Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Legislation Update
On August 12, 2008, Mayor Bloomberg singed into law Intro 777 which, among other things, moves ECB into OATH. The law takes effect in thirty days.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
July 31 Meeting Report
Due to the difficulty of arranging a full bargaining session during the summer months, a “technical session” with smaller delegations for both sides was held on July 31, 2008. No new language was exchanged between the parties, but representatives from both sides informally discussed their positions on the proposals already on the table.
As a result of the discussion, certain areas of disagreement were clarified, which should help guide the course of the next negotiating sessions. As the discussions were agreed to be informal and nonbinding, they will only be summarized here.
The City explained why it preferred to use its boilerplate when the choice of language is one of form over substance. The UFT staff has started its analysis of the proposed language differences to determine what substantive impact, if any there would be by using City boilerplate as it exists in other City contracts
The City representatives also explained that some of our other proposals are actually not covered in other contracts, but exist in policies outside the terms of the collective bargaining agreements. It was suggested that the City might be willing to agree to include these proposals either in the contract or by separate side letters, provided the two sides had a meeting of the minds on all of the outstanding issues.
Last but not least, there was a philosophical discussion regarding the role of per session judges, their rights to entitlements and the need for managerial flexibility in staffing. This philosophical difference on how the City envisions our role, in comparison to our vision, goes to the heart of our negotiations. While we will continue to vigorously pursue those rights and benefits, we anticipate that these fundamental differences of perception will make an early culmination of the negotiations unlikely.
The parties are hoping to schedule the next session by mid-September. Further developments will be posted here.
As a result of the discussion, certain areas of disagreement were clarified, which should help guide the course of the next negotiating sessions. As the discussions were agreed to be informal and nonbinding, they will only be summarized here.
The City explained why it preferred to use its boilerplate when the choice of language is one of form over substance. The UFT staff has started its analysis of the proposed language differences to determine what substantive impact, if any there would be by using City boilerplate as it exists in other City contracts
The City representatives also explained that some of our other proposals are actually not covered in other contracts, but exist in policies outside the terms of the collective bargaining agreements. It was suggested that the City might be willing to agree to include these proposals either in the contract or by separate side letters, provided the two sides had a meeting of the minds on all of the outstanding issues.
Last but not least, there was a philosophical discussion regarding the role of per session judges, their rights to entitlements and the need for managerial flexibility in staffing. This philosophical difference on how the City envisions our role, in comparison to our vision, goes to the heart of our negotiations. While we will continue to vigorously pursue those rights and benefits, we anticipate that these fundamental differences of perception will make an early culmination of the negotiations unlikely.
The parties are hoping to schedule the next session by mid-September. Further developments will be posted here.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
UFT Letter to Members, July 2008
July 16, 2008
Dear Administrative Law Judge:
I am writing with information on the status of our contract negotiations with the City, as well as other developments within our ALJ Chapter.
Since the opening of negotiations on April 2nd there have been three bargaining sessions with the City, the most recent of which took place on June 25th. The Negotiating Committee and UFT representatives met again with Management representatives at the Office of Labor Relations.The parties reviewed in detail the draft contract that the City proposed to us at the last session, and moved closer to agreement on several basic issues such as Union Recognition, Union Activity, and Dues Checkoff, where the parties share some similar positions. On some of the more significant issues including Due Process Rights, Grievance Procedure, and Employee Status, differences between the two sides were identified and acknowledged, but not addressed further. As is typically the case, it is expected that meaningful discussion of monetary issues such as salary and benefits will come toward the end of the bargaining process. As such, the Union has not yet provided Management with our proposal for an hourly pay raise.
Subsequent to the June 25th meeting, the Union provided the City with a document highlighting the specific language similarities and differences between our proposals. We are now awaiting the City’s response pending review of this document, and scheduling of our next bargaining date.
The membership should keep in mind that both parties are taking the position that until an entire agreement has been reached, either side may modify, amend or withdraw any of its proposals. While it is accurate to say that most of the main issues remain unresolved, progress on some of the smaller issues is noted. Given the complex nature of the bargaining and the fact that this is a first collective bargaining agreement with the City, members should expect that we’re going to have a tough fight ahead on our most
important proposals. Although our goal is always to share with you as much information as possible, I trust that you also will be sensitive to the strategic need for certain details not to be discussed publicly and to remain within the confines of the Negotiating Committee.
In an effort to keep you as informed as possible, the UFT will host a meeting open to the whole ALJ membership this September. Negotiating Committee members and UFT representatives will be present to address your questions and discuss the issues that are on your mind. Specific information on this meeting will be mailed to you later in the summer.
On other fronts, legislation accomplishing a transfer of ECB from DEP to OATH is now working its way through the City Council. Prior to the vote and during the committee hearing process, the UFT sent a letter setting forth some concerns. A copy of that letter is enclosed.
We look forward to having a more in depth conversation with you soon and encourage you to bring any questions to the UFT event now being planned for September. In the interim, you may always feel free to speak with any of the members of the Negotiating Committee listed on the first page of this letter, or you can also contact Ilene Weinerman, Special Representative at the UFT Brooklyn Office (718-722-6902 or iweinerman@uft.org). Information can also be found on the ALJ chapter blog, the address of which is http://newyorkcityaljs.blogspot.com. Also, as a reminder, if you have moved during the last few months, please contact Ilene with your new address to be certain you receive all of the mailings from our office.
I thank you again for your support of our efforts, and hope you will have a pleasant and relaxing remainder to your summer.
Sincerely,
Howard Schoor
Brooklyn Borough Representative
Dear Administrative Law Judge:
I am writing with information on the status of our contract negotiations with the City, as well as other developments within our ALJ Chapter.
Since the opening of negotiations on April 2nd there have been three bargaining sessions with the City, the most recent of which took place on June 25th. The Negotiating Committee and UFT representatives met again with Management representatives at the Office of Labor Relations.The parties reviewed in detail the draft contract that the City proposed to us at the last session, and moved closer to agreement on several basic issues such as Union Recognition, Union Activity, and Dues Checkoff, where the parties share some similar positions. On some of the more significant issues including Due Process Rights, Grievance Procedure, and Employee Status, differences between the two sides were identified and acknowledged, but not addressed further. As is typically the case, it is expected that meaningful discussion of monetary issues such as salary and benefits will come toward the end of the bargaining process. As such, the Union has not yet provided Management with our proposal for an hourly pay raise.
Subsequent to the June 25th meeting, the Union provided the City with a document highlighting the specific language similarities and differences between our proposals. We are now awaiting the City’s response pending review of this document, and scheduling of our next bargaining date.
The membership should keep in mind that both parties are taking the position that until an entire agreement has been reached, either side may modify, amend or withdraw any of its proposals. While it is accurate to say that most of the main issues remain unresolved, progress on some of the smaller issues is noted. Given the complex nature of the bargaining and the fact that this is a first collective bargaining agreement with the City, members should expect that we’re going to have a tough fight ahead on our most
important proposals. Although our goal is always to share with you as much information as possible, I trust that you also will be sensitive to the strategic need for certain details not to be discussed publicly and to remain within the confines of the Negotiating Committee.
In an effort to keep you as informed as possible, the UFT will host a meeting open to the whole ALJ membership this September. Negotiating Committee members and UFT representatives will be present to address your questions and discuss the issues that are on your mind. Specific information on this meeting will be mailed to you later in the summer.
On other fronts, legislation accomplishing a transfer of ECB from DEP to OATH is now working its way through the City Council. Prior to the vote and during the committee hearing process, the UFT sent a letter setting forth some concerns. A copy of that letter is enclosed.
We look forward to having a more in depth conversation with you soon and encourage you to bring any questions to the UFT event now being planned for September. In the interim, you may always feel free to speak with any of the members of the Negotiating Committee listed on the first page of this letter, or you can also contact Ilene Weinerman, Special Representative at the UFT Brooklyn Office (718-722-6902 or iweinerman@uft.org). Information can also be found on the ALJ chapter blog, the address of which is http://newyorkcityaljs.blogspot.com. Also, as a reminder, if you have moved during the last few months, please contact Ilene with your new address to be certain you receive all of the mailings from our office.
I thank you again for your support of our efforts, and hope you will have a pleasant and relaxing remainder to your summer.
Sincerely,
Howard Schoor
Brooklyn Borough Representative
UFT Letter to City Council on ECB
Council Member Simcha Felder
Chair, Committee on Governmental Operations
NY City Council
250 Broadway—17th floor
New York, NY 10007
Council Member David Yassky
Chair, Committee on Small Business
NY City Council
250 Broadway—18th floor
New York, NY 10007
June 19, 2008
Dear Chairpersons Yassky and Felder:
As you may be aware, all of the per diem Administrative Law Judges of
the ECB are now represented by the United Federation of Teachers, after last summer’s landslide vote of 221 - 7 in favor of unionizing. Negotiations with the City toward a first collective bargaining agreement are now in progress. The Union has been offered an opportunity to comment on the proposed legislation, and for the record, has the following observation.
In an address to the Virginia State Convention of 1829-30, Chief Justice John Marshall stated:
"The independence of all those who try causes between man and man, and between man and his government, can be maintained only by the tenure of their office. I have always thought, from my earliest youth till now that the greatest scourge an angry Heaven ever inflicted upon an ungrateful and sinning people, was an ignorant, a corrupt, or a dependent Judiciary."
We agree that impartiality and independence are the foundation of fairness to respondents, and that the quality of administrative law adjudication should be constantly improved. The display of these qualities is dependent upon the integrity and strong ethical standards of each individual judge. While the general goals of the proposed legislation are laudable, the current City Council proposal contains no structural or institutional protection for the decision-making independence of ECB’s Administrative Law Judges. Consequently, these per diem judges may be dismissed at any time and for any reason.
Prior versions of this legislation provided 4-year terms for the ALJs. Currently, OATH judges are appointed to a 5-year term. In the absence of this type of protection, much of what the City Council hopes to achieve with this proposal may not come to fruition. We strongly urge the City Council to include a provision that protects the rights of ECB’s Administrative Law Judges and safeguards against the possibility of their arbitrary dismissal.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Howard Schoor
Brooklyn Borough Representative
Chair, Committee on Governmental Operations
NY City Council
250 Broadway—17th floor
New York, NY 10007
Council Member David Yassky
Chair, Committee on Small Business
NY City Council
250 Broadway—18th floor
New York, NY 10007
June 19, 2008
Dear Chairpersons Yassky and Felder:
As you may be aware, all of the per diem Administrative Law Judges of
the ECB are now represented by the United Federation of Teachers, after last summer’s landslide vote of 221 - 7 in favor of unionizing. Negotiations with the City toward a first collective bargaining agreement are now in progress. The Union has been offered an opportunity to comment on the proposed legislation, and for the record, has the following observation.
In an address to the Virginia State Convention of 1829-30, Chief Justice John Marshall stated:
"The independence of all those who try causes between man and man, and between man and his government, can be maintained only by the tenure of their office. I have always thought, from my earliest youth till now that the greatest scourge an angry Heaven ever inflicted upon an ungrateful and sinning people, was an ignorant, a corrupt, or a dependent Judiciary."
We agree that impartiality and independence are the foundation of fairness to respondents, and that the quality of administrative law adjudication should be constantly improved. The display of these qualities is dependent upon the integrity and strong ethical standards of each individual judge. While the general goals of the proposed legislation are laudable, the current City Council proposal contains no structural or institutional protection for the decision-making independence of ECB’s Administrative Law Judges. Consequently, these per diem judges may be dismissed at any time and for any reason.
Prior versions of this legislation provided 4-year terms for the ALJs. Currently, OATH judges are appointed to a 5-year term. In the absence of this type of protection, much of what the City Council hopes to achieve with this proposal may not come to fruition. We strongly urge the City Council to include a provision that protects the rights of ECB’s Administrative Law Judges and safeguards against the possibility of their arbitrary dismissal.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Howard Schoor
Brooklyn Borough Representative
Friday, June 13, 2008
Message From Wayne Greene
I will be commencing a full time position with the Department of Health & Mental Hygiene on June 23rd. In anticipation of that, I have resigned from the Negotiating Committee. To avoid any conflict, I did not attend the negotiating session that took place on June 6th. It has been a pleasure working with everyone on the Committee, and I wish you all great success.
Wayne Greene
Wayne Greene
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Report about our second negotiation session with the city
The Negotiating Committee and our representatives from the UFT met with the city's negotiators for the second time on Friday June 6. The city's representatives presented what they styled a comprehensive agreement. After caucusing, we asked a number of specific questions and received a number of specific answers about the proffered agreement. It was then agreed that the next negotiating session would be held in several weeks, after the committee has had time to review the proffered agreement in further detail. The initial review of the agreement reveals that the City has adopted some of our demands verbatim while rejecting and/or ignoring others. Some demands have been countered by provisions very close to our demands. The next meeting with the city's representatives will take place before the end of this month, and we will keep the membership up to date as to our progress.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Report about our first negotiation session with the City
As scheduled, all nine members of the Negotiating Committee and one alternate member, along with our UFT representatives, sat down with representatives of the city for our first bargaining session on Wednesday April 2. Present for the city were several representatives each of the three agencies (DOH, ECB, TLC), as well as representatives from OLR, OATH, OMB and the Mayor’s Office. We presented written contract demands and, as expected, the OLR representatives indicated that they needed some time to review and develop their response to the comprehensive set of proposals that we have submitted. If anyone is interested in seeing a copy of the proposals, ask a member of the committee next time you see one, or e-mail us at newyorkcityaljs+negotiations@gmail.com.
Monday, March 3, 2008
ALJ CLE from OATH
On March 11, the Administrative Judicial Institute, a division of OATH, is offering a free CLE titled "New York City Administrative Law Judges: Practice and Career Perspectives". All the details can be found here: http://nyc.gov/html/oath/html/inst_training.html
They ask you to register by March 5th, so sign up soon.
And did I mention it's free?
They ask you to register by March 5th, so sign up soon.
And did I mention it's free?
Friday, February 29, 2008
City Council Update
On Wednesday, February 20th, Ethan Finneran and I, together with our two UFT organizers, met with two City Council staff members. This meeting arose as a result of the UFT's relationship with the City Council. Although the Council has its own agenda, it was clear that they are interested in the concerns of the ALJs.
The most significant point is that the UFT has enabled us to obtain a line of communication and influence in the legislative process. The Council staff was receptive to our concerns about any possible transfer of ECB to OATH.
We also learned that there is no bill drafted yet by the Council staff, and no bill has been presented for introduction to the Council. We were assured that we would be notified and consulted about any legislation that does get drafted.
It was also clear that the two Council staff members wanted as much detail as possible from us about the workings of ECB. Ethan and I presented, apparently for the first time, a more complete picture of ECB and an appreciation of the complexities involved in its operation.
-- Scott Kegelman
The most significant point is that the UFT has enabled us to obtain a line of communication and influence in the legislative process. The Council staff was receptive to our concerns about any possible transfer of ECB to OATH.
We also learned that there is no bill drafted yet by the Council staff, and no bill has been presented for introduction to the Council. We were assured that we would be notified and consulted about any legislation that does get drafted.
It was also clear that the two Council staff members wanted as much detail as possible from us about the workings of ECB. Ethan and I presented, apparently for the first time, a more complete picture of ECB and an appreciation of the complexities involved in its operation.
-- Scott Kegelman
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Update on Contract Negotiations
Last month the UFT sent a formal request to the city to begin contract negotiations. So far, we have not had a reply. However, the UFT negotiators tell us that this is not unusual, and that typically the city takes several months before beginning to negotiate. There is no formal deadline for a response from the city, but failing to reply after a long period of time could be seen as a failure to negotiate in good faith.
In the meantime, the Negotiating Committee is continuing to meet, keeping an eye on the ongoing changes at ECB and considering how these might alter our negotiating stance.
As always, we will keep the membership informed of any new developments.
In the meantime, the Negotiating Committee is continuing to meet, keeping an eye on the ongoing changes at ECB and considering how these might alter our negotiating stance.
As always, we will keep the membership informed of any new developments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)