|
Supervisory - FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions)
| Question: |
Should I sign this "NOTICE TO ALL CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS EMPLOYEES INCLUDING CONTRACT MEDICAL STAFF" regarding PLATA IMSP? |
| |
|
| Answer: |
January 12, 2005 CCPOA and the state signed a memorialization (rank and file) regarding the notice on IMSP. The Department must give a copy of the notice to all employees to satisfy the PLATA court judge. The memorialization states the Department will not take any corrective or disciplinary action against the employee who refuses to sign the notice. It is up to the individual to make the decision whether or not to sign the document.
On January 11, 2005, during discussions regarding the notice for supervisory staff, the state made the same assurances as were made for rank and file. A similar memorialization document was written to capture, in writing, those assurances.
|
|
| Question: |
Is CDC going to start rotating Peace Officer positions assigned to Headquarters? |
| |
|
| Answer: |
CDC Rotating Peace Officers from Headquarters' Assignment
On April 12, 2004, CCPOA received an Information Notice dated April 9, 2004, regarding CDC formalizing the policy Appointments to Peace Officer Positions in Headquarters Assignments (4/3/04 MEMO). In formalizing their policy, CDC incorporated the memorandum Rotational Policy-Peace Officer Positions in Headquarters (10/18/02 MEMO) issued by Director Edward Alameida dated October 18, 2002. The significance of incorporating Alameida's memorandum is that the formalized policy applies to Peace Officers with evidence that their position was a rotation position at the time of acceptance, at the level of Correctional Administrator, Department of Corrections/Parole Administrator I, AP level and below who are physically located at a recognized headquarters' assignment (HQ LOCATION DOC) from October 18, 2002. The Department has decided that a four-year maximum assignment duration for Peace Officers into headquarters' assignments must be established in the best interest of both the employee and the Department. The Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) has determined that certain headquarters' employees in the POFF or Safety retirement system positions are viewed as exceptional allocations. An exceptional allocation is defined as an employee performing duties outside the scope of those defined for the classification.
On April 21, 2004, CCPOA requested to meet with the Department to discuss the formalized policy without waiving CCPOA's right to Meet and Confer. On May 18, 2004, the parties met and discussed the formalized policy created by the Department. CDC stated that the Department is committed to achieving operational effectiveness and efficiency by developing and utilizing staff resources to the fullest extent possible, however, the Department's placement process will restrict their ability obtain this goal. CCPOA disagrees with many of the items contained within the formalized policy, but the process how the Department intends on placing rotated employees back into the field tops the list. The placement process for employees in rotation positions begins on October 18, 2004.
The placement process that CDC established when attempting to achieve operational effectiveness and efficiency by developing and utilizing staff resources to the fullest extent possible will only meet the needs of certain individuals. CDC established a three (3) part placement process to reassign the employee to an institution/parole field office at the end of the rotational assignment. The first option is to reassign him or her to a vacancy, in his or her current classification, at the institution/parole field office where he or she most recently held a position. The second option is to reassign him or her to a vacancy, in his or her current classification, at an institution/parole field office within the corresponding region (corresponding region of the institution/parole field where he or she most recently held a position). The third option is to reassign him or her to the first available institution/parole field office vacancy, in his or her current classification, within the State. If you were not previously assigned to an institution/parole field office or were assigned to a non-rotational headquarters' assignment, the third option shall apply. If more than one person in the same classification who is excluded from collective bargaining (SO6/MO6) is due to rotate, the person(s) with the greatest amount of State seniority will determine placement pursuant to the above-mentioned criteria. If more than one person in the same classification who is included in collective bargaining RO6 is due to rotate, the person(s) with the greatest amount of Unit 6 seniority will determine placement pursuant to the above-mentioned criteria. If the rotated employee utilizes the placement process of the Department, the employee will be entitled to moving and relocation reimbursement. The moving and relocation reimbursement will not be provided to an employee who does not complete the four-year rotational assignment.
The Department has identified headquarters positions which are exempt from the rotation requirement. The Department has determined that where constant and significant inmate/parolee contact is required (i.e., the Transportation Unit and the Parolee-at-Large program), Correctional Counselor III, performing the duties of Classification Staff Representative and appointments to the Special Agent classification are exempt. Parole Agents I/II, Adult Parole (AP) who rotate assignments in accordance with the existing Parole and Community Services Division (P&CSD) Rotational Policy are exempt from the formalized policy. The Director may grant exemptions to the rotational requirement based on management needs of the Department. CCPOA has requested specific information (CERVANTES INFO REQUEST) regarding their recognized exemptions.
The Department is jeopardizing their ability to achieve operational effectiveness and efficiency by developing and utilizing staff resources to the fullest extent possible because placement into an headquarters' assignment will only meet the needs of certain individuals with the placement process they intend to put into place. Moreover, the Department is not doing the right thing for employees by not including into the rotation, employees with evidence that their position was a rotation position at the time of acceptance, at the level of Correctional Administrator, Department of Corrections/Parole Administrator I, AP level and below who are physically located at an recognized headquarters' assignment from June 25, 1999. Keep in mind that the Department has put out at least three memorandums (June 25, 1999 (Terhune), October 18, 2002 (Alameida), and April 3, 2004 (Woodford) directing managers to rotate employees who are viewed as exceptional allocations. If the Department places rotation employees into the field utilizing the cut-off of October 18, 2002, when they eventually develop a policy which covers people who were hired in headquarters' assignments prior to October 18, 2002, the positions available for placement into the field may be significantly less.
|
|
| Question: |
What is the status of the 16% cuts in CDC? |
| |
|
| Answer: |
In October of 2003, the Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) noticed the California Correctional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA) of the California Department of Corrections (CDC) intent to eliminate over 600 Bargaining Unit 6 positions throughout CDC.
The notice included the following positions:
Correctional Officer positions associated with visiting officer positions sufficient to reduce the inmate-visiting program to two days per week.
Eliminate Correctional Officer positions assigned to Inmate Assignment Office.
Eliminate Correctional Officer positions assigned to outside non-reimbursed community crews
Reduce the number of Correctional Officer positions assigned to duties of vendor packages for inmates
Elimination of Correctional Officer positions assigned to Third Watch Yard officer positions at the 180-degree and 270-degree design institutions for Level III and Level IV populations.
The parties agreed to first reconcile for each institution the Post Assignment Schedules (PAS) for each institution with the Governor's Budget to establish a baseline for staffing prior to commencing negotiations on the CDC's new notice to eliminate BU6 positions.
The reconciliation process continued for approximately six (6) months without completion. On March 30, 2004, the parties commenced negotiations in Sacramento over the State's notice to eliminate BU6 positions.
The statewide negotiations would be conducted at CDC headquarters with the CCPOA statewide negotiators and representatives of the CDC headquarters. The negotiations were held in the Director's conference room with video and audio connections with each institution. The local CCPOA representatives and local institution representatives were then connected via video and audio. The State's team was responsible for coordinating and scheduling each institution and arranging for release of local CCPOA representatives on Official Business (OB).
CCPOA submitted numerous written requests for information to DPA relevant to the notice by the State to eliminate BU6 positions. The response by DPA and CDC was incomplete, inaccurate and untimely. As the negotiations commenced, the DPA quickly informed CCPOA that it was going to eliminate the Correctional Officer positions associated with quarterly package positions on April 12, 2004.
On April 6, 2004, the DPA scratched the plan for elimination of c/o positions related to the third watch yard officer at the 180 degree and 270 degree design institutions for level III and level IV units.
Instead 10 Py Correctional Officer positions at each institution are to be eliminated effective April 26, 2004, whether or not negotiations have been completed.
The DPA and CDC continued to fail to provide complete and accurate documents relevant to impact of the elimination of positions.
CCPOA sought an arbitrator's intervention for injunction relief but the arbitrator's decision ruled against us.
On April 26, 2004, the CDC implemented the elimination of positions at the institutions despite the fact that the State had not met their obligation under Section 16.07(c) and Section 27.02 of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). CCPOA shall continue to negotiate the impact of the BU6 position eliminations and evaluate further appropriate avenues of redress.
|
|
| Question: |
What is the status of the Bridging Program?
|
| |
|
| Answer: |
On April 8, 2004, the Bridging Program negotiations team concluded negotiations and was prepared to sign the final agreement. However, management “needed to review” the agreement prior to signing. CCPOA has been waiting for the signed agreement to be forwarded. Once the agreement is received, a copy will be sent to all chapters. |
|
| Question: |
Why did I receive this 1099 Misc. Form? |
| |
|
| Answer: |
The CCPOA Basic Combined Legal Plan is provided autmoatically to all CCPOA Active members and Bargaining Unit Six participants. It is an association benefit that provides personal and professional legal plan support for all Correctional Peace Officers and their eligible family members.
You have been provided a 1099-Misc. form for the prepaid portion of the combined, basic legal plan. The existing prepaid legal component of the CCPOA Basic Legal Plan (provided to all Bargaining Unit 6 and CCPOA Supervisory Members), is properly included in gross income.
The only action that you need to take is to provide the 1099-Misc form on your tax return.
If you wish to write a letter regarding any concerns you have, please write to:
Gerrit Buddingh'
Administrator
CCPOA Benefit Trust Fund
2515Venture Oaks Way, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95833-4235
|
|
| Question: |
Can we satisfy an Accounts Receivable with the use of Leave Credits? |
| |
|
| Answer: |
We have finally worked out the process for Unit 6 members to elect to clear an Account Receivable (AR) through the use of leave credits, excluding sick leave. In the original process, employees had to be removed from direct deposit, and had to use a larger number of leave credits to pay for the AR due to the tax implications.
In the updated process, the employee no longer needs to be removed from direct deposit, and since the AR will be collected as a payroll deduction (035 deduction code), the taxable gross is reduced.
Please review the following documentation that describes the process as per MOU Section 15.12 (C)(3):
|
|
| Question: |
What is the status of the CPOST Apprenticeship Program? |
| |
|
| Answer: |
Effective July 1, 2003, the Commission on Correctional Peace Officers Standards and Training (CPOST) had it's budget reduced by 50%. Because of this budget reduction, CPOST is claiming that it is forced to reduce services. Therefore, CPOST has made the difficult decision to cease its staff support of the Apprenticeship Program.
On March 4, 2004, CCPOA filed a Writ of Mandate (request the court to order) with the Superior Court in Sacramento, to require CPOST to maintain the Apprenticeship Program.
On April 29, 2004, CPOST officially committed to dedicate two staff members to maintain the program.
Due to this action taken by CPOST, CCPOA made the decision to take the Writ “off calendar” for the time being. CCPOA is monitoring the progress made by CPOST to ensure that the program remains viable.
Please continue to fill out all apprenticeship paperwork until notified otherwise.
|
|
| Question: |
Why is the raise for Unit 6 smaller than the raise for the California Highway Patrol (CHP)? |
| |
|
| Answer: |
On July 1, 2001, the "total compensation" package for Correctional Officers was $666 lower than a California Highway Patrol Officer. Total compensation refers to all compensation, i.e., physical fitness, seniority pay, educational incentives, retirement contribution, etc.
From July 2001 to July 2003, Correctional Officers actually encroached on the $666 due to increases in physical fitness pay ($65 for officers with less than five years and an increase to $130 for those with more than five years), seniority pay (extra 1 percent at 25 years), and educational incentive (from $100 to 2.2% of salary).
Our raise is therefore slightly lower than the one received by the Highway Patrol in order to bring the comparison formula back to the agreed upon $666.
|
|
| Question: |
What is the State's position on layoffs |
| |
|
| Answer: |
Of course every detail of the layoffs must be negotiated. However, the following information is taken directly off the DPA web site.
Budget Cuts and Layoffs: Is My Job Affected
updated 7-3-03
Several thousand “surplus ” notices have been issued to employees who potentially
would be affected by layoffs if layoffs become necessary to achieve budget savings.
Not everyone who receives a surplus notice will necessarily be laid off. In
fact, layoff decisions will be made only after the State has a clear picture
of how much money it needs to save from personnel costs.
DPA is working with the unions in the hopes we can reach agreement on alternative
ways to achieve these savings. For instance, if we're able to reduce the costs
of our labor contracts, we can use these extra dollars to pay for positions
that will otherwise be eliminated.
This Web site provides information to answer common questions about the layoff
process and what happens to your benefits if you are laid off.
Click on a topic below for more information.
Staff Reductions and Layoff
Seniority system
Notice requirements
Options to Layoff
Transfers and demotions
State Restriction of Appointments (SROA) Program
Coping With Change
Employee Assistance Program (EAP)
If You're Laid Off
Unemployment compensation
Health, dental, and vision coverage
Unused leave
CalPERS pension (Updated 6-10-03)
Savings Plus account
FlexElect
EAP
Life insurance
Disability insurance
Long-term care insurance
Workers' comp
Impact on other benefits
State Reemployment
State job listings (SPB's jobs page)
Reemployment Lists
Career Planning Assistance
Finding a New Job (Employment Development Dept. workshops on job hunting, resume writing, and other job seeking services)
FAQ About EDD's Job Seeking Services
Labor Market Information
CalJobs (EDD's online system linking job seekers with employers)
More
Career Preparation & Job Training links
|
|
| Question: |
What is the deadline to submit the physical fitness certification
to ensure uninterrupted receipt of physical fitness pay |
| |
|
| Answer: |
During the March 5, 2003, Quarterly CDC/CCPOA Labor Management Committee
Meeting, CDC presented CCPOA with a copy of the revised instructions for
obtaining the Annual Physical Fitness Incentive Pay (PFIP). These instructions
should be seen more as a clarification of issues that arose last year, than
a revision. The process in which this incentive is paid, conforms with the
BU6 MOU with the following clarifications:
Any licensed Physician, Nurse Practitioner, Physicians Assistant or foreign
licensed Physician may perform the certification. For the purpose of this
certification, Chiropractor certifications are not acceptable.
Employees are allowed to utilize Physicians who are employed by CDC as
long as the Physician maintains an additional practice apart from
the institution and the physical exam takes place at that outside
practice.
The physical fitness certification must reflect the date of certification
and the original signature of the person performing the examination.
Photo copies of the department form may be used. However, the signatures
must be original.
Correctional Officer Cadets who graduate from the academy in 2003 are
eligible for PFIP at the beginning of the first pay period after graduation.
As these cadets receive Physician's certification prior to entering the
academy they do not need to submit the annual Physician's certification
until the certification process for 2004/2005.
Medical Technical Assistants, Correctional Counselors, Parole Agents
and CDC Fire Captains must submit the annual Physician's Certificate to
Personnel, prior to receiving PFIP (these classifications do not go directly
to the academy upon appointment).
The effective date to begin receiving PFIP is determined by the date
the completed form is received by personnel.
Employees receiving physical exams between 3/1/03 and 6/30/03 and
who submit the certification form to Personnel, do not need to re certify
for the 2003/2004 fiscal year (7/1/03 to 6/30/04).
To continue to receive PFIP without interruption, employees must
have a physical exam between 3/1/03 and 6/30/03 and must submit
their certification to Personnel no later than 7/10/03.
Employees currently receiving PFIP who are on military leave for the
War on Terrorism or workers' compensation will continue to receive PFIP.
Upon their return to work, they will have up to 120 calender days to submit
their certification form to Personnel or the pay will terminate after
the 120th day.
Employees currently receiving PFIP while attending the academy, on a
training and development assignment, or serving in an out-of-class assignment
will continue to receive payment.
|
|
| Question: |
What is the status of the CCI workload arbitration award? |
| |
|
| Answer: |
A portion of the award grants 270 vacation leave credits to those CCIs who qualified under the grievance, any permanent CCI employed on any day between February 4, 2000 and May 17, 2001, and who is still employed on the dates of the leave credit issuance.
The credits were to be added to the leave balance as follows:
|
90 leave credits on July 1, 2002
90 leave credits on July 1, 2003
90 leave credits on July 1, 2004
|
The first installment has just recently been added to the books. Unfortunately, the addition was not made in time to be reflected on the last pay check stub, however, it should appear on the next check issed. The next addition should appear on schedule in July.
|
|
|
Print This Page