04/14/1969 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ "1-' 1'.,~ 4/14/69 I maintenance workers belong to their union. Mr. Mohr said one of the problems was that the Council did not have.a policy ,statement before them, and that they should not initially be involved with the development 'of mach~nery and implementation, but should deal at the policy level. Mr. Jackson said what they are requesting is a policy statement, and he hoped the policy would be established that the cit~ would enter into collective bargaining. There was further discussion concerning the mechanics ,and whether collective bargaining should be approved. The Manager said t;:he staff would require time to prepare for a full-.scale discussion.. Mr. Jackson asked ',that discussion of po~icy be scheduled for ,the earliest possible, date. ! There ",as .further-discussion about matters of policy, the effect of collective bargaining ,with relation to the city's type government, and the effect of proposed state legislation on the city's attitude toward collective bargaining. The City Attorney said the state law has 'enablingi legislation to allow cities in oregon to agree to collective bargaining with representatives !: of their employes, but if the state ~aw had not been enacted, then it would have required a charter amendment. At the ~resent time" no charter amendment would be necessary. I Ii Mis. Beal said she."ghought the Council was under some misapprehension about ,what was expected' of it) ~he only question before the Council was whether or not the Council desired to instruct , the ,City Manager to bargain collectively with .union employes. The process of impt:Lementing I; that bargaining was between 'the City ,Manager and representatives of the union. If the City 'Mana+ . . II ger and the pepresentatives of the union agreed upon a contract, they would bring that ,contract ,: to the City Council for approva 1. ' ;1 'i Br~.PUrdy moved.seconded by Mr. Teague to direct the City Manager to prepare city materials, including those prepared for ,a previous hearing, to contact other ~ities in the state who have had experience in collective bargaining, ~o call in people who have had experience to discuss' this matter with the Council, and that this be done prior to one month following passage of the budget. Mr. Teague asked to add tha: when this matter is discussed, all members of the Council be present:~ Mrs. Hayward pointed out that it was not appropriate to guarantee, that all council members be !I present, and that, if such a policy was agreed upon, an absence would delay discussion. C'ouncili members would ariange to pe there if they considered it to be ,impor.tant. .. d Mrs. Hayward moved seconded by Mr. Mohr to amend the motion to read that this be done within one month of adop,tion of the budget by the Council. ~ After some discussion, the question was called on the motion for amendment. Dr. Purdy, Messrs. Teague, McDonald, Gribskov voted against the motion. Mis. Hayward, Mr., Mohr and Mrs. Bea~ voted in favor. Motion failed. A vote was taken on the original motion as stated. Motion car-ried. I Dr. Purdy moved seconded by Mr. McDonald that Item 2 of the Committee report be approved. :Mrs. Beal said she felt things had changed since the last meeting, and asked the City Manager what h'e proposes to do in the event the firefighters call a strike. The Manager said ,at this point he cannot ianswer that question. There are a number of alternatives to be ,considered, and at this point he has no basis for decis ions. In answer' to a question from Mrs. Bea 1 the Manager said he doesn I t know if he anticipates a strike and he certainly hopes not. 'Mayor Anderson said he felt'some of this discussion was outside the motion. Mrs. Beal said that apparently some Council members though if the unions were recognized the City might be faced with a strike. This has happened just becuase the City did not recognize the union, ,so it seems appropriate, to ask the City Manager what his plans are to deal with this. The Mayor said that the course of the discussion was out of order, and not germamelE: to the motion as made If comments in regard to this item should be forthcoming later, the chair'would recognize them. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Hayward to amend the motion to read that the date for discussion of collective bargaining be set for one month after adoption of the budget by the Council. In answer to a question from Mr. Wingard, Mr. Mohr said there is a good possibility the Council will be here until ~fter the leaves fall, waiting for the budget to be passed. He ~hinks the issue of collective bargain- ing must come before the Council wlth all due speed. Dr. Purdy said the reason for his motion was that he felt it would take a lot of work on the part of the staff to get the budget passed. I Mrs. Beal felt the City needed all the help it could get to pass the budget, and certainly firemen had i!een a tremendous help in that respect. That was one reason for putting the question ahead. Mrs. Hayward said another reason for doing it was, as specially noted in the minutes of April 2"the City Manager had :said he could have material ready for discussion within three or' four weeks of that date. If he, could prepare it withilin three or four weeks of that date, it would seem reasonable he could have it ready within ,three or four weeks of adoption by the Council. A vote was taken on the amendment. Mohr, Wingard, Hayward and Beal voted in favor; Teague, May~r Anderson, pro Purdy, McDonald, Gribskov were opposed. Motion to amend original mot{on failed. Mr. Flynn suggested to the Council that it should be a' matter of record t):1at', in the early part of the evening the Council voted to authorize the Ci.ty Manager to sign agreements. 4/14/69 - 10 .....