Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-23-2016 PBA MinutesCITY OF SEBASTIAN PBA UNION CONTRACT NEGOTIATION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING August 23, 2016 Present: Al Boettjer, Coastal Florida PEA Union Representative Zack Picket, Coastal Florida PEA Union Representative Ken McDonough, Police Officer Union Representative Jason Mills, Police Officer Union Representative Ken Killgore, Administrative Services Director, City of Sebastian Cynthia Watson, Assistant Administrative Services Director/HR Manager, City of Sebastian Greg Witt, Deputy Chief, Sebastian Police Department Contract negotiations between the City of Sebastian and the PBA began at 3:40 PM. Al Boettjer brought the meeting to order stating this was a contract negotiation meeting between the City of Sebastian and the Police Benevolent Association, Inc. Article 40 Group Health Insurance— Discussion took place. The intent was to try to make the 2011 employees whole and make them all at compatible rates. Mr. Killgore stated we accomplished even more than that in terms of getting everybody on the same footing and reducing the amount of premium required for family coverage to 40% of the City's cost so not only will the employees benefit but so will those who were paying 75% of the premium cost if they take that election. So if an employee elects to take Family coverage their cost will be $445.14 instead of the $777.16. Ms. Watson stated it (the premiums) have completely dropped for everybody. The employees will have to pay a 20% out-of-pocket copay but we are increasing the HRA card to offset the copay for a single from $2,000.00 to $2,500.00 and from $4,000.00 to $5,000.00 for anything above single coverage. The deductible is $2,000.00 for single and $4,000.00 for all others. The maximum out of pocket will be $4,000.00 for single and $8,000.00 for anyone else. Mr. Boettjer stated we have had a lot of discussion about the 60%. The purpose of that is not so the employee pays 60%. The City is going to try to keep the rate at 40%. But the worst case scenario would be that the employee would only pay 60%. Mr. Killgore stated the City is putting a cap on it. This should be a signal to the employees we are trying to keep the rates as low as we can. Everybody will be paying the same rate. It was stated that other agencies don't give the card; they have to pay the deductible out of their own pocket. Article 41- Clothing Maintenance, Equipment and Vehicles Section 41.5 — Take Home Vehicles —This is not a deal breaker for us but we want to table this until we see where other parts of the contract are decided. Article 33 —Vacation Leave — Discussion took place. Section 33.7 —The old contract stated that those hired on or after October 1, 2011 would not be paid out their vacation leave. Mr. Killgore stated they won't receive their full amount instead they will receive a percentage. Mr. Boettjer stated there is a new subsection--- (b). Therefore, Section 33.7 (b) will read: "Upon retirement, resignation, or other separation from City service, all regular full-time or regular part-time employees that are no longer on probation and were hired after October 1, 2011 shall be entitled to be paid for all of his/her unused accrued balance of vacation leave at the rate of base pay according to the following: • If separated before completing first year 0% • 1-5 years of completed service 25% • 6 years and above of completed service 50%d" Mr. Killgore stated that we feel that this is a reasonable compromise as far as doing this for vacation and we would like to do the same thing for sick leave. Right now they don't get any payment. Mr. Boettjer stated the Sick Leave is Article 34. Article 34 — Sick Leave — Discussion took place. The new subsection b was added to read: Section 34.5 (b) — "Upon separation from employment in good standing (resignation or retirement with a two-week notice or medical separation) and was hired after October 1, 2011, the employee is eligible to be paid for his/her accrued balance of sick leave up to a maximum of 600 hours. The percentage is as follows: If separated before completing first year 0% 1 to 5 years of completed service 25% 6 years of completed service and above 50%" Article 16 — Temporary Assignment — Discussion took place regarding the Investigator's pay - Section 16.2. Mr. Killgore stated we did speak to Michelle (Chief Morris) and we are very firm on this. We feel that while they are getting that 3% because they are giving up compensation for court time and overtime. We argued that the training is valuable but yet even if they go back as an officer those in the position won't lose it but any one new that once they aren't an investigator anymore, we just don't think that it's fair that they come back as an officer making what they were making. Also the officer has been adding to his experience and training. We are just not convinced that the 3% lasts forever. Mr. Boettjer asked, "Are you talking about grandfathering the current investigators and they will remain with the salary?" Mr. Mills stated that you are giving them the 3% when they go in but when you take them out they are coming out at a different rate. Can we change this to a dollar amount? Discussion took place on this. The City will make a change to the wording and add a grandfather clause for those currently in the position. All tentatively agreed with changes. Mr. Killgore asked if there were any other issues other than retirement that had to be discussed. Article 10 — Personnel Records — Mr. Killgore stated he made a note regarding Section 10.1 that all internal affair matters shall be maintained at the police department. Mr. Boettjer stated we agreed to that at the last session. The change is included in Section 10.1. Article 15 — Rates of Pay Section 15.1— Discussion took place. The Union agrees to negotiate the second and third year of the contract for potential rate of pay change. We wanted to lock ourselves in at 3% but if the money is right then we might come back or the City might come back with more of an increase. It was agreed that there would be a 3% increase in the current year with wage openers in second and third year. Article 26 — Longevity Pay — Mr. Killgore stated that Section 26.2 was added to state, "Employees in a probationary or suspension status greater than 6 months due to a demotion or transfer or for other disciplinary reason shall not receive longevity pay increases until they are no longer on probation." Longevity Section 26.1 stays the same. This was approved by all. Article 28 — Holidays — Mr. Killgore stated that Article 28.3 was modified the language as discussed. Article 18 — Injury Pay and Light Duty Assignments — Mr. Killgore stated we went back to the eighty (80) work days instead of ninety (90) calendar days. This was approved by all. Article 35 - Personal Leave — Mr. Killgore stated that the hours were changed to show 8, 10 or 12 hours. Mr. Witt wanted to know if Personal Days can be taken in hours or whole days. If days were taken in whole days then it would be fair to all. It doesn't matter whether you work 8, 10 or 12 hours. Personal days are a benefit of the day. Comp time is used for hours. The Floating Holiday was taken as a whole day. Discussion took place regarding the number of hours. The intent is to give the same number of days off. It was agreed to change to 4 days and the days have to be used as whole days and change the pro -rata to days. Article 48 — Retirement — Discussion took place. In summary, the Union requested a COLA, DROP, and Military Service and Prior Service Buy Back. The Military Service is a benefit and it helps us. The DROP would be beneficial to all. There isn't a cost. You're keeping valued employees and it is pretty much an industry standard. The DROP program has a standard of five (5) years. The Actuary would have to calculate the buy-back. Discussion took place on how it is calculated. The City will offer a buy-back. The DROP Program was discussed. Discussion took place on how to set-up the DROP Program. One requirement was that the retirement age was set at 55 with 15 years of service. Discussion took place regarding a COLA. The rate depended on the economy. It was recommended that there be some kind of Retirement COLA. The Union would like to establish it and then work on it in the next three years. The City feels that this is the first step because we have to take it to the Police Pension Board and they will have to ask for an actuarial study. Mr. Killgore stated the fourth item was changing the factor from 2% to 3%. When the percentage was dropped from 3% tot% years ago, the actuarial study at that time said there would be a 4.2% savings. So if we go this way then the savings will flip which means a 5% or 6% contribution to the plan. We've got to take action to do something in relation to the State Insurance Funds. The state has passed a law, Senate Bill 172, which states the amount over the frozen amount has to be distributed 50/50. It's about $22,000, so theoretically the City could grab about $11,000 of it. The other $11,000 is put in a defined contribution account for each member based on their credited years of service. By the time we divvy it up, it's not huge money but that is the bottom line. If the City kept the $22,000 portion and for those that are at the 2% and we are only taking 5% but if we use the 3% factor and then it goes to 8%; so taking the additional deductions and the $22,000, 1 think gives us enough money for quite a number of years with a reasonable number of turnover. We are only getting that savings with turnover. Mr. Killgore stated he believes he can justify a change if the City would get that much of the State money. What he would like to see is if the City would get all $45,000. That way we could take it through the process ---take it to the Board and get an actuarial report and then take it to City Council then I think we could change the factor, change the deduction amount and possibly fund the COLA. I am scared the COLA number could come back pretty big. Mr. Mills suggested coming back with a 1% COLA to start. Mr. Killgore is willing to look at the numbers. Mr. McDonough stated the requirements would be fifteen (15) years of service and 55 years of age. Mr. Killgore stated that the check this year was $145,700. The frozen amount is $123,482 and that is where I got the $22,218. Last October was the last actuarial report. As of last October there is $84,862 which is $15,000 from 2012, $22,000 from 2013, $24,000 from 2014, and $22,000 from 2015. So there is $84,000 that is frozen that can only be used for additional benefits. Mr. Killgore is suggesting the Union agree that the City would take for future years the $145,000 and we are going to commit ourselves to those future costs. So give the City all rights to the State money and in return we would turn it around to do the factor change, and all other items. The other will be a wash to the City. The State also says we have to reach an agreement by October 1". This decision has to be in the Contract and we have to have a Mutual Consent Agreement. Mr. Killgore stated he drafted a Consent Agreement and he ran it by the Pension Board Attorney and he is okay with it. He stated he has yet to run it by the City Attorney which will be necessary too. It states that if we don't do what we say, either party can get out of the Agreement. Mr. Killgore stated that we would add a paragraph under the retirement section in the Contract that would say "The City agrees to initiate the process of changing the factor to 3% for all employees with the intent to make such change providing there is no significant adverse actuarial impact and providing employees consent to all State funding applied to the City's required contribution." So if we signed this and signed the contract with a clause similar to that in the contract as well, the City is saying okay. I only drafted this that goes from 2% to 3% but there could be a paragraph in the contract that just addresses the 3% and say, "unless we get surprised by the actuarial study, and if in the range we are talking about that we would be giving up or whatever money we use whether state money or money getting in the future, we want to back out or come to an agreement to make this happen. All we are saying is that we are willing to support change and use the state money. What we are getting really is the recruitment. This whole thing is revocable. Mr. Boettjer stated we have to make a decision on the money or the money will be split. The decision has to be made by October 1. Mr. Killgore stated as a sign of good faith he would put items on the Board agenda to direct him to request an actuarial study. Mr. Mills asked what happens if all comes back and its say for example 1%. Mr. Killgore stated if we are complying with state statutes then it would go to City Council and I would think that it would be in place in one year. Mr. Boettjer stated that the Union has to state they would give the funds to the City. So the language has to be clarified and it has to be in the contract. I think we are in agreement to the 3%. All the Mutual Consent is saying is that we, the Union, are releasing the money to the City and somewhere it has to be stated that the money is for the 3% increase. In addition, that when the COIR is implemented, the 55 years of age and 15 years of service are the requirements and that the COLA issue would be resolved during the 3 year contract. There needs to be an Ordinance change for these items, Buy-back, COLA, etc. Mr. Killgore stated the paragraph would read, "The City agrees to implement a change in the factor from 2% to 3% making all employees 3%, construct a COLA increase; add a buy-back provision for military and time with other agencies and to implement a DROP program. To the extent that such cost does not exceed monies from the Chapter 185.08." The City can only do this if we get those funds." Mr. Killgore will put this in the contract and send it out to Mr. Boettjer, Mr. Mills and Mr. McDonough for review. Discussion on how the intent would be written, but the 3% has to happen now. Mr. Boettjer stated that the DROP program came up before and there was even a Resolution written it didn't go through per the Al Minner. There is only one person now who would be eligible for DROP. Discussion continued on the DROP program. Mr. Killgore will make changes and create the language for the agreement which is similar to the consent which will include the intent, DROP, 3%, COLA and Buy-back and it will reference the Consent Agreement and Contract. We should be able to wrap up the contract by a week from today and then it will go out to the Union for approval. Mr. Boettjer feels we can have an agreement next week, September 3rd, 2016 we still have to get our attorney to review it. I'll drive down and we can have the members review it and then sign it. Take Home Vehicles — All agreed to go back to the original language. Ms. Watson will send it electronically to Mr. Mills and Mr. McDonough. Sick Time — Mr. Killgore agreed to the 50% after 6 years. The Union is saying to do the cash in at 80 hours for sick time but must have at least 12 weeks or 480 hours of sick time before any cash in and the Union is willing to give up no buy-back for vacation time. The meeting ended at 6:03 PM. NOTICE OF CHANGE IN TENTATIVELY AGREED TO ARTICLE LANGUAGE The contract proposed language agreed to on August 23, 2016, was rejected by review of the membership as pertains to personal leave. Negotiations resumed as pertains to Articles (28.6) and (35.1) as a result of the membership rejection. The Coastal Florida Police Benevolent Association and the City of Sebastian have re -negotiated these CBA Articles as noted below. These were the only changes to the Collective Bargaining Agreement and were made as a direct result of membership rejection of the Prior Contract language pertaining only to Articles (28.6) and (35.1). Prior Contract Language: is __.._ _.. City _.. _, iAduding 35.1 Eligibility Eael; FegulaF full time baFgaining unit FReFRhpr ;hall he entit'Pri te tweRty fGUF (24) A laeFs must late At least fe Ft y (40) .. nicking hquFS d g the fiscal yeaF to 1. eAtitlPd W n,. al I Pave. WOFI('..n hours a deteFFRFRed by tiMe @061RIly City tiffle, includiRg a!l paid ... of and 6rng�en.^d& Proposed Language: 28.6 Deleted. ` 35.1 Eligibility— Each regular full-time bargaining unit member shall be entitled to twenty-four (24) working hours of personal leave per year, plus an additional eight (8), ten (10) or twelve (12; working hours based on their assignment on October 1st. A. Employees starting during the year will get a pro -rata portion of the personal leave hours. Those starting during the first three months of the fiscal year receive thirty-two (32), thirty-four (34) or thirty-six (36); the second three months twenty four (24), twenty-six (26) or twenty-eight (28); the third three months sixteen (16), eighteen (18) or twenty (20); and the last three months eight (8), ten (10) or twelve (12). B. Personal leave must be used by the last full pay period of the fiscal year. PBA Agreement 16.2 18.6 26.2 Extra 3% for Investigators "while serving" Added provision that paid leave, workers comp and disability will not exceed take home pay. Added provision that Longevity suspended while on probation "for greater than 6 months". 28.6 Deleted provision for the Floating Holiday and added a Personal Day. 30.4 Shortened period of recall of laid off employees from 2 years to 1 year. 30.5 Added provisions that shorten employee deadlines if recalled from a layoff. 33.1 Added provision to stipulate that employee must not have been suspended within 2 years to be eligible for promotion to Sergeant. 33.2 Added provision the employee does not accrue vacation when they are on unpaid leave. 33.7 Restored vacation leave payout for hires after 10/01/11 to 50% after 6 years. 34.2 Added provision that employee does not accrue sick leave while on unpaid leave. 34.4 Changed birthday off to 8 hours paid in December if they haven't used sick leave. 34.5 Restored sick leave payout for hires after 10/01/11 to 50% after 6 years. 35.1 Added provision to prorate personal leave for new employees and that it must be used by the last full pay period of the fiscal year. 36.2 Added that all accrued leave must be used before being granted a leave of absence. 36.8 Added provision that Longevity suspended while ori probation "for greater than 6 months". 37.4 Shortened time period required to resolve grievances. 40 Insurance Family Plan at 40% for all employees in FY2016 brings cost down to $450 month Adding provision that it will not exceed 60%. 41.5 Charge for take-home vehicles. 48.3 13�` Add language to consider making all employees at a 3% Pension factor — "The City agrees to initiate P oroces� of changing the factor 3%for all employees with the intent to make such change providing there is no significant adverse actuarial impact providing emnln consent to all State funding applying to the City's required contribution." 48.4 Add language to change employee contribution for all employees from 5% to 8%: "Should the �Z change to set the factor in Item 48.3 at 3% for all employees be adopted, the contribution for all employees shall be the same at 8%". • 3% Pay increases for FY2016 with reopeners in FY2017 and FY2018. • Did away with step plan and replaced with Minimum -Midpoint -Maximum, allowing employee pay adjustments during the contract period for market, experience, etc. • Bargaining unit generally agreed to almost all wording cleanup language. • Reduced Family Plan to 40% should help with recruiting and make it more affordable. • Change in Pension factor to 3% for all employees should also help with recruiting. �- VkOp /1;67 (?eLA � C"L' "