The Annual Star Tribune Overtime Article

Ah yes, time for the annual Star Tribune overtime article where us public employees earnings are aired for all to see.

There are two parts to this expose. If you click on:

Explore overtime pay for metro area public employees

You can type in the name of yourself, or your favorite Sheriff's Office employee and get a 5 year total of their overtime income and what percentage of their total income the overtime amounted to, as well as their gross wages for 5 years.. For instance I made $57,000 in overtime over the last 5 years which amounted to about 15.4% of my income according to the Star Tribune. 

The comments in this section are priceless:

Supervon2 says, This is structured by the Unions so their top brass gets the most out of the deal. The Star should show who the highest earners and surprise! They will turn out to be the Union power brokers.

Ah yes, those infamous Union power brokers! Hey dipshit, I mean Supervon2, the overtime is the result of Department of Corrections minimum staffing levels. The more inmates in custody, the more staff MUST by law, be there to deal with them. This isn't Belarus! If there are duty stations that must be filled, they are filled with overtime. If someone doesn't volunteer, someone is FORCED to fill it. Therefore ALL overtime is MANDATORY.  If employee A doesn't sign up for it, they or employee B will be forced. At the end of the year no matter how much or how little overtime was worked by one person, the taxpayer will have covered the same amount of hours that year. Quit making employees who volunteer to work longer hours at a dangerous job look like thieves. By the way, it is common to be forced to stay several times a week. Thought you were going to your kid's game or going to that movie? Think again. Your 8 hour shift just became a 12, and you can't leave until you are relieved, so it might get even longer.

jbpaper says, The Strib should do a story on how the overtime effects their pensions and what that will cost the taxpayers in the long run. 

I can answer that. It's like most things in life. The more we earn the more we PAY IN! Like Social Security or a 401K, therefore the more we get out. You wouldn't suggest the State take the extra money we pay into our pension would you? Would you? 

The other article you can click on is:

Overtime costs soaring at Twin Cities agencies as they struggle toward full employment

This article is an overview of the metro Sheriff's Offices and their various amounts of overtime. Some excerpts of interest are:

Excluding undercover officers, the Star Tribune found that overtime payments in Hennepin County nearly doubled from $2.3 million in 2010, when it accounted for 5 percent of the payroll, to more than $4.5 million in 2014, when it accounted for 9 percent.

The Hennepin County Board has criticized Stanek for his rising overtime bills and hired a consultant from California for $100,000 to analyze personnel spending, which accounts for about 80 percent of the sheriff’s budget. The analyst’s report is due in September.

Let me make a couple of observations. We endured 5 years of wage freezes during the great recession. The cost of living went up, wages did not. How does a wage earner support their family? The American way, we work more hours. 

During that time Hennepin County Detention Deputies fell to the lowest wages in our job class in the seven county metro area. When the job market opened up, people left for better paying jobs. As people left, shortages occurred which had to be filled with overtime! That is not rocket science.

What's really fun is to go to Data Mine and type in the name of your favorite high up elected official and see how their salaries went up. For Instance Hennepin County Sheriff Rich Stanek's salary over the same 5 year period covered by the Star Tribune (2010-2014), went from $149,483 to $158,905. That's salary, not wages and overtime.  

The County Commissioners had more modest raises over that period. Hennepin County Commissioner Mike Opat went from $97.194 to $104, 703.

The biggest winners by far were the  Minnesota State Commissioners. They got between 20 and 30%  raises this year! 

Unlike us jailers who earn higher wages with grueling 12 hour shifts, the politicians and their cohorts got big raises for putting in the exact amount of time they always have. 

So Supervon2, you just keep looking for the evil Union power brokers and at the men and women putting in long hours, while the people you elect, and the people they appoint, laugh all the way to the bank.

The I.A. Blues

Based on a true story! Enjoy.

Internal Affairs Confusion

A few days ago I received a letter from Hennepin County Sheriff's Office Internal Affairs. Why is not important. The mechanics of what transpired is.

Our MNPEA attorney was not available to be there with me on the date and time they wanted. I informed I.A. and THEY moved it to a time my Union Attorney could accompany me. (Keep in mind they moved the date so my MNPEA attorney could be there).

All was well until my MNPEA attorney and I appeared at I.A.

The Supervisor of I.A said, pointing at me, "You can come in." Then pointing at our attorney, "You cannot."

I explained that he was my Union representative and I was entitled to have him with me.

He looked at our lawyer and said, "He's just a witness and doesn't need representation."

 I cited Weingarten and said because I could be subject to discipline I was entitled to Union representation. I explained that with my many years as a Union Steward  I've seen times in I.A,. where someone who was just a witness suddenly became the focus and was subject to discipline. I also noted that if they accused me of lying I could be subject to discipline.

He still insisted I was "just a witness." I then brought up the Correctional Officers Discipline Procedures law. It states if a correctional officer is giving a formal statement they are entitled to representation.  A recorded statement in I.A. IS a formal statement. All to no avail.

I then said, "Look, I'm here, my rep is here, let's just go in and get this done.."

His reply was, "We'll tell you if you need representation".  

I finally stated, that I was willing to give a statement but that I wanted my rep or I would refuse.

He said "no," so I left.  

Some additional facts. Everyone else called in on this investigation was allowed our attorney, except me.

Remember again, the original date of the interview was changed so my union could be there!

The Law is Clear! 

Your right to representation is guaranteed by Weingarten. 

In addition to guaranteeing the right to a union representative, Weingarten also states:

If the employer denies the request for union representation, and continues to ask questions, it commits an unfair labor practice and the employee has a right to refuse to answer. The employer may not discipline the employee for such a refusal.

and

MSS 241.026 CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS DISCIPLINE PROCEDURES

States:

(b) "Correctional officer" and "officer" mean a person employed by the state, a state correctional facility, or a local correctional or detention facility in a security capacity.

(c) "Formal statement" means the questioning of an officer in the course of obtaining a recorded, stenographic, or signed statement to be used as evidence in a disciplinary proceeding against the officer.

Subd. 4.Place of formal statement.

The formal statement must be taken at a facility of the employing or investigating agency or at a place agreed to by the investigating individual and the investigated officer.

Subd. 5.Admissions.

Before an officer's formal statement is taken, the officer shall be advised in writing or on the record that admissions made in the course of the formal statement may be used as evidence of misconduct or as a basis for discipline.

Subd. 10.Rights not reduced.

The rights of officers provided by this section are in addition to and do not diminish the rights and privileges of officers that are provided under an applicable collective bargaining agreement or any other applicable law.

An Internal Affairs Interview conducted by Detectives in I.A. and recorded is a Formal Statement that can result in discipline!

and

Article 34 of our contract:

Section 3. Employees will not be questioned concerning an administrative investigation of disciplinary action unless the employee has been given an opportunity to have a union representative present at such questioning. An employee desiring such opportunity shall promptly notify the EMPLOYER and arrange for such representation in a timely manner. The employee shall cooperate fully in such questioning providing full disclosure of all pertinent facts.

 This is why you pay union dues. Union representation is your right.

25 years!!

25 years as a Detention Deputy with the 

Hennepin County Sheriff's Office!

July issues and meeting

There's a MNPEA member meeting on Thursday July 9th at 6 PM. 

Basement  Location 
2233 N Hamline Ave 
Roseville, MN 55113

Hot issues:

Vote taking place over night shift retro

New Tattoo policy

Techs being made to FTO, but not getting paid for it! That's right. The Detention Techs are being  made to FTO staff and even fill out FTO paperwork, but not paid. This is a glaring error in our contract that needs to be addressed.

When we first got FTO pay in the contract for Detention Deputies the first thing they did was remove all of our FTO status so they didn't have to pay. Eventually they appointed new ones, and only the annointed got FTO pay, but they continued to assign non-FTO's to those duties. It was grieved. Inspector Cook (yeah we're going back a few years) stated if we filled out the FTO paperwork we were to get FTO pay. My gut feeling is if you ain't gettin' paid, you shouldn't be doing it. Yes, you may have to train someone in your position, but there should be no paperwork required of you without compensation. 

I understand a grievance is coming.

This is the time to start thinking about contract negotiations. They will begin again in the fall.

A friendly reminder to all. 

DO NOT GO TO INTERNAL AFFAIRS WITHOUT OUR ATTORNEY. 

Police Union sues Chicago PD over tattoo policy

This from the Chicago Tribune:

Police union says it will fight order banning visible tattoos, baseball caps (click for full story)

"The Chicago Police Department has quietly made changes to its uniform policy, requiring that on-duty officers cover up any tattoos and banning them from wearing baseball caps.

The department’s largest union, which represents rank-and-file officers, quickly voiced its opposition, saying the department should have first negotiated the changes before making any announcement. A number of officers also spoke out against the move, saying their tattoos are part of their identities.

But the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 7 said Tuesday it plans to file an unfair labor practice complaint with the Illinois Labor Relations Board over the new directive."

This is an interesting read considering the HCSO's similar new visible tattoo policy. It seems all of these guys work in concert with each other. 

The article states, "The move puts Chicago in line with other big-city police departments like New York and Los Angeles that have implemented similar changes to their uniform policies as body art has become even more common."