Attending: Frank Thompson, Brad Heath, Ted Long, Mike Malizio, Kim
Olerich, Jerry Sandver, Scott Campbell, Harvey Smath, Carl Bramlett and Joseph
Yeaney.
Issue:
Review of previous minutes.
Discussion: The minutes of the April 23, 2002 meeting have been
reviewed and approved.
Action: As
above.
*****************************************************************
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)). PICS
Report was completed for CRCI and the results were made available in April 2002.
The report, and position management analysis completed by the Department of
Corrections Central Office, resulted in a reduction of a (0.3 FTE) correctional
officer position. CRCI has employed the extra staff member through May 2002, but
is now unable to support the additional 0.7 FTE within the existing budget. This
effectively reduces one security staff position (Union perspective).
No disciplinary letters were issued since the last meeting.
Position
Number
Vacancies
Sergeant 7 0
Corporal 9 0
GF Officer 48.3 0
GF Work Crew 4 0
OF Work Crew 4 3
Temporary Hire 3
Long Term Leave 0
Pending DPSST 5
Remain on Agenda
*****************************************************************
Issue:
Control of Unscheduled Leave:
Superintendents
will work through their Labor/Management committees within their institutions to
define the indicators that will enable this group to address unscheduled leave,
how it might be controlled and what is reasonable in terms of beginning the
supervisor/employee dialog on unscheduled leave.
Discussion:
All institutions inputs were
submitted to the State-wide Labor/Management Meeting. No policy will be developed at CRCI until the State-wide
Labor/Management Committee acts on this issue, and DOC establishes a policy, and
defines unscheduled leave.
Mike Malizio distributed a
spreadsheet and charts detailing overtime usage at CRCI.
Frank Thompson gave congratulations to both labor and management for
significantly reducing overtime hours in April 2002.
Scott Campbell asked if CRCI would
possibly bring back the use of Comp-Time as a method of controlling overtime.
Frank Thompson stated it was always a possibility, but only as a
management tool. From a policy standpoint comp-time will not be utilized. Brad
Heath then stated administering Comp-Time is a very difficult task; it is not a
part of the relief factor.
Action:
None at this time.
Remain
on Agenda.
******************************************************************
Issue:
Vacation Leave Review: There
has been some reference made during the course of the Labor/Management Meetings
that there is difficulty for staff in getting vacation leave approved.
The indication is that people call in sick because they can't get a
vacation leave day approved. Management is looking for assistance from labor to help
identify the actual root cause of the problem that has been referenced as a
contributing factor.
Discussion: Brad Heath stated there has been a suggestion made
at previous meetings that staff call in sick because they are not able to get
vacation days off when requested. Brad
had sent an e-mail to Scott Campbell on this issue.
Frank Thompson asked Scott how often this situation is occurring, and
would Scott assist on detailing the scope of the problem.
Scott responded it is a practice at CRCI, and statewide, for staff to
call in sick if they can’t get vacation. Staff
do not ask for vacation time off as they know it will be denied. It is a simple
process to check the number of people already on vacation and compare it with
the number of available reliefs. Scott then declined
to assist on this issue. The local union will not assist management
discipline staff when using sick leave. Frank
Thompson then repeated Scott’s statement that, essentially, the practice at
CRCI is for staff to substitute a sick day for a vacation day when they
feel they will not be able to otherwise get vacation time-off.
Action:
None.
Remove
from Agenda
******************************************************************
Item:
Institution Air Quality: Members
of the Local Union feel institutional air quality is below OSHA standards. The
Local Union requests the location of air filters, how often the filters are
changed, when air ducts were cleaned last, and what is the fresh air exchange
rate.
Discussion: Jerry Sandver discussed this issue. CRCI does not have a closed-air system. By Federal law we are required to have a minimum of 15% air
exchange, and Physical Plant records document an 18% to 44% air exchange at
CRCI. Air filters are recommended
by the manufacturer to be changed every six months. CRCI changes air filters on the average of every two months
because of the air turbulence caused by the airport. It has been documented the air inside CRCI’s building is
cleaner than the air outside. The
$2,000.00 hepa-vacuum has been received, and Jerry is scheduling cleaning of the
air ducts and upper air
plenum (area above the ceiling tiles) throughout CRCI.
Action:
Begin
the process of cleaning air ducts and
upper air plenums, and continue the cleaning on a
regular scheduled basis.
Remove from Agenda
*****************************************************************
Item:
Other-Funded Work Crew Supervisor Selection Process
A new process was discussed at the last meeting. Scott and
Kim were to meet and reword the contested area, then forward the document to
Jonathan Herman for review prior to returning it to Frank Thompson.
Discussion: CRCI’s
proposed policy has been sent to Human Resources for review. The local union and
management did not agree on contested areas. Frank stated he might change the
word “dependability” to “availability.”
Scott then asked if seniority would be the only qualification.
Frank and Kim, using the example of the “raspberry farm”, stated
seniority would be given priority, as stated in the Work Crew Selection Process.
Frank Thompson stated that an option would be to find contracts where
correctional officers are not needed. However, where some technical knowledge is
necessary to satisfy the requirements of a specific project under a contract,
the staff must be able to ensure the expectations of the contract are met.
The inability to meet the specific needs could result in valid cause for
removal from that assignment. Kim Olerich stated staff could be removed from
work crews, within ten minutes of assignment, if they did not posses necessary
technical skills to meet the contract. Technical supervision, whenever possible,
shall be provided by the agency whom with we have the contract.
Where it is otherwise unavailable, staff may be required to provide
minimal and cursory technical supervision to meet the requirements of the
contract, with review by the Work Programs Manager and the Superintendent.
Scott then mentioned this item was raised as a staff safety issue.
Correctional Officers are hired to maintain custody of the work crew not perform
work or train inmates. A supervisor from Powder River was killed when performing
unauthorized technical work. Host Agencies need to provide technical
supervisors.
Action:
CRCI needs to receive the procedure back from Human Resources, and
include the results of this discussion in the procedure. Management will begin posting each crew availability
and qualifications as they arise. Management will respect the seniority of
staff.
Remain on Agenda
*****************************************************************
Item:
Overtime
Procedure: What
is the current status of the Overtime Procedure?
Discussion: A faxed signed copy of the Overtime Procedure was distributed to
the local union. The original
document will be sent from Central Office and distributed to all Procedure
Manuals at CRCI.
Action:
It
was agreed that OIC’s would implement this procedure immediately. Manette Emra to update the procedure manuals.
Remove from Agenda
*****************************************************************
Item:
Granting
of Holidays Off: The
Local Union believes CRCI has an unofficial past practice of granting/assigning
holidays off to staff. The Local
Union requests that a formalized procedure be put in place.
Discussion:
Scott asked for an official procedure to document current
practices at CRCI for scheduling holidays off.
Frank asked “why?” Scott
cited the example of the
Intake Sergeant having a five-day unrelieved post, and
if he does not want the holiday off. Scott wants clarification on the most
senior staff getting this day off if the incumbent does not want it.
Frank asked if there were any other issues and Scott replied “no”,
but SRCI now has this type of procedure in place.
Brad Heath then stated the way to resolve this question is for all leave
requests to be sent through him and the Staff Deployment Coordinator, Nok Smith.
They would then be able to assure the most senior staff that requested a
holiday off would get that holiday. It
was noted the CBA defines holidays and shift and days off, and this is part of
the bid process.
Action:
Frank
Thompson stated he and Brad Heath would discuss this issue, and make the process
more formal prior to the next labor/management meeting.
Remain on Agenda
*****************************************************************
Item:
Scheduling
Vacation Leave: The
Local Union has recently been made aware CRCI has continued the practice of
separating work crew supervisor leave requests from those of security staff
assigned within the institution. This practice may not treat all staff equitably
as per the collective bargaining agreement.
Discussion: Scott stated that General Fund Work Crew
Supervisors have a different leave policy, and are not being treated the same as
other security staff. Kim
Olerich stated she does not grant time off in advance.
Kim said she has always talked with OIC first, and if they said they don’t
need the work crew supervisor, she would approve a vacation day or time-off
early. Scott then said there have
been situations were other staff have requested time off, but the work crew
supervisor had been given priority, which is wrong.
All staff should be treated equally.
Action:
Brad
Heath will discuss this issue with OICs to assure they are aware of the correct
way to handle this situation. OIC’s
need clarity that work crew supervisors do not have preference in receiving time
off over other staff. They can be utilized in other areas of the institution.
Brad will also back up this discussion with an e-mail to OICs with a copy to
Scott Campbell.
Remove from Agenda
*****************************************************************
Prior to the end of the
meeting Frank Thompson stated management will work with the local union to
relieve as many labor representatives as possible to attend these meetings.
The local union raised the issue about managers selecting union
representatives to attend the meeting. This is a union function. The local union
needs to know how many representatives can be relieved and then will select the
representatives based upon the issues.
It was decided to have the next meeting on Tuesday, July 16, 2002 at 6:15 AM.