|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CCPOA - Labor Line UpdateUpdated: March 18, 2008 On September 18, 2007, the Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) imposed on CCPOA, its Last Best and Final (LBF) package offer, thereby concluding (in failure) the negotiations process for a successor MOU. In the language of the LBF, the DPA stated that the LBF would be in effect for three years. CCPOA filed an Unfair Labor Practiced (ULP) charge with the Public Employee Relations Board (PERB) making the argument that any LFB package cannot legally exceed one year in duration. On December 7, 2007, PERB rendered a Complaint Letter regarding the ULP charge in favor of CCPOA . PERB stated that DPA had violated the California Government Code when it imposed a three year LBF. By way of explanation, the Government Code states that any LBF which includes an expenditure of funds is subject to Legislative approval. That means the LBF must be approved by the Legislature within the current Budgetary year, thus, the LBF has a one, fiscal year, of life. DPA immediately filed a response with PERB indicating that the areas of the LBF which had economic elements which would be subject to Legislative approval would be in effect for one year, however, the remaining portions of the LBF would still be in effect for three years. The state's position is reckless and counter intuitive. CCPOA then returned to PERB and objected, insisting that the entire LBF (just as in the past, the entire MOU) is subject to Legislative approval and has a one year life. PERB ordered a Settlement Conference. On January 14, 2008 the parties met. The session lasted approximately one hour, at which time it was abundantly clear that the parties could not settle the issue. A full hearing is scheduled for April 16th and 17th. Now we must enter the realm of the "What Ifs." What if PERB decides that only the economic elements of the LBF are subject to Legislative approval? Then: 1) the state must find a Legislator to carry the LBF, a) they have been unable to accomplish this, b) the time frames to submit the LBF in the budget has passed, 2) if DPA manages to accomplish #1, then CCPOA may have to live with the non-economic parts of the LBF for three years. What if PERB decides that the entire LBF is subject to Legislative approval? Then: 1) same as one above, What if PERB decides that the entire LBF is subject to Legislative approval, the DPA finds a Legislator to carry the bill and the bill fails? Then: 1) the parties go back to negotiate for a successor MOU. CCPOA had tried on numerous occasions to get the state back to negotiations: December 27, 2007 - Letter to Dave Gilb, Director, DPA, from Chuck Alexander, We will continue to press the state to meet its obligation to BU6 and enter into good faith negotiations concluding with a mutually acceptable successor MOU. UNIT 6 BARGAINING HISTORY - 2001 TO DATE A full listing of updates to CCPOA's negotiations work with the state from 2001 to today. This document includes resources, links to memos sent by CCPOA and various state departments with regard to Unit 6 bargaining. FULL History Updated through January 17, 2008 CCPOA "Labor Line" memo regarding negotiations, LBFO, etc. Although the State and CCPOA have not yet reached agreement on a new MOU the effort continues. The following is an overview of what transpired during negotiations and where we are headed from here... FULL Memo & Resources List September 18, 2007 Memo to State Board. September 12, 2007 State's Last, Best and Final Offer to CCPOA Please click the attachment below to view September 18, 2007 memo from Steve Weiss, CCPOA Chief of Labor, and September 17, 2007 letter to Julie Chapman, DPA Chief of Labor Relations. Attached Files: 091807_memotostateboard.pdf OFFICIAL NOTICE: REIMPOSING THE FREEZE ON LATERAL TRANSFERS Please click the attachment below to view notice. Attached Files: official_freeze_lateral_transfers.pdf |
