2008 Woodie Awards
CSEA seeks overtime pay for staffers
Union awaits outcome of unfair labor practice filed in November last year.
Seth Nidever
Issue date: 5/7/04 Section: News
- Page 1 of 2 next >
The classified union of the Kern Community College District is awaiting the outcome of an unfair labor practices charge it filed against the district on Nov. 1 relating to a change in working hours, union officials say.
In a formal hearing, union officials will challenge the administration's unilateral decision last spring to increase Monday to Thursday hours for many staff members from eight to nine with a four-hour shift on Fridays. They say that was a violation of collective bargaining rules requiring the district to consult with the union.
"By law, they have to negotiate," said Mike Nolan, the union's outgoing labor relations representative. "Wages, hours, and working conditions are a mandatory subject of bargaining."
Ray Quan, district director of human resources, could not be reached for comment.
Richard Galtman, a Fresno-based attorney representing the district for the firm Lozano Smith, confirmed that the issue will be decided in a formal hearing this summer but declined to comment on the specifics of the case.
Among other things, the union is seeking back overtime pay for the ninth hour and the regularization of schedules, which Noland said have been subject to change without notice.
Noland said the district's actions in the case were characteristic of its dealings with the union over the past year. Instead of negotiating what may have been an easy issue to agree on, it unilaterally changed schedules, he said.
"They feel they have the ability to do basically whatever they want to do," he said.
The work hours issue was the last of three unfair labor practices, or ULPs, filed against the district in 2003, according to union President Cynthia Munoz.
The first alleged that the layoffs of some 50-60 employees in July were done improperly. That issue was resolved in mediation when the district agreed to reinstate medical benefits and salary retroactive to the initial layoff dates, according to Nolan.
In a formal hearing, union officials will challenge the administration's unilateral decision last spring to increase Monday to Thursday hours for many staff members from eight to nine with a four-hour shift on Fridays. They say that was a violation of collective bargaining rules requiring the district to consult with the union.
"By law, they have to negotiate," said Mike Nolan, the union's outgoing labor relations representative. "Wages, hours, and working conditions are a mandatory subject of bargaining."
Ray Quan, district director of human resources, could not be reached for comment.
Richard Galtman, a Fresno-based attorney representing the district for the firm Lozano Smith, confirmed that the issue will be decided in a formal hearing this summer but declined to comment on the specifics of the case.
Among other things, the union is seeking back overtime pay for the ninth hour and the regularization of schedules, which Noland said have been subject to change without notice.
Noland said the district's actions in the case were characteristic of its dealings with the union over the past year. Instead of negotiating what may have been an easy issue to agree on, it unilaterally changed schedules, he said.
"They feel they have the ability to do basically whatever they want to do," he said.
The work hours issue was the last of three unfair labor practices, or ULPs, filed against the district in 2003, according to union President Cynthia Munoz.
The first alleged that the layoffs of some 50-60 employees in July were done improperly. That issue was resolved in mediation when the district agreed to reinstate medical benefits and salary retroactive to the initial layoff dates, according to Nolan.