UNITED WE STAND
ASEA Contract Negotiating Committee
Bargaining Update #12
March 17, 2004

1. We met with the State March 9-12.

2. We came to a tentative agreement on nine articles during this bargaining session. Seven of those were status quo: Articles 4 (Management Rights), 5(No Strike or Lockout), 8 (Emergency Personnel), 27 (Shift Assignment), 36(Legal Indemnification), 39 (Superceding Effect of this Agreement), and 40 (Legislative Action). Two of the TAs included minor changes. We agreed to language changes reflecting the State’s HR reorganization in Article 15 (Complaint Resolution Process). In Article 38 (Savings and Separability) we added some clarification language.

3. After extended discussion, and late in the day on Friday, the two teams reviewed the Articles that were still open. This was the situation:

Article 1 (Union Recognition and Representation)—We are trying to add long-term nonpermanent personnel to the definition of employee. The State does not want to expand the definition.

Article 2 (Union Representation and Activities)—We are willing to add language so that Stewards will record their release time on the State timesheet. The State wants to limit the use of the release time.

Article 3 (Union Security)—We want to protect our fundamental rights to function as a Union; for example, our ability to collect dues and the ability to finance our PAC. The State is attacking those rights.

Article 11 (Employment Status)—We have proposed language to ensure that an employee only serves one probationary period in a job class series. The State is not interested.

Article 12 (Layoff)—We wanted a severance package but have settled for status quo. The State wants to delete language relating to recruitment procedures for severe reductions in force. This means the State would continue recruiting even if there were employees on layoff status.

Article 13 (Contracting Out)—We want the process and timelines clarified. The State likes the way it is doing business.

Article 16 (Grievance-Arbitration)—We want status quo. The State wants to limit the authority of the arbitrator.

Article 17 (Classification Reviews)—We want to maintain your right to appeal a classification issue to the Commissioner of Administration. The State wants to eliminate that process.

Article 18 (Performance Evaluations)—We want to limit the period of an evaluation to one year, codify the Rater’s Guide, and allow for a two step merit increase for outstanding employees. The State is not interested in rewarding employees for performance.

Article 19 (Health and Security)—We do not want your monthly out-of-pocket expense to increase. We want the State to increase its monthly contribution by the amount the Health Trust has projected is necessary to protect your benefits. The State wants to tie its contribution to the economy plan of the Select Benefits System. This plan offers minimal benefits (70/30 co-pay and $500 deductible) and is used mostly by workers as a supplemental to another plan.

Article 21 (Wages)—We want a $1200 lump sum payment in the first year and then a 3% increase in each of years 2 and 3. The State is still offering a freeze on merit steps, a 0% in year one and 2% in years two and three.

Article 22 (Overtime and Premium Pay)—We are looking at status quo here. The State wants to redefine the workweek so your weekend will be at risk and it wants to tie overtime eligibility to the FLSA. This means two things: (1) no overtime until after forty hours of work and (2) many of you will very likely become ineligible for overtime when the new federal overtime rules become effective later this year. The State also wants to delete the seasonal compensatory time option.

Article 23 (Meal and Relief Periods)—We want status quo. The State wants to make it easier to not pay you for the extra lunch break that you get if you work an additional two hours in a day.

Article 24 (Holidays)—We have introduced language to ensure that if your Holiday falls on your regular day off (other than a weekend) it will be clear when you will be allowed to observe it. The State wants to be allowed to save money by having a management option of when it will be observed.

Article 25 (Annual and Sick Leave)—We want status quo. The State wants to eliminate this article by converting all employees to personal leave.

Article 26 (Personal Leave)—We want several things. The most important are: (1) Preserve the option for members to continue on the sick/annual leave system, (2) Add language to comply with the Governor’s Administrative Order 213 allowing members who are called to military duty to receive benefits, and (3) Create an Emergency Leave Bank. The State will not agree to any of these.

Article 29 (Safety and Health)—We want to increase the protection for workers who are assaulted on the job by creating special Injury Leave Account modeled on the one used by the Correctional Officers. The State is not interested in spending any additional money to offer additional protection to injured workers.

Article 30 (Travel, Per Diem and Moving)—We proposed language to make sure that members will get a meal allowance when they travel and return to work on the same day. The State wants to delete the option of noncommercial lodging.

Article 31 (State Owned/Controlled Housing)—We want status quo. The State wants to increase the length of the article from two lines to roughly five pages. It believes that members are not paying enough. By the State’s estimate there are five members who get state housing.

Article 33 (Protection of Rights)—We want status quo. The State wants to delete the language that says if an overpayment is less than thousand dollars they will forgive the money.

Article 35 (Educational Advancement and Training)—We want members to be provided with State granted occupational licenses that are a requirement of the job at no cost to the employee. The State wants to get paid.

4. At the end of the day on Friday the CNC declared that the parties were at impasse. It was obvious that neither side was willing to move on any of the above 21 Articles. We asked the State to join us in requesting a mediator. The State has declined to do so and is protesting our declaration of impasse. We have petitioned the Alaska Labor Relations Agency (ALRA) for a hearing to determine if we are indeed at impasse. If ALRA decides in our favor it will appoint a mediator to meet with the parties. If the mediation fails we will then move to interest arbitration for the Class One employees.

5. On Friday the Contract Negotiating Committee (CNC) sent a letter to the State Executive Board (SEB) requesting a joint meeting between the SEB, the Chapter Presidents and the CNC. The purpose of the meeting is informational; for example, we need to discuss, at a minimum, the legal implications of impasse, the process of interest arbitration, and the Member Action Team (MAT) program of providing information and generating worksite action.

In Solidarity,