AFSCME Local 512

MORE Good News!

A grievance was filed months ago against the County because it has not required other Unions (such as the CA Nurses Association) to take the same cuts that Labor Coalition members have made. This is known as the "Shared Sacrifice" Grievance.

This is the Contra Costa County Labor Coalition Hotline with an update on Monday, June 14, 2010.

We met with the state mediator and the County’s representatives today as part of our "Shared Sacrifice" grievance. At the mediator’s request and in accordance with state law, the mediation session was confidential.

The mediator shuttled back and forth between the County’s team and our team and explored ideas that might resolve our dispute. The "Mediator's Suggested Remedy" will be presented to the Board of Supervisors on June 22. We will be meeting with management again on Thursday, July 8^th, and expect to know then whether the mediator’s suggested remedy will lead to a settlement of our grievance.

Please share this message with your co-workers, and check the hotline or your Union’s web site for updates. Any questions can be directed to Sue Lambert at slambert707@yahoo.com.

Good News!

GOOD NEWS!

AFSCME 512 previously filed a grievance with the County regarding the County’s non-compliance with the Blue Ribbon Agreement.* County HR’s decision after the Step 3 hearing was that the County was in “substantial compliance” with the Agreement. The grievance was advanced to Step 4.

On May 24, 512 and 3 other Coalition Unions (AFSCME 2700, Local One and SEIU) met with Stephen Pearl, a State Mediator, to discuss the grievance. Mr. Pearl’s determination was that the County was “clearly in violation of the sideletter Agreement.”

Since Mr. Pearl is a mediator, not an arbitrator, he can only express opinions and make recommendations. However, Pearl’s determination made quite an impact on Ted Cwiek, County HR Director, who subsequently seemed amenable to Pearl’s recommendation to bring in an arbitrator. (An arbitrator’s decisions are binding on all parties.)

Please note that 512 pursues this grievance for a number of reasons, including the following

· Approximately 38% of EHSD’s staff is temporary.

· Having more and more of the work done by temp employees amounts to a slow creep toward privatization.

· The temps, predominantly women, earn no credit toward retirement, do not accrue sick leave, and do not get paid for holidays, when the offices are closed.

· Long-term use of retirees results in members being precluded from advancing into higher positions, and the retiree’s former peers must shoulder the additional workload when the retirees reach the 960 hour limitation on their exempt earnings.

· Government Code 31000.4 puts a 90-day limit on the use of agency temps. The County should comply with the law.

The next step in the grievance process is to bring in an arbitrator. He or she will make rulings that the County must abide by. Hopefully, the arbitrator will rule that the County must adhere to the negotiated agreement, stop hiring temps instead of permanent employees and stop allowing employees to retire and return to their very same job the ext day.

You will be notified of future developments as they occur.

PERB Charge Filed Against EHSD

A charge has been filed with the California Public Employment Relations Board regarding the failure of EHSD's administrators to meet and confer with AFSCME Local 512.

Judy Dias, the Department's HR Director, advised a few 512 members in casual conversation on or about February 16, 2010 that it had hired 81 County temps as Eligibility Workers. Proper notice was not given to the Union, nor was a Meet and Confer opportunity extended. The temps began arriving on February 22 and were assigned to various EW Supervisors before they were interviewed, fingerprinted or trained. The EW Supervisor's workload had been the subject of a recent sideletter. The Department's action in hiring the temps served only to INCREASE the workload.

Some of the issues that the EHSD failed to iron out with the Union prior to the hiring were:

increase in the EW Supervisor's workload.
pay for working out of class for EW Supervisors that were expected to train the temps.
safety issues, since no background checks were made.
discrimination in hiring/nepotism, as only a chosen few EHSD employees were given job applications to dispense to their family & friends.

The educational level/literacy of the temps is also an issue. According to one EW Supervisor, the temp assigned to her unit literally did not know how to address an envelope.

Some brainiac(s) assigned these temps to Intake, Expedited Food Stamps and Minor Consent Medi-Cal. Apparently, administrators didn't learn anything from the Lugo lawsuit.

512 went one step further. PERB was asked to seek a court injunction (Injunctive Relief) to bar the EHSD from employing the temp EWs unless and until the Department meets and confers on these issues and makes a REASONABLE plan that will not cause our members - EW Supervisors and Clerical Supervisors - to be disadvantaged, with possible physical harm resulting.

PERB has until 3/18/10 to respond to the request for Injunctive Relief.

Please help spread the word that 512 is not going to accept this outrageous conduct by EHSD administrators and tune in next Thursday for a status update!

Please go to the Downloads page under Member Resources to view new contract language.