PEF/DOT Statewide Labor/Management Committee
NOVEMBER 13, 2007
MINUTES
Present:
|
PEF Lou Ferrone, Chair John Duengfelder Ed Lucas Don Kehoskie Mike Stella Sue Stepp Charles Kelefant Bill Holthausen |
Lorraine Turturro Dawn Klemm Dan Connors Andrew Puleo Dan Majeski Scott Goodspeed, Esq. Art Munson, Field Rep Josephine Rice, Recorder |
MANAGEMENT Geraldine Smith, Chair Lou Desol Deb Meade Suzanne Coonley Jim Tynan Danial D’Angelo Janice Morris Pamela Kelly George Christian |
Old Business:
1. Provide an update on upcoming Civil Service exams
Management provided a list of scheduled exams, subject to change. The 2008 schedule is full and Civil service is scheduling for 2009.
PEF asked about the results of the 4.2B exam for provisional SET and ET. Management answered those that passed were hired permanently. Those that failed were either continued provisionally or released. The list is in effect for at least one year. If exhausted before one year, we can hire provisional employees that did not fail the last exam. Civil Service can schedule a special holding of the exam for other candidates that can be appointed permanently upon passing.
PEF question- If a special exam is not given, can a person who failed a previous exam be appointed provisionally when there is no existing list? Civil Service has been strict on provisional exams. They have allowed us to continue provisionals for people who failed exams where salaries were not competitive and recruitment problems were shown.
The ET and SET is tentatively scheduled for fall 2008.
2. Provide an update on all (PEF, CSEA, MC) title consolidations, revisions, eliminations and reclassifications since our March 23, 2007 meeting – List was provided.
3. Has the Department completed its line number realignments? Please provide a list of all affected employees. Have the employees been provided with P7s and have the P7s been placed in their PHJ’s? Will people who are moved seasonally be issued P7s?
Line number realignments have not been completed. Anyone whose line number is being changed will have a copy of the P7 in their PHJ. P7’s for seasonal employees (winter assignments) depends if their travel status is in effect. Management will research the seasonal policy and report to PEF.
4. Provide a list of all new hires and promotions that have taken place since our June 28, 2007 meeting – Management provided a list
PEF asked how junior engineer (JE) titles were allocated to PET’s and about reclassifications of CE1’s to PET’s. Management replied that in some cases, when JE’s do not pass the fundamental of engineering exam (part 1) they may be transferred to vacant PET titles. The JE to PET appointments are actually reclassifications of CE-1’s to PETs. PEF asked for the JE to PET list and management said it will provide PEF with the list.
5. Training: We have noticed that several recent training announcements are for classes accredited with CEUs and PDHs. We appreciate DOT’s efforts. Will DOT continue to increase space available to all employees holding PE licenses regardless of their current job assignments?
DOT has just signed a five year contract with NHI for 20 -24 courses per year. The approximate cost of three-day technical training class is $12,000. The free courses offered do supply needed training however don’t offer CEU’s. Most of these are in-house and are too state specific to be eligible for CEU’s.
PEF asked is DOT looking for CEU classes for licensed land surveyors and landscape architects. DOT answered they are attempting to get as many relevant classes as possible. DOT also stated that they continue to get in-house employees to teach as well as NHI.
PEF stated new hires will have these CEU requirements. There will be a growing demand for those opportunities and we do have other disciplines that need it as well.
DOT replied, the cost to bring those courses in for engineers and landscape architects is very high. In discussions with PEF and PSW, all agreed it was cost prohibitive. We will speak with GOER. We may have in-house resources. DOT staff resources are also lacking to coordinate it. We have the data but have to take it to the next step and look at needs.
6. Is the Department looking to continue or expand the Special Assignment to Duty Pay pilot program that recently expired? SADP is a contractual issue that cannot be discussed in the L/M forum.
7. In the June 2007 L/M meeting, DOT confirmed that it is working on the establishment of standards regarding employee rotation and/or mentoring programs. What is the current status of these programs?
Looking at standards for JE rotation is on hold in lieu of higher priorities. We will not be implementing any ideas. Mentoring was seen as being a critical piece. In general it’s important for the department and diversity. We are selecting a staff person to be the key technical person to make this happen. Something will come on line at that point. All employees can step up to be either a mentee or mentor. DOT will announce a program on IntraDOT soon. Management will share with PEF as more information becomes available.
8. Provide an update on Regions 3 and 6’s bridge inspection consultant contracts. What has Management heard in regard to the administration’s promise of exclusive bridge inspection by State forces?
DOT has put together a budget initiative to add eight additional in-house bridge inspection teams in the next two years. In the first year Regions 7, 9 and 5 will each get an additional team. In the second year, Regions 6, 5, 8 and 3 or 9 will get a team. This package includes bridge maintenance staff and equipment. The initiative is currently under review. At the end of the two years there will be more in-house inspection than consultant.
9. Update of the review of the Under Bridge inspection (UBI) units’ safety evaluation reports.
The report is expected to be completed by the end of this year and will be shared with PEF The two 60’ units purchased last year have issues with uplift when extended certain ways. Currently, DOT has instructed the UBI operators to limit the amount of extension to keep the units from tipping/uplifting. During the winter DOT will install counterweights and/or alarms to remedy the problem. The 60’ units are intended to be shared statewide and DOT will not purchase any additional 60’ units. Two additional 40’ units will be purchased for Regions 8 and 3.
10. What is the current status of the 2007-2008 budget and its impact on State forces? What effect will the Tappan Zee Bridge have on the DOT budget and workforce, in the next budget year and onward? What are future years’ projections of budget and staffing? – Handout
There is no forecast for an increase in staffing in the next budget year. With people leaving, it’s a struggle to keep even, not just engineers, also technicians. Hopefully recruitment efforts will show results and attract new employees. The department has increased its recruiting to the southern states. We are approximately 300-400 under the target.
There have been no significant changes to the Fiscal Plan that we developed in April for the 2007-08 Budget. The targeted fill level remains at 10,271 for the Department as a whole.
Currently, the Department has formed a Tappan Zee Task force which has been allotted a dedicated target of 7 out of the 10,271 total targets for the Department. This staff is engaged with the development of the project and the EIS and planning studies that are underway. Future staffing needs are unknown, but as the project develops, we will keep you informed.
The Executive Budget for 2008-09 is currently under development, and we don’t have any definitive information from DOB at this time regarding the outlook. However, the State is clearly facing fiscal challenges. DOB projects State budget gaps in the next three years of $4.3 billion in 2008-09; $6.2 billion in 2009-10 and $7.9 billion in 2010-11. We expect a budget that will constrain spending.
11. How does the Department plan on creating diversity in the workforce? Has the Commissioner’s call for diversity had an impact on the workplace yet? PEF requests the list of who the Commissioner has appointed to the Diversity Committee.
DOT is implementing various efforts to achieve diversity. We are in the midst of creating the Management Diversity Bureau and interviewing for that director. The internal Affirmative Action is working cooperatively with regions. A lot of ad hoc activities are working towards that. Rather than recreating what we wanted, it’s more directly tied into daily activities. An informational bulletin was issued. Responses varied among the regions. Some regions have reissued it. We are seeking volunteers for this committee of employees that shows a good representation. Activities will vary depending on areas in the state. They will be involved in social activities and participate as a non-voting member in various interviews. Future eligible lists will have a higher representation in diversity for managers to select from.
PEF- is the state looking to meet quotas? No. Agency has under-representation. Data has been shared with various program managers in terms of what regions looks like. They have goals for improving based on what was established by Civil Service. Federal level requires goal attainment. We will do our best to improve and make Department look more like NYS. It’s a strategic goal. Trying to decide what operational activities should be.
PEF- Are there any specific positions being created, i.e.: clerk 2? There are different ways of getting our work done. We are not changing the work just to create diversity. Work could be done by different titles, clerical/administrative, that’s currently being done by engineers. Calculation Clerk 2 titles can fit into any field office to help with construction, maybe by next season.
Internships and student assistants are being used as a recruitment tool. Competitor employers typically pay interns and assistants. That’s a disadvantage for us. It’s not a strictly protected class opportunity. We have been recruiting from southern engineering schools. There is a diversity mailbox on the internet to improve communications. We are looking for a maximum of 13 volunteers on the committee, that doesn’t exclude a PEF leader on the committee.
Management will provide names on the committee thus far.
12. Is DOT considering the reintroduction of legislation for Design Build or Public Private Partnerships (PPP)?
DOT is pursuing the same legislation introduced last year. The governor’s office will decide whether or not to move the proposal on to the legislature.
The previous administration had proposed Public Private Partnership, but DOT does not know whether or not the current administration is pursuing PPP. PEF requested the record show that PEF is opposed to Design Build and Public Private Partnership.
13. Does DOT plan to formalize garage and fleet facility inspections? If so, PEF requests a copy or summary of all facility inspection reports.
There are no plans for wide scale formalization of inspections. DOT does not have the skill set necessary to set it up, never mind enforce it. If an employee finds an unsafe situation, he/she should run it up the appropriate chain of command.
14. Safety Equipment – Are the regions budgeted specifically for personal safety equipment, such as work boots, safety vests, high visibility gear, etc?
Lime green is one of the options, along with green on orange and orange on green for the new high visibility gear beginning April 2008. There is not a separate pot for safety money. It comes out of the monies allocated to MPS. The regions have to prioritize their safety funding, but the new visibility gear comes first. The funding for the new safety gear and an increase to $100 for work boots can negatively impact funds for training and travel.
PEF suggested safety funding be separate from travel and training, due to supervisors having to choose one over the other. PEF stated that possibly Federal dollars are available for safety apparel.
15. In regards to the Incident Command Center policies, Charlie Kelefant and Ed Lucas met with DOT’s ICS representative to question the staffing of the ICS centers. DOT doesn’t seem to have a statewide ICS structure in place. PEF requests the formation of a joint L/M committee to make recommendations as to regularize the system.
PEF points out that the ICS situations almost automatically bring up L/M issues, such as overtime eligibility, OT meals, shift work, out-of-title work, and on call/recall situations. PEF feels the formation of a sub-committee would allow the DOT to regularize these concerns in emergency situations. Management’s response was that many of these issues are covered in M.A.P. PEF points out that it would be beneficial for everyone, if who is available and able to do what, is clarified prior to an emergency. Management replied that they are at the mercy of DOB in regard to OT waivers and every emergency is looked at on a case-by-case basis. An additional concern of PEF is the concrete definition of what constitutes an emergency and also when an emergency loses its urgency and becomes a normal operation. Management agrees to consider the formation of a sub committee upon discussion with its ICS representative and his supervisors. Charlie Kelefant and Ed Lucas are PEF’s designees for the sub-committee.
The primary role of the main office is to make sure an affected region is getting needed resources, coordinating resources from other regions. There are a lot of LM issues brought into that situation. DOT’s role is restoring transportation services in emergency cases. That may involve overtime meals, shift work, out-of-title work, on-call, re-call.
PEF- It plays into members’ professionalism when asking for volunteers. Many times G22 and below works itself out. Not readily with G23 and above. Budget is not always requested for pay or work schedule adjusted. Anything in ICC status should be considered an emergency. There is endless reliance on our dedication and professionalism that workers are not getting compensated, it’s not appropriate.
New Business:
1. EI-07-XXX, “Policy on Professional Stamps for Final Engineering Documents,” proposed that everyone who reviews engineering documents must stamp them.
a. What precipitated this proposal?
PEF asked if the August 2007 bridge collapse in St. Paul precipitated this proposal. Management said no. The proposal was an old proposal that was resurrected by the new Chief Engineer. He has a personal belief that we should use our stamps. Design took the ideas since design issues the EI’s.
b. All regions were supposed to comment on this proposal. PEF requests
Copies of the comments.
Management said there have been two rounds of comments from regional construction and design groups. Management said they would provide the comments, (the second round of comments are still being compiled).
c. When will this proposal be finalized and implemented? Management isn’t sure since there are many questions, debates, and discussions. A second revision of the EI will be circulated for a third round of comments.
d. What is the personal liability of the professional who stamps the documents?
The draft EI does not change anyone’s liability; it remains the same as it is now. The second revision of the policy will clarify this point.
PEF asked what an employee’s liability is if he /she need to review/approve consultant plans. Management responded that this issue will also be addressed in the next version of the EI. Management is under the impression that a state stamp cannot “over stamp,” or “trump,” a consultant stamp.
The revised version of the EI will clarify some definitions. Also, some of the documents which require stamps may be changed. DOT is working with the State Education department for their clarifications as well.
PEF and DOT agreed to continue this discussion at the next LM under Old Business, to address third round comments.
2. PEF requests a list of all former PEF members who have retired and been rehired into the same PEF titles they retired out of. Have these employees been asked to sign any kind of employee contract or waiver? If so, PEF requests copies of said contracts/waivers. How long does DOT plan to continue this policy?
Management stated they don’t have a list and don’t foresee a list being compiled. Each request is reviewed individually by DOT and GOER. This is not a new practice. DOT has been rehiring retirees to drive snowplows and work as TCI’s. This practice fills the agency’s need to keep its knowledge base and fulfill retirees’ desires to continue working. The employee is coming back under Section 212 of the law – earnings limit. It’s the employee’s responsibility to monitor that so as not to negatively impact their retirement. Its part time and agency reserves the right after a specified period of time to require the position to be full time. If they refuse, agency reserves the right to fill the item full-time. Employer is looking to cover a knowledge gap or move forward on a critical project. We are not looking to have long term part-time employees. We look at their cases every six months. We retain our options by having the employee agree to circumstances for returning when signing the memo.
3. Traineeship programs: PEF request that Management explain these programs and how compensation is related to probationary performance.
A complete explanation of the PEF traineeship is on the Civil Service website. The option of a probationary increase in compensation depends whether an employee worked for DOT previously or is a new hire. Two positions that are not traineeships offer this “step up” for “outstanding” performance at the sixth month probationary review – Senior Administration Analysts and Senior Administration Assistants. Management will provide PEF with a copy of the rules. PEF pointed out that some supervisors are unaware of these rules. DOT stated that personnel reminds supervisors if a probationary report is not submitted, and will apply the increase retroactively when necessary.
4. Now that the battery exam is no longer given, how does an employee get a promotional profile if they haven’t already taken the battery?
The Battery Exam was one component of promotional exams and agencies are struggling with its suspension in filling of positions with minimum qualifications consisting only of the battery score and probation. Furthermore, the requirements for many other promotional exams have not changed since suspension of the battery exam. For example, the Transportation Management exam was last given in 2006 and one of its scoring components is the Battery Exam. Right now, only the candidates with battery scores can be considered for promotions generated by that exam. DOT and Civil Service are working together to resolve that issue. Currently, Civil Service is identifying different competencies and adding them to specific promotional exams. Civil Service is also considering going back to oral exams. Civil Service is also looking into automating ranks based on on-line resume submissions, similar to the ranking of JE’s. DOT does not know what Civil Service has in mind to replace the Battery Exam. PEF asked that if the Battery was determined to be biased, why do some battery exam questions show up on promotional exams. Management informed PEF that a definitive decision has not yet been made in regard to whether or not the battery questions were biased.
5. PEF requests an explanation of the engineering Intern Positions (number of employees, location etc.)?
DOT currently has a request into Civil Service for 30 Engineering Intern positions. The positions will be non competitive, similar to the TCI positions. DOT is hoping to hear from Civil Service in November and then forward the request to DOB for approval. Fifteen positions will be for students pursuing BS degrees in engineering and fifteen targeted for students working toward associate degrees. DOT hopes to partner with the student’s colleges and allow the students to earn credit hours as well as income. Salaries will be dependent upon how many credit hours the students have completed. DOT has also reached out to technical schools which mandate internships as part of graduation requirements. DOT hopes the program will be in place by spring 2008.
DOT has already classified 105 Student Assistant positions which are temporary, hourly positions to be filled by full-time college students of different disciplines, thirty of the positions assigned to the engineering division. Eventually, the DOT would also like to utilize the positions in Environmental Analysis, Real Estate, Audit, and Civil Rights. Resumes are already being received and DOT hopes to have the Student Assistants on board by January 2008. The positions are considered entry level and will pay approximately $12 to $14 an hour.
The Engineering Intern and Student assistant positions are part of DOT’s recruitment effort. PEF requests management to post on the IntraDOT for advance notice to current employees. PEF also requests that DOT keep us up to speed.
Management has been posting L/M minutes to the IntraDOT under “Hot Topics”.
The next statewide L/M meeting is tentatively scheduled for February 2008.