|
|
Post by gary on Oct 9, 2015 16:59:10 GMT -5
I have received the following info from a very reliable source:
The union has agreed to increase the transfer wait time from 90 days to 15 months effective with new hires in 2016 calendar year because of too many transferring from crapland. . . . [T]he Union has to vote on it, but it will pass as there are other great changes as far as teleworking and earning credit hours while teleworking even on the weekends.
|
|
|
|
Post by keepsake on Oct 9, 2015 17:04:09 GMT -5
All I an say is wow if this is accurate. That will change some folks' calculus. I thought the idea was to get more candidates. Some probably counted on being able to transfer earlier than 15 mos. This could alter peoples' choices on the "still interested in these locations" confirmation and/or the rumored GAL expansion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thomas fka Lance on Oct 9, 2015 17:09:26 GMT -5
It is accurate, it's just waiting to be ratified by the union members. If ratified this contract will run through September 2017
|
|
|
|
Post by luckylady2 on Oct 9, 2015 17:10:26 GMT -5
Wow - that will change the calculus quite a bit, won't it?!
|
|
|
|
Post by gary on Oct 9, 2015 17:10:08 GMT -5
I have confirmation from two other solid sources, one of whom asked that I post the following:
From: Zahm, Marilyn
Sent: Friday, October 9, 2015
Subject: FW: Good News regarding our contract
Dear Colleagues,
On behalf of the AALJ National Executive Board, I am pleased to report that we have finally concluded our negotiations on a new collective bargaining agreement.
We have been working since the beginning of the year to improve the CBA – some of which provisions were negotiated and some of which were imposed by the Federal Service Impasses Panel (FSIP).
The change in leadership at ODAR has worked to our joint benefit. On Tuesday, we spent several hours working with Deputy Commissioner Terrie Gruber, Assistant Deputy Commissioner Donna Calvert, Associate Commissioner Tom Funciello, and Chief Judge Debra Bice, and reached a Settlement Agreement on a number of items to be added to the contract:
· Credit hours may be earned on telework pursuant to the terms of the CBA regarding the earning of credit hours. This means that up to 3 credit hours per work day can be earned Monday through Friday when teleworking. In addition, a judge can telework on Saturday and Sunday and earn up to 8 credit hours during a calendar week (defined as Sunday through Saturday); the 8 day cap on number of days of telework per months will not apply to telework on Saturday and Sunday (as no hearings are ever held on those days), nor will the cap on the number of judges teleworking on a particular day apply to Saturday and Sunday telework.
· The cap on the percentage of judges who can telework on a particular day (Monday through Friday) will rise to 60% from 50%.
· The HOCALJ will normally approve a request to temporarily switch telework days if the change does not impact scheduled hearings or cause the number of judges teleworking on that particular day to exceed 60%. Scheduled hearings are those where a notice of hearing has been issued or the claimant or representative have agreed to a hearing date, even if the Notice has not yet been issued. The Agency agrees that, except in extraordinary circumstances, cases will not be noticed more than 120 days out.
· VPN is required for all telework days, with internet access as set out in the CBA (the judge must maintain a broadband connection – high speed internet – at the judge’s own expense).
· Judges will not be permitted to leave the hearing office with paper cases for telework after 10/1/16. In the interim, if a paper case is removed for telework, the judge will be required to provide a PII log and report as required by the CBA.
· Hand-written notes generated by the judge on a case can be removed from the office for telework only if the Judge completes a PII log and report.
· Judges hired after the signing of this Settlement Agreement (hired to start working in calendar year 2016) must complete 15 months (450 days) of continuous service with the Agency to be eligible for a voluntary reassignment; a request for reassignment will not be accepted if it is sent prior to the 451st day of continuous service. This provision applies while the current CBA remains in effect. (Note: the Agency has had great difficulty keeping judges in a number of less-desirable locations; the movement of judges out of an office after being there a short time is disruptive and unfair to claimants . Given that the Agency has a valid business reason for requesting this change, and that as judges we are concerned about insuring that claimants are provided with appropriate service, we reluctantly negotiated this provision, reducing the time the Agency wanted down to 15 months.)
· The term of the contract will be for four years from September 30, 2013.
· Union officials, including LARS, will use the electronic OUTTS system to record official time.
· The AALJ will not appeal the FLRA ALJ “Decision on Motions for Summary Judgment” which was issued on 9/15/15. Back story: After the Agency implemented the FSIP-imposed Articles on September 30, 2013, the AALJ filed an unfair labor practice with the FLRA; the FLRA General Counsel agreed with us that SSA had violated the law by imposing those articles, and a complaint was issued. The FLRA ALJ assigned to the case (a former SSA manager) recently dismissed the complaint.
· A timeline for a CBA ratification vote was agreed to. We expect to have ballots mailed to all of our bargaining unit members by early November at the latest.
· If the CBA is not ratified, this Settlement Agreement will not be effective in any respect and the parties must resume negotiations over the 18 Articles that were not subject to the FSIP procedure. The 11 articles that were resolved under the jurisdiction of the FSIP are not subject to ratification; they will continue to be implemented while this contract is in effect.
The new CBA that is subject to the ratification vote will be electronically emailed to you by the end of the month. We will provide you with information on the significant changes prior to your voting.
Marilyn
|
|
|
|
Post by keepsake on Oct 9, 2015 17:17:58 GMT -5
Note the language that they "reluctantly negotiated [the 15-month] provision, reducing the time the Agency wanted . . . ." Would be interesting to know what the Agency wanted if 15-months was "negotiated down."
|
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Oct 9, 2015 17:18:00 GMT -5
3 credit hours allowed to be earned on telework days in exchange for extending the transfer period to 15 months. No skin off the teleworkers and the majority of voters as they are at least two years into the job and past their first hop. All in all, the Union did OK.
|
|
|
|
Post by lizdarcy on Oct 9, 2015 17:52:04 GMT -5
I would like to read the entire proposed contract -- but, from what I see, it looks like a good outcome. I think the union did a good job. They were lucky to be negotiating with Terrie Gruber and Donna Calvert. It turned out better than I expected. Of course, they will have to start negotiating the next one pretty soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by christina on Oct 9, 2015 17:52:54 GMT -5
honestly, it's fair. the 90 day transfer has proved to be a headache for some offices. do i want to spend 15 months plus somewhere? no, not really but i do feel this is a fair arrangement. i will look over rest of this soon
|
|
|
|
Post by phoenixrakkasan on Oct 9, 2015 17:57:03 GMT -5
I am not surprised about the change from 90 days to 15 months. It makes sens for both sides, but most for management and the efficiency of the office. Based on this change and the new way cents are issued, those applicants who have a narrow GAL lucked out.
|
|
|
|
Post by ba on Oct 9, 2015 18:00:54 GMT -5
Note the language that they "reluctantly negotiated [the 15-month] provision, reducing the time the Agency wanted . . . ." Would be interesting to know what the Agency wanted if 15-months was "negotiated down." Two years. |
|
|
|
Post by Thomas fka Lance on Oct 9, 2015 18:18:31 GMT -5
Quite frankly, the 90-day-transfer was never a guarantee anyway. Some folks found themselves "stuck" in locations for up to two-years while waiting for locations they wanted. Luckily, I want "crapland"
|
|
|
|
Post by christina on Oct 9, 2015 18:35:07 GMT -5
Quite frankly, the 90-day-transfer was never a guarantee anyway. Some folks found themselves "stuck" in locations for up to two-years while waiting for locations they wanted. Luckily, I want "crapland" Or longer than 2 years |
|
|
|
Post by keepsake on Oct 9, 2015 22:02:02 GMT -5
Does anyone know off hand how long the 90-day to transfer rule has been in effect? Since the last CBA or longer? Just curious as to how big a change this might be from past practice. Any long-timers know what it was before the 90-day rule or how often this has been changed historically?
|
|
|
|
Post by christina on Oct 9, 2015 22:06:10 GMT -5
90 day rule I want to say started around 8 to 10 years ago. Before that, it was 2 years but I think there was hardship exception
|
|
|
|
Post by february on Oct 9, 2015 22:21:53 GMT -5
I guess I'm glad this came out before the much-discussed GAL expansion. Totally changes what I was hoping/planning on doing. While I totally get the reasons why ODAR wants this change, I have to think it's going to make it even harder to fill certain locations. We shall see.
|
|
|
|
Post by prescient on Oct 9, 2015 22:40:11 GMT -5
In all honesty, it's worse to "fill" a vacancy in crapland, and then 90 days later have the vacancy re-open, than to never fill it at all.
I'll be interested to see how/if this results in applicants pruning their GALs or declining offers.
|
|
|
|
Post by saaao on Oct 10, 2015 6:52:08 GMT -5
I guess I'm glad this came out before the much-discussed GAL expansion. Totally changes what I was hoping/planning on doing. While I totally get the reasons why ODAR wants this change, I have to think it's going to make it even harder to fill certain locations. We shall see. This will probably will change the calculus for some, though it shouldn't. Even under the previous regime, about 12-24 months in your first office really should have been what someone was mentally prepared for. I get the impression that a lot of peoples' expectations of transfer speed has been colored by all the quick transfer success stories. Those are more common now with all the hiring but still the exception, and as HO's fill up the wait time would have increased. The take anything and then transfer game has always been musical chairs. Waiting on the edge of your seat for a transfer offer from day 91 is it's own morale sapper. If you go somewhere with the knowledge that you are going to be there a minimum of 15 months you are spared the anxiety of waking every day hoping that this will be the day, which allows you concentrate on your job and give your new city a real chance to be permanent. Also if you look at the ODAR HO map, you will see a lot of strange location choices. If staffing deficits result in locations being closed, consolidated or moved to more populous area, that wouldn't be the worst result. |
|
|
|
Post by redsox1 on Oct 10, 2015 8:25:59 GMT -5
90 day rule I want to say started around 8 to 10 years ago. Before that, it was 2 years but I think there was hardship exception I think that the current CBA has the two year provision. My understanding is that it changed around 2008-09 by an MOU signed by prior the CALJ. |
|
|
|
Post by christina on Oct 10, 2015 8:42:29 GMT -5
yeah, i have never seen the contract so i did not realize it was a MOU that allowed for the change.
2008 may be right. i was thinking the people who applied in 2007 were able to transfer in 90 days. But they would have not been hired until 2008, which is consistent with what Redsox stated above. i can say the 90 day option has been around for awhile but i don't remember the exact timing.
|
|
