Image provided by: SEIU Local 503; Salem, OR
About The OSEA news. (Salem, Oregon) 1970-1981 | View Entire Issue (Jan. 19, 1978)
Page 9 The OSEA News January 19,1978 Work plan goals must be pertinent to job Work plans, in addition to being mutually agreed to, must deal with items that are per tinent to your job and over which you have control. Bill Thompson, an OSEA member in the Revenue Department in Salem, con tacted OSEA Employe Representative Gordon Webb when his work plan had eight items which he believed didn’t belong in his work plan. They included matters of depart mental policy, invasions of his rights and things over which he had no control. For example, one item said he would “par ticipate in any fund raising within the Division as requested.” An employer certainly has no right to require an employe to par ticipate in fund raising. Another talked about coffee breaks and lunch hours; those already are covered in the central agreement. Another item dealt with visitors from OSEA, Thompson has no control over what visitors from OSEA might enter his department. W.V. Welch, manager of the personnel income tax section, agreed that “most of these items do not need to be in a work plan as they are covered in the central agreement or are standard office policy.” They were removed from Thomp son’s work plan. Evaluation upped Merit evaluations are an important consideration for working state employes. They make a difference with regard to annual pay raises and op portunities for future promotions. They necessarily are somewhat subjective since they are the opinion of one person about your work per formance. To try to make them more objective, they must be based on a mutually agreed to work plan and a current position description and they must be filled out by an immediate supervisor familiar with your work. When Fay Templeton, a clerical assistant at the Department of Education, received a “C” merit rating, she was aware that some of these conditions did not exist so she came to OSEA Employe Representative Gil Polanski to file a grievance. Polanski argued on her behalf that her summary grade of “C” was inconsistant with the narrative of her evaluation, that it was inconsistent with her work plan and that it was not done by someone who had supervised her. Her evaluation had been based on the duties of a secretary, not those of a clerical assistant. As a result of the grievance, her grade was raised from a “C” to a “B”. Lund educates Board on education Education plan told A clear message from the last General Council was the desire on the part of the membership for more training, especially training for job representatives. With that in mind, Education and Research Director John Lund at the Jan. 7 Board meeting outlined his plans and priorities for training. It’s important, he said, that we don’t raise our expectations too high. His first priority, however, is enforcement of the contracts and that means training for job representatives. To that end, a pilot training program will be held Jan. 21 at baby sitting guide this page touches on only a few of the many important matters that a person has to know if he wants to take good care of children. 5. name and address and telephone number of close relative at the start of any baby sitting job, always ask the following information: 1. place, address and telephone number where parents can be reached. 2. location of the nearest fire alarm box. 3. names and ages of the children you are watching. 4. special instructions for the care of the children., 6. our house address The undersigned parents or guardians of: Chemeketa Community College for all interested Salem area members and job represen tatives. “Training begins with job reps,” Lund said. “We need a consistant and standardized format for this training so that all similar grievances are handled in the same way . ” A related problem is that the Association does not have enough job reps. This is especially true in the Salem area where members are spoiled because they can call an employe rep so close at hand at headquarters, he said. In the future, a member won’t be able to be a job rep unless he or she has attended a job rep training program. A job rep manual is now being printed to help job reps with their work. Also, a monthly newsletter and outlining grievance arbitration settlements and other information important to job reps will be published. Other resources, such as classes offered by the Labor Education and Research Center and outside' speakers will be made available to , job representatives. “There is a certain amount of fear associated with standing up and taking on an issue for the first time,” Lund ack nowledged. “Job rep train ing will not make you a better person, but it will give you the tools to work with.” Lund told the Board members that their first responsibility to the job rep training will be to insure a turnout. A class of about 60 is necessary to make the training sessions work. Other job rep training programs are tentatively scheduled for Feb. 25 in Port land, Mar. 4 in LaGrande and Mar. 11 in Ashland. Once the job rep training is well established, what comes next? Leadership training. Leadership training will run the gamut from how to run a meeting and the group process to getting people to talk with one another and organization. Training and possibly a speakers’ kit for use in new employe orientations is another project Lund will be un dertaking in the future. OSEA guarantee the contracts Association a spot on the agenda at new employe employe New orientation. orientations should be attended by OSEA members in the agency, not by a staff person. “I’m an outsider in your agency,” said Lund. “OSEA members can be most effective securing new mem bers at these meetings because they know the lingo and the job that is done by the agency,” Lund said. Looking further into the future, Lund envisions a “free university” or job banks to help members improve their on-the- job skills and to help them win promotions. However, he said in closing, 1978 will be “The Year of the Job Rep.” Deputies appeal to Appeals in case of emergencies: 1. telephone number of fire department-------------------------;----- : 2, telephone number of police___________ ________________ 3. name and number of family doctor—----------------------- ■---- 4. name and number of close neighbor— authorize needed emergency and urgent health care to the afpresaid children: signed:----- ;;----------- cascade health care courtesy of NEWPORT - A two-front battle to win back the positions of four Lincoln County sheriff’s deputies fired by Sheriff Everett Hockema earlier this year has converged on the Oregon Court of Appeals. At the Court of Appeals is an appeal brought by the Lincoln County Sheriff’s Deputies Association (affiliated with OSEA) of a decision recently rendered by Lincoln County Circuit Court Judge A. R. McMullen at the request of the Lincoln County sheriff which said, in effect, the sheriff has an absolute right to hire and fire his deputies; that they are not public employes as normally understood, with the job protection afforded other public employes under the state collective bargaining law. However, two weeks earlier, the Employment Relations Board rendered a decision on the same question which said that they are public employes under the state law and are therefore protected from being fired for union activities. That issue was brought to ERB by OSEA. That decision is being appealed in the Court of Appeals by Sheriff Hockema. The sheriff also is asking ERB to delay the enforcement of its order (which directed rein statement of the four deputies with back pay and benefits, plus interest) until his appeal is decided by the Court of Appeals. OSEA contends that the law gives ERB, and not the circuit courts, jurisdiction on all labor relations matters in the public sector. Meanwhile, the fired deputies, are finding work where they can. They were fired Aug. 9.
