leave.

Discussion:    Mike Malizio stated he had made a typographic error in the agenda for this meeting on this item.  He asked those present to change the reference to “CRCI” in the issue statement to “DOC”.  Frank Thompson also asked that reference to an accountability system be removed.  He wants to have a dialogue on this issue with labor, not a disciplinary system.  He then said that unscheduled leave is a major driver of overtime costs.  Frank wants to dialogue with Scott Campbell to determine if he is interested in creating a sub-committee to look at this issue.  Elizabeth Mancino then stated poor staff morale and denied vacation requests in the institution is a problem.  Frank said that resolving that issue would take time, but labor and management can dialogue and work on suggestions to forward up.  Scott added that security staff workload has increased, CRCI has one officer for two units, and this is unacceptable.  People call in sick because they want a day off, and can’t get that day off scheduled.  Scott then asked how many represented staff would be on the proposed sub-committee.  Frank then asked Scott to submit his questions to the concept via e-mail and Frank would respond.  Scott stated he does not see a value in this idea, that management needs to solve the morale problem first.  Joe Yeaney said he would volunteer to serve on this sub-committee

Action:            Scott will get back to Frank on this idea it the local union feels a committee is worth doing.  Management will determine the number of participants.

Remain on Agenda.

******************************************************************

Issue:              Monthly Discipline Logs:     The 2001-2003 collective bargaining process modified Article 50 – Discipline and Discharge language.  The Local Union requests a monthly agenda topic in which a Monthly Discipline Log is provided to the Local, but not discussed.

Discussion:    Scott Campbell said this issue came up in statewide negotiations.  A change was made to Article 50.  Scott would like a monthly report on discipline completed at CRCI.  Ted Long said he had checked with Jonathan Herman on this issue, and he nor Tom Wells were aware of any changes to Article 50.  Jim Steiner said he knew the change was made, and DAS has a model of the report.  After a brief discussion the Union clarified their request to be an accounting of the number of disciplines issued for the month.  Mr. Thompson responded if there is no harm then he has no problem with the request.

Action:            Frank Thompson stated he would investigate this request with DAS and our HRC staff.  At present we do not prepare such a document, nor is one required by the new CBA.  AFSCME is provided copies of all disciplinary letters.

  Remain on Agenda.

******************************************************************

Issue:  Staffing Levels Report:  The Agency is nearing completion of this report.  The Local Union requests a copy of this report.

Discussion:    Frank Thompson said the Agency does not have a copy of the final report, nor does CRCI.  Scott was frustrated because he had requested a copy from the Deputy Director and had not received a response to his request.  Jim Steiner added that Staffing Standards will be a critical issue for CRCI in the future.

Action:            Management will share a copy of the Staffing Standards report if this institution is sent a copy.

Remain on Agenda, and change issue to “Staffing Standards Report”.

******************************************************************

Issue:              Oregon’s Smoke-Free Workplace Law:  As of January 1, Oregon Law (ORS 433.835-433.990 requires (with few exceptions) that:  An employer shall provide a place of employment that is free of tobacco smoke for all employees.”  A place of employment is “every enclosed area under the control of a public or private employer that employees frequent during the course of employment.”  How do we meet this requirement at CRCI?

Discussion:    Scott Campbell stated that staff do not like walking through the smoking area at the North end of the institution.  Frank Thompson said the law (ORS. 433.835-433.990) deals with employee workstations, not with an outside open-air smoking area.  Scott than asked that the smoking area be cleaned, possibly once a week, since there is an odor in the area when it is not cleaned. 

Action:            Frank stated that management will have the Grounds Crew clean the smoking area regularly, at least once if not twice a week.

Remove from Agenda

            *****************************************************************

Evaluation of Meeting

A.                   Consensus of meeting value:  Labor and management agreed the meeting was of value, and frank discussions were held.

Next Meeting:  Scott Campbell requested a modification to the meeting date for the next two months.  Scott said he would not want to attend Labor/Management meetings as the only representative from labor.  Frank Thompson then stated he did not want a statement for the records made by either labor or management that said they would not attend meetings because of issues not discussed at these meetings.  Labor and management need to discuss meetings as they are scheduled.

It was decided to have the next meeting on Thursday, February 28, 2002 at 6:15 AM.