Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-08-99 Utilities tommittss *sport Utilities Committee 10 the Common E ountil of the City of ffioutb 3Betttn The February 8, 1999 meeting of the Utilities Committee was called to order by its Chairperson,Council Member Rod Sniadecki at 4:50 p.m. in the Council informal meeting room. Persons in attendance included Council Members: Aranowski, Pfeifer, Kelly, King, Varner,Ujdak, and Sniadecki; James Szucs, Jeff Jankowski, Carl Littrell, Phil St. Clair, Lew Powell, Cathy Hubbard-Shead, Terry Bland, several Teamster members and stewards,and Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand. Council Member Sniadecki noted that the Committee meeting was called for informational purposes of receiving updates on the City's policies addressing wages for snow days and the use of vacation time. He noted that he sees the Common Council as a facilitator in these areas since the Administration sets the specific policies involved. Nevertheless, he noted that the Council plays a role with regard to advice and consent of such administrative policies. In light of the fairness issue raised by the Teamster members on these issues two (2) weeks ago, and the delivery of city services,he believed that additional information and updates were warranted. Mr. James Szucs, Business Agent for Teamsters Local Union No. 364, then presented the position of the Teamster employees who work for the city. He noted that several Teamsters were called on January 4, 1999,the first work day of the year,and were told not to report to work. The contract which took effect on January 1, 1999 and runs through December 31,2002,basically states that if a Teamster employee reports to work and is sent home that the city will pay that employee for two (2) hours. This language is new to the contract. As a result of the contractual language,he does not believe that the concerns of the Teamsters can be raised as a grievance since there is no contractual obligation. Mr. Szucs noted however that he believes that the real issue is one of"fairness",and could be raised as a complaint. He noted that in the past,hourly employees were paid a full day by the city when sent home due to weather. He further questioned by there was no accommodation for using a personal day, instead Teamsters were restricted to use a vacation day in order to get a 40-hour work week. He noted that most employees do not elect to use a vacation day on the first work day of the calendar year, especially when many Teamsters took additional precautions to report to work in a timely manner. Mr. Szucs further noted that when several Teamster employees inquired whether they would be paid for January 4th when they were called, that they were told it was a "snow day", and therefore assumed that it was a paid work day. Several Teamsters were told that they would be paid because of the city's past practice. Mr. Jeff Jankowski, Deputy City Attorney, stated that he was confused as to why these issues were before a Council Committee instead of the Board of Public Works. He noted that the Board approves the contract,not the Council. He further noted that no grievances have been filed over these issues. He stated that the Council has no jurisdiction in this area. • Utilities Committee February 8, 1999 Page 2 Council Member Sniadecki noted that as the Chairperson of the committee, he deemed the issues raised by the Teamsters as important and relevant. He voiced particular concern over the fairness issue raised. He noted that at the beginning of this meeting that it was to be informational and that no official action would be taken. He again noted that he sees the Council as a facilitator in this area especially if the delivery of city services is a concern. He asked Mr. Jankowski to continue. Mr. Jankowski then provided four (4) handouts, namely the January 11, 1999 Memorandum from himself and Cathy Hubbard-Shead addressing "canceled workdays"; June 5, 1998 Economic Proposed Changes to the Teamster Contract; Article 5 entitled "Overtime Standby Operations and Shift Differential"; and a copy of Indiana Code § 35- 44-2-4 entitled "Ghost employment" (copies attached). Mr. Jankowski reviewed each of the handouts briefly. He noted that past practice applies until the new Article 5 took effect on January 1, 1999. In response to a question from Council Member King, Mr. Jankowski noted that since vacation days have an economic value under the contract and since personal days do not, that that is why the Teamsters are restricted to using vacation days. Bill Sniadecki, a Teamster steward, contended that the city's policy for non-Teamster employees is "pyramiding" since they basically are receiving double pay if they showed for work on January 4th, per the January 11, 1999 memorandum. Discussion by other Teamster members on this issue followed. Dr. Varner voiced concern over how the Teamster may have been told that it was a "snow day". He stated that each employee contacted should have been told that it was a"cancelled work day without pay", when called. He further recommended that a policy should be standardized for all departments in the future. Dr. Varner noted that there would be confusion especially since the city may have paid for snow days in the past. Council Member Ujdak inquired into past practice and thought that the ghost employment statute provided may not be applicable to the issues at hand. It was noted that "administrative choice" was followed, however apparently in March of 1998,Teamsters were paid for a snow day and were also paid during the blizzard of 1978. In response to a question raised by Council Member Sniadecki on this issue, several Teamsters noted that they were paid for a snow day in 1998 and also in 1978. They noted that alot of Teamsters reported to work, especially those who hold CDL's and could have been utilized for snow removal efforts. Council Member Sniadecki asked for an update on SEMA and FEMA funds which he understands would pay up to 75 % for costs incurred by the city. Mr. Jankowski noted that SEMA and FEMA funds cannot be used to pay for a regular work day. He further noted that the city provided notice of the cancelled work day via radio and television the evening of January 3rd. I Utilities Committee February 8, 1999 Page 3 Council Member Pfeifer questioned whether there were any Teamsters who were not entitled to vacation days and therefore could not make up the day via that procedure. She thought that some accommodation should be considered so that any affected employees could earn a full paycheck,with this being the decent thing to do. Cathy Hubbard-Shead stated that two (2)Teamster employees did not have vacation days which could be utilized. Cathy Roemer stressed that vacation days must be earned and that the City Administration would oppose changing this policy. Mr. Szucs concluded on behalf of the Teamsters that he appreciated the opportunity to have the Teamsters voice their concerns before the committee. He again noted that he does not see a grievance under the contract. However, he stressed that the issue of fairness is a complaint to which he believes the city's elected officials should be aware of in addition to the city administration. He again requested consideration of both personal days and vacation days so that the Teamster employees could receive a full paycheck. He noted that there has been considerable frustration and confusion by stating it was a "snow day" instead of a "cancelled work day without pay". Cathy Hubbard-Shead noted that change in policies often brings confusion. She noted that all supervisors need to get on the right page. The Council Attorney requested that if the City Administration issues a Memorandum to the department heads on the procedure to be followed for "cancelled work days", that the Council and Clerk's office receive a copy of it for future reference. Council Member Kelly thanked the Teamsters for coming and sharing additional information. He recommended that they pursue their complaint through the Board of Public Works if they so desire. Council Member Sniadecki thanked everyone in attendance for coming and requested a written update from the city administration on FEMA and SEMA policies. There being no further business to come before the committee, the meeting adjourned at 5:38 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Rod Sniadecki, Chairperson Utilities Committee Attachments