Council 2's Spring 98 Newsletter

You really have to keep a sense of humor when dealing with some of the antics in Spokane County government and, if the normal isn’t enough for a laugh, they always will provide you with new material. The latest: The District Court judges and their newest attempt at literature. It’s great reading!

On top of the better-than $100,000 they’re spending to contest our 30-year-old collective bargaining law, they wrote a new employee handbook. No doubt they did so by assembling some of the greatest legal minds to make sure that they circumvented the bargaining process (may be in violation of state law) with the best handbook a group of judges could write on taxpayer time.

According to the procedures adopted by the judges to handle the everyday operations of the court, all the judges get together at least once a month with a smaller executive committee meeting more frequently. The executive committee consists of the Presiding Judge, currently Judge Sara Derr, the past President Judge Maggs and the Acting Presiding Judge.

These folks must be the real brains of the outfit. I mean, the ones who for hours and hours spent the time needed to possibly write, and certainly approve, a handbook that deals with everything including almost two pages on clothing. Rather than write on the normally accepted appropriate dress required, they really went to work. The mental pictures one conjures up when you think about three judges in their robes writing on undergarments is just hilarious. But as far-fetched as it seems that’s exactly what they did. Here is their rule:

Unless excused for medical reasons, appropriate undergarments will be worn at all times. An employee medically excused from wearing undergarments shall wear appropriate substitute clothing over the subject area. An example, for a female employee medically excused from wearing a bra, may be two loose fitting shirts, worn atop of one another, made of regular non-see-through material.

In addition to the above rule, they cited 10 specific examples of inappropriate clothing which include "weekend-wear" shorts. Are weekend-wear shorts something different than regular shorts? I don’t know, maybe it’s some kind of crazy outfit judges wear on Saturday and Sunday and they do not want that kind of fun going on during the week.

You really have to wonder about these individuals who make better than $96,000 a year and are spending a ton of money and time making sure people dress according to their standards. The real question is why didn’t they write a rule that requires the judges to wear proper undergarments beneath their robes? Makes ya kinda wonder, doesn’t it?

News In Brief

'Let's take our pension system back'

Council 2 is angry at the way in which members’ pension funds and policies are being handled by the state authorities.

The union believes the interests of the state are being placed ahead of the interests of city and county employees.

The result: Workers are losing out on the benefits that they will receive in retirement.

"Public employees are outraged by the current system," says Pat Thompson, Director of Legislative/Political Action for Council 2 . "We are on the outside looking in, and we are increasingly frustrated by what we see.

"We are trying to expose the Pension Policy Committee for what it is — a political machine created to benefit the state and not the members of the plan.

Several recent developments have supported Council 2’s contention that anti-worker interests are directing pension policy and that pension management is spinning out of control, Thompson adds.

The Olympian newspaper commented, "True or false, the current accusations of political favoritism and manipulation of investment information against the state Actuary’s Office demonstrate the need to have an independent oversight committee setting pension policies."

"While the current structure always has allowed for this, some current legislators are taking unfair advantage of the system," Thompson says.

Among them are Rep. Don Carlson (Rep., Vancouver) who is chairman of the Joint Committee on Pension Policy and Rep. Helen Sommers (Dem., Seattle).

"I want to stress that this is a bipartisan problem and will need a bipartisan solution," Thompson clarifies.

The plan is the Washington School Employees Retirement System Bill (sers iii) which made it through both houses and was signed by Gov. Gary Locke.

Although sers iii directly affects classified school employees, its approval may cost the remaining plans — including those to which many Council 2 members belong — millions of dollars.

Here’s why: A provision in the new plan enables members to move their money around on a daily basis. To enable them to do so, the State Investment Board will need to take nearly $200 million out of long-term high-yielding investments and move them to what amounts to a low-yielding checking account. As a result, instead of all of members’ money in the pension funds yielding 20 percent to 40 percent a year, a big chunk of it will be earning perhaps 4 percent to 6 percent.

The Department of Retirement also would have to hire 35 people and spend $17 million to administer the bureaucracy that sers iii creates.

All the afl-cio unions representing classified school employees were adamantly opposed to the sers iii bill. But two organizations that represent classified school employees supported it. One was the Washington Educational Association, which represents mainly teachers, but also counts some classified employees as members. Since they had already bought into the plan for teachers, they were left with no choice but to support it. They convinced the Public School Employees Association to join them.

"It’s really unfortunate that some groups openly waved the white flag to legislators and didn’t fight for their members," Thompson says. "They gave up on lowering the retirement age. One group, pse, publicly praised the same people who have been cheating pers members for years."

When members of the House Appropriations committees held hearings on the bill, the State Investment Board and the Department of Retirement also attended the hearing. Also there were a group of labor activists, including several Council 2 members. Officials of both the sib and the drs warned the committee of the complications and costs of the sers bill.

The backers of the bill responded by moving the implementation date to Sept. 1, 2000 and by saying they would study the negative effects in the meantime.

In another move, Council 2 has joined Council 28 in suing the state. "Our hope is to prove that the state manipulated the numbers to increase employee contributions above and beyond what it takes to fund the plan," Thompson explains.

When the session began in January, Council 2 realized it would be a difficult one on the pension front, particularly as Council 2 was talking with a hostile jcpp and the committee would be advancing two bills on the Plan iii retirement issue. But Council 2 also felt that it would be assisted by the whistleblower complaint filed against the State Actuary. The accusations were serious and the report on the investigation into the Actuary would not be completed before the end of the session. As a result, Council 2 felt the committee would not move forward with any major legislation.

Two pieces of good news on the pension front did emerge from the session: The pers iii bill that Council 2 opposes failed to make it out of the Senate Ways and Means Committee. Gainsharing for pers i retirees also passed.

The went, they saw, they participated

It was grassroots lobbying at its best. When more than 150 Council 2 members took part in the annual Legislative Weekend in late January, they did more than simply meet legislators.

They actively lobbied the lawmakers to discourage them from passing the latest amendments to state retirement bills.

They went armed with letters outlining Council 2’s objections to the pers iii bills.

They met with senators and representatives to express their frustration with a system that takes their money, but shuts them out of the policy-making process.

And they listened with rapt attention to the keynote speaker, State Auditor Brian Sonntag. They greeted him with a standing ovation for his efforts in supporting Council 2.

Sonntag spoke on his office’s investigation of the State Actuary’s role in creating fiscal data for the Joint Committee on Pension Policy (see report on Page 3).

This year’s Legislative Weekend was the biggest ever. The event continues to grow in popularity.

"People are really enjoying the ability to meet with their legislators, to discuss the issues that are important to them," says Council 2’s Legislation/ Political Action Director Pat Thompson.

Mike Murphy, State Treasurer, left, with
Brock Logan, Staff Representative in the
Lacey office, and Pam Swenson of
Local 618 in Thurston County

John King, member of Local 120-CD
(Pierce County Corrections), left, Dow Constantine,
Representative for the 24th District, and Bill Grant,
Representative for Walla Walla, pose for a picture.

From left: Ron Lauzon, Jane Lauzon, Walt Bailey, John
Olson, all of afscme # 275, with State Representative
Lynn Kessler and State Senator Jim Hargrove.

City of Spokane committed unfair labor practice, commission rules

The City of Spokane committed an unfair labor practice in its treatment of a position in the maintenance department, according to a finding in March by the Public Employment Relations Commission.

The commission found that the City should have given notice to Local 270 before removing non-supervisory tasks from Steve Hendricks, who worked as the Library Caretaker Foreman.

The commission also found that the City should have provided an opportunity for collective bargaining on the decision to remove the tasks from Hendricks.

Evidence before the commission was that the Library told Local 270 that it intended removing the Library Caretaker Foreman position from the bargaining unit as the foreman’s duties changed after the opening of a new library downtown and the addition of another branch library.

Spokane Staff Representative Randy Withrow told the City that Local 270 did not agree with the removal of the position from the bargaining unit. He cited other City positions that involved similar work and were non-exempt.

More than two years later, the City promoted Hendricks to the new position of "Facilities and Maintenance Manager" and transferred the position to a supervisory one out of the bargaining unit.

After hearing evidence when Council 2 was represented by wsccce legal counsel Dave Kanigel, perc agreed.

Arbitrator dismisses County's objection to ruling

An arbitrator has dismissed an objection by Spokane County to his ruling that five County appraisers are entitled to back pay extending back nearly three years.

The arbitrator, Howell L. Lankford, ordered the County to pay promptly the amount owing. He also repeated his finding that the County is responsible for the entire fees and costs of the arbitrator.

The original ruling was reported in the Winter 1997 issue of County and City Employee.

In its objection, the County said that, if the appraisers were working out of class, specific evidence needed to be presented to show they were working at the higher level for at least two hours a day. Such evidence was not presented, the County said.

In his rejection, Lankford said he had not found that the appraiser 2s were working out of class. He had found that they were working at the level of appraiser 3s. The back pay, he said, was based on the failure or refusal of the Spokane County Assessor to participate in good faith in the agreed-on Task Evaluation and Analysis Method (or team) analysis process. That approach calls for wages and classifications to be based on what you do—not on what you are currently classified as.

Hearings in Briefe

Probe discloses questionable practices

An official inquiry earlier this year into the practices of the State Actuary’s office—which helps set policies involving your pension money—disclosed questionable practices.

But investigators said the practices did not break the law because the legislature has seen to it that there are few laws to break.

The office helps set policies affecting $27 billion in pensions for hundreds of thousands of past and present state employees, including Council 2 members.

The investigation into the actions of Actuary Gerald Allard followed whistleblower complaints by a former Deputy Actuary, Steven Bland. Bland suggested that Allard was manipulating the numbers to help certain lawmakers pass some pension bills and kill others.

For example, if a bill is presented to the legislature that lowers the retirement age from 65 to 60, the Actuary determines how much it will cost the system. He’s the only one who can do that. But, since he reports to the committee that doesn’t want the bill in the first place, he inflates the numbers and, in effect, kills the bill.

Allard is not even an accredited actuary, but is allowed to serve in the office in terms of a change in the law that permits a non-actuary to serve as long as he employs a deputy who has the credentials. Bland was such a deputy.

Allard also has been in office far longer than originally intended. The intent was to have an Actuary advising the Legislature whose continued employment would not influence the advice he or she gave. The Union contends that this conflict of interest has been magnified because of the current pension governance structure.

The complaint was investigated by consultant Steven Miller who was hired by State Auditor Brian Sonntag.

The report found that the secretive way the Actuary’s office conducts business heightens suspicions about its activities even when they involve no wrongdoing.

"Because there is not much accountability, a definite lack of openness and decisionmaking made in the light of day, that contributes to the suspicion and mistrust," Sonntag said.

But Rep. Don Carlson, the Vancouver Republican who is chairman of the Joint Committee on Pension Policy, was reported as saying that he sees little reason to change the system.

Applications open for $10,000 Jerry Clark Memorial Scholarship

An arbitrator has ruled that Grays Harbor County officials acted wrongly when they failed to appoint Charles Cooper as Assistant Area Supervisor in the Copalis area of the county.

The ruling was made by Arbitrator Gary L. Axon following a hearing in late October. The hearing followed a grievance filed by Council 2 against the County’s actions.

Axon agreed with the argument presented by Council 2’s General Counsel Audrey Eide. He found that the County violated an article of the bargaining agreement between the County and Local 275.

The agreement states that when vacancies occur the job should be given to the next most senior qualified person for a 30-day probationary period.

The evidence showed that Cooper, who has worked for the county for 17 years, was next in line in terms of seniority to be promoted to the position, the arbitrator found. Cooper was more senior than the Equipment Operator from the Elma area, who was appointed to the position, Axon said.

He ordered the County to place Cooper in the position for a probationary period of 30 days.

If Cooper successfully completes the probationary period, Axon ruled, the county is ordered to make up to him all the wages and benefits he lost as a result of not being selected when the job was initially awarded.

Locke vetoes Public Records Bill