Item 3: Ratification of Unanimous IGR Actions and Action on Non-Unanimous IGR Actions

Home Browse Search

Sponsored by: Introduced and printed pursuant to House Rule 12.00. Presession filed (at the request of House Interim Committee on Business and Labor) URL: http://www.leg.state.or.us/11reg/measpdf/hb2300.dir/hb2348.intro.pdf Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation Susan Mullett CS-HR 1/25/2011 Pri 1 Oppose Comments: For the City of Eugene, all management positions except for the Police Chief and possibly Division Managers Captains) would fit the definition as described by this bill and would require these positions to be included in the union. At a minimum this could create uncomfortable situations as well as difficulty in the first line of supervision on a day to day basis as they must supervise staff that are in the same union. Lieutenants, and sometimes Sergeants, are normally in charge of whatever police operations are occurring at any given time. In the City of Eugene, those in first line supervisory positions and above are defined as FLSA exempt based on their supervisory duties. The narrow definition of supervisory duties defined in this bill would jeopardize the FLSA exemption for these first line supervisors and mid-level managers, and could require these positions be redefined as FLSA non-exempt. For the City, this would result in both higher personnel costs based on eligibility for overtime and the need to increase our managerial employees. This bill weakens the supervisory control as we lose role definition and distinction between first line supervisors and staff who report to them. It becomes a practical operational issue on a day by day basis. Police upper management relies on the input from Sergeants into handling handle daily operations and make recommendations regarding disciplinary matters. This bill results in administrative and operational concerns for the City of Eugene. This is similar to Bill 2633 from last year’s legislative session. Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation Joann Eppli FIRE 1/27/2011 Pri 1 Oppose Comments: After further review and discussion, agree with Chuck Tilby’s comments. This bill includes language that opens the door for extreme misinterpretations. Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation Chuck Tilby EPD-ADM 1/24/2011 Pri 1 Oppose Comments: I have consulted with Alana Holmes and Chief Kerns on the impact of this bill that defines any employee who cannot impose economic discipline as non-supervisory. Therefore, it appears to apply collective bargaining law to all police employees other than the Chief. Two main issues exist for the PD: 1) this would apply collective bargaining rules (overtime, etc) to over 30 employees - the financial impact could be significant, 2) the department needs reliable problem solving at current supervisory, middle management and division management levels - this could be significantly depleted if these employees are also represented. Consistent arguments to 2009 position on this bill. HB 2350 Relating Clause: Relating to Oregon Indoor Clean Air Act; declaring an emergency. 5