HEARTLAND ALLIANCE

Negotiations

December 19, 2012

 

 

1.      Salary and Benefits (Articles 1 and 10):

 

No written proposals on the table.

 

2.      Meal Periods (Article 2, Section 3):

 

TA 12/7/12

 

3.      Competencies/Job Descriptions/Qualifications (Article 4):

 

No written proposals on the table.

12/19: Management is supposed to send us something about this prior to 1/15.

 

4.      Bumping and Layoff (Article 5): 

 

Heartland provided a written proposal on Article 5 during the parties’ December 7, 2012 session.  Heartland is waiting for a response from the Union on that proposal.

The Union submitted a proposal on 12/19. Here are the notes from our 12/19 discussion of it at bargaining on that date:

Union’s positions 12/19:
·      We want employees to have full notice of what’s available in terms of vacant & bumpable positions throughout the agency. If management is not sure of their qualifications, we don’t want them cut off. Management may not know what an employee had prior employment experience in. So if the employee sees that something’s open and they can show that their experience qualifies them for it, then they can move into it. At Hull House we solved this problem by giving people the whole list of possible open & bumpable positions – so they got more information than simply 1 open and 1 bumpable position. They’d still have to bump the least senior person.
·      We moved in management’s direction in that we’re willing to keep bumping within the same company, but we propose that people at least be able to bump into (a) same generic job description or (b) a different generic job description if they have experience in it. The thing we’ve changed is “generic job description” –current contract says it must be “same job.”
·      We moved toward management’s preference to avoid bumping by saying people fill vacancies before they bump. We agree that an employee would want to do that before they bump anyway. We all agree bumping should be a last resort.
·      We moved away from management’s proposal that the reassignment be solely determined by management.
·      We are all in agreement the person still has to be qualified for whatever job they move into.
·      “Bumping pool” process. This is what we developed in negotiations w/ Hull House about 15 years ago. Say you have 10 people wanting to bump into 8 positions. We’d narrow it down to least senior person AND a position you already have experience in (which might leave only 2 positions). THEN you start the bumping process for your most senior laid-off person.

Management asks: What if the 1st person takes 10 days to even notify if they want to bump? What we’re concerned about is a delay, in those rare cases of mass layoffs
Tim says: Our model might save time. Stuff about bumping is only applicable in the minority of layoffs anyway.

 

5.      Investigating/Conflict of Interest (Article 18):

 

Heartland provided a written proposal on Article 18 during the parties’ December 7, 2012 session.  The Union provided a verbal counter-proposal that it would agree if “direct service relationship” were limited to individual caseload, and suggested getting an ethics opinion on the issue.

 

Heartland maintains its December 7, 2012 written proposal.  Heartland is consulting with the Adler School of Professional Psychology for ethics guidance on this issue. 

 

Heartland further notes that its proposal relates only to who may interview a participant and does not have any effect on the bargaining unit member’s right to their choice of Union representative during any grievance or investigative proceedings.  It likewise does not limit what bargaining representatives may review notes and/or reports of participant interviews, only those who actually conduct the participant interview.

 

In response to the Union’s suggestion regarding the manager’s interview of the participant, Heartland states that the managers generally do not have a service relationship with the participants, thus preventing any real or perceived conflict.

 

12/19: Management says: The Adler School of Professional Psychology references NASW Code of Ethics section on Dual Relationships, as well as the APA Code of Ethics. The Union has looked at the NASW code of ethics as well.

Tim says: The Union is sensitive to this issue of the dual relationship/conflict of interest. It could be impractical to address the conflict of interest in the exact way that management wants to do it. We ask that management please bring us examples of when this has been an issue. We’ll wait for this from management and discuss it on 1/15.

 

6.      Timelines for Employee Business Expenses (Article 20):

 

Verbal agreement on November 28, 2012 to clean up the language so that the second paragraph in Article 20, Section 5 agrees with the first paragraph in that same section (i.e., both paragraphs should state "30 days" not "60 days”).  No written TA.

 

12/19: We agree we can TA the 30 days for EBEs

 

7.      Calling-Off Prior to Shift (Article 30):

 

Heartland provided a written proposal on Article 30 during the parties’ December 7, 2012 session.  Heartland is waiting for a response from the Union on that proposal.

As of 12/19: Union is not yet prepared to move in management’s direction re calling off prior shift. Need to discuss more on 1/15.

 

8.      Productivity (Articles 30 and 31): 

 

To be discussed.

As of 12/19: Need to discuss more on 1/15.

 

9.      Sick Leave and Holidays (Article 26, Section 8):

 

Heartland proposes to maintain the status quo, current contract language.  The policy of not paying holiday pay to employees who call in sick before or after a holiday is applicable across all of Heartland’s entities.

As of 12/19: Union maintains employees who can show they are sick with a note from a medical professional should be able to get paid for an adjacent holiday. Need to discuss more on 1/15.

10.  Temporary Employees/Probationary Period (Article 13):

 

Heartland proposes to maintain the status quo, current contract language.  Heartland further proposes that in those rare situations where a temporary employee is hired on as a bargaining unit employee performing identical duties to those performed while a temporary employee, the Union will utilize the grievance procedure to bring such situations to Heartland’s attention and adjustment of the probationary period as appropriate.  The Union has used the grievance procedure in the past and Heartland has effectively remedied these situations.  Heartland agrees that it will comply with all notice requirements as outlined in Article 13.

 

12/19: Union is not sure how this would work – to address this only through grievance process. Tim doesn’t see anything in the contract that clearly allows us to handle it via grievance. Management notes Union raised this issue via recent example; can discuss more 1/15.

 

11.  Residential Services Staffing Ratios (Article 15, Section 2(B)):

 

Heartland proposes to maintain the status quo, current contract language.  The Union proposes reintroducing staffing ratio language into the contract, language that was bargained out of the contract during previous negotiations, specifically to add or reassign staff to the third shift on the 6^th Floor at Pathways (Pathways Home Permanent Housing). 

 

Heartland sees no need for the proposed ratio language.  A review of the incident reports does not support the need for additional staff at Pathways.  The 6^th Floor is not a program that is required to be staffed 24/7 and the current staffing levels are appropriate.  Additionally, Heartland is not aware of any staff member on the third shift who could be reassigned to the 6^th Floor but states that the supervisor is frequently present at the Pathways building at night.

 

12/19: Management only submitted their evidence regarding this on 12/18. Union hasn’t had a chance to run it by residential services staff yet; will do so and provide further examples of this as an issue on 1/15, assuming res. staff continue to experience problems with staff:PP ratio.

 

12.  Career and Professional Development

 

No written proposals on the table.

12/19: This was something from management that may or may not even come up.

 

13.  PTO, Benefit Design and Structure

 

No written proposals on the table.

12/19: This was something from management that may or may not even come up.

.