PEF/HESC
STATEWIDE L/M MEETING
ONE COMMERCE PLAZA, ALBANY, NY
2nd Quarter 2006
FINAL MINUTES
Present: David Haase, Patricia Spath, Bill Chester, Tina Brooker, Susan Kent, Christine Kleinegger, Ed Ray, Josephine Rice (Recorder), Kevin Henchy, Linda Dillon, Dennis Langley, Warren Wallin, Jeff Cohen
ISSUE
MINUTES
DISCUSSION
Minutes of the December 13, 2005 minutes were discussed. Management objected to a statement regarding OGS’ policy on parking lists. The former lots were not strictly by seniority but based on when the person came to the agency and signed onto the list. Further discussion was continued under Parking. Both parties agreed to exchange minutes within thirty days of the meeting. Minutes were approved with the clarification on parking.
ISSUE
l. Privatization/Public Benefit Corporation/National Guaranty Agency (Executive)
1 A. Is it now the intention of HESC management to privatize in totality or in part the
functions of HESC that are currently performed by State Employees? If so, what functions and what titles would be affected? In what way would these titles and functions be affected?
1.B. Are there now any plans for HESC to enter the secondary loan market?
1.C. Are there now any plans for HESC to become or create a Public Benefit Corporation (PBC) to enter the secondary loan market?
DISCUSSION
Management stood by its previous response not to privatize. They have no plans to establish a PBC or anything like it. There are no plans to enter a secondary loan market. PEF will keep the issue on the agenda.
ISSUE
2. Corporation Goals
At the 12/13/05 Statewide L/M meeting HESC Management stated that 2006 financial and operational goals would be provided to PEF when they are made available. PEF also requested a copy of the 2005 goals.
2.A. Please provide the detail of these items as well as the reports/results from the approximately twenty individual 2005 goals.
2.B. Please provide the detail of the 2006 individual goals.
DISCUSSION
Management stated that the goals for 2005 are on the Intranet. PEF wanted to know if the numerical goals were being met to get an idea of how each vice president is managing their area and how the goals were divided up between each operational unit.
ISSUE
3 Parking (Administrative Finance)
The Sheridan Hollow parking facility will be opening in July or August 2006. At the December 13, 2005 L/M Meeting PEF representatives were told that the Sheridan Hollow parking facility space assignment would be assigned in May, 2006. Seniority would be the standard. Recently, HESC staff members were notified that the HESC parking list would be utilized for assigning parking spaces in the new facility.
3.A. We request a negotiation to establish an acceptable method to allocate spaces to staff based upon Article 19 of the PEF Collective Bargaining Agreement.
DISCUSSION
Management stated that new employees are asked, as part of their orientation, if they wish to get onto the parking list. PEF was told that the parking in the Sheridan Hollow would be controlled and assigned by HESC and not OGS. Discussion ensued as to how the available spots would be filled. SED administers their parking by seniority. Management was asked what the breakdown was between M/C and Union, when it came to assigning spots. Managements response was that the ratio was 75% union and 25% M/C. Management was then asked for a breakdown on the number of spots available between One Commerce Plaza, the Triangle lot, and Sheridan Hollow. Managements response was that they were not exactly sure of the numbers, they would have to defer the question to Jeff Cohen. PEF requested that management contact Jeff and have him join the discussion. Management agreed and Jeff Cohen joined the meeting. Jeff Cohen (Management) stated that the OCP lot has 75 spots, 39 for union and 24 for M/C with 9 special for M/C. Those include employees that may have been promoted from PEF to M/C and were not asked to relinquish their space once assigned. There is currently one vacancy at the moment in that lot. There is no set percentage at OCP and it’s always in flux. PEF asked if any individuals had received an M/C parking spot even thought they were not M/C. Management answered yes, under management’s discretion, in order to have flexibility. PEF asked if there was ever a situation where one union person left and was not replaced by another union person parking in the building. Management couldn’t recall one. PEF then requested the current ratio of parking spots allocated to M/C versus Union members. The current ratio according to management in One Commerce Plaza is 50/50, in direct contrast to the stated ratio of 75% union and 25% M/C. (PEF felt that management is following the 75/25 ratio at Triangle lot and asked the same be done for inside the building. Management replied that M/C people may have left who were previously union positions. PEF asked how this was tracked. They believed that, once all M/C were assigned spots, the remainder went to union positions. Management replied it was easy to track because of the few number of M/C’s) Sheridan Hollow will be open in August 2006. M/C will have up to 50 spaces allocated out of a possible 200 spots. Management did not believe they would be utilizing all 50 M/C spots at Sheridan Hollow and could fill them with union members. (There are 500-600 potential union parkers, which includes CSEA.) PEF appreciated management’s intention but wanted a written policy in place for the 75/25 allocation for all parking sites to protect members. PEF also indicated the written policy could be beneficial to management as well when dealing with any complaints or when questions arise.
Management stated that there are 19 medical spots in the Elk Street lot. Medical parking is also available in the peripheral lots. Management stated that the current parking list is posted on the HESC electronic bulletin board. PEF requested and Management agreed to provide a monthly parking list. PEF stated that most agencies have a parking committee established to decide these matters with representatives from M/C, PEF, CSEA and sometimes, security. PEF requested the establishment of a parking committee. Management agreed to take the request into consideration.
ACTION
Management will meet with PEF and CSEA representatives later today to discuss the parking issue.
ISSUE
4. Collections (Corporate Operations)
Our recent collections numbers seem lower than expected. There has also been a change in the number of days that HESC keeps accounts in-house. These funds support our operations and there is real concern about the numbers and where we sit overall as a Guarantor Agency.
4.A. What does the decrease in revenues from in-house collection coupled with the increase in costs for vendor collections mean for our short and long-term financial viability?
4.B. Without regard for the national standings (based upon calculations including nonproductive judgment accounts) what is being done to improve our collections numbers?
4.C. Is the hiring of 10 SLCR l’s representative of a reemphasis on in-house collections?
DISCUSSION
Management replied that the collection numbers are not lower than expected but set with the rest of the competition. To improve the numbers, there is an agreement with Tax and Finance for intervention. The focus is on rehabilitation loans, which will generate more revenue for HESC. Outside vendor rehab collections are at 85%. They are trying to make the best use of in-house resources. PEF commented that HESC keeps 18.5% collection costs for every loan consolidated. With regard to rehabbed loans, 18.5% is revenue, and an additional 18.5% is generated from the federal level. The other difference between consolidations and rehabs is that any notation by HESC on a borrowers credit history is removed if the borrower elects to rehab their loan. The concern was what portion of that federal percentage was being paid to the vendors, and could HESC use those funds to hire new collection staff, and keep a larger portion of the funding for HESC’s own general fund. Basically PEF was asking management to compare the dollars spent on outside collection agencies versus the dollars spent to perform the tasks ourselves. Management’s goal is to provide Tax and Finance with a file of accounts on a monthly basis. They will then match and return with the available employment information, and if necessary, move the borrower into the wage garnish program. The easier collections will be kept in-house. PEF felt that many from collection staff have left the agency with few replacements. PEF asked if outside vendors were being used because of the staff shortage and the status of the out-of-state attorney for collections. Management replied that each outside vendor has a corresponding attorney. The plan is to give accounts that are over 180 days (or at least two quarters) past due to vendors as they can be a little more aggressive. In the past, we may have kept those for two years or more without movement. It’s being tracked monthly by Finance. As many collection positions are being filled as possible.
This would replace 4A and 4B
Management replied that the collection numbers are not lower than expected. The focus is on Rehabilitated Loans, which will generate additional revenue for HESC. Approximately 85% of HESC’s Rehabilitation Loans are handled by outside collection vendors. HESC is trying to make the best use of in-house resources when evaluating the default portfolio. Where ever possible the easiest collections will be maintained in-house. Currently HESC retains 18.5% of Consolidated Loans and 37% for Rehabilitated Loans. A concern was raised by PEF that perhaps too much of the federal revenue was paid to outside collection vendors. PEF asked management to compare the dollars spent on outside collection agencies versus the dollars spent to perform the tasks ourselves.
HESC will be providing Tax and Finance with a file of accounts on a monthly basis that will be matched with employment information. If employment is identified the borrower will be moved to Administrative Wage Garnishment.
PEF felt that collections staff have been cut severely with no significant replacements. PEF asked if outside vendors were being used because of shortage of collection and legal staff. Management replied that each outside vendor has a corresponding attorney. The plan is to give accounts that are over 180 days (or at least two quarters) past due to vendors since they can be more aggressive. In the past, we may have kept those for two years or more without movement. Management replied that collections are being reviewed monthly by the Finance and Operations Divisions and collection positions are being hired as deemed necessary.
4.C Management stated it’s a function of filling current vacancies.
ISSUE
5. HESC Facilities and Space Requirements (Administrative Finance)
The OGS Lease Agreement for One Commerce Plaza is ending in 2007.
5.A. Is it the intention of HESC management to remain at One Commerce Plaza?
5.B. Does OGS support the position/intentions of HESC management?
5.C. What is the tenor of the negotiations on renewing the lease?
5.D. What locations will be considered if the lease is not renewed?
5.E. What changes will occur within HESC leased space in the next six months?
DISCUSSIONS
OGS has requested information from potential landlords. It’s been published that the space being sought will have five parking spots for the state vehicles. They will retain what they believe is the best value. The current landlord will also be bidding. Management has no need to move and was just approved minor construction on the twelfth floor. One wall will be torn down in IPO. PEF stated their concerns for sufficient parking if HESC were to move. Management replied that OGS first identifies the location and then takes bids on parking. Management will follow up with OGS and forward PEF’s concerns.
DISCUSSION
6. Transfer Policy/Job Fairs (BHRM)
PEF has supported flexibility for BHRM through a side agreement that allows transfers within divisions without the necessity of posting each item. Recently, job fairs have been held for hiring IT titles and HESC-specific titles.
6.A. Why were current HESC employees in the titles affected (particularly HESPA 2) not allowed the opportunity to participate in these events?
6.B. Why should PEF allow flexibility and expediency to BHRM if our members’ interests are not being served?
DISCUSSION
Management was given the opportunity to bring new people into the agency under the unrestrictive waivers that were granted for HESPA 2’s and IT titles, in an effort to increase their numbers. As vacancies arise, they will be posted. Anyone with an issue can be brought to BHRM attention. PEF reported complaints from staff who couldn’t be reassigned between programs. Management had discussed previously how people are reshuffled within their own divisions, sometimes leaving a different vacancy. PEF is reviewing this side agreement. Management felt it was effective in filling positions and helpful to members. The final vacancy is posted, once offered to those within the division first. PEF replied that members were feeling excluded from the process.
ISSUE
7. Hiring Policy (BHRM)
BHRM has unilaterally initiated a policy for hiring that is selectively exclusive. The substance of the policy is that the candidate pool can be limited to either eligible-list candidates or transfer candidates but not both. This limits the available number of eligible candidates. Some candidates have been promoted from other agencies into titles which have established lists of in-house candidates using Civil Service Law Section 52.6.
7.A. Is the change in policy consistent with our values of teamwork and personal growth?
7.B. Is expediency in hiring more important than having opportunities for our existing staff to learn new functions and expand their knowledge of the Corporation?
7.C. Can in-house candidates be allowed the same chance to interview as outside candidates?
DISCUSSION
Management stated that they have a responsibility to fill vacancies as quickly as possible. They have options, including the promotional/eligible lists and transfer lists. It’s difficult to include everyone in the interview process. Positions are posted, as per the contract. Managers sometimes have preferences of hiring from the eligible list or transfer list. It’s at management’s discretion if they choose to limit the available candidates. PEF suggested sending an internal memo from HR, offering career counseling and feedback opportunities to those not selected. Management had raised that issue in survey review. Those not selected can contact HR for feedback.
ISSUE
8. Career Ladders/Transfer Opportunities/Succession Planning (BHRM)
Some HESC titles (HESPA 2 and 3) have limited transfer opportunities. Others at higher levels (Director of Finance) have no clear path to succession.
8.A. What actions are being made on behalf of our members to increase the opportunities for transfer and/or promotion from and to HESC-only titles?
8.B. What are HESC’s plans for succession in light of expected retirements?
DISCUSSION
Management stated that this was the central focus of the agency. They are looking to ensure there are adequate promotions filled for succession plans that are critical. They are working on career ladders, with Civil Service, and transfer opportunities between titles. PEF was advocating for additional transferability for HESPA 1 and 2’s. One reclassification was submitted. They need to substantiate the positions where the gaps are created. It becomes more difficult on a higher level. Minimum qualification discussions would take place at Civil Service. Certain parameters are already in place. PEF asked if any exams were planned for director positions. Management replied that they are unilaterally developing them. Most are from Civil Service with input from the agency. They are not engaged in any unique titles for HESC. They are looking at succession issues in every division, as needed rather than a comprehensive plan for the entire agency.
ISSUE
9. Workforce Plan (BHRM)
9.A. We request a copy of the most recent Workforce Plan for HESC submitted to the Division of the Budget.
9.B. In the most recently’ submitted Workforce Plan what PEF-represented titles are listed?
9,C. How many of each PEF-represented title are included in the Workforce Plan?
9.D. What quantities of each PEF-represented title are to be included in the next Workforce Plan submission?
DISCUSSION
Management considers the workforce plan a fluid management tool. Issues are reviewed, in general, with senior executive staff regarding their needs and existing vacancies and future initiatives. From the initial plan, unanticipated changes come into the mix which may change the direction to other focuses. Individual waivers are grouped and sent to DOB. PEF described how some agencies are taking the approach of submitting blocks of waivers.
ISSUE
10. HESC Legislative Update
10.A. What Corporation changes have been realized or are expected regarding the successor HERA legislation?
10.B. What other legislative items affecting HESC have passed recently or are under consideration?
DISCUSSION
The HERA legislation is effective July 1. Management will have a policy bulletin on the subject. State scholarships benefited people in New York State. They are streamlining the administration of these programs. There were additional enhancements to the TAP through the HESC website. They are seeking legislation to tighten up the language, narrow interpretation of the law.
ACTION
Management will e-mail PEF the full response.
ISSUE
11. IT Contractors
11A. What skills or technological expertise do our members lack that contractors are needed to complete Corporation projects?
11.B. What training would he recommended for our members over the next 12-36 months?
11.C. What technological packages/languages will be explored over the next 6-18 months?
DISCUSSION
Management needed them for the enormous workload and to immediately bring in expertise for specific areas to allow projects to be implemented within their time lines. PEF felt staff should be trained in these areas. PEF requested information on current contracts. Management replied it frequently changes. PEF felt members would be very interested in the in-house training. Management felt employees should work through their chain of command in identifying their training needs. They have planned for extensive annual training for IT based on the needs they expressed. PEF wanted management to be more proactive by offering the training needed for the upcoming migration of the system. Staff would not be aware of skills they may need unless management shares their plans for the future. It is also at management’s discretion to approve training even if staff feel it’s needed.
ISSUE
12. Telecommuting-IT – See 13.
I 2,A. Have enough staff members requested Telecommuting privileges to make it a priority to have a policy in place?
12.B. IT has already expressed a willingness to set a policy. We request representatives to negotiate an IT Divisional policy to allow telecommuting for staff
ISSUE
13. Telecommuting-HESC
13.A. We request negotiation regarding a HESC-wide policy to allow telecommuting for staff where feasible.
13.B. The U.S. Government has announced suggestions for a possible bird-flu pandemic that includes telecommuting. Will HESC consider initiating technological changes in anticipation of such an event?
DISCUSSION
Management stated telecommuting is not utilized extensively but is available on a limited, case by case basis through the chain of command, depending on business necessity. It’s been successful for both sides with those who have participated. PEF requested a written policy be drafted. Management had concerns with privacy and confidentiality of data. PEF replied that the information would be transported on lap tops or encrypted. They asked for automatic approval based on established criteria.
ISSUE
14. Social Committee Issues
The current arrangement regarding HESC-sponsored and Union supported events has come under scrutiny by union audit and recent events regarding safeguarding funds. Some State agency management groups take responsibility for arranging and financing social events. This includes receiving contributions, safeguarding funds, and making payment to vendors. HESC Management was to explore the possibility of performing these functions.
1 4.A. We reiterate our request that HESC management representatives perform this function, including banking of collected funds for tickets as well as disposition of funds to vendors.
14.8. Who is representing Management/Confidential on this committee?
DISCUSSION
Management offered to purchase a safe to secure the funds. Linda Dillon volunteered to fill the M/C representative vacancy on the committee.
ISSUE
15. Camera Monitoring
After a rash of petty thefts on the 13th Floor of OCP, Management decided to install monitors in common areas. PEF representatives were given assurances that the cameras would record only off hour periods and would not monitor individual work stations.
15.A. What hours of the day do the monitors operate?
15.B. At what times of the day are recordings of activity being made by the cameras?
15.C. Are individual work stations viewable via the monitoring system?
15.D. Who is authorized access to the monitors?
15.E. How were the locations for the cameras decided?
15.F. Who is authorized to review recorded activity?
15.G. Has any unauthorized/illicit activity been detected?
15.H. What was the cost for the system installation?
15.I. What is the cost for the monitoring system on an annual basis?
DISCUSSION
The camera locations were decided based upon the incidents reported, in consultation with management. There have not been any reports since the new equipment was installed. It only records between 5pm and 7am. It’s not intended to be used to monitor employees.
ISSUE
16. Equipment & Training for Fire Marshals and Searchers
16.A. What equipment has been provided to Fire Marshals over the last interval?
DISCUSSION
Orange hats were provided to the fire marshals. PEF asked that they also be given flash lights, if they haven’t already done so.
ISSUE
17. Proposed Schedule for 2006 PEF Labor/Management Meetings.
17.A. September. 2006; December 2006. – TBA
ISSUE
18. Student Assistants
18.A. What is the basis for restricting hours for Student Assistants?
18.B, Why are hours restricted for Student Assistants by B.HRM rather than allowing the unit managers to schedule their personnel based upon the needs of the unit?
18.C. We request a written copy of the policy regarding restriction of hours for Student Assistants.
18.D. Why is the HESC practice for participation in training and other events different for Student Assistants compared to permanent employees?
DISCUSSION
Management stated that temporary employees are to offer support and must be matriculated. The hours are limited to 30 per week during school. They may work full time and overtime at Management’s discretion during holidays and summers. Most work 12-14 hours. Each should be brining to the job a level of expertise. PEF asked if a training class, which is at no additional cost to the agency, can be used for a temporary employee. At Management’s discreation on an individual basis, appropriateness and job availability, approval will be by HR. Management will look into it. Sometimes there are waiting lists for the training spots.
19. Electronic Bulletin Board
19.A. What are the criteria for submitting items for posting?
DISCUSSION
PEF was recently denied posting an event on the bulletin board. Management replied that was based on a personal decision by the member affected.