November 2002

(Back)

VOTE! VOTE! VOTE!

Know the issues,
Know the candidates,
Make informed decisions,
and VOTE on November 5th!
There are two very important items on the election ballot affecting classified at SRJC - Prop 47, the Bond Measure; and a contested seat on the Board of Trustees, Analy District. Study the issues, make informed decisions, and VOTE on TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5TH !!

We have all heard the expression, "Politics is Union Business." So why is it that we have this strange silence on campus about the Candidates and Issues in the November Election?
The simple answer is that we are prohibited by the provisions of California Education Code 7054A from disseminating campaign information and literature that promotes a candidate or ballot measure through any and all sources of the campus mail system.
These restrictions, of course, do not extend to the political process. So I will briefly remind you of the importance of being well informed on the candidates and the issues, getting actively involved as a volunteer, like many of us did in the Measure A campaign, and making sure that you voice is heard on November 5th by casting your ballot.
Finding a reliable source of information on candidates and issues may be a tricky issue. While the news articles by reporters in most of the local newspapers provide factual information, the Editor's recommendations must be considered in the context of their political orientation.
As a member of SEIU 707, you may also refer to the slate card of endorsements that have been mailed to your homes recently. You may also wish to visit the SEIU 707 web site at www.seiulocal707.org to review endorsements (Political Views Tab/Working Families Hot Link) and obtain information about our union. Remember. Your vote counts. Don't throw it away.

As reported in October's newsletter, the Board rejected the arbitrator's decision on this issue. Our general manager, Michael Allen, addressed the Board's October meeting to express SEIU's disappointment in that decision as well as with the District's unwillingness to publicize our revised proposal for reopening negotiations to include binding arbitration procedures.
Making matters hotter, we learned that the District was advertising a Lab Assistant position for Tuesdays through Saturdays! I filed a grievance before the closing date for recruitment; our field rep, Steve O'Keefe, and I met with Human Resources in the first step toward resolution, and we learned this week that the District has rescheduled this opening to Mondays through Fridays.
In Michael Allen's address to the Board, he pointed out that the District had not complied with the contractual requirement to publish its own findings in response to the arbitrator's decision; very shortly thereafter, a copy of this document was provided to us. It reveals that the Board relies on the argument that we accepted the practice of scheduling employees outside the 8am to 5pm core hours for over 15 years by not filing any grievances to that practice. While the arbitrator's decision debunked that argument, in my opinion, it is the one on which the Board relies. Therefore, we will be vigilant in objecting to any deviation, and Human Resources and the administration are aware of our intention.
That means you need to be alert to any job advertisements or District-initiated plans to schedule full-time, regular classified employees to work other than approximately 8am to 5pm, Mondays through Fridays and let us know you believe there is a violation of Article 6.5-6.7. Here are guidelines: We don't represent short-term, non-continuing employees and cannot influence their schedules or pay scale. We do represent part-time employees and full-time employees who work designated shifts; however, we have met and conferred with the District about these schedules so they are not violations.
Our representatives on the facilities planning committees tell us that the Maas Consulting firm is recommending the District put more of its resources into the Friday/Saturday college schedule in order to get more funding from the State. Sounds like good advice. Unfortunately, no planning to increase staffing appears on the horizon. If the District implements the consultants' recommendations and does not increase staffing, either the weekend programs will be unsupported, or the District will attempt to reschedule current employees. We have repeatedly urged the District to develop with us a comprehensive plan to achieve an adequate level of staffing so that the District can meet its expansion plans and needs. To date, the District has not put this issue on the table.

In February, Shirley Davis and Wende Wahl started reviewing and updating the General Membership Bylaws and the CAC (proposed change to CEC) Rules and Procedures. The proposed changes were presented to CAC for review in March. During the summer a subcommittee met numerous times to review and make changes to the proposed documents, review what was changed, and finally last week approved both documents.
The CEC Rules and Procedures document serves as a guideline for self-governing of the executive council, therefore only requires a vote of approval by the executive council (CAC). Basically, the changes gave more uniformity and consistency to the process of governing. Some changes involved defining duties of the officers, adding council members, and further defining CEC member responsibilities.
The General Membership By-Laws will be presented to CAC at its regularly scheduled meeting, Friday, October 25. After the CAC reviews and "blesses" the document, it will be presented to the general membership for discussion and approval (TBA).
Briefly, some of the changes in the General Membership By-Laws involved statements for clarity and definition. For example, "fee-for-service" had to be added and defined, clarification of when elections will be held, and defining the membership of the Classified Executive Council.
Be looking for the General Membership meeting announcement and make every effort to attend so you can become familiar with the rules for representation of classified staff in the areas of wages, hours of employment, and working conditions with the Sonoma County Junior College District.

Three members of SEIU/SRJC met with the Accreditation Team as part of the accreditation process on October 22nd and 23rd. Standards 4 (Educational Programs), Standard 7 (Faculty and Staff), and Standard 10 (Shared Governance), were reviewed. Below are a couple of issues discussed.
SEIU representatives meeting with representatives of the Accreditation team asserted the need for adequate staffing throughout the District. Evaluating adequate classified staffing ratios by program and location are recommended to be included in the planning process, be it for program or facilities expansion. Representatives also recommended to the Accreditation Team that the Classified Staffing Committee be proactive in researching and identifying current staffing issues and making recommendations.
The findings of the self-study included "sufficient concern regarding the lack of staffing to indicate the need for a comprehensive study to determine the extent of departmental needs for classified staffing at all sites" (Accreditation Self Study Report, page 128.)
SEIU also discussed the issue of staff diversity with the team. While the District has made some improvements in this area, it is felt that the overall diversity of classified staffing, as well as throughout the District, is still inadequate.
The evaluation process for classified was another concern expressed. The District's evaluation process of classified has been inconsistent and sporadic. Some classified are evaluated annually others have not been evaluated for three years, seven years, or more. The District does not currently have a tracking system to monitor compliance with Article 4 of the contract. Article 4 states that "permanent unit members shall be evaluated annually during the months of March and April of each year." It goes on to state that the evaluation "shall be a fair and impartial assessment of the unit member's job duties and performance of these duties.... [t]he primary evaluation assessment is to be constructive rather than disciplinary." The Accreditation Team made the recommendation to the District to develop performance evaluations for all groups with the need to clearly define and include desired outcomes, as well as a tracking system.
Standard 10 focused on shared governance. This year the number of classified representatives serving on campus committees is very high. A total of 55 classified representative positions are filled, with only 7 openings remaining. SEIU discussed the importance of classified representatives on all committees being allowed to bring forth pertinent issues for discussion and serious consideration. While classified input on many committees is valued, representatives did question the current function and member responsibilities on some standing and ad hoc committees.
What next? In a few weeks Dr. Agrella will receive the final report of the Accreditation Team. It is expected that the President will share this report with the campus community, and begin the process of integrating the results of the self-study into the ongoing planning and evaluation activities of the District.

As you can see from this edition of the Power Source, the Union has been very busy working to protect your rights as well as to increase the efficiency of our unit. We need your help to make this an even stronger organization. We need more members who are willing to help to further the goals of this unit. To become a SEIU Local 707 Union Member contact one of the following:

Bill Lambert
(x4398, wlambert@santarosa.edu)

Virginia Hotz-Steenhoven
(x4386, vhotz-steenhoven@santarosa.edu),

Any CEC (Formerly CAC) Member
(see list at: www.santarosa.edu/seiu).

We need to pull together to make sure our gains do not get eroded in light of the current situation of the state budget. We need you!

Power Source Menu

SEIU Home