COLUMBIA RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION

Management: Sandver, Olerich, Long, McGee, Malizio, G. Smith, Seeley, Krahn, Conway, Premo, Herman, DeMir

AFSCME: Bramlett, Mancino, Campbell, Otterbein, Wolf, N. Smith, Chance, McBride

Update - Continue discussion of exchanged proposals.

Discussion:    Draft of the Overtime Procedure presented by Mr. McGee. The Union has not had time to review the document as it was distributed to the Union President on March 30, 2000. A general discussion of the Draft

Procedure is as follows:

Pg. 4 - Item D - Medical Exemption - Mr. Long expressed concerns with the need to have this language in the Procedure since management has the right to control the assignment of overtime. The Union pointed out this was managements language and has No problems with the inclusion and prefers it stays in the procedure as it clearly states staff with medical conditions may not work voluntary or mandatory overtime.

Pg. 4 - Item C 5 - Concern is whether it is manageable to work the list the way it is set up. By using words scheduled overtime, need to work at least ½ of shift to be moved to the bottom of the mandatory overtime list. Tentatively no problems.

Section B - No problem

Section A - Scheduled Overtime - A.1 - Change "five" to "three".

Definitions G - Change about five days or more to three working days.

H - change four work days to three work days.

D. Mandatory Overtime - Leave strike in.

E - work becomes worked - after "of" add "mandatory or unscheduled."

Action:    Campbell will take to union meeting on Tuesday and report back to management by April 15.

REMAIN ON AGENDA

When vehicles are take to the Motor Pool for maintenance security staff are being pulled from posts. Are there other options for maintaining vehicles? Management to report back on options discussed, or other solutions from February meeting.

Discussion:    Will be doing reorganizing of the Work Programs area. Will be changing duties of Accounting Tech (Canteen Worker) to cover other duties. Will assign vehicle maintenance tracking system and monitoring mileage, scheduling of maintenance, and contact person for State Motor Pool.

Will continue to use correctional staff to transport vehicles to motor pool because they are "the most deployable." Mr. McGee will continue to look at ways on how transporting vehicles to motor pool. Will try to arrange with motor pool to be able to have loaner available when we take a car to the Motor Pool for maintenance.

Why don't we do our own oil changes? These are leased vehicles, and we need to conform to their rules. We would have to be authorized by motor pool to do oil changes, would have to be accredited. CRCI is not set up to do vehicle maintenance.

When vehicles need to transport, security staff transporting, other security staff cannot get scheduled breaks. Management will be working on this.

Action:    Monitor to see how breaks are affected. Will start on this process to get cars scheduled ahead of time.

REMOVE from Agenda

These items of discussion are from both security and non-security, can affect morale.

There appears to be differing levels of personal property within the institution depending on work location.

What type of property is authorized to be in the institution? Should there be different treatment for different areas of the Institution? Does personal property within an institution compromise security?

Discussion:    Does personal property belong in institutions. Why do we have to have it institution? If things come up missing, accusations are made that peers are taking. Are these things necessary to do our jobs. All staff are told at NEO, if you bring anything into institution, it is at risk. Employees are advised not to put any personal items on display on desks or in office. There is nothing in writing to prohibit. State policy is if staff bring in personal property, staff is responsible for any losses.

What is the process for bringing things in? There should be a list and pre-approved by Supervisor/ISM so we know what is in the institution. We do have a concern for the personal electronic equipment in the institution. Possibly should consider a waiver. Responsibility of staff to be aware of what bringing in and of the supervisor to monitor. If personal items are in the institution, and inmate gets injured, who is liable? Union expressed concerns of vicarious liability to employer. Expressed concerns about specific areas within the Institution and the property which has been brought in. Some property appears to be valuable while others seem to present security concerns.

Primary concerns are safety/security issues with personal items. Excess accumulations could cause fire hazard. Will be taking a look at this. Not sure where we want process to go - Right now do not have a written procedure.

Could have staff to evaluate what personal items they have in their office. With loss of property control person, we have no check on items being brought in.

Action:    Personal property brought in should be reviewed from a security standpoint. Initiate some process for staff inventory of personal property brought in their area. Will talk about in Management Meeting. Have looked at in the next 30 days.

REMAIN on Agenda

Is there an expectation of professional dress for individuals who work in an institution? How is the dress code applied to all staff, contractors and volunteers who enter CRCI?

Discussion:    Dress code applies to anyone who comes in the institution. We are doing our best to monitor staff dress to dress code policy. Policy is broad and has differences from work group to work group. Policy leaves a wide latitude for "non uniformed" staff.. Try to encourage all staff to be a role model for the inmates. What is professional image? It is very subjective.

Union expressed specific concerns about open toed / open heeled shoes. Stated safety and security concerns on footwear. All staff must remain deployable to any area in an emergency. Dress code policy is not clear on open toed/open heeled shoes. What is appropriate and what are safety issues?. Mr. Smith stated that open toed / open heeled shoes could not be worn in the warehouse, maintenance or kitchen preparation areas as this is in violation of OSHA regulations. Union posed question if open toed / open heeled shoes should be allowed in the Institution.

Action:    Wearing of revealing garments - bring to supervisor. If concerns - bring to the supervisor of the section to review and resolve. Increase effort to ensure people are adhering to the dress code as interpreted. Contact Supervisor to address issues that come up with staff.

Need to consider OSHA standards as areas of response. If cannot be resolved with supervisor, Superintendent will resolve.

REMOVE from Agenda

CRCI has a past practice of honoring staff and recognizing achievements. This practice appears to have been discontinued. Is there a Recognition or Award program currently in effect? How does this affect morale?

Discussion:    Ms. Humbert was responsible for oversight of the program. When she departed the Institution and Ms. Premo arrived no one picked up the program as Ms. Premo had too many other responsibilities. Awards program drifted due to lack of staff to oversee. Now under Executive Assistant (Mike Malizio). Awards program is not necessarily a management driven program, it needs to be a grass roots effort. How much participation are we getting from staff? Needs partnership of both management and represented staff. We are open to suggestions. If general consensus, can redirect, and have people from different sections, select own chair person, Exec. Assist. will act as guide and support for group.

Timeliness of recognition program was raised as a concern by the Union as was a lack of notification of selections. No update has been provided for the entirety of 1999. It was mentioned that the Safety Committee organization structure might be chosen as the model to oversee the program. There is also a DOC Policy on recognition programs to consider.

Action:    Within next month will get committee designated under Malizio's guidance and have a meeting. Committee to publish criteria for selection. Various section heads to come up with representative for committee.

REMOVE from Agenda.

Issues 7 & 8:    7 - Communication between Managers - 8 -Chain of Command (Issues # 7 and 8 combined).

Questions has been raised about how honestly issues are aired between managers and their superiors. Is there a silence about what is really going on? Misinterpretations and resentments have come from this "appearance" of silence and indifference. Additionally, there appears to be a lack of trust from the front line staff towards management.

What is the current Chain of Command and how do issues get resolved using it? What is the Open Door Policy? How is supposed to work? What happens when a manager is unavailable or unwilling to meet? What is meant by handling issues at the lowest level?

Discussion:    Problematic staff - perception is that nothing is happening. Realize that things may be happening and cannot violate confidentiality. On going struggle/concern of getting problems resolved sooner, due to investigations, etc. Progressive discipline also can take time. Also feel that it appears that not everyone is talking with everyone in front office. Are there glitches of managers not communicating with each other? If there is a change in the way we do business, everyone should know. Perception is that information is not being passed down. If there seems to be a disconnect somewhere along the line, bring to McGee's attention.

Most operational issues should follow the chain of command. If issues go further up, need to be directed down to the proper person. Issues of labor/personnel may be proper to go higher up.

What happens when the manager is unwilling to work out problems, can we go higher. Yes, feel free to go higher.

Action:    If communications seems to be lacking, bring to attention of Superintendent, so this can be resolved. If changes are made, let everyone know.

If questions are asked of management which affect all staff possibly post the questions and responses in Outlook permanently for anyone to look at. Union suggested a letter be posted on Outlook clarifying the Open Door Policy and how it should be used.

REMOVE from Agenda.

There appears to be differences in how work schedules are designed and accounted for. How can equality be achieved? If you are in the Security Series there are strict time lines and hours of work versus working in Program Services, Medical or Administration. How is equality of working conditions and hours achieved? Who is accountable to ensure all staff are treated equally?

Discussion:    Inequity in how staff are accountable to schedule. Appears some staff have a semi posted schedule but not adhered to. Perceptions of inequity affect morale. How can we all get on the same page and get paid or not paid for time worked. There is a continuing effort to make this happen.

Specifics were asked for. An example was given about a staff being observed leaving the Institution early in the presence of manager. Specifics are available. Information will be given after the meeting as this is not an appropriate venue to discuss personnel issues. Issues mentioned during discussion were staff reporting to work late, taking long lunches and leaving early. If anyone has an issue with Programs Services staff, please talk to Seeley. Schedules may be adjusted for unrelieved posts. It was mentioned there will be no tolerance for people who are claiming time worked and not actually working.

If it continues to be an issue, it needs to be addressed to make a non-issue. Union expressed concern that staff failure to work scheduled hours may amount to fraud - perhaps theft. It was agreed there are avenues to correct this problem including reporting it to appropriate authorities.

Action:    Will devise additional steps to address the issues with staff.

REMOVE from Agenda.

A. Actions items listed and reviewed for clarity, effective discussion, clear action items.