Legislature(2015 - 2016)SENATE FINANCE 532
02/24/2016 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Sheldon Fisher, Commissioner, Department of Administration: Contracts | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
February 24, 2016
9:08 a.m.
9:08:07 AM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair MacKinnon called the Senate Finance Committee
meeting to order at 9:08 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Anna MacKinnon, Co-Chair
Senator Pete Kelly, Co-Chair
Senator Peter Micciche, Vice-Chair
Senator Click Bishop
Senator Mike Dunleavy
Senator Lyman Hoffman
Senator Donny Olson
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Sheldon Fisher, Commissioner, Department of Administration;
Kate Sheehan, Director, Division of Personnel and Labor
Relations.
SUMMARY
^SHELDON FISHER, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION: CONTRACTS
9:09:01 AM
SHELDON FISHER, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION,
discussed the PowerPoint, "Understanding Labor Contracts"
(copy on file).
Commissioner Fisher addressed slide 2, "Bargaining 101":
•Negotiations are mandated by the Public Employment
Relations Act (PERA) AS 23.40.070-23.40.250.
•The State begins bargaining successor agreements
between October and December; start date may be
accelerated if both parties agree.
•Wages, hours and other terms and conditions of
employment are mandatory subjects of bargaining.
•The State may, but is not required to, negotiate
permissive subjects of bargaining.
-Classification, retiree benefits, representation
of non-permanent employees
•Monetary terms must be approved by the Legislature.
-Provided that monetary terms of agreements are
submitted to the Legislature by the 60th day,
PERA requires legislative session consideration
during that calendar year.
-If rejected by the Legislature, then it is as if
there is no agreement. The parties must
renegotiate to impasse or agreement.
•If negotiations do not lead to agreement and
mediation fails, employees have the right to strike.
-Exception: protective service personnel do not
have the right to strike but must enter binding
arbitration after impasse.
•Employees who are on strike do not get paid, but may
not be terminated because they choose to lawfully
strike.
•Striking employees may be replaced - either
temporarily for the duration of the strike, or
permanently under certain circumstances.
Co-Chair MacKinnon handed the gavel to Co-Chair Kelly.
Commissioner Fisher highlighted slide 3, "Monetary Terms":
Marine Units (IBU, MEBA, MMP)
•Cost of living differential (COLD)
•Travel pay
•Training funding
•Pass privileges
•Non-watch pay
Correctional Officers
•Uniform allowance
•Duty station incentive pay (Spring Creek)
•Education incentive pay
•Prisoner transportation officer cert pay
•CDL Cert pay
Public Safety
•Uniform allowance
•State provided medical exams
•Pilot, diver, and canine pay
Mt. Edgecumbe Teachers
•Family night pay
•Activities and extracurricular pay
General Government Unit
•Sea duty pay
•Uniform provision
•Life, Travel, and Accident insurance
•Travel and per diem
Labor Trades and Crafts
•First Aid training
•Subsistence pay
•Tool allowance
•Bunkhouse and housing rentals
Supervisory Union
•Hazard pay
•Supervisory differential
•Sea duty pay
•Physicals
Alaska Vocational Technical Center Teachers
•Initial Teacher Placement and Step Advancement
•Department Head Pay
•Sabbatical Leave
9:13:39 AM
Commissioner Fisher discussed slide 4, "Range of Options to
Reach Resolution":
Impasse and Implement
•Sometimes described as the "nuclear option."
Arbitrate
•Arbitrator will determine.
-Interest Arbitration: "split-the-baby" and
give each side something.
-Baseball Arbitration: Must choose one
proposal
Negotiate - Settle
•Both sides get something out of negotiations.
9:16:43 AM
Commissioner Fisher highlighted slide 5, "Bargaining Unit
(BU) Detail." The slide showed the bargaining units; the
number of employees; and the negotiation schedule. He
stated that, currently, there were negotiations with five
of the bargaining units. He shared that LTC-Public
Employees, Local 71 had been negotiating for over a year.
He remarked that the five bargaining units plus the non-
covered employees that follow the terms of the bargained
agreement, then 87 percent of the employees were impacted
by the current round of negotiations.
Vice-Chair Micciche queried when the costs associated with
the 2015-2016 negotiations impact the state budget.
Commissioner Fisher replied that the five BUs were intended
for the FY 16 budget.
Vice-Chair Micciche wondered whether the five would be
completed by the end of the current fiscal year.
Commissioner Fisher replied that there was a slide
pertaining to that question. He stated were two more units
that he believed would be completed by the sixtieth day. He
stated that the APEA would not be completed by the sixtieth
day. He was optimistic that negotiations would be complete
by the end of the legislative session.
Co-Chair MacKinnon wondered what unit had not closed their
contract negotiations. Commissioner Fisher replied that LTC
[Labor, Trades, and Crafts] Local 71 had not completed
their negotiations. He furthered that there was progress in
the negotiations, and was optimistic that it would be
complete by the sixtieth day of session.
Vice-Chair Micciche wondered whether the Marine Highway
System union was completed, but not yet ratified by the
member. Commissioner Fisher responded in the affirmative
and explained that a negotiation was reached in the summer
of 2014. The negotiation was approved by the legislature in
the previous session, but it had not yet been submitted for
ratification. He explained that it was currently stuck in
mediation, and was ongoing. He shared that the status quo
continued, and was, in some respects, more favorable for
the state. He explained that the status quo was less costly
to the state, than the approved negotiation. He remarked
that he was confused why the union would resist the
approved negotiation.
9:21:18 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon wondered if there was a cost of living
allowance (COLA) in the group. Commissioner Fisher replied
in the affirmative and explained that the COLA was zero in
the first year. The contract was now in the second year, at
a time for an agreed 1 percent COLA. Without the
ratification, the state was not paying the COLA.
Co-Chair MacKinnon noted that there was a bill to remove or
reduce COLA. She wondered whether the legislation referred
to the terms in the contract. She explained that there was
a state statute with some COLA.
Senator Dunleavy shared that the legislation was about the
geographic differential.
Co-Chair MacKinnon wondered whether the group benefitted
from the geographic differential. Commissioner Fisher
replied that it depended on different terms.
Co-Chair Kelly asked for a restatement.
Commissioner Fisher explained that the group had both a
COLA and geographic differential provision. There were
other terms, which were sometimes used, such as subsistence
pay to address geographic cost differential. He was not
aware of the legislation, and whether it would impact the
group.
Senator Dunleavy surmised that the group had not received
the one percent COLA. He remarked that often, the final
settlement, would retroactively pay the COLA. He wondered
if that was part of the plan. Commissioner Fisher replied
that he had not planned for retroactive pay. He stressed
that the COLA would be distributed, as long as the units
were agreed on schedule.
Co-Chair Kelly queried the timeframe on ratification of the
negotiation. He wondered if there was a statutory limit.
9:24:20 AM
KATE SHEEHAN, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF PERSONNEL AND LABOR
RELATIONS, replied that there was no timeframe for
ratification in neither statute nor collective bargaining
agreement.
Co-Chair Kelly queried provisions in the contract or
statute, which protected the state from paying a
retroactive lump sum. Ms. Sheehan responded that there was
no retroactive payment requirement.
Senator Dunleavy surmised that the situation existed in the
current contract. Commissioner Fisher agreed.
Senator Dunleavy announced that retroactive payments only
occurred upon approval. Commissioner Fisher agreed.
Senator Dunleavy wondered whether the imposition of terms
and conditions was considered in the negotiations.
Commissioner Fisher replied that he assumed that
negotiating impasse and implementing the best finals.
Senator Dunleavy agreed.
Co-Chair Kelly for a restatement of the question.
Senator Dunleavy explained that there was a concept called
"imposition of terms and conditions" when reaching an
impasse in negotiations. He wondered whether that was a
tool in the process. He asked if that concept was excluded
from the process. Commissioner Fisher replied in the
negative.
Co-Chair Kelly encouraged the commissioner to resist
retroactive COLA payments. He felt that the legislature
would look unfavorably on a retroactive payment.
Vice-Chair Micciche wondered whether there was a sense of
willingness of flexibility in negotiations with the five
units. Commissioner Fisher replied in the affirmative. He
remarked that the bargaining units were different from one
another. He shared that the two bargaining units who had
been given terms included GGU, who had recognized that they
needed to make concessions. He shared that the employees
could not solve the fiscal crisis, but there was a
recognition of the budget problem.
Co-Chair MacKinnon noted that the Marine Engineers
Beneficial Association (MEBA) had 103 bargaining unit
members with an overtime cost exceeding $1 million. She
assumed that it was an average of approximately $9800
overtime paid to each individual. She wondered how someone
can reside in a separate port than they worked. Ms. Sheehan
surmised that Co-Chair MacKinnon was wondering how one
person could be paid from a different port than their home
port.
9:29:42 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon replied in the affirmative, and also
queried the reason for high overtime for MEBA. Ms. Sheehan
deferred to the Alaska Marine Highway on overtime. She
announced that there were different provisions for the
different vessel assignments: home port and home vessel.
She remarked that, depending on the quarterly schedule, one
may be assigned to a vessel outside of the home port. She
agreed to provide more information.
Co-Chair MacKinnon wondered if the employees were on four-
hour cycles on board ship. Ms. Sheehan replied that she
believed that marine engineers on the Southwest system
worked 8.4 hours on some vessels. She furthered that some
worked 12 hour days on the Southeast system, with two weeks
on and two weeks off.
Co-Chair MacKinnon queried more information about $10,000
of overtime per individual annually. She felt the overtime
could be better managed.
Commissioner Fisher completed discussing slide 5.
Commissioner Fisher displayed slide 6, "Negotiating
Framework: Cash Compensation":
•Cash Component of Compensation
-Below Market
•High income professional employees tend to
be below market
•New employees tend to be below market
-Above Market
•Low income employees tend to be at or above
market
•More tenured employees tend to be above
market
Vice-Chair Micciche requested a full-burden comparison.
Commissioner Fisher agreed to provide that information.
Co-Chair MacKinnon surmised that in 2014 the combined COLA
and merit increases in the 10-year cycles was nearly 62
percent. Commissioner Fisher agreed.
Co-Chair MacKinnon queried the classification of the "low
income" workforce. Commissioner Fisher replied that "lower"
may be a better term. He shared that those employees were
generally class 15 and below. Their compensation would be
between $40,000 to $45,000 and less.
Senator Bishop requested a slide that showed the number of
employees by range.
Co-Chair MacKinnon stated that there was an average pay
scenario. She wanted to see how each unit was populated,
and the salaries that the employees were moving through.
Commissioner Fisher agreed to provide that information.
9:36:48 AM
AT EASE
9:38:28 AM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Kelly asked about the merit system, and wondered
if the commissioner had explored the possibility of
switching to every two years for new employees. He remarked
that it could possibly save the state $19 million in two
years. He queried the pitfalls of that possibility.
Commissioner Fisher replied that he had also analyzed that
possibility. He explained that the presentation showed
that, given that overall cash compensation was below
market, and benefits were above market. Therefore, the
negotiations focused on attempting to bring the benefits in
line. The cash compensation was not a focus of the
negotiations.
Co-Chair Kelly interjected that there could be a statute
change for new employees. He wondered if that change would
affect the negotiations. Commissioner Fisher believed that
the change would be negotiated in the bargaining unit.
Ms. Sheehan echoed Commissioner Fisher's response, and
explained that it would be negotiated for the classified
employees.
9:40:28 AM
Senator Dunleavy asked about the spread between the red and
green lines on the graph. He wondered why the red line was
assigned 44 percent, when it appeared to be above the 60
percent mark. Commissioner Fisher replied that he would
need to confirm those numbers. He explained that the blue
line represented the COLA.
Senator Dunleavy queried the actual percent. He wondered
what was causing the spread, or whether the spread actually
existed. He noted that after 2004 the lines did not
converge. Commissioner Fisher explained that the lines
represented a brand new employee from 2004. He stated that,
by definition, everything started at a zero point. He
remarked that the lines represented the COLA and merit
increments.
Senator Dunleavy asked about the green line as compared to
the red line, and wondered why there was such a spread
between the two. Commissioner Fisher stated that the COLA
increases were roughly comparable to the CPI. The merit
increases drove the additional growth. He referred to the
salary schedule that the state had created.
Senator Dunleavy noted that the state created the salary
schedule. He wondered if it was a negotiation process or
another framework. Commissioner Fisher replied that it was
a combination of the two.
Senator Dunleavy stressed that the framework was created
within the negotiations. He wondered if the requirements
were in statute or by negotiation. Commissioner Fisher
responded that it was not required by statute. He stated
that it was either through negotiation or through a
unilateral decision to add increases in an un-bargained
sense. He stressed that any changes must be bargained.
Senator Bishop queried the benefits of above and below
market, and which benefit was the biggest driver.
Commissioner Fisher replied with slide 7.
9:46:25 AM
Co-Chair Kelly felt uncomfortable with the notion of the
state recruiting the best people. He stressed that the
private sector was in competition with the state, and felt
it was difficult for the private sector to keep up with the
state. He remarked that he did not see people moving from
state government to the private sector, rather he sees
people moving from the private sector to state government.
He shared that many businesses had a difficult time
retaining personnel, because most employees wanted a state
job. He preferred that the best engineer was working for
the company building the bridge, rather than the one who
was making the regulation.
Senator Bishop queried the level retention and recruitment
of state employees. Commissioner Fisher responded that he
did not have numbers for the tier 4 employees. He surmised
that the retention was probably below average for an
employer. He stated that there was early turnover in the
life cycle of an employee, which was not unusual and
supported the hypothesis that the employees entered below
market. He felt that there was a struggle to find qualified
employees for the higher skilled positions.
Co-Chair Kelly observed that many university employees
moved to other agencies, rather than to the private sector.
Vice-Chair Micciche expressed respect for the
commissioner's experience in the private sector. He shared
the comparisons of actual cash calls across the state. He
remarked that it was difficult to determine the actual
salary increases, including COLA and geographic
differential. He shared that there were some departments
that had difficulty retaining employees. He felt that there
was enough Department of Labor and Workforce Development
(DOLFD) to evaluate the average private sector increase
from 2004 to 2014. He requested that information. He did
not want an increase that seemed higher than the private
sector. Commissioner Fisher responded that he would provide
specifics. He agreed that the growth was higher than
traditions in the marketplace.
9:52:49 AM
Vice-Chair Micciche remarked that there could be the same
comparison at an entry level position in the private
sector. He queried further information. Commissioner Fisher
agreed to provide some of the requested information.
Vice-Chair Micciche restated that his request may give the
public a more realistic view. He did not believe that the
public employees were dramatically overcompensated.
Co-Chair Kelly shared that he had been in a previously
legislature that provided a study showing that the lower
level employees were overcompensated, and the higher level
employees were undercompensated. He stressed that many
employees believed that the state was a more secure
environment than and oil company. He shared that BP had
expressed that they wanted similar support to the state.
Senator Bishop requested a 10-year analysis of how many
employees had left state service.
9:55:49 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked that all state contributions be
examined. She remarked that she wanted to look at SBS and
the viability of social security. She noted that the state
currently faced an unfunded pension liability. She felt
that a ten year examination would help to understand
whether the employees were undervalue entering the system,
the cost to carry forward, and how quickly the employees
meet their peers in the private sector or federal
government. She remarked that the federal government was
often taking the state employees than the private sectors,
specifically in the natural resources section. She wondered
if the Court System was a 15-year retirement. She stressed
that there were fixed numbers with long-term implications.
Co-Chair Kelly remarked that he would like to continue with
the presentation.
9:59:53 AM
Commissioner Fisher addressed slide 7, "Negotiating
Framework: Benefits":
Employee Benefits: Overall tend to be above market.
•Health Benefit:
•Economy Plan - zero employee premiums
•Low deductible options across plans
•Flat rate for dependents
•Retiree health insurance with 10 years of
service
•Retiree premium percentage lowers with
longer term of service
•Pension: Alaska Public Employees' (PERS) and
Teachers' Retirement (TRS) Systems are hybrid
defined benefit and defined contribution plans
providing:
•Contribution amounts structured to reach
retirement goals
•PERS: 8 percent employee + 5 percent
employer + 12.26 percent SBS totaling:
25.26 percent
•TRS: 8 percent employee + 7 percent
employer +12.26 percent SBS totaling:
27.26 percent
•Most private plans offer employer
match of 3-4 percent
•Leave accrual (even with negotiated caps)
•Accrue 270 hours per year (36 days)
•After 10 years, if hired before 7/1/13
•After 15 years, if hired on or after
7/1/13
•Job Flexibility
•Alternative work weeks
•Hours worked: 37.5 hours
10:05:47 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon requested the total liability of
outstanding accrued leave. Commissioner Fisher agreed to
provide that information.
Commissioner Fisher looked at slide 8, "Negotiating
Framework: State and National Trends":
National:
•2007-2015 saw little to no pay increases
•Current trends include pay increases,
elimination of furloughs
State:
•Municipality of Anchorage: 1.5 percent COLA per
year for 3 years
•Anchorage School District: 1 percent COLA +
$1,000 bonus through 2017
•Juneau School District: 2 percent COLA, 1 year
agreement
Commissioner Fisher highlighted slide 9, "Bargaining
Priorities":
Cash Component:
-Overall below market
-Current Fiscal climate requires modest
reductions
-0-0-0 percent
-15 hours of furlough per employee per
fiscal year
-Modest changes to other monetary terms of
the CBAs
•Benefits:
-Overall above Market
-Healthcare costs are growing at a multiple of
inflation making cost containment a critical
objective of these negotiations
-Ask Employees to accept plan design changes
and contribute to monthly health care
premiums in order to control costs and align
interests in minimizing future cost
increases.
-For employees that are not part of
AlaskaCare, we want to right-size health
trust reserves
•Other Priorities
-Performance Evaluations: Create a meaningful
performance view system
-Consistency
-Create consistency in our contracts
-For example: Leave, administrative manual,
travel rules, pay procedures
-Flexibility
-Create flexibility in our contracts.
-For example: contracting out, promotional
rules
-Leave Terms - continue the progress of prior
negotiations to address leave accruals
10:10:47 AM
Commissioner Fisher discussed slide 10, "Status of
Contracts Before the Legislature":
TEAME (27 Employees)
•Contract expired June 30, 2015
•Agreement reached December 2015, ratified by
members
•Contract pending Legislative approval
Terms Include:
•0-0-0
•Addition of coordinators to improve student
activity sponsorship
•Improvements and clarifications to the
grievance process
•Additional time for management to complete
annual evaluations
•Contract language improvements regarding
leave use, cash-in, and donation
ASEA (GGU, 8,795 Employees)
•Contract expires June 30, 2016
•Agreement reached February 2016, pending
ratification by members
•Contract pending Legislative approval.
Terms Include:
•0-0-0
•Reduced health care contribution rate in
FY17
•Furloughs
•Improvements to the grievance and complaint
process
•Performance tied geographic limitation for
layoffs
•Contract language improvements for finance
and payroll processing
•Transition fully to the Administrative
Manual for Travel and Per Diem
Co-Chair MacKinnon noted a contentious closeout during the
previous session. She valued all state employees and
appreciated the terms and concessions for both parties; and
the willingness to work together. She thanked the committee
members who reached out to the individuals that would
benefit from the agreement.
Commissioner Fisher addressed slide 11, "FY 2017 Savings":
•Healthcare contribution: Reduced payment in FY 17,
growing in FY 19.
•Furlough Savings
-$3.3m Gross Employee Savings
•Forecasted 2.6m will be cashed in by
Employees
-$763k Employer Savings
•22 percent Pension Contribution
•1.15 percent Term Leave Rate
10:17:07 AM
Co-Chair Kelly queried the number on the graph.
Commissioner Fisher replied that the number was in the
lower right hand column of the upper chart.
Vice-Chair Micciche queried the process for valuing
accrual. Commissioner Fisher agreed to provide that
information. He stressed that the state had previously
negotiated changes and caps to the accrual rates. He
stressed that the state was above market, and he hoped that
the BUs would become in line with the other BUs in the
private sector and the market.
Commissioner Fisher discussed slide 12, "Update on Other
Negotiations":
•Labor Trades and Crafts (LTC) - 1,772 Employees
-On-going
-Likelihood of reaching agreement by sixtieth Day
•Supervisor's Union(SU) - 2,317 Employees
-On-going
-Challenging negotiations
-Possibility of not reaching agreement by
sixtieth Day
•Confidential Employees Association - 204 Empl.
-On-going
-Likelihood of reaching agreement by sixtieth Day
•Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association (MEBA) - 103
Employees
-Tentative agreement July 2014 (0 percent- 1
percent- 2 percent). Legislature approved
contract in 2015. MEBA has yet to send contract
for a vote. Mediation pending
10:20:47 AM
Senator Dunleavy noted that there was a tentative
agreement, but the members would not send the contract for
a vote. Commissioner Fisher agreed. He explained that MEBA
had felt that there was a misunderstanding of the terms.
The administration was negotiating a resolution.
Co-Chair MacKinnon wondered if the MEBA contract was
currently zero. Commissioner Fisher replied in the
negative.
Co-Chair MacKinnon surmised that MEBA saw a
misunderstanding. Commissioner Fisher replied that there
were good faith negotiations, and any deviation would imply
that there would be an examination of new terms.
Senator Dunleavy wondered if the misunderstood items were
the only reevaluated items. Commissioner Fisher replied
that MEBA wanted the administration to accept terms that
would increase cost. He stated that the administration was
pushing back on that request, which caused all items to
blend together.
Senator Hoffman wondered if DOA must reach terms by the
sixtieth day of session. Commissioner Fisher replied that
DOA would not bring the contract for legislative approval,
if MEBA agreed to the terms.
Senator Hoffman asked if the complete package would be up
for approval by the legislature. Commissioner Fisher
replied in the affirmative.
Senator Hoffman asked if the timeframe was in the 60 day
rule. Commissioner Fisher replied in the affirmative.
Senator Hoffman wondered if the legislature could withdraw
the terms of the agreement. Commissioner Fisher replied
that there was no progress with MEBA, so he did not believe
that the agreement would be made by the sixtieth day. He
deferred to Ms. Sheehan.
Ms. Sheehan deferred to a legal position regarding whether
the legislature could withdraw the terms of the agreement.
10:26:47 AM
Senator Olson queried any plans to continue with the Marine
Highway System, should a strike take place. Commissioner
Fisher responded that both parties had filed an unfair
labor practice claim against the other. He explained that a
strike was not entitled during that claim.
Senator Olson queried the administration's plan to continue
service. Commissioner Fisher deferred to the marine
highway.
Commissioner Fisher addressed slide 13, "Next Steps"
•The Legislature decides whether to fund the monetary
terms.
-The monetary terms of a collective bargaining
agreement are subject to funding by legislative
appropriation. (AS 23.40.21)
-If the Legislature fails to fund the monetary
terms of an agreement, the next steps vary by
bargaining unit and may be affected by whether a
tentative agreement was reached with sufficient
time to permit submittal by the sixtieth day of
session.
•A contract submitted to the Legislature after the
sixtieth day does not prevent the Legislature from
either considering or funding the contract.
•If a union fails to ratify the agreement, then the
funding is reduced proportionately, and we operate
under status quo and return to negotiations.
Commissioner Fisher looked at slide 14, "Rejection of
Monetary Terms: CBA Terms":
If the monetary terms of an agreement are rejected the
following contractual provisions apply:
ASEA: Re-enter negotiations for 10 days; if no
agreement, Class 2 and Class 3 employees may take
a strike vote
APEA: Not required to enter negotiations; impasse
exists and members may call for a strike vote
CEA: Must re-enter negotiations upon demand by
either party; negotiations last for 10 days but
may be extended by mutual agreement; if no
agreement, impasse exists and members may call
for a strike vote
IBU: Must re-enter negotiations within five days
MEBA: Must re-enter negotiations immediately
MMP: Must re-enter negotiations immediately
PSEA: Upon written request, immediately negotiate
a mutually satisfactory supplemental agreement
ACOA: Must re-enter negotiations immediately
LTC: Impasse exists and parties agree to pursue
reasonable efforts to obtain a mutually
satisfactory resolution
AVTECTA: Must re-enter negotiations
TEAME: Must re-enter negotiations immediately
*Note: No definition of "immediately" is provided for
in the collective bargaining agreements.
10:30:28 AM
Senator Dunleavy noted that there had been increases in
pay, but there was still difficulty in retaining personnel.
He wondered whether the state could make nonmonetary
efforts to retain personnel. He felt that there was a
similar situation with teachers in rural Alaska. He
remarked that the pay was decent, but there were other
factors that pushed those teachers away such as working
conditions. Commissioner Fisher responded that there was an
attempt to maintain a constructive and balanced approach to
the negotiations.
Senator Dunleavy requested some legislative remedy
suggestions that could enhance the tools. Commissioner
Fisher agreed to provide that information.
Co-Chair MacKinnon expressed appreciation for the appendix
document. She queried the administration's management of
overtime. She stressed that there were extreme overtime
costs to the state in the marine highway system.
Commissioner Fisher agreed to provide that information. He
stated that overtime was managed at the department level.
10:36:38 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon felt that there were some issues related
to the equal furlough across the board. Commissioner Fisher
replied that there was work to ensure that there was equity
in the furlough participation.
Senator Bishop felt that overtime must be examined by
bargaining unit. He remarked that there were situations
that caused the overtime.
Senator Hoffman looked at slide 19, and queried the details
about the hiring levels. He requested details about those
hired above the exemption rule.
ADJOURNMENT
10:40:05 AM
The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 022416 Updated DOA-SFIN_Labor_Contracts_2 24 16 FINAL.pdf |
SFIN 2/24/2016 9:00:00 AM |
Presentation: Labor Contracts |