Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout21-Personnel CI'ICi OF SAN BERNARDICo -."BEQUOT FOR COUNCIL AOON Dept: Personne 1 ftEC'O. - ADt~1M. &ftIlect: \~8S VEC -5 P't 2' S \ Unit Modification - Impasse (Executive Session Requested for Discussion) From: M.J. Perlick Date: 12/5/85 Synopsis of Previous Council action: Previously recognized the General Unit as the most appropriate unit - for all General Unit employees. Recommended motion: Proceed to the impasse process or direct otherwise. ~~ Contdct person: M.J, Perlick Phone: 383-5161 Supporting data attached: Yes Ward: n/a FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: n/a Source: Finance: Council Notes: 75-0262 J Agenda Item N~I ' , ~ - - CIH OF SAN BERNARD~O - REQUCtT FOR COUNCIL Ac;J.ON STAFF REPORT The firm of Silver, Kreisler, Goldwasser & Schaeffer submit- ted a petition for General Unit modification in a timely manner. A hearing was subsequently held on 10/30/85 and a decision made on 11/20/85 (copy attached) ~ to allow the unit modification. Chuck Goldwasser requested an impasse meeting via a letter received on 11/21/85 on the subject/decision. This meeting was held on 12/2/85 with City Attorney Sabourin also in attendance. The impasse process was reviewed by both parties and it was agreed that Mediation (alternative A of Resolution 10584 Section 13) should not be used, as there is nothing to truly negotiate. Chuck Goldwasser desires a determination by the Mayor and Common Council, after a hearing (alternative B of Resolution 10584 - Section 13) but is aware of the final alternative (C) "any other dispute resolving procedures to which the parties mutually agree or which the Mayor and Common Council may order". This matter is thus submitted to Council. Should Council not desire a public hearing, they may wish to review the petition itself and the summaries/briefs filed by both parties (AFSCME and Silver, Kreisler, Goldwasser & Schaeffer). I recommend an executive session for this kind of review. On 12/16/85 an executive session has been scheduled for the discussion of this matter. Council may t.hen wish to (1) set a subsequent executive session for review or (2) set a hearing date or (3) order another process. I recommend that a public hearing ~ be used for this situation. MJ:jr 75-0264 c o (\P\\:' , I I ~)..; ~->-;. '-. . .;" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO -' 300 NORTH "0" STREET, SAN BERNARDINO. CALIFORNIA 92418'()138 bEeT s:r:oN PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT M,J, PER LICK DIRECTOR OF PERSONNEL November 20, 1985 Mr. Charles A. Goldwasser Silver, Kreisler, Goldwasser & Shaeffer 1428 Second Street, Suite 200 Santa Monica, CA--9.0401 Ms. Ann Imparato Staff Representative, AFSCME Calif. Dist. Cncl. 36 AFL-CIO 1530 West Lincoln Avenue, tl09 Anaheim, CA 92801 reI Denial Or-Request for Unit Modification On October 30, 1985, a Unit Modification hearing was held, as author ized by City Resolution 1'0585. Arguments \~ere made"by the representative of the San Bernardino Police Officers Association in favor of a "safety support type --unit and arguments against same were made by an attorney from AFSCME. I recognize that there is a strong desire on the part of the current non-safety employees of the Police Department to form their own unit. This denial of unit modification should not in any way be taken as a negative move on the part of the City towards those employees. In his statement, Mr. Goldwasser strongly argued that non sworn employees in the Police Department should not be in with the General Unit due to a number of factors. I was not persuaded, however, that granting the unit modification would assure employees the fullest freedom in the exercise of their rights as set forth under City Resolution 10584. Such a unit modification would not have a positive effect on the effi- cient operation of the City, and it most probably would have a negative effect. The unit modification as requested is hereby denied. The appropriate unit is confirmed as a unit containing all General Unit employees.' (continued) . - '- - c o Mr. Charles A. Goldwasser November 20, 1985 Page 2 Sincerely, ~ ~~ (-/tvL~ MARY JANE PERLICK Director of personnel MJ:jr - - J \0\ \, Mayor Evlyn Wilcox -Jack Matzer, City Administrator Police Department: T. Wood P. '. Gantes-- ---- G. Aponte S. DawsCil'l--' N. Clark J. Coar S. Zoulko R. Rees J. Alexander S. Moore P. Schoultz cc: - _.- lo- _... - , ( :) . - - - .-' \... o ('-, --- :> SILVER. KREISLER. GoLDWASSER & SHAEFFER STEPHEN H. SILVER RtCHARD M. KREISLER CHARLES A. GOLDWASSER GEORGE W. SHAEFFER, JR. J.lEONARD STERN STEVEN E. KAYE CYNTHIA R. SAFFIR MLLIAM J. HADDEN DAVID J. DUCHAOW SUSAN SILVER NANCY P. CULVER SYLVIA E. KELLISON A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION 1428SECOND STREET, SUITE 200 SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA 90401 TELEPHONE (213) 393-1486 TELEPHONE (213) 870.0900 COMMERCEBANKBUlLOING 1201 DOVE STREET, SUITE l!IOO NEWPORT BEACH, CAUFORNIA 12660 TELEPHONE(714)955-1971 November 20, 1985 OF COUNSEL NORMAN B. SILVER PERSONAL INJURY OF COUNSEL SHAlEF.KREPACK M.J. perlick Director of Personnel City of San Bernardino 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino CA 92418-0138 '--- -.-. -, Re: Impasse/Petition for Unit Modification/ San Bernardino Police Officers Association (Safety Services Support Unit) Dear Ms. Perlick: ,. Pursuant to Rule l(F) of the Rules and Regulations implementing employer-employee relations for the City of San Bernardino and section 13 of Resolution No. 10584, the San Bernardino Police Officers Association hereby files this written request for an impasse meeting regarding the issue of unit modification as set forth in the Petition filed on October 1, 1985, and denied by you on or about November 20, 1985. It is the position of the San Bernardfno Police Officers Association that the bargaining unit presently denominated General Employees Unit be modified as set forth in the Petition for Modification of Unit to provide for a Safety Services Support Unit. It is requested that an impasse meeting be scheduled in accordance with Resolution 10584 forthwith. Please contact this office so that a mutually agreeable date and time for such meeting may be established. Very truly yours, ~.~'")G~~ CAG/cg cc: Terry Wood, Pat Gantes, City Clerk. CHARLES A. GOLDWASSER C_~ San Bernardino POA Darryl Zoulko, San Bernardino POA City of San Bernardino c ~ , , ~ . , " .' , , ., .. ~ ~ '.. . ; \ .... .' . ..... . -..~". ":'~'~I .. "t..~ '. . ." , .. . , -- o :2. :) fROM RESOLUTION 10584 . SECTION 13: Resolution of Impass".. Impasse procedures may be invoked only after tbe possibility of settlement,by direct discussion bas been exhausted. The impasse procedures are as follows: . (A) MEDIATION (OR CONCILIATION) " All mediatiC?n proceedings shall be private. The 11ediator shall . . make no public recommendations nor take ~ny public position concerning the issues. The Mediator(s) shall be chosen by J!lutual agreement of t:b~representatives of the City and employee organIzations. Xf mutual agreement is not reached, the Mediator shall be chosen by the California State COnciliation Service. (8) . A DETER.~IN"l\.TIQN .BY THE WlYOR AND COMMON. COUNCIl. after a hearing on the merits of the dispute. (C) "Any other dispute resolving procedures to which the parties mutually agree or which the llayor and COmmon Council tnay order, Any party may initiate the impasl'e procedure by filing witb .the other party (or parties) affected a written reg;uest for an i..passe JOeeting together with a statement of its position on all disputed . issues. An impasse meeting may then be scheduled by the designated City Representative forthwith after the date of filing of the written reg;uest for such meeting, with written notice to all parties affected. The purpose of such impasse meeting is .,~ .. ., .' .' T a-:' c - - - ,,......, u o :> FROM RESOLUTION 10585 (C) , ~ ~-> MODIFICATION OF ESTABLISHED UNIT A Petition for (.!odification of an established unit may be filed by an employee o:!:ganization ...:i th the Municipal Employee Relatio:1s Officer during the period for filing a Petition for Decertification. The Petition for Modi- fication shall contain all of the information set forth in Section 9(A) of Resolution No. 10584 along with a statement of all relevant facts in support or the pro- posed modified unit. The Petition shall be accompanied by written proof that a~ least 50% of the employees within the proposed modified unit have designated the employee org~~ization to represent them in their employ- ment relations with the City; provided, however, the employee organization may request that such written proof be sub~itted to a mutua~ly agreed upon disinteres' ted third party. The Designated City Representative 'shall hold a hearing on the Petition for Modification, ,at which tL~e all affected employee organizations shall ,be heard. Thereafter, the Designated City Representa- tive shall determine the appropriate unit or units as :between the existing unit and 'the proposed modified unit. I$... the. Designated City Representative determines, that the proposed modified unit. is the appropriate unit then he shall follow the procedures set forth,inSe~J teA) of Resolution No. 10585 for determining formal recognition rights in such unit of the employee organi- zation. (F)IKPASSES IN REPRESENTATION PROCEEDINGS Any unresolved complaint by an affected employee organ- ization advanced in good faith, concerning a decision of th~ Designated City Representative made pursuant to Sub- sections (A), (E), or (el hereof, shall be precessed in accordance "lith the procedures set forth in Section:,13 of Resolution tlo. 10584; provided, ho\'lever, the \1ritten request for an impasse meeting as described in Section 13 of Resolution No. 10584, must be filed with the Designated City Representative or the City Clerk, within 7 days after the affected employee organization first receives notice of the decision upon whicp its co~plaint is based, or its complaint will be considered closed and not subject to the impasse procedures or to any other appeal. . . )!_i\. ,.~ .J....... "r.. SECTION~O: Criteria for Recognition in II '" ",.., (A) The designat(., City RepresE.,..)ative, . an Appropriate Unit after reviewing t~ petition filed by an employee organization seeking formal recognition as a majority representative shall recommend to the Mayor and Common Council whether there is a community of interest among the units or employees of such organization. The following factors, among others, are to be con- sidered in making such recommendation: I. Which unit or employee organization will assure employees the fullest freedom in the. exercise of rights set forth under this Resolution. 2. The history of the unit or employee organization in representing employees. 3. The effect of the unit or employee organization on the efficient operation of the City and sound employer-employee relations. 4. The extent to which the employees have conunon responsibilities. i ~-....-.., I ) ...... 5. The effect on the existing classification structure of dividing a single classification among two or more units or employee organizations provided, however, that no unit shall be established on the sole basis of the extent to which employees in the proposed unit have been previously organized. CB) In recognition of employee organizations: 1. Professional employees shall not be denied the right to be represented separately from non-professional employees; and. ----.--,-.-- -~--....-/ 2. Management and confidential employees who are included in the same unit with non-management or non-confidential empJoyees may not represent such employees on matters within the scope of representation. \ I. .n. ~ . :::II ~ m n '~ c:J <- m T1 1E) CJ --, I - -w < -0 ~ N "en ;'J W -;0-: Cif)