HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1976/04/21 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Held Wednesday April 21, 1976
An adjourned regular meeting was held on the above date beginning at 3:00 p.m. in the
Council Conference Room, City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, with the following
Councilmen present: Mayor Hamilton, Councilmen Egdahl, Hyde, Scott (arrived late)
Councilmen absent: Councilman Hobel
Staff present: City Manager Cole, Assistant City Manager Asmus, Assistant City
Attorney Beam, Assistant to the City Manager Wittenberg
Mayor Hamilton opened the meeting at 3:25 p.m. opening the public hearing on consideration
of the revised Employer-Employee Relations Policy.
Introduction of Mr. "Bud" Bigge was introduced to the Council. He
Director of Personnel said he feels comfortable with the Relations Policy
as written and the comments made by the staff in
response to those areas disputed by the Police
Officers Association, Fire Fighters and Employees
Association.
DEFINITION OF Sergeant Cox (Police Department) read an excerpt
SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEE from the 1973 National Advisory Commission on
Criminal Justice Standards and Goals defining
Supervisory employees and unit determination which
he felt were one and the same. The Policy does
not spell out who is and who is not a supervisory
employee. The Association would like to have the
following sentence added: "Employees whose duties
are substantially similar to those of their sub-
ordinates shall not be considered to be super-
visory employees.''
In answer to Councilman Hyde's query, Mr. Asmus
remarked that adding the sentence would not help
the problem - it would add to the confusion.
Sergeant Cox explained that the basic concern of the
association was that the sergeants and lieutenants
will be cut off from the bargaining unit. The
whole intent is to keep the association as one unit;
however, at the same time, they recognize what is
happening throughout the United States with police
strikes, etc. The reason they want it spelled out
is so they can deal with that.
Review of policy Mayor Hamilton suggested having an annual review
of the policy by either the association or the
staff.
Sergeant Cox said he would agree to this, since
they are concerned about future personnel in staff
and Council who may have a different philosophy
than the present members.
Motion for staff's acceptance It was moved by Councilman Hyde, seconded by Mayor
of Supervisory Employee (3A-20) Hamilton and unanimously carried by those present
that the staff proposal in regard to Supervisory
Employee be accepted.
City Council Meeting -2- April 21, 1976
Definitions
As used h6rein, the following terms shall have
the indicated meanings:
SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEE means any employee who has
authority, in the interest of the City, to hire,
transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, promote,
discharge, assign, reward, or discipline other
employees, or responsibility to direct them, or
to adjust their grievances, or to effectively
recommend such action, if, in connection with
the foregoing, the exercise of such authority
is not of a merely routine or clerical nature,
but requires the use of independent judgment.
RIGHTS OF THE CITY (4B-6) Donald Byrum, representing the Fire Fighters,
declared that they are objecting to the manning
portion of the section. Two years ago, they were
told that manning was not a negotiable item. For
this reason, they would like to have deleted in
this section "the numbers and kinds of personnel."
(Councilman Scott arrived at this time - 4:00 p.m.)
Discussion of terminology A general discussion ensued in which it was con-
curred that although management had the right to
determine manning, the Fire Fighters could bring
this up as a negotiable item if they could prove
that manning was related to safety, workload and
any other relevant supportive evidence.
Motion to accept draft language It was moved by Councilman Egdahl, seconded by
Councilman Hyde and unanimously carried by those
present that the draft language in reference to
4B-6 & 4C (Rights of the City) be accepted.
Rights of the City
The exclusive rights of the City shall include, but not
be limited to the right to;
Determine the methods, means, numbers, and kinds of per-
sonnel, and the job or position content, required to
accomplish the objectives and goals of the City.
The establishment or exercise of City rights shall not
be subject to meeting and conferring, provided however,
a certified employee organization shall not be pre-
~luded from meeting and conferring with representatives
of the City when the consequences of decisions on mat-
ters of City rights directly affect wages, hours, and
other terms and conditions of employment.
RIGHTS OF EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATIONS Sergeant Cox noted that the Association's concern
AND CERTIFIED EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATIONS was for continuation of an organizational bulletin
(6A) board at work locations. Mr. Asmus reported that
this has been resolved and included in the Policy.
PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION Sergeant Cox expressed the Association's concern
AND UNIT DETERMINATION (8C) in requesting that this section be deleted.
He stated, however, that given the same assurance
that the Policy will be reviewed at least on an
annua) basis, the Association would not pursue
this item.
Draft language of It was moved by Councilman Egdahl, seconded by
8C accepted Councilman Hyde and unanimously carried by those
present that the draft language be accepted for
8C.
City Council Meeting -3- April 21, 1976
Petition for Certification and Unit
Determination
The Municipal Employee Relations Officer
may initiate determination of such other
appropriate representation units as he
may consider necessary based upon criteria
contained within this Policy.
CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING Assistant City Manager Asmus explained that this
REPRESENTATION UNITS (9B) particular section was diSCUSSed at length with
Sergeant Cox and the Association's attorney. Mr.
Lindber9, the City Attorney, also reviewed the
section, and no one could interpret it the same.
The draft language presented to the Council is what
the staff believes the Government Code Section
3508 means.
Mr. Asmus further explained that the section
stipulates that "peace officers shall be included
in a unit or units consisting solely of peace
officers..." and therefore, if they wanted to join
the Teamsters Union, for instance, they would not
be able to.
Sergeant Cox mentioned the word "subordinate,"
explaining that if they were to join the Teamsters
and were not subordinate to that organization, they
would comply with this section of the Policy. He
added that the City cannot preclude the peace
officers from belonging to any organization of their
choice.
Discussion A general discussion followed in which the Council
and staff discussed the significance of having the
section delineated in the Policy.
Mr. Asmus commented that he believes the whole
matter will be clarified within one or two years
by the State legislation.
Motion to adopt It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded by
draft language of 9B Councilman Egdahl and unanimously carried by those
present that the staff's draft language for 9B
be adopted.
Criteria for Determining Representation Units
Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of
the section, peace officers shall be included
in a unit or units consisting solely of peace
officers and shall not participate in any
employee organization(s) or be represented
by any employee organization{s) subordinate
to any other organization; management em-
ployees shall be in a unit consisting solely
of management employe~s; confidential em-
ployees shall only be in a unit consisting
solely of confidential employees~ super-
visory employees shall not be denied the
right to be represented in a separate unit
from non-supervisory employees; and pro-
fessional employees shall not be denied
the right to be represented in a separate
unit from non-professional employees.
IMPASSE PROCEDURES Donald Byrum, representing the Fire Fighters, stated
(14B, C) that there was no statement in the section that
gives any solution to an impasse.
City Council Meeting -4- April 21, 1976
The Fire Fighters are suggesting as an alternate, a
"last best offer" which would be submitted to the
Civil Service Commission for action. This would
not be bringing in any outside third party from
the State.
Councilman Scott's opinion Councilman Scott commented that this area was a
delicate one and would be handled best in nego-
tiations rather than made a part of the Policy.
He remarked that where there is going to be labor
negotiations and there is a State law that the
employees cannot go out on strike, then those
employees who do strike should be terminated. On
the other hand, if they do not have the right to
strike, there should be some way to settle the
disputes - whether by Civil Service Commission,
Council or the electorate.
Mediation Mr. Byrum declared that the Fire Fighters would
accept this section if one change were made - on
mediation. They do not want to see the City having
the right to refuse mediation.
Discussion Director of Personnel Bigge explained that both
parties must agree - in good faith - for mediation.
If both paries are not agreeable, then it is
meaningless to have this section in.
It was noted that the Fire Fighters or any other
association still had the right to come before
the Council.
Mr. Byrum felt disputes of the employees could not
be aired satisfactory at a public hearing before
the Council. Attorney Beam remarked it would be
a public meeting, not a public hearing.
Edward Ybarra Mr. Ybarra read a statement prepared by the
Chula Vista Employees President of the organization whereby he stated
Association that the lack of advisory arbitration takes away
the employees right of fair treatment. Mr. Ybarra
added that the association agrees with the state-
ments made by Mr. Byrum.
Draft language of staff It was moved by Councilman Hyde, and seconded by
accepted Councilman Egdahl that the staff language regarding
the Impasse procedures (14B, C) be accepted.
~mpasse Procedures
B; If the impasse is not resolved following
the impasse meeting, then the City and
the certified employee organization may
agree upon the appointment of a mediator
mutually acceptable to both parties. In
the event both parties elect mediation,
but cannot mutually agree upon a mediator,
the Conciliation Services of the Cali-
fornia State Industrial Relations Depart-
ment shall be requested to provide one of
their mediator~.
1. Any mediation shall be private and a
mediator shall not make any public
recommendation nor take any public
position.
2. The costs, if any, of mediation
shall 6e divided equally betwaen
the City and the certified employee
organization.
City Council Meeting -5- April 21, 1976
C. If the parties fail to agree to submit the
dispute to mediation, or have failed to
resolve the dispute through mediation
within fifteen {15) days after the medi-
ator commenced meeting with the parties,
then matters within the scope of repre-
sentation shall be submitted to the City
Council. Any legislative action by the
City Council on the impasse shall be
final and binding.
Motion carried The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Councilmen Hyde, Egdahl, Hamilton
Noes: Councilman Scott
Absent: Councilman Hobel
CONSTRUCTION (19C) Sergeant Cox stated that the Police Officers
Association is concerned about the wordage - what
is a sickout, a slowdown or other partial stoppage
of work? He asked of 25% of the crew were off now,
it be called a flu epidemic; however, during nego-
tiations, what would it be called? The way it is
now written, one, two or three people can jeopardize
the entire bargaining unit.
Mr. Bigge explained that if 25% of the police
officers got sick and only 2% of the other City
employees got sick, then it would be considered a
concerted action.
Mr. Asmus added that it would have to be clearly
shown that the Association was behind any movement
to slowdown or stop work.
Council discussion Council discussed the meaning of the wording in
the section, the Milias Meyers Brown Act direction
to develop rules and regulations to implement the
provisions of the Act, the Skelly case, legality of
the section, and the advantages of delineating
this section in the Policy.
Motion to delete section It was moved by Councilman Hyde, seconded by
Councilman Scott and unanimously carried that this
section not be included in the Policy.
SECTION 19 - Construction
This Policy shall be administered as follows:
C. Nothing in this Policy shill be con-
strued as making the provisions of the
California Labor Code Sectio~ 923 ap-
plicable to City employees or employee
organizations, or of giving employees
or employee organizations the right to
participate in, support, cooperate or
encourage, directly or indirectly:
1. Any sickout, slowdown or other
partial ~toppage of work, In the
event employees engage in such ac-
tions, they shall ~ubject themselves
to discipline up to and including
termination.
2. Any strike or total stoppage of
work. In the event empl~,ees
engage in such actions, they
shall be deemed to have aban-
doned their employment.
City Council Meeting -6- April 21, 1976
In the event employee organizations engage
in the above actions, they may forfeit all
rights accorded them under this Policy for
a period of up to one (1) year from com-
mencement of such activity.
Motion for resolution It was moved by Councilman Egdahl, seconded by
Councilman Hyde and unanimously carried that a
resolution be brought back incorporating the
changes made today in the Policy and the inclusion
of the statement that the Policy can be reviewed
by either the staff or the employee groups at
any time other than during negotiations.
ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hamilton adjourned the meeting at 5:45 p.m.
City C1