July 2010
Probation Corrections Officers Request a Revote
On June 14, 2010, the Specialized Peace Officer (SPO) bargaining unit (which consists of members in the classifications of probation corrections officer, welfare fraud investigator and deputy coroner investigator) voted to reject the contract modification proposed by the County of San Bernardino (County). The number of "yes" votes agreeing to the contract modification proposal (proposal) was 100, but the number of "no" votes were 102.
On June 15, 2010, Chief Scray sent out an email to all Probation staff informing them that as a result of the failure of the proposal, she was considering closing down West Valley Juvenile Detention & Assessment Center (WVJDAC). As a result of the email, I began receiving telephone calls from probation corrections officers (PCOs) asking if they could revote. Virtually all calls to me for the next couple of days were from PCOs requesting the same information. Initially, I told the PCOs there would not be a revote since they had already been given the opportunity to vote. However, after a number of calls I met with Mike Eagleson, Chief of Labor Relations, to inform him of the PCOs request to revote, and their reasons for their request.
The majority of the PCOs who called complained they had already sent in their ballots by the time Chief Scray had gone out to the facilities to talk to them about the budget shortage and the different scenarios that could occur. The PCOs also stated that SEBA had not informed them that the closure of a facility would occur as a result of not agreeing to the proposal. Some claimed that since a significant amount of PCOs did not vote (221) they should be given another opportunity to vote. A few stated that SEBA had allowed revotes in previous years.
I found out that Chief Scray went out to the facilities to inform her staff of the budget situation the first week of June. It was at that time the Chief Administrative Officer released the proposed budget to the Board of Supervisors, and Department heads were given the authorization to release the information to their staff. In regard to the PCOs' complaint that SEBA did not inform them of WVDAC's closure, SEBA was never informed by the County that any facility would be closed if the proposal was rejected by the members. However, SEBA did inform members that layoffs would occur if the proposal did not pass.
A total of 423 ballots were mailed, and 202 ballots were returned. It was a record turn out for SEBA as 47.75% of the members voted! A SEBA average for number of members voting in an election or contract proposal is normally 33%. There has never been a revote in a proposed contract when the content of the contract remained unchanged. I believe members are referring to previous situations when a proposed contract is initially rejected by the membership, the proposed contract is then revised through further negotiations with the County and is sent out to the members for a vote on the revised contract proposal.
The PCOs who called requesting a revote were told there would have to be justification in order to even consider the possibility of a revote. The number of PCOs requesting a revote would have to significantly exceed the number of PCOs who voted against the proposal. Once that threshold had been reached we would have to discuss it with our legal counsel and our Board of Directors. Unfortunately, that number was not reached as of the date of the writing of this article.
|
