OK I am going to weigh in on this whole part time issue, but first let me say that this is only my opinion and does not reflect any policy of the union or the employer. Also in no way does this indicate my personal opinion on the value of officers be they Full-time, Part-time or Contract. This is just my personal opinion of how I believe the Collective Agreement should be applied to this issue of Part-time scheduling. I apologize now for the length of this post.
The first thing that people need to remember is that seniority should be the overriding factor, in almost all applications of the collective agreement. The problem we see in our department is that seniority is used in the full time scheduling of shifts. When we do our shift bids it is done by seniority and that is how our days off are applied, that is how we get EO’s and book PTO and so on. In part time scheduling shifts are given out “as equitably as practicable using seniority”. The current method of distributing shifts equally from top to bottom so that all Part time officers have the same amount of shifts does nothing more than ignore seniority. The union and employer have interpreted this as being a “fair process”.
Let’s take a look at what this fair process really does. In my view shifts should be distributed from the top of the part-time seniority to the bottom giving the person at the top as many shifts as they can handle, to a max of 40 hours if they want them. Then the next person and so on all the way down the list until there are no shifts left. Will those at the bottom of the list be stuck for shifts? Yes they will. They should be no different than all the full time officers that are stuck on midnights, based on their seniority. In article 15.b of our CBA the operative term is seniority, not fairness. “Seniority” is recognized under the law, where as the employers idea of fairness is not. The biggest problem here is that seniority is applied differently for full time officers then it is for Part-time. If proper seniority were applied to part time scheduling, there would be no issue with lower seniority officers getting UI benefits. This is another area where they have successfully brought right in line with the rest of employers operation. They have brought us into the fold, something all of you indicated that you didn’t want, when we bargained our last agreement.
During bargaining the union and the employer both agreed that the preference would be for the creation of full time employment. That was clearly stated on more than one occasion. There for, it was clear in my mind, that if an opportunity for the creation of full-time employment was available, it would be considered.
Another side effect of this “Fair Process” is that it stagnates any movement in the full time ranks and prevents the Union pressing for more full-time jobs. If the union can show that there is a position available, and that it can be consistently filled with a Part-Time officer for an extended period of time, the union can then show that there is a position available for a full time officer. For example, if there is a part time officer that works 40 hours a week on a day shift for 20 weeks, the union would be able to prove on paper, that there is a position available for a full time officer. With the current scheduling process the union will never be able to show the necessity for the creation of full time jobs.
Also let it be noted that almost every other article in the collective agreement as governed by the proper application of seniority. As far as I can tell, the only one that doesn’t have seniority applied properly is the Scheduling Article.
There are many full-time officers out there that see this issue as strictly a part-time problem. I assure you, it is not. Let me point out, that if the “two for one language” were ever to be enacted and current full time officers find themselves in the part-time ranks. They would not be able to apply for UI benefits under the current method of shift distribution. If I went down to part time I would not be able to absorb the loss of 2 or 3 days per week. So by not getting behind these PT officers we are potentially harming ourselves in the long run. There are a number of articles in our Collective Agreement that should be used to their fullest extent possible to ensure that seniority for all members of the bargaining unit remains intact. All of us full-time officers would have serious objections if our seniority was not respected, so then how can we sit by and watch as a full third of our department is having their negotiated rights trampled.
