|
News
Contract Language Dispute on Call Back -Article 15.6
In May of 2010, Local 4502 filed a class action grievance on how call back language was being applied by the City. The dispute centered on how the agreed upon reformatting of Article 15.6-Call Back; and the addition of one paragraph which gave the employer the right to require employees to come in to work except for good cause would be applied. We have since that time moved that issue to arbitration. In that arbitration, the Local has just entered in to a settlement agreement with the City that gives the bargaining unit a better chance at resolution. The concept of the call back dispute is as follows:
The Union maintains that the new language was focused on giving the City the ability to require employees to come in when there was an urgent and immediate need – except for good cause. Local 4502 further maintains that the definition of what a call back is…when you are called in between your shift and asked to come in…never changed; only the employers right to now require them to come in except for good cause. The employee should still receive that minimum 4 hours. The City on the other hand, maintains that the Union agreed to language that redefined call back so that it would only apply if the employee was forced to come in to work. If the employee was given the choice – it would not be call back.
The result of this interpretation has been that CMAGE/CWA members are being called at home, between their shift, and asked if they want to come in to work. If they say yes…they are only being paid for the actual time worked. If they say no, the employer is going down the list to AFSCME employees and asking the same question – do you want to come in, and when the AFSCME employee says yes, they are getting the contractual minimum of 4 hours. Obviously this is a problem for our Union, and frustrates the members who get call back opportunity.
Local 4502 and the City have entered in to a settlement agreement on pending arbitration that will move this matter in to the upcoming negotiations. The settlement states that both parties agree to resolve this issue in bargaining and will do so in good faith. The City further agrees to apply the past practice method of applying call back to continue on classifications that have “emergency” in their title. The Union agrees to this language in order to give us the best possible opportunity of a resolution that we feel is fair and reasonable. There are many factors that make arbitration results less than what you hope for or intend. When actively working on a contract negotiation, both sides often have good reason to allow for latitude in reaching desired goals. It is the hope of Local 4502 to adequately and fairly resolve this contract interpretation dispute in that arena.
Until our 2011 contract is finalized and issues such as this are worked out, we ask for your patience and support in taking this matter to an environment where we have the best possible chance of resolution.
In Solidarity,
Brien Bellous - President
|
