Maintenance of Time Records/Timekeeping - Article 12.17 Arbitration

Following GOER’s November 8, 2000 memo announcing its interpretation of Article 12.17 of the 1999-2003 Agreement, a number of agencies have implemented changes in their attendance record keeping practices. As these situations have arisen PEF has been actively reviewing each situation, as it arises, to determine where agency implementation has violated Article 12.17. As a result, we now have agency-wide class action grievances pending in a number of agencies and facility by facility grievances pending in OMH and OMR.

We have begun arbitration of the first grievance to be filed, a statewide class action grievance for DOT. To date, we have completed three days of hearing, the first on May 7^th, the second on June 4th, and the third on July 17th. During the first two days of hearing, we presented the union’s case to prove a well established past practice at DOT of overtime eligible PS&T Unit members only recording present or absent on their attendance forms unless they worked beyond their normal work day for which they earned compensatory time or overtime pay. This practice was changed by DOT following GOER’s issuance of the November 8, 2000 implementation memo and all DOT employee are now required to record their precise times of arrival and departure from work.. We are arguing that this change violates Article 12.17.

On the third day of hearing, we presented the union’s case on what occurred at the bargaining table regarding Article 12.17. This testimony supported the union’s position that the change in language in Article 12.17 simply eliminated the historic distinction between record keeping practices for overtime ineligible and overtime eligible employees and should not have resulted in a change in the historic practice for overtime eligible staff.

We have two additional days of hearing now scheduled: August 24th and October 25th. During these days of hearing, the union will present any additional evidence we believe is necessary to support our case. The State will present its case. And finally, the union will have an opportunity to present any rebuttal to the State’s case. Once all the evidence is in the parties will submit written briefs presenting our arguments and the arbitrator will issue a written decision.

Stand by/On Call Pay and Overtime Meal Allowance Retroactivity Grievances

PEF is currently pursuing a Statewide class action grievance challenging the State’s refusal to implement enhancements of two benefits that we negotiated in the 1999-2003 Agreement retroactively to April of 1999. In particular, the State refused to pay increases in Article 31 - Standby-On Call Pay and the expanded Article 38 - Overtime Meal Allowance benefit. Instead the State implemented these benefits in April, 2000 and August, 2000 respectively. We are arguing that since Article 31 and Article 38 contain no express effective date, the April 2, 1999 effective date of the contract controls.

To date we have conducted two days of hearing: April 23rd and June 26th. On April 23 we presented the union’s case on the bargaining history of these two articles and the State began its case. On June 23rd the State continued its case, presenting the State’s evidence on the bargaining history of these two Articles.

We have a third day of hearing scheduled on September 24th on which the State will complete its case. The union will thereafter have an opportunity to present any rebuttal evidence to the State’s case. While we anticipate that we should be able to present any rebuttal evidence on September 24th, a forth day will be scheduled if necessary. Thereafter, the parties will submit written briefs presenting our arguments and the arbitrator will issue a written decision.