10/11/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilwoman Shirey asked if passing the ordinance now would preclude any changes suggested as the result of negotiations between staff, the three unions, and the Council subcommittee should such negotiations be held. Personnel Director said . that adoption of the ordinance now would have no impact on AFSCME because any impasse is at least 21 months away. He suggested if the ordinance was to be con- sidered further that it be done in the spring when bargaining was over and the personnel staff could "get back to the issues left behind." He said a request from anyone of the three parties, staff, or the Council could initiate such a process. Councilman Keller asked if in staff's opinion the intent and workability of the ordinance had been changed in resolving differences to date. Personnel Director answered that there had been no change in intent, the basic thrust ha.s been the same since July 28 meetings. Modifications made, he said, would ensure effective enforcement. With regard to workability, he referred to memo previously given to Council members stating it was "acceptable to the parties," and he felt the best way to describe the final document presented was that "it contained compromises for everyone." Councilwoman Beal, recognizing the obligation to the voters in passing the charter revision, felt there was a stronger obligation to the unions since an agreement had been reached in negotiations on the proposed wording. She felt the unions should be drawn together again to get agreement from them. Mrs. Beal moved second by Mr. Bradley to table the issue until the II-B-I October 25 Council meeting, pending further work between staff and the unions. In resonse to Mayor Anderson's request for direction and intent of the motion e without debating the move to table itself, Councilwoman Beal said her idea was that the staff and three unions should get together and reach mutual agreement on what was heard "loud and clear" - that AFSCME wants changes and the other two unions do not want changes without having been a party to tHose negotiations. She felt that if it was easier for staff to come back to the Council subcommittee that reviewed the charter revision, that could be worked out. Assistant Manager pointed out that the motion was to table to a date certain, which in fact was just postponing to a date certain - and that would be debatable. Mayor Anderson ruled the motion debatable. Councilman Murray also recognized the obligation to voters, at the same time recog- nizing the potential of a continual hassle working under an ordinance to which there has not been unanimous agreement. He felt if further meeting between staff and the unions could be expedited so as to get back to the Council with a "hard decision" as quickly as possible, it should be done. Councilman Keller urged adoption of the ordinance at this meeting, calling attention to the strong commitment already made to the voters. He recognized too the minor points differing from the initial document, but he thought it important to proceed now. Councilman Williams spoke for adoption at this time also. He said that after the commitment to the people to adopt an ordinance as soon as possible after the charter revision was passed, walking away from it at this point would make him wonder about the general grant of power given in the charter. e Councilman Bradley wondered if there was anything in the proposed ordinance that - could be "put on the back shelf" without jeopardizing its workability in the coming collective bargaining sessions. Personnel Director said he would not recom- 10/11/76 - 12 i&1