Summer
2006
Contents:
By Steve Bell At the June 30th all-hands meeting, the Director
referred to the “temporary” denial of certain forms of compensation as a “pretty
minor inconvenience” for those agency personnel affected. He went on to say that
those of us who claim that these “minor inconveniences” are a catastrophic
change in how we do our jobs is a “far reach”. “You learn how to live with it.
You morph. You change. You go on. That’s how you deal with it” he said.
Ask any river how she creates her gorges, wide and deep, and she will tell you
it is by constantly eroding the banks away - one pebble at a time. The loss of
each pebble, in and of itself, is a minor inconvenience that goes unnoticed by
the trees on the shore. But sooner or later the erosion will weaken the bank to
the point of making it vulnerable to catastrophic failure at the next high
water. When that happens, the trees discover they can no longer stand upright.
They fall from the bank and are swept away under the power of the river.
So it is with our rights as state employees. We are asked to take on a little
more work here, put in some uncompensated time there - and a vacated FTE remains
unfilled. We accept extra duties or work longer hours every now and again
(without the minor inconvenience of additional compensation) - and another FTE
is lost. Cost-of- living increases fail to keep pace with inflation and the
result is a net-loss of income.
Like the constant erosion of the river’s stream bank, we learn to live with it.
We morph. We change. We go on. All the time losing a pebble here, a pebble
there, never knowing when the next high water will come and sweep us downstream.
No, we would not mind or miss the minor inconvenience of a few lost pebbles
every now and again if it were not for the unmitigated cumulative impacts that
set the stage for catastrophic changes that threaten and endanger our careers.
But there is hope. Rivers, by their very nature, must take the path of least
resistance. If the banks refuse to surrender any more pebbles we can minimize
the losses we may experience when the high waters return. Put an end to the
unmitigated erosion of your rights. Always document all of your time and always
claim whatever form of additional compensation that you are entitled.
By Bryan Murphie Patience is a virtue. This is quite true and with
regards to contract negotiations, quite necessary. Steve Bell and I are
representing WAFWP at contract negotiations this year. We began negotiating our
2007-2008 contract with the state back in April. So far, we have had modest
success at coming to agreement on the Articles within the contract. The ground
rules guiding negotiations prohibits a detailed discussion of the meetings we
have held; however, I can say that we have come to a tentative agreement on 20
Articles. We have yet to delve into the more difficult issues, such as salary,
exchange time, benefits, work schedules, and so on. Compensation issues are on
hold until negotiations regarding health care are finished. The goal is to have
a contract ready for ratification before October 2006. Stay tuned…
By Rhonda Fenrich The General Government Union Coalition met with
the State on July 12-13 to negotiate health insurance premium contributions by
the State for the upcoming biennium. These sessions did not result in an
agreement. Unfortunately, failure to reach an agreement on health care premiums
will likely result in a delayed agreement in the remaining economic issues, such
as wage increases, since they are intimately connected to the amount of money
the legislature will appropriate towards the implementation of your contract.
It became perfectly clear on the first day of health care bargaining that the
State and the unions were operating from two very different sets of assumptions
regarding the State’s obligation under the current collective bargaining
agreements. For your current contract, the State agreed to contribute $663.00
towards your health insurance premiums from July 1, 2005 – June 30, 2006, and
$744.00 towards your premiums from July 1, 2006 – June 30, 2007. While it
appears that the legislature appropriated $744.00 for each represented position,
it only appropriated $618.00 for each non-represented employee. Even though the
$744.00 should result in an average premium cost-sharing of $4.00 per
represented employee, the PEBB board is requiring an average contribution of
$73.00, regardless if an employee is represented or not. Thus, a portion of your
$744.00 is either being used to offset the costs of insurance for unrepresented
employees, or is being used to bolster the State’s $70 million unrestricted
health insurance reserve fund. Either way, the State’s actions violate the
contract and can be considered unjust enrichment. We agreed to take part in a
grievance on behalf of all unionized employees on this issue. (Check your
website to view a copy of the grievance.)
This fundamental disagreement on the application of your current contract
resulted in further disagreement regarding the starting point for the current
contract. The State would like employees to contribute a minimum of 12% of your
health care premiums. PEBB has proposed to almost double your contribution
effective January 1, 2007, even though the $744.00 contribution should actually
result in a reduction of your contribution. Obviously a lot of work still needs
to be done in order to achieve a meeting of the minds on this issue.
Stay tuned to your website for more timely updates!
By Derek Stinson
 The
2006 year-to-date income (dues and interest) as of 9 July was $70, 920. Expenses
for attorney fees, bookkeeper, board travel, reimbursement, and other
miscellaneous items was $55,182, resulting in a positive cash flow of $15,738.
The interest rate on CDs has become fairly attractive recently (around 4% or
better), so we are purchasing 12 month CDs that come due on a rotating basis
quarterly. Account balances were $101,925 in savings and checking accounts, and
$71,490 in CDs, for a balance of $173,416. Upcoming arbitration is expected to
increase expenses in the 2nd half of the year.
By Pat Miller The Wildlife Program has recently begun implementation
of new aircraft safety Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for Wildlife Program
personnel. The Agency Safety Office will take the Wildlife Program’s SOP and
develop an agency- wide policy that will impact Fish and Habitat Program
personnel, as well. This SOP has been in development for several years and was
reviewed recently at a Program School.
The SOP creates an advisory committee that will help guide the implementation
and improvement of the SOP in the future. Several WAFWP members are on the
committee, including Scott McCorqudale, Dana Base, Woody Myers, and myself.
The SOP outlines FAA certification requirements that the aircraft and pilot must
meet in an effort to evaluate pilot performance. This is part of the existing
SOP, although the exact structure is not well defined. The intent is to develop
a database that employees can use to view other biologist evaluations for
different charter companies and aircraft pilots before selecting a new vendor.
Flight plans will need to be filed for each flight.
The SOP also calls for specific equipment requirements for flights below 500 AGL
(Above Ground Level). Such items include Nomex III flight suits, helmets such as
the SPH-4 or 5 or the UGH, gloves, and all-leather, or all-rubber boots for
personal protection. Other requirements for survival gear, such as Emergency
Location Transmitters and communication equipment, are listed as well.
The most controversial component of the SOP is the requirement for
flight-following on flights below 500 AGL. Checking in with an appropriate party
will be required after every 30 minutes, or when the work area changes
significantly. The SOP allows employees to create their own system for
flight-following. Examples of a flight- following system might include employees
on mountain tops using the DNR radio system, regional offices or district
offices using the DNR system, vendor fuel trucks using company radio systems,
and landowner radio nets that grant permission and agree to flight follow. WDFW
employees in Region One are evaluating a new semi-automatic flight-following
system. This system utilizes a transponder in the aircraft that sends a signal
to a computer terminal, which in turn provides location and other data every two
minutes. This system may provide an easy alternative to the flight-following
process.
WAFWP is monitoring the SOP closely to insure that equipment required by the
policy is provided as required by the Contract. One proposal is that extra suits
and helmets be available for occasional flight participants. An inventory of
existing equipment is being completed and the program will develop a purchase
plan.
Please feel free to contact Scott or me if you have any questions or concerns.
By Steve Bell On June 16th we met with representatives from WDFW,
OFM and the AGs Office prior to a scheduled arbitration hearing for the Oil
Spill Team. We were pleased to hammer out a last minute agreement that was
acceptable to all parties. However, after the subpoenaed witnesses, arbitrator,
and complainants had all been released, the State unilaterally changed the
agreed-to language of the settlement. For no clear reason they insisted that the
agreement include a withdrawal of the other pending grievances, including
Exchange Time, Demand-to-Bargain and the Unfair Labor Practices we filed.
None of this had been discussed, and certainly not agreed to, when we thought we
had reached a settlement. We have been twice blind-sided by the State; first,
when they unilaterally changed the conditions that we work under, and again when
they changed the language and scope of the potential settlement.
WAFWP contacted the American Arbitrator’s Association (AAA) and asked them to
reschedule the arbitration. We have asked that the next arbitration occur over a
two day period and be consolidated to include all three of the pending
arbitrations. We are still waiting for an arbitration date from AAA.
By Tom Cyra
 The
upcoming annual meeting in Olympia on August 30th brings us around, once again,
to election time. This year, four board positions are open for elections:
Vice-President, Treasurer, Member-At-Large, and Habitat Board Member. A call for
candidates went out to Association members earlier this summer, and there is
still a need for additional candidates. It is not too late to add your name to
the ballot. Look for candidate biographies included with your ballot.
After two terms on the board, Bryan Murphie is stepping down as Vice-President.
With no candidates stepping forward thus far, Russell Rogers, currently the Fish
Board Member has graciously offered to run for Vice-President. Russell works in
the Shellfish Program at Point Whitney. Derek Stinson, who last year was
appointed to fill the remaining term of Treasurer, is running for re-election.
Derek works in Olympia in the Wildlife Program. Camille Speck has agreed to run
for re-election for Member-At-Large. Camille works in the Marine Resources
Program at Point Whitney. The Habitat Program appears to be continuing its
unrepresented streak, as no one has come forward to run for the Habitat Board
Member.
By Russell Rogers
 By
now, you all have interacted with Total Time, the electronic system for
accounting our time for the Department. In general, the reviews for the new
system have been good, and we should applaud the department for moving to a more
user-friendly and paperless system for submitting our time sheets. While the
transition to this system as been pretty smooth for an agency the size of WDFW,
there have been a few glitches along the way which have been fairly minor for
the end user. I have submitted my time sheet from both work and at a remote
location (home) without any major problems.
One item that may take some getting use to is all the categories for leave. By
my count, there are at least 56. Since I could not find out exactly why the
Department needs such detailed accounting of our leave time, it remains a
mystery. I had trouble figuring out which category to use for sick leave for an
L&I doctor’s appointment. The only category that is labeled with an L&I claim is
“9188 LWOP – Industrial L&I” in the “Other Leave” menu. That is not the option
that I wanted as we should be allowed to use our sick leave and have L&I
reimburse the Department. Doing so would avoid having reductions in our
paycheck. According to the Personnel Office, the correct category to use is
“9062 Sick Leave – On time loss” also in the “Other Leave” menu. If it is not
clear to you which category to use, check with your supervisor, payroll, or
personnel.
Another problem that many WAFWP members have encountered pertains to the
requirement to submit their time sheet before the end of the pay period. If your
actual hours worked is different than what you submitted, the process for
correcting it can be very cumbersome, requiring that you print a hard copy of
your timesheet and make the changes with a pen (remember that primitive
technology). This may be more of a problem of the logistical transition to the
system than of the system itself. My conversations with people in the Personnel
Office indicate that the Department is working to shorten and eventually
eliminate this issue. They also informed me that they hope to have all of our
leave slips worked into the system, as well.
If you run into a problem that results in an unwanted loss to your paycheck or
to your leave balances, please contact me, or your job rep, as soon as you
identify the problem.
Want a copy of the original Newsletter?
Download PDF here. |
