|
To: All OCSO Deputy and Supervisor Bargaining Unit Members
From: Mike Smith - Vice President - Central Florida PBA
Date: September 14, 2009
Subject: Contract Negotiations Update
To clear up any rumors or misunderstanding, please read and share the following information. During negotiations on September 14, 2009, PBA rejected OCSO’s recent status quo contract offer because OCSO refused to maintain our current contract health insurance premiums … which means you pay more. OCSO also refused to fund a merit step or even provide an unfunded merit step (excluding topped out members) to avoid further pay compression problems … which means you make less and fall further behind in the pay step plan. PBA even removed our binding arbitration in discipline proposal which was a huge concession for us. Regardless, OCSO would not agree to our 3rd “status quo proposal. We did reach a tentative agreement on the following simple articles.
• Article-1 Recognition
• Article-11 Strike Prohibition
On 08-28-09 and 09-08-2009, the OCSO proposed status quo on Article-20 (Educational Assistance) and Article-21 (Acting Ranks). During negotiations on 09-14-09, the PBA agreed to status quo on these two articles but the OCSO promptly declined to agree which left us wondering why they would disagree with their own proposal!
Since negotiations began in April 2009, we’ve had increases in health insurance premiums while OCSO has admittedly received no premium increases. We’ve received no wage increase proposals yet PBA believes Sheriff Demings may give Orange County back a substantial amount of money from the 2008/09 budget. To date, the OCSO has basically ignored or refused PBA proposals throughout the entire negotiation process and appears to only be concerned with their proposed language. The OCSO continues to present a stubborn and stalling approach designed to “divide and conquer” the PBA membership but it will not work if we stay strong and united!
The OCSO presented the PBA with their so-called “Status Quo” contract at the August 28th negotiations with a cover letter stating only minor changes “with exception of neutral general wording & editorial changes to improve clarification”. In our humble opinion, “Status Quo” means the language and the intent of the language based on Present Contract Language (PCL) in the deputy and supervisor contracts. The OCSO promptly gave their sworn managers a bullet point copy of their misleading Status Quo proposal to share with their troops.
NOTE: Some deputies actually believe this misleading information, harshly criticize us and help OCSO’s attempts to divide and conquer us! Of course, OCSO used their recent proposals of a 300% - 600% increase in take home fees and roll back to 86 hours before POT as leverage by removing those proposals. This is enticing to some but we still have many other issues that need to be addressed before we can agree to OCSO’s so-called status quo contract.
The PBA advised OCSO that their “status quo” proposal significantly changed the intent of the contract language and took away current benefits from the PCL. The OCSO also changed language in a tentatively agreed to article. Some may think this is petty, but it is not. One word can change the intent and meaning of the contract article. Some examples of OCSO’s status quo changes in PCL are listed below.
• Article-6 (grievance). Language was changed in Section-3/C when new evidence is discovered between steps. (PCL) “facts are newly discovered” to (OCSO proposed) “except for fact that were not reasonably known”
• Article-12 (Personnel Records) Language was changed in Section-1(B) regarding material being placed in your personnel file. (PCL) “the employee will have the right to place a response in their file”. (OCSO proposed) “he may supplement the public record with other relevant written documents”. Who says what is relevant, OCSO or you?
• Article-15 (Seniority) OCSO proposed seniority to include any civilian time along with sworn time to calculate your seniority date. The PBA believes only continuous sworn time should be calculated which is (PCL).
• Article-13 (General Orders) Language was changed in Sections 1, 2 (modifications) and major changes in Section-4 which is referred to as the “Me Too Clause”. Remember when Sheriff Beary gave all those golden parachute retirement packages to the Captains and above? Article-13/Section-4 is the section the PBA used to file a grievance on your behalf. Section-4 in part (PCL) “the sheriff provides an additional employment benefit, wage adjustment or salary increase to other employees, the sheriff shall notify the association and upon request negotiate over the benefit. (OCSO Proposed) restricting the language to if the sheriff gives a benefit to one of the two bargaining units only.
• Article-27 (Insurance) The OCSO is reducing the premium amounts approximately 6% to 15% from the PCL. The OCSO is also attempting to remove the percentage amounts in the contract.
On 09-08-2009 the OCSO sent the PBA a revised status quo contract proposal with what they called “a few issues that we have determined warranted revision on our part”. To their credit, OCSO did change a lot of their initial status quo contract proposal language back to PCL, but they missed a few areas that could change the meaning and intent of the PCL. Don’t worry; we caught them … especially in major areas of compensation and insurance!
What’s next? So far, the OCSO has not provided us with any more negotiation dates. Therefore, we may go past the contract expiration date of September 30, 2009 and then PCL prevails as we are in a real “status quo” setting until we get a resolution amongst ourselves or with assistance from an arbitrator. PBA will update our members if the contract expires and we need to go to the next step in the process.
If the PBA and OCSO agree to a “Status Quo” contract for one year, then we go back to negotiations in 6 months. Unfortunately, we may be dealing with the same administration and issues. Meanwhile, Sheriff Demings will delay contract improvements while breaking campaign promises he made to all of us.
Be safe. |
