The Governor also announced his proposal for an early retirement incentive. CSEA is reviewing it. The Legislature would have to pass this bill for it to take effect. Stay tuned for further developments.
We believe this is the way it will be come payday, but in the current atmosphere of fiscal crisis, anything is possible.
The newspapers reported yesterday that a retirement incentive plan is slated to be part of the completed budget, but details are scarce. Reports say that there will be two parts to the incentive. First, those in Tiers 2-4 will be able to retire without penalty if they are at least 55 years old and have at least 25 years of service. It is thought that eligible employees will be able to do this without management consent. The second part will be offers to targeted employees (those filling positions management feels it can do without) which would increase service credit by one month for each year of service, up to a maximum of 36 months.
Please note that this is all speculative, and any proposals will have to survive the larger battle over the budget deficit.
The Governor is NOT allowing payment of the 4% raise to Executive Branch State employees until a budget is in place. (He also wants CSEA and PEF to give up the 4% permanently, although he needs us to agree to that.) It is not yet known if he will authorize an appropriation for the 4% for court employees or not. We will know when he submits next week's emergency bill. If the bill does not contain the raise, the governor says it will be paid when a budget is in place.
Please continue checking in to this website for further developments.
Both the full-time and part-time employees received increases to the fee schedules for their respective dental plans effective July 1, 2009. These increases in the schedules may translate into less out of pocket costs for you. Increases were applied to exams, periodontal treatment, cleanings, bridges, crowns, root canal therapy, fillings, dentures, extractions, radiographs and orthodontics. Because of the changes to orthodontics, the lifetime maximum was also increased from $2580 to $2948 for full time employees, and the orthodontic maximum for part-time employees went from $1950 to $2601. As a result of the changes to the dental plans, new benefit books have been mailed out to all employees and information is also available on the CSEA EBF's newly redesigned website, www.cseaebf.com.
The second enhancement applies to the co-pay reimbursement benefit. On July 21, 2009, Chairman Danny Donohue and the EBF Trustees approved the physician and prescription drug co-pays to be combined and increased to a maximum $325 reimbursement annually. Any reimbursement request that has already been submitted for the current year is being reviewed and a letter sent to the member stating that they may submit for the higher reimbursement. In a separate mailing, all UCS covered employees will be advised of the details of this enhanced benefit.
Should you have any questions, please contact the CSEA EBF at 1-800-323-2732.
Naturally, this is a difficult decision to make, and employees will have little time to decide. CSEA urges members who are faced with the choice to ask UCS for all possible details of how such an offer would affect them if they take it, especially in regard to health insurance coverage and other benefits.
"This is not an early retirement incentive and CSEA has not yet chosen to participate in the payout offer. As this edition went to press, CSEA was still reviewing the proposal. If CSEA were to adopt the payout offer, offers to employees from the Personnel Office would be generated beginning on July 8. The offers sent from UCS to payout candidates would include instructions on how to accept the offer."
"Please remember that other job titles are non-competitive but NOT confidential. Those employees do not have disciplinary or layoff rights for their first five years in non-competitive service, but once they have five years they DO get these rights.
"I know this gets very complicated, but it is important to remember that any 'confidential' employee can be dismissed summarily."
(Source: Jim Hennerty, CSEA Dep. Director of Contract Administration)
CSEA LEGAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM - FIREARMS ENHANCEMENT
As announced in the latest edition of the CSEA newspaper "The Workforce," CSEA has introduced a pilot program to provide legal services to CSEA-represented employees who carry firearms as part of their job. In the event of an occurrence where the member needs legal assistance based on the use of a firearm or other use of force in the line of duty, legal assistance is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Our CSEA Region 5 attorney is Edward Dunn, Esq., of Syracuse. See the document below for more information. You may contact the CSEA Legal Department at 1-800-342-4146, extension 1443 for further questions or comments.
CSEA Legal Pilot Program - Firearms
EMPLOYEE FREE CHOICE ACT
You've undoubtedly heard of the Employee Free Choice Act, proposed federal legislation that gives workers more freedom to join unions and limits an employer's ability to intimidate workers trying to join a union. If you would like to learn more about this important legislation, go to www.csealocal1000.org to view a video that explains in further detail the background of the legislation.
"CSEA Reaches Contract Settlement for 6,000 Court Employees Across New York"
CSEA - New York's Leading Union - has reached a tentative agreement with the New York State Office of Court Administration on a new contract covering more than 6,000 non-judicial employees in the state's Unified Court System.
"CSEA and the Unified Court System have reached a fair and responsible agreement that recognizes the value and importance of the court employees who make the system work every day," said CSEA President Danny Donohue. "These were challenging negotiations and I am extremely proud of the focus and commitment of the CSEA bargaining team."
The four-year agreement retroactive to April 1, 2007 includes salary increases in every year of the agreement, improved downstate and Mid-Hudson Valley location pay, enhancements in longevity bonuses for long-term employees, improved payments to the Employee Benefit Fund and Labor-Management programs and increased funding for body armor for security personnel. There were no significant changes to health insurance provisions.
Across-the-board cost of living adjustments are as follows:
* April 1 2007 - 3 percent or $950, whichever is greater (retroactive);
* April 1, 2008 - 3 percent or $975, whichever is greater (retroactive);
* April 1, 2009 - 3 percent or $1,000, whichever is greater; and
* April 1, 2010 - 4 percent or $1,025, whichever is greater.
CSEA also agreed to a salary increase deferral for employees earning more than $115,000 annually until a judicial pay raise is enacted. Employees at or above that level will have their salaries held harmless but will receive the contract provisions once the judicial pay raise issue is resolved. If it is not resolved by the end of the contract, the employees will receive all of the contract cost of living adjustments retroactively. This issue would affect about 500 individuals out of the bargaining unit's 6,000 members.
CSEA-represented court employees work in a range of non-judicial jobs, from court clerks to clerical and administrative staff to security officers in the court system in every part of New York.
Additional details about the agreement will be posted on the CSEA website www.csealocal1000.org shortly. The agreement will be presented to the CSEA rank and file members for review and ratification in the weeks ahead. It must also be approved by the state legislature and signed by the governor.
[Editor's note: Additional details will also be available here at the CSEA Judiciary web site, www.cseajudiciary.org]
CSEA and UCS have made a tentative agreement on a new contract for 2007-2011. The deal includes increases in compensation, location pay, and other benefits. More details will follow once final wording is agreed upon.
(December 18, 2006, James Hennerty, Dep. Director of Contract Administration)
The Appellate Division, Third Department, effectively killed the CSEA lawsuit disputing UCS's decision to change its mind and not reclassify Court Clerks to Senior Court Clerks when Court Officers provide security. The Justices insist that the peace officer status of Clerk titles in the downstate area does provide a "back-up security" force that makes them different from upstate Clerks. The fact that that belief is completely untrue does not seem to have penetrated the judicial mindset.
The Court also pooh-poohed the Civil Service Law mandate that the State give equal pay for equal work, questioning the ability to enforce it, and saying that the State can violate the policy in some cases. This is the kind of "reasoning" that makes the public think judges are irrational, arbitrary, and capricious!
There will probably not be an appeal of the decision. We would need Court of Appeals permission to appeal, and they are not going to find against the Chief Judge and Chief Administrative Judge, their bosses. CSEA will work on new strategies to address this ongoing problem.
(November 22, 2006, James Hennerty, Dep. Director of Contract Administration)
CSEA began a lawsuit earlier this year disputing New York State's decision to make our members pay for the cost of Medicare Part B premiums for retired employees. Previously, the State and local governments (for those in the NYS Health Insurance Plan) paid for the cost of the Part B premiums. CSEA contends that the change violates the Civil Service Law and is a change in terms of employment without negotiations, and a violation of the Health Insurance articles of the various CSEA-NYS Contracts.
State Supreme Court in Albany County ruled that CSEA was wrong and NYS right. We appealed.
The Appellate Division of Supreme Court, Third Department, has UNANIMOUSLY overruled Supreme Court and agreed with CSEA 100%! We expect the State to request the highest court, the Court of Appeals, to reconsider the matter. In the meantime, it looks like NYS may not get away with this cost-shifting through a back door.
The CSEA/UCS Sick Leave Bank exists pursuant to an agreement between the parties dating back to February 8, 1994. The agreement was negotiated by a subcommittee appointed by CSEA, comprised of Tom Jefferson and Robert Lorenc, and a designee appointed by UCS, Robert Herrick. That agreement outlined in specific detail the intent, benefits, guidelines, and operational aspects of the Sick Bank. The agreement remained unchanged until the contract negotiations and collective bargaining agreement between UCS and CSEA agreed to on August 4, 2004 covering the contract period 2003-2007. The newly agreed to agreement, only slightly modified from the original, is printed in its entirety in the current contract as Appendix C, pages 99 thru 104. That printed agreement represents the proverbial "bible"governing the operational aspects of the bank.
In broad terms, the bank is administered by one representative each from UCS and CSEA. Each designee has veto power relating to any particular application, that is, an application requires two "yes" votes to be approved. The representatives are in more than frequent contact with each other reviewing applications. On occasion, the applicant is asked to submit additional medical documentation. All information in the application is strictly confidential, discussed neither with local management or local union representatives. Coverage to an applicant can be awarded for up to a year at either full- or half-time rate. Given the fact that medical conditions are not static and, hopefully, subject to improvement and change, grants are not made for extended periods of time. Rather, a grant of a mutually agreed to reasonable period of time is made and the applicant is encouraged to reapply as needed.
When reviewing an application, five criteria are utilized for evaluation purposes. Said criteria are: 1) length of service, 2) nature of the disability, 3) reasonable expectation of return to work, 4) attendance history record, and, 5)the maximum number of days that can or have been granted.
The bank cannot make retroactive grants to cover any lapsed periods wherein the employee is on off-payroll status. Thus, it is vitally important to have completed applications submitted well in advance of the expiration of total leave credits.
Employees transferring in from another union who were members of the former union's sick bank may apply to join the CSEA/UCS bank within sixty days of transfer. They must pay the initial full contribution charge. It is analogous to changing insurance carriers. Carrier B will not give you credit or a refund for what you paid to Carrier A. One would be expected to pay Carrier B's full charges for coverage.
The bank functions to serve in a fair and equitable fashion to applicants "in need." It also has an equally important mission, to shepherd and protect that precious commodity, the time paid into the bank by all of the members that have joined the bank. Since its inception and to date, the bank has been a huge joint labor/management success. Countless members /employees have been permitted to utilize the grants to get well and return to work, thus benefiting both labor and management.
(June 6, 2006, Bob Dillon, CSEA Contract Administration Specialist)
CSEA and the UCS have settled an Improper Practice Charge filed by CSEA when the Courts unilaterally changed the Court Reporters Manual in relation to what material must be turned over when a Reporter leaves state service.
In a 2003 revision to the Manual, UCS stated that reporters, when leaving court service, may be required to turn over electronic notes and CAT (computer aided transcription) personal dictionaries to their supervisor for storage. This was a change from the previous practice, which required reporters to give to the UCS only the paper tapes of court proceedings transcribed by the reporter, since the tapes were the only material that the UCS supplied reporters with.
The modification unilaterally changed the terms and conditions of employment for court reporters, without notice or negotiation with CSEA.
CSEA immediately filed an Improper Practice Charge with the Public Employment Relations Board.
The settlement calls for reporters leaving State service to sign an affidavit agreeing to produce all transcripts requested after separation from service or, alternatively, to provide, on UCS-provided disks, a copy of electronic stenographic note files and CAT dictionary to UCS.
(February 10, 2006, James Hennerty, Dep. Director of Contract Administration)
The Civil Service Employees Association, on behalf of New York's Support Magistrates, today announced the filing in Albany County Supreme Court of an Article 78 proceeding against the State of New York Unified Court System (UCS). The petition seeks to have rescinded the salary classification imposed by UCS in October 2005 as arbitrary and capricious, and requests that all Support Magistrates statewide be allocated on the salary grade JG-33.
In a Dec. 5, 2000 memorandum, UCS announced the completion of a review of various job titles and salaries, with Support Magistrates assigned a salary grade of JG-33. Despite the urging of the Support Magistrates since 2000, the UCS never implemented the Support Magistrates at the promised Grade 33, and contrary to its own study and classification plans, UCS implemented the Support Magistrates at a Grade JG-31 in October 2005.
"We have exhausted all remedies available to us," said Thomas Gordon, a CSEA Local 333 activist who is also president of the New York State Support Magistrates Association. "This is an issue of fairness and equity. With the filing of this petition, Support Magistrates are only seeking what was promised to us by UCS in 2000. The Grade 31 allocated to us in October 2005 is grossly inappropriate because it fails to recognize essential substantive differences between magistrates and other non-judicial legal employees of the State court system. The Grade 33 promised five years ago does recognize those essential differences."
Family Court Support Magistrates are empowered under the Family Court Act to hear and decide child and spousal support and paternity proceedings. Support Magistrates handle approximately 48 percent of the cases filings in Family Court each year. Two-thirds of the salary of each Support Magistrate is reimbursed to the state by the federal government.
(Note: There are approximately 100 Support Magistrates.)