December 20, 2010 Regular Meeting

CALL TO ORDER

2:12 p.m.

ROLL CALL

President E. Dennis Normandy

Present

Vice President Donald A. Casper

Present

Commissioner Morgan R. Gorrono

Present  (Left at 4:30 p.m. Missed Item #9)

Commissioner Lisa Seitz Gruwell

Present

Commissioner Mary Y. Jung

Present

President E. Dennis Normandy presided.

REQUEST TO SPEAK ON ANY MATTER WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION AND WHICH IS NOT APPEARING ON TODAY’S AGENDA

Joe Brenner, IFPTE Local 21 requested that Item #9 be taken out of order.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Regular Meeting of December 6, 2010

Action:

Approve.  (Vote of 5 to 0)

ANNOUNCEMENTS

The Executive Officer announced that due to the Martin Luther King Day holiday, there will be only one meeting in January to be held on January 3, 2011.  If necessary, the Commission will hold Special meetings to conduct/address any emergency matters.

HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR’S REPORT  (Item No. 5)

No report.

EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S REPORT  (Item No. 6)

No report.

0374-10-1

Hearing on Civil Service Reform Phase II Recommendations on Layoffs/Bumping: Proposal to Eliminate Interdepartmental (Citywide) Bumping.  (Item No. 9)

Speakers:

(1)      Anita Sanchez, Executive Officer informed the Commission that correspondence has been received from several employee organizations and numerous emails and phone calls from individuals requesting this item be postponed to a later meeting and/or opposing the proposal.

(2)      Albert Sandoval, Carpenters Local 22 member, stated he felt blind-sided of this hearing and questioned whether the employees have been strong-armed without their knowledge.  He strongly urged the Commissioners to vote against this proposal.

(3)      Tim Paulson, Executive Director, San Francisco Labor Council, stated that on behalf of public and private sector unions, all are absolutely against this resolution.

(4)      Vincent Harrington, Attorney for SEIU Local 1021 stated that he concurs with the comments made by Tim Paulson.  He reminded the Commission that his clients assisted the Commission in the litigation which attacked this very merit system within the last twelve months.  It was made very clear by SEIU Local 1021 as well as IFPTE Local 21 that this is a critical system that works effectively, that does not interfere with the rights and retained obligations of management and rather permit the employees to protect themselves in these adverse times.  It cannot be underestimated what the value of this system is its dependability and its reliability and most importantly, its objectivity that an individual may retain his or her job, not because they are a favorite but rather, they’re in a classification and doing it well, they have seniority which is objectively determined. That is a critical principle, particularly in these uncertain times.  Requests the Commission to take this issue very carefully under consideration and understand what a momentous change this really is as proposed by the City.

(5)      Bob Muscat, Chair of the Public Employees Committee, San Francisco Labor Council, also Executive Director, IFPTE Local 21.  Does not believe this is the start of any dialog.  If anyone was interested in talking about problems related to this or any other issue, this is not the way they would have approached it.  He thanked all those in attendance who are not going to let anyone behind the scenes try and move this kind of proposal without anyone paying attention to it.  That is not the start of a constructive dialog, it actually insults the processes that we’ve gone through over the last few years to help the City under some difficult economic circumstances because we know that the fate and future of the City is also our fate and future as well.  For a proposal like this to come down without any warning or advance notice to people is totally unfair and not acceptable.  If anybody wants to have a dialog this is not the way to get started.

(6)      Margot Reed, SEIU Local 1021 stated that one of the things the Commission has done in the past is to have a special hearing for a specific thing, especially something that’s going to have as much impact as this .  She suggested the Commission set aside time specifically for this issue to be heard so that a complete and thorough discussion including attorneys, witnesses and stakeholders are in attendance.

Larry Mazzola, Jr., Assistant Business Manager, Plumbers and Pipefitters Union Local 38 stated that Local 38 City employees have given back to the City for seven of the last nine years and they will also be giving back again in Fiscal Year 11-12.  They feel that they have done their part to collectively try to solve the City’s budget deficit and have already committed to sit down with the City to discuss the pension and health and welfare issues and have already begun the process.  He continued that a Rule change of this magnitude requires collective bargaining because it is a change in the condition of employment.  Even Micki Callahan, Human Resources Director who is present realizes this is a negotiated item, as stated in her memo to the Commission saying that “the City will seek to negotiate elimination of bumping rights with the unions during contract negotiations for 2012.”  He respectfully asks that this item be taken off of today’s agenda.

(8)      Art Gonzalez, Machinists Business Representative asked the Commission to vote no on the elimination of Citywide bumping.  The City will lose its greatest resource, your workforce.  There is no succession plan for people that rebuild, replace and repair equipment.  He also agreed with all the previous speakers.

(9)      Sylvia Alvarez-Lynch agreed that no discussion, no workshop should be even considered.  You are violating the basic underpinnings of the Civil Service Rules and regulations for City and County employees.  The Department of Human Resources has more or less given the Labor force a slap in the face by scheduling this during the holiday season when most people who are affected are on vacation and away from the City with little or no notice or voice.  There was no notice to the unions, there was no opportunity to meet and confer.  Any type of change affecting workers’ conditions of employment mandates a meet and confer.  The Charter, that needs to be brought into play.  This is a carveout, this is a violation only open to the vote of the City and County residents.  It is not lost to her that this is scheduled prior to any layoffs next year.  It is also not lost to her that most of the affected workers with seniority and bumping rights are over the age of forty, a protected class.  The ramifications and dissemination is such a historical event of bumping and seniority rights being eliminated will force those over forty to more or less think of retiring because they will have no option.

Has anyone thought of the huge financial ramifications that will be placed on the Retirement and Health Service System?  She urged that any discussion on this subject not be continued and she also agreed that Labor must be given final notice as to anything that states that their seniority and bumping rights are going to be eliminated.  The continued dissemination of Civil Service Rules and regulations is not lost upon her and others that this will only weaken a fair and equitable playing field for people who work in the City and County of San Francisco and that privatization is not ……… Privatization will be the next step.

(10)  Reuben Johnson, Department of Public Works.  He stands before the Commission with 23 ½ years of service.  Was formerly with the United States Navy.  He stated that basically with the Civil Service system as it stands with its modification is a program, in the group that he represents has eliminated a lot of ambiguity in the employment market which is a battlefield now.  It also imparts regimentation within its rank and file.  If you try to change the Rules in the middle of the stream, you’re going to get triple the response you’re getting today.  He wholeheartedly recommends that the Commission give a thumbs down on the measure.

(11)  Steve Budai as a private citizen concurs with all the statements by the previous speakers.  This measure would cost the City over a billion dollars.

(12)  Charles Belov pointed out that if the Commission did not plan to make a decision today, why does the agenda say “Discussion and Possible Action”?  He is a City employee not just an MTA employee.

(13)  Mercedez Hernandez, took exception to some of the newspaper articles going around that laid off people are not qualified.  You have to pass the examination so how can you say they’re not qualified.  When people have to bump into a different position, it’s not because they don’t qualify, it’s because they don’t know the procedures and policies which is why there is a probationary period.  A number of the employees from Grupo Presente have been laid off four or five times, not because they didn’t know the job but because by the time they got to the position, people were upset with the fact they had to bump in, they had no resources, no training and all of a sudden they said they’re not a good match for the position.

(14)  Eric Omokaro, stated that he is not the regular filer of this kind of hearing but he was alarmed when he heard about the hearing.  He stated that if this had happened in 2008, he could have been a victim.  Two years ago, his position of seven years was eliminated in a small department who had no requisition for him.  He could have been laid off if he did not have a previous class to bump into.  This proposal in his opinion has no value and should not be considered.  He does not see how it could possibly benefit the City when you have resources invested in people to train and get them into specialist positions and then dump them after thirty years of service.

(15)  Mike Brown, Senior Field Representative, Carpenters Local 22 stated that our public sector representative was notified of this agenda item on Friday and that’s one of the things I’m hearing from others.  They were not notified with adequate time to prepare a response to present today.  He stated that he concurs with all the previous speakers and believes this needs to be done in a more public manner and through due process.

(16)  Douglas Bias, Class 7346 Painter stated that he read the December 20^th draft report conducted by Anita Sanchez and one of the scenarios outlined where a single employee in a single department would be effectively put out and that’s his scenario.  He knows other guys in his bargaining unit, that’s their scenario as well.  They have other issues ongoing as well, a pending unfair practice charges with the State.  He’s concerned about how any action on this item would affect the terms and conditions of employment regarding the outcome of the charges.  He concurs with everything he has heard and doesn’t want to see civil service employment be put back in the hands of the public sector and corrupt officials.  He recommends that the Commission reject this proposal today.

(17)  Bradley Wiedmaier speaking as a citizen of District 6 and also as a member of the San Francisco Peace and Freedom Party Central Committee (SFPFPCC).  He read a resolution stating that the SFPFPCC protest the Civil Service Commission’s proposal to attack seniority rights in departments and support the speak-out by United Public Workers for Action in rank and file San FranciscoCity workers.  He added that this is not the way to start a process and should send back to the Department of Human Resources their proposal.  The concerns about demoralization are not caused by bumping but by the tremendously outrageous cuts that are coming down in City services.  He urged the Commission to reject this proposal and in the future the rank and file members of the unions be consulted at the very beginning of the process and not at the end.

(18)  Steve Zeltzer, retired City worker and also a member of United Public Workers for Action stated that he thinks this is a sneak attack on the public workers of San Francisco.  They have been under attack by the Mayor, Mayor Newsom who appointed the Chair and who appointed the Human Resources Director blaming them for this crisis.  They’ve attacked the Muni drivers and he feels it’s time for the public to stand up and fight back.  They are not responsible for this crisis.  He said we should get some Labor people, some union people on this Commission instead of corporate representatives.

There is an effort now in this country to bankrupt the cities and then say ‘we’re going to get rid of the contracts.  We’re going to get rid of unions.  Why is it that the public workers are forced to take furloughs and layoffs? We need to unite the public workers to fight these attacks.

(19)  Frank Martin del Campo, SEIU Local 1021 stated that this proposal is outrageous and offensive.  He agreed with all of the past speakers and added that in the City’s recommendation, it states that City workers MAY not be qualified.  They do not assert that is the case, they don’t tell you what they’ve done to get them qualified, they don’t tell you about the managerial neglect of the public sector that does not train employees.  So, he asked the Commission to look at the foundation of this proposal and on that basis today reject it.

(20)  Daniel Carlin, Local 22, Recreation & Parks Department Carpenters Shop Steward spoke on behalf of all workers from his shop definitely oppose the resolution.

(21)  Daniel Feerick, Chief Steward, Laborers Union Local 261, at Department of Public Works, agrees with all the previous speakers.  If this proposal passes, you open people up to a litany of abuses; nepotism, favoritism, you pick an ‘ism’.  Do you want to work here?  How badly?  This protects the worker as well as the City itself from a lot of litigation.

(22)  Fernando Leal, Technician with the MTA and IBEW Local 6 member stated they are very upset and outraged by this process.  Their members also work in many departments; Airport, Water, Municipal Transportation Agency, etc. and have not been able to move into those departments except during layoffs and now you’re going to make that impossible.

(23)  Angela Thomas spoke on behalf of San FranciscoCityCollege and UnifiedSchool District.  This system was a system that people had faith in and believed in.  Now, based on the last several rounds of bargaining that has taken place, they know that their livelihood can be taken away.  Civil Service was the last frontier.  It was fair.  It looked out for every body and now that seems to be going away also.

(24)  Larry Griffin, requested that the meeting me postponed to a later date.  The timing of this meeting, coupled with the short notice is intended to circumvent the participation of the people whom this action will affect the most.  As a City employee, the result of this item will have a major impact on the career and livelihood of thousands of workers.  Seniority is at the heart of civil service and people have come to rely on it and built on it over the years.

(25)  Ging Louie, IFPTE Local 21 inquired about the history of the elimination of bumping for every employee and not just managers.

(26)  Vice President Donald A. Casper: The proposal for the elimination of interdepartmental bumping across the board is new to him and new to this Commission.  He indicated that he has gone through all of the pertinent documents and memos produced during this Reform process beginning in the Spring 2005 and has not spotted the elimination of interdepartmental bumping for any, save managers.

(27)  Micki Callahan, Human Resources Director:  This proposal was submitted to the Commission as she recalls in March 2009 in a report detailing a number of follow-up recommendations.

(28)  President E. Dennis Normandy: These are precisely the kind of fact finding we need to do.  Rather than use up time in discussions I would prefer that the time be used in taking the testimony.

(29)  Dean Coate, President IFPTE Local 21, stated that he agrees with the previous speakers and feels this is a bad proposal and bad beginning to a process that could have been done in a more cooperative and respectful manner.

(30)  Roger Varela, Human Services Agency and member of IFPTE Local 21 stated that there is a reason why bumping rights exist.  The workers fought for those rights, we gave a lot of things for those rights.  He stated that he was present in the negotiations in 1994 on Saturdays with his children.  So this issue is very dear to his heart when you try to snatch it away just like that.  He is not blaming the Commission per se, but he is blaming the powers that be.  He urged the Commission to please do the right thing.

(31)  Commissioner Gorrono: When the Commission is up for its budget every year and its being cut to nothing, all of you should watch the calendar and have this kind of interjection into the process.  If you want to protect the civil service system, that’s what you need to do, come and stand up for it.  We have a very tiny budget as it is now.

(32)  Carmen Herrera, Delegate for IFPTE Local 21 and former member of the Commission on the Status of Women.  She is speaking against this proposed reform because it would detrimental to long term employees, women and older employees who have good standing and dedicated to serving as public servants.

(33)  Joseph Majer: City employee and member of Carpenters Local 22 spoke against the proposal.  It is not the reform of civil service, it is the destruction of civil service.  What point is there of a civil service system if we’re not going to have seniority and ensure that workers who perform the job can keep their job?

(34)  Sin Yee Poon: Chief Elective Officer of SEIU Local 1021 is a City employee on leave.  She stated that City wide bumping is one of those basics that we build the merit system on.  Seniority and having an objective basis of evaluating employees is really a cornerstone of the merit system.  Doing away with Citywide bumping and the rights of the employees who are experienced in the job classifications and the work they do is clearly not in the interest of preserving the merit system.

(35)  Robert Thomas, Director Human Services Agency stated that while he has a great deal of regard for Director Callahan, he does not work for her.  I rise to add a little historical perspective.  There was a time when interdepartmental bumping was only available to those who had five years of service.  Currently, under the civil service rules there are all sorts of things that happen when layoffs occur.  He would hope that with the Commission’s desire to keep these proceedings civil that we not lose sight of that fact and that we remain open to the ideas of change.  Public employees are under attack in this country.  If we want to maintain the principles of the merit system we need to be open to new ideas and this is one.

(36)  Vitus Leung, General Services Agency spoke on civil service reform in general rather than this particular proposal.  He stated that he has reviewed this round of the reform and would like to make a full disclosure: He was involved with the modern day civil service reform dating back to 2003 and that set of reforms has been memorialized in writing and the MOU.  He stated that this reform is a continuation of all the good work that has been put together, the Commission, the City and all the affected unions and I see this as the continuation of a dialog.  He feel this reform will give us an opportunity for some realistic and intelligent discussions about what is wrong with the system and to minimize the chance of going backwards doing business as usual.  He feels the system as it stands has room for major improvements whether we’re talking about bumping or the extension of the list.

(37)  Martha Hansen works for the Public Utilities Commission at the Southeast Plant and this is her third layoff.  She has heard no alternatives for remaining in City employment if bumping is eliminated and it is very scary. 

(38)  Stephanie Cain from the San FranciscoUnifiedSchool District stated that we have a lot of labor partners here today and they’re very conscious of their fear around the subject.  The School District is very interested in some kind of reform in this area that would take into account our different business needs and mission.  She stated that they see a lot of negative impact on their business operations when there is a large layoff at the City.

(39)  Susanne Rodriquez-Corns is a thirty year employee who works for Health Service System who stated on behalf of herself and her employees at the Health Service System, this is a bad proposal.  She concurs with all previous speakers.

(40)  Michael Brown, Human Resources Professional with the Department of Public Health spoke on behalf of the Health Department stated that he is glad the Commission is looking into this issue and he appreciates the unions coming forward and talking about the seniority issues.  He is willing to come back and share some of the stories in the Health Department related to bumping.

(41)  Terrence Dunnigan, Ironworkers Local 377 stated that he heard someone say recently “we’ll be stronger, greater and more efficient.”  What that means is they want to cut people’s jobs.  Everyone has families and they came to the City for a reason; they wanted stability and a seniority system.  A lot of people are going to be upset if this passes.

(42)  Anita Madrigal, a sixteen year employee who has had eight jobs in the last four years due to bumping and reclassification.  When the department decided to close out the clerical positions at the Department of Public Health, she was one of the people who lost.  She was always optimistic, thinking it’s going to get better.  She’s been promoted, demoted, reassigned, reclassified and finally in the last job she didn’t pass probation.  What this does for the emotional part of us, where this has landed her is in therapy.  She is so stressed out and feel so incompetent, she lacks in being the person that she was.  She urged the Commission to reconsider because this is a bad move to make for City employees.

(43)  Jennifer Johnston, on behalf of the Department of Human Resources stated that it’s true that many times employees don’t get advance notice about layoffs because one layoff action will cause a full chain of events but we do try to give as much notice as possible.  It can be as little as one day and that’s an unfortunate by-product of the current system we have.  She gave a brief synopsis on how bumping works and pointed people to the DHR website for more information.

(44)  President Normandy thanked Jennifer Johnston for making the points of clarification on bumping.  He feels that some of the intensity in the room can be attributed to a lack of understanding or false information.  For those in the unions with the Public Utilities Commission who are involved in the 4.5 billion retrofit with the Water System, should know that he is going to be absolutely fair.  He also stated that he takes exception to the idea that they’re trying to pull something off.  The Commission is committed by Charter to make sure that we protect the people in the system.  The Commission has a larger obligation to the citizens of San Francisco.  We are not going to vote today as I established early on.  Some of the language in the agenda may have been misunderstood simply because there is always the possibility of an action.

(45)  Bob Muscat IFPTE Local 21 apologized for speaking out of turn but there is no justification that this was introduced in 2005 to just show up with no notice to anyone December 20, 2010.  It is totally inappropriate for this to appear on your agenda at this time and we do not accept that explanation.

(46)  Vice President Casper stated that he has gone through the documents generated during the Civil Service Reform process and with the exception of possibly missing a document for March 2009, he began by stating that the elimination of departmental bumping first appeared on the radar screen in a March 10, 2005 article in the San Francisco Examiner quoting unnamed sources in the Department of Human Resources.  The elimination of interdepartmental bumping was among the items, according to the Examiner which was to be put on the table.  He went on to outline each additional meeting and its subject matter pertaining to Civil Service Reform, ending with December 20, 2010, as the first appearance of the mention of the elimination of citywide interdepartmental bumping.

On November 8, 2010 the Department of Human Resources sent a memo to this Commission in which it laid out six specific recommendations for Phase II of Civil Service Reform.  Interdepartmental bumping was not mentioned.  At the request of the Department of Human Resources, this Commission placed on today’s agenda the Proposal for the Elimination of Inter-departmental Bumping beyond MEA represented employees.  According to his research, and again there could be a March 2009 memo that he does not have, this is the very first time in the whole history of Civil Service Reform that the proposal for the elimination of interdepartmental bumping for other than managerial employees have ever been floated and by reason of that, he is am very, very concerned at the manner in which the proposal has now been suddenly placed on the table.  At the last Commission meeting, it was determined that President Normandy and he would meet with the Department of Human Resources to set up a schedule for the consideration and action on each of the six proposals which was put forward on November 8^th, actually five of the proposals because we already acted on one concerning a clarification of appointments from the holdover roster to Category 17 temporary exempt positions.  The meeting is set for next week but this is the first time on his radar screen that the elimination of interdepartmental bumping across the board has ever surfaced.

(47)  President Normandy: I look to Vice President Casper for a lot of institutional memory, he and Commissioner Gorrono.  The comments highlighted by VP Casper is that this is coming to us as newly as it is coming to you.  So again, I repeat, this is just the beginning of the process.

(48)  Clark Bell, an active City employee and member of IFPTE Local 21 stated that he is concerned and feels everyone has been blind sided by this whole process. 

(49)  VP Casper stated that what has to determined is whether the order of layoff rules are a civil service carve-out subject only to this Commission’s action following mandatory meet and confer in that the history of citywide bumping is fairly recent but it’s complicated.  Prior to an arbitration conducted by Sam Kagel in this general area, bumping rights did exist in various MOU’s and they may still exist as a kind of link to a period when it was uncertain whether bumping rules/order of layoffs was a civil service carveout.  This is very complicated matter.

(50)  Peter Gabancho is a member of IFPTE Local 21 and thanked the SFUSD for sending them an excellent electrical engineer who bumped into his department during the last round of layoffs and is now a productive member of their group.  So not all bumping stories end in horror and tragedy.  Secondly, layoffs and bumping can be very disruptive to a department but it is disruptive to families and people’s personal lives as well.  It should not be an easy decision for a manager to decide to lay people off and to make it easier to lay people off does not help anyone.  The Civil Service system is as much to protect the citizens of San Francisco from graft and nepotism as it is for any other reason.

(51)  President Normandy directed that a three person task force be formed headed by the Executive Officer and joined by the Human Resources Director as well as our representative from the City Attorney’s Office to come back at the first meeting in February with a proposal that can discussed in open session as to the time frame for the discussions on this matter.  Further, highlight whatever might be necessary by way of looking at individual union contracts and Charter provisions that might come into play.  It is obvious from this meeting today that this should have been done before this was ever put on the agenda.  He also requested an opinion from Vice President Casper given his institutional memory as to whether this approach might be feasible.

(52)  VP Casper stated that the whatever the process turns out to be must include a series of informal meetings where discussion can take place outside of the straight jacket both procedurally and time wise of Civil Service Commission or any other commission hearings.  A task force such as President Normandy has described is needed so that these complex issues can be discussed in a way that all complex issues are discussed; you sit down, you talk to each other, you argue, you pick up the phone and call someone else who knows more about it than you do, you go do some reading, come back and argue some more and that’s the way complex issues get determined.  We need an informal mechanism.

(53)  Deputy City Attorney Paul Zarefsky stated that in formulating something called a Task Force you might unintentionally be creating a body that has to operate under all the formal rules of Sunshine.  If that’s your intent that’s fine.  If it’s your intent to have a more informal, sort of internal process with more flexibility to it, he suggested designating one staff member such as the Executive Officer to have responsibility for this with the understanding that the Executive Officer will be consulting with the Director of Human Resources, with the City Attorney’s Office and other elements within City government.

Action:

Direct the Executive Officer to work with the Human Resources Director and the Commission’s City Attorney Counsel to review Charter, Rules, MOU and other applicable provisions covering Layoffs; Prepare a staff report to the Commission with recommendations and process with time-frames for discussions regarding this proposal; schedule staff report for hearing at the February 7, 2011 meeting of the Commission.  (Vote of 4 to 0; Commissioner Gorrono missed vote.)

Note:

The Commission also directed that this group include and consult with Vice President Casper to have benefit of his institutional memory.

COMMISSIONERS’ ANNOUNCEMENTS/REQUESTS  (Item No. 10)

None.

ADJOURNMENT  (Item No. 11)

4:59 p.m.