May 9, 2012 CWA Stewards’ Meeting

May 4, 2012 MOA

Objectives Going in to Bargaining Knew would end up paying more for healthcare Not allow contract to be gutted Preserve key language gains made over last

three decades In particular preserve language gains made

during last two contractsLanguage which made contract enforceable Language which prevented unilateral changes

The State’s Proposals

Eliminate SL 13 – Job Security Eliminate SL 35 – Displaced Worker Pool Eliminate SL 29 – Right to Use Email for Union business Eliminate A1E – Conversion of intermittent, hourly and

P-T position to F-T A2C6 – Mutual respect and common dignity language.

Eliminate language that makes verbal and physical harassment a violation of this provision and eliminate right to arbitrate violations.

State’s Proposals

Article 5 – Discipline Official Reprimands not be appealable beyond a department

hearing. Union must provide state with information regarding discipline

Article 6 – Compensation 3.5% salary reduction for term of contract No increments during first two years of contract Eliminate clothing allowance and shift differential

Article 8C1 – Hours of Work Delete provision that the “State will not change hours of work to

avoid paying overtime.”

State’s Proposals

Article 16 – PES – Replace PES with PAR Article 19 – Retirement Benefits

Eliminate article Article 20E – Intermittent Health Benefits

Eliminate Article 20F – No reduction in benefits or

increases in out-of-pocket payments - Eliminate Article 21 – Retiree Healthcare – Eliminate all

current language, but reference new legislation

State’s Proposals

Article 25 – Union Rights – Eliminate paid union leave for members and stewards

Article 32 – Health and Safety – Eliminate all Union-Management Health and Safety Committees.

Article 39A – Maintenance of Benefits – Eliminate

Article 41A – Effect of Law – Eliminate

State’s Proposals

SL5 – Alternate Workweek – Eliminate SL17 – Promotion Unclassified Employees – Eliminate SL32 – State College/University Side Letter – Eliminate SL33 and 34 – Essential Employee Designations –

Eliminate SL38 – On-call Employees – Eliminate SL41 – Treasury Intermittent Employee Furlough Recall

Rights - Eliminate

What we knew before entering into MOA Knew we wanted to avoid imposition Supreme Court decision – NJ Transit (1991)

“Whenever public employees reach impasse with their employer, there are a host of procedures available to resolve the impasse, but when push comes to shove, it is the employer’s last offer, its unilateral last offer, that prevails and, by law, the employees must abide by it.”

Knew an Economic Pattern had been set by another Union CWA spent years preventing other unions from

setting the pattern Across-the-boards – 3rd yr. 1%; 4th yr. 1.75% Shift differential - $55,000 cap Clothing Allowance – Reduced from $700 to

$550; new criteria and $55,000 cap for uniforms and special clothing

Bonus for workers not receiving increments first two years of contract

Knew needed to fix major problems with other union’s agreement Article 6 – Appropriation and Allocation

Language Article 39 – Maintenance of Benefits SL13 – Job Security Article 6 – Clothing Allowance

Criteria$55,000 cap for uniforms and special clothing

Needed to Fix

Article 6 – Shift Differential - $55,000 cap Article 20 – Health benefits – “For informational

purposes only” Article 16 – PAR – “For informational purposes

only” Article 21 – Health Insurance in Retirement –

“For informational purposes only” and eliminated level of benefits for employees who accrued 25 years of service at dates prior to July 1, 2011.

Review MOA - Article 6

Current language“Subject to the State Legislature enacting

appropriations of funds for these specific purposes, the State agrees to provide the following benefits effective at the time stated here, or if later, within a reasonable time after enactment of the appropriation.”

MOA - Article 6 cont’d

State’s proposed language: “Subject to the appropriations and allocation of full

funding for these specific purposes, the State agrees to provide the following benefits . . . . In the event the full funding for the specific purposes set forth below is not allocated and appropriated, the State shall have no obligation to provide said benefits, and payments for any such benefits shall be at the sole discretion of the State.”

MOA - Article 6 cont’d

CWA flatly rejected any change in language

State proposed that full funding and allocation language only apply to CWA members at the colleges and universities

CWA rejected State agreed to existing language

MOA - Economics

All increments paid July 2013 – 1%; July 2014 – 1.75% July $450 bonus for workers who were not eligible to

receive increments first two years Shift differential - $.25 hour for employees earning less

than $100,000 and working 2nd or 3rd shifts “Over-under” bonus eliminated

Fewer than 100 ees eligible for bonus Bonus inconsequential If earn $35,000 would have received $49 – not in base

MOA – Clothing Maintenance Allowance Reduced from $700 to $550 New criteria

Required to wear a uniform, protective clothing or special clothing

Jobs require employees to come regularly into contact with toxins, dyes, dirt, contaminants, chemicals, blood or other bodily fluids, or other materials that ruin or soil clothing

Clothing requires special or separate washing or cleaning Engage in direct care or direct education work that includes

physical contact with students or institutional clients which requires employees to come into regular contact with the substances listed above.

Clothing Maintenance Allowance

CMA not paid if:State provides uniform or protective clothing

and employee earns more than $100,000State pays for uniforms, protective clothing or

special clothing or pays to clean or launder clothing

State pays for uniform or protective or special clothing and clothing does not need to be laundered separately from other clothing

Clothing Maintenance Allowance

Application of criteria will result in a reduction of at least 20% of number of employees who received CMA in final year of last contract.

Procedure for identifying employees who are qualified to receive CMA Department identifies employees who received CMA, but are not

eligible to receive CMA under new criteria Union identifies employees in dispute If disputes not resolved at department level, attempt to resolve

with OER If not resolved with OER, submit to an arbitrator designated by

OER and CWA to hear all such disputes

MOA - Article 39 – Complete Agreement Current Maintenance of Benefits Language

“The fringe benefits, which are substantially uniform in their application to employees in the unit, and which are currently provided to those employees, such as the Health Benefits Program, the Life Insurance Program and their like, shall remain in effect without diminution during the term of this Agreement unless modified herein or by subsequent agreement of the parties.”

Proposed change to Article 39

“The fringe benefits, which are substantially uniform in their application to employees in the unit, and which are currently provided to those employees, such as the Health Benefits Program, the Life Insurance Program and their like, shall remain in effect without diminution during the term of this Agreement unless modified herein, changed pursuant to statute, or by subsequent agreement of the parties.”

Union rejected and language remains unchanged Agreed that if legislation is passed changing entitlement to

supplemental compensation “employees shall become eligible to that legislation effective in accordance with said legislation.” A.22F(11)(c).

MOA - SL 13 – Job Security

While able to undo damage to Articles 6 and 39, could not completely undo damage to SL 13.

SL applies when privatization or closure is “primarily” for fiscal reasons as opposed to “solely” for fiscal reasons.

Employees to be laid off as a result of privatization, for any reason, will be given “every priority to continue their employment within their classification or any other position available for which they are qualified.”

SL 13 – Job Security

At least 90 days advance notice must be provided to the union of any privatization or closure, for any reason, that could result in layoff or displacement” of employees.

State must provide “relevant cost information available to the public”

What was eliminated? Requirement of a comprehensive cost analysis Opportunity to show Union can do work more efficiently than

contractor If general layoff State must review private contracts and if no

substantial cost savings use best efforts to bring back work

MOA - Job Security

Displaced Worker Pool Side Letter 35 eliminated But Title 11A:4A-1.1(c) provides:

“the commissioner shall establish a $15 fee for each application for an open competitive or promotional examination for a position in State service. . . . Receipts derived from the application fee established pursuant to this subsection shall be appropriated annually to the department for costs of the displaced worker pool program. This fee shall not be assessed and collected unless the commissioner implements a displaced worker pool program.”

SL29 – Right to Use Email for Union Business Was not eliminated, but was modified. Now use of email by the Union clearly covers “contract

administration and enforcement.” Stewards retain the right to send individual emails to other

stewards, members and local representatives. Stewards also retain the right to send group emails to

employees within their jurisdiction. A single group email can be sent to up to 80 employees. Such group emails must be copied to OER.

Individual emails to a member or steward about a specific disciplinary action, grievance, appeal or contractual matter no longer have to contain the “identifier Union Business.”

Provisions State Sought to Eliminate that Remain In Contract A1E – Process to convert intermittent, special

services, hourly, per diem and TES employees to full-time positions.

A2C6 – Respect and DignityRetain language that verbal or physical

harassment violates provision.Retain right to grieve and arbitrate violations.

Provisions that State Sought to Eliminate that Remain In Contract A8C1 – Hours of Work – Retain provision that

prevents state from changing hours of work to avoid paying overtime.New Language states “when an employee is

required to work hours outside of the employee’s normal work day or workweek, the State will not avoid paying overtime by changing the employee’s hours of work within the work day or workweek that such hours have been worked.”

Provisions that State Sought to Eliminate that Remain In Contract Article 19 – Retirement Benefits Article 20E – Intermittent Health Benefits

Contributions will be based on new statute After furlough can retain benefits by paying at same rate for

six pay periods After 12 weeks can retain for another 20 pay periods by

paying full cost. Thereafter intermittent qualifies for COBRA benefits.

Article 21 – Retiree Health Benefits for workers accruing 25 years prior to July 1, 2011.

Article 25 – Paid time off for union stewards and members

Provisions State Sought to Eliminate that Remain In Contract Article 32 – Safety and Health –

Department Health and Safety Committees Article 41A – Effect of Law SL5 – Alternate Workweek – requires

negotiations SL17 – Promotion of Unclassified

Employees

Provisions that State Sought to Eliminate that Remain In Contract SL32 – State College/University Side Letter

Provides for “ongoing dialogue” with representatives of all the colleges and universities.

SL33 and 34 – Essential Employee DesignationsProvides procedure for designation of

essential employees at 24/7 and non 24/7 facilities and for challenging designation

Provisions that State Sought to Eliminate that Remain In Contract SL38 – On-call Employees

Process for negotiating over procedures for assignment of on-call duty, compensation and conduct of employees while on-call

SL41 – Treasury Intermittent Employee Furlough Recall RightsRight to fill permanent vacancy and to be

recalled before new intermittent employees hired

MOA - Article 16 - PAR

State insisted on reversion to 3-tier evaluation system in PAR rules

Reason for 2-tier evaluation system in PES was concern that disproportionate number of white men received highest rating compared to women and minorities

Issue was never unsatisfactory ratings

MOA - Article 16 - PAR

CWA negotiated important safeguards. Other than change from 3-tier to 2-tier, new

article contains some important improvements.

All employees covered, including unclassified employees

State required to provide Union with report of final PAR ratings broken out by department and by gender, race and sex

MOA - PAR

Other than use of 3 tiers (exceptional, commendable and unsatisfactory) instead of 2 tiers (satisfactory and unsatisfactory) essential safeguards remain in place.

Unsatisfactory and commendable ratings and performance standards may be appealed to a JUMP panel with a neutral issuing a decision. Under prior contract could only appeal to arbitration

unsatisfactory rating Neutral’s decision can be appealed to Civil Service,

but appeal must present issue of general applicability of law, rule or policy

MOA - Discipline Article

Pre-2003 appealed discipline to Civil Service. What all other state unions do. 2003 negotiated for right to arbitrate discipline. Now instead of losing most discipline appeals

before ALJs and Civil Service, win majority of cases before arbitrators.

Prevented any meaningful erosion of discipline appeal rights.

Discipline Article

One change was to minor discipline appeal procedure. Agreed that written reprimands may not be appealed

beyond the departmental hearing. But reprimands cannot be used to establish progressive

discipline After one year expunged from personnel file, if requested in

writing, and if the employee is not served with another preliminary notice of discipline charging misconduct within the year.

This sunset provision does not apply to reprimands for workplace violence, acts of discrimination, or code of ethics violations.

Discipline Article – Exchange of Information The State will, upon request, make available to the

Union information in its possession to which the Union is entitled to properly represent the employee. Management will provide the requested information within seven (7) calendar days from receipt of the request.

The parties will exchange the names of witnesses they may call and documents they may introduce at the arbitration hearing. Names and documents will be exchanged within seven (7) days from the date of a request from either party and in no event later than seven (7) days prior to the arbitration hearing.

Discipline Article – Exchange of Information The Union is not precluded from calling witnesses and

submitting documents that were not provided to the State prior to the arbitration hearing, based on the case presented by the State at arbitration.

After the Union identifies a witness to the State, the State will not interview the witness without first notifying the Union. Such notification will not be less than forty-eight (48) hours prior to the interview.

The Union is not obligated to aid the State in sustaining its burden of proof in a disciplinary proceeding and the State continues to be under an obligation to undertake a thorough and complete investigation before bringing disciplinary charges against an employee.

MOA - Grievance/Arbitration

Only change an improvement Agreed to mediation procedure similar to

procedure for discipline cases 75% of discipline cases settled in

mediation Mediation procedure will expedite

resolution of contract cases

PLB Days – Not Addressed by MOA Union continues to fight to enforce this one remaining

provision of the 2009 MOA After Christie elected, Civil Service adopted rule

requiring PLB days to be used by June 30, 2012 Civil Service rationale was that Statute required PLB days to be

treated as vacation days CWA challenged the rule claiming that PLB days should

not be treated as vacation days Court agreed with the Union and invalidated the Civil

Service rule and remanded the issue to Civil Service

PLB Days

Civil Service then proposed a pilot program again requiring use of days by June 30, 2012

CWA opposed adoption OER proposed a program permitting use of days through

December 31, 2012 CWA rejected OER then proposed permitting indefinite carry over of

days, but no right to cash out days upon separation from state service.

CWA rejected that proposal as well

PLB Days

Not clear what action Civil Service will now take If no rule, it is CWA’s position that MOA

controls. CWA was always of the view that a rule was

unnecessary to implement the MOA PLB days are compensation for furloughs and salary

deferrals They are not vacation days.

If Civil Service adopts a rule contrary to MOA, CWA will again go into court.

Re-cap: Did we accomplish most of our objectives? Preserved integrity of our Contract Preserved enforceability of Contract Did not permit our Contract to be gutted

For the most part, preserved key language gains made over last three decades

Re-cap: Did we accomplish most of our objectives? Maintained critical language in Contract, including:

Appropriations language in Article 6 Maintenance of Benefits Language Effect of Law Retiree Health Care Maintained increments, clothing allowance, shift differential Intermittent employee rights – healthcare, recall, permanent

vacancies Essential employee designations Paid Union leave for stewards and members Right to use email for union business Components of Job Security Side Letter

Re-cap

Knew there would be very little knew money in across-the-boards

Knew we had a struggle on our hands with respect to SL 13 – Job Security

Here’s what we also know We are never going away Kean is gone Florio is gone Whitman is gone Christie too will be gone We will never go away

Re-cap

When Whitman privatized Motor Vehicles this Union vowed to fight until all those workers were public workers again

We will win back our job security – if necessary through legislation – and it will be stronger and more comprehensive than before.

We will enforce the right of laid off workers to Displaced Worker Pool benefits.

We will again bargain health care. And we will continue fight to protect and improve the

standard of living of our members.

Re-cap

And as we do all of this our members will be protected by an enforceable Contract that preserves the vast majority of important rights we have fought for and won over the last 30 years.