The Director is saying the same thing the Union is. It’s important to remember the position is a at-will employee and their job is to support whatever the current political administration’s platform is. He is our Department’s lead manager. The Union leadership is CAL FIRE’s 2881’s legislative voice in what happens with our personnel and conditions. If you don’t believe me, just look at the origin of many of our gains over the past decade. As leadership in CAL FIRE they can contrast with each other but when it comes to political sway, the reach of our Department’s leadership is limited. Not saying this as a bad thing simply the reality of a situation. The Union’s job is to get our rights and benefits, the Director’s job is to implement the rights. We may not agree with legislators at times, but it is they who pass rights and benefits into budget. So when throw around support for who did what, I just want to be sure we give credit where is due, and who is along for the ride.
So we have to wait another year to vote on the new agreement if one isn’t voted in by the end of the month?
No,
Like the last agreement. Once the new tentative agreement has been negotiated and agreed to by management and labor. The union brings it to the members for a ratification vote. It is also taken to the Legislature for a vote. Once both sides vote to approve it takes effect. The starting date of the new agreement will be retroactive back to July 1, 2024 till the ending date that will be part of the new agreement.
Until that process is finished, the existing agreement remains in place for up to 1yr, June 30, 2025.
Nice letter from President Edward’s, but missing the details on “what” a 66hr schedule looks like.
The members were supposed to know schedules by 7/1/2023. It’s been a year, crickets.
Meanwhile the current MOU expires at Midnight tonight and every member that has health insurance gets a pay cut tomorrow based on the extension that expires at Midnight.
I just hope the bargaining team gets this money rolled into base pay. Because they way it was agreed to, the state & fed tax it as “Other or OT” income and $lthe $260 gross is only about $180 after all the taxes are taken out. The remaining after tax $$ didn’t cover 25% of the increased medical costs I’ve been paying since Jan 1, 2024.
The temporary agreement never stated the membership needed to know the work schedules on July 1, 2023. “The State and the Union agree to present a mutual agreement to the Director of Finance by July 1, 2023 to be included in the Governor’s proposal for the 24-25 budget.”
I went back through and read everything from the last agreement and I don’t see it written anywhere that members were supposed to know work schedules by July 1, 2023. I’m not perfect though so if you find it please post it up.
Everyone should understand that a change of this magnitude is going to have starts/stops and hiccups. Some people are going to get screwed in some ways and some are going to make out like bandits. The majority of you will reap a pretty big benefit. You will never hear from those where this make a positive impact as that’s not how human nature work. But hopefully everyone will realize what a huge improvement this is. I’m a bit jealous…
I’ve never heard that the members would know he schedules on 7/1/23. Please cite where you got this info or stop saying it…
why do you think the 260$ goes away when all aspects of the current agreement stay in place until and new agreement is reached?
Our cash stipend was exactly the same as SEIU. Theirs ended last year on the expiration date. They had extended contract talks and the stipend was not in their new contract. So they received no back pay or further payments.
Section 11.1.7 has a specific expiration date of June 30, 2024 for the $260 health care payment. It does not mean this "automatically " extends.
I guess I read and interpret these 3 bullet points in sequential order to mean. There would be a plan in place to reduce the work week from 72 to 66hr, it would be jointly worked on by Labor & Management and it would be submitted to the Director of Finance by July 1, 2023 for inclusion into the Governor FY 24/25 Budget proposal.
Which happens to be a public document, that was discussed in multiple hearings for the Legislature and Senate to approve and fund as part of the budget the Governor signed on Friday.
Let’s not forget that $260 month, while not PERSable, Is used to calculate an employees EDWC OT rate. With that money removed from the OT calculation, it’s about a 3.95% PAY CUT for the purpose of calculating the OT rate. The last 2yr agreement had a total of 6.5% general salery raises. 6.5 minus 3.95 is a general salery increase of 2.55% over the last two years.
You forgot to factor in inflation.
I stand corrected. That’s why we’re in bargaining.
So, no where did iit say that schedules will be presented to the membership 7/1/23?
No it doesn’t, God forbid the members know anything before it rolls out.
You know we have to vote on it as a membership to adopt it right??? So we would know all the ins and outs by then and everything would retro back to the end of the previous contract date.
That’s where the confusion lies, yes we will vote on the new Mou. I keep getting told, we already voted on the 66. Edward’s email today seemed to support this…
“The 66-hour work week for CAL FIRE is now enshrined. The 66-hour workweek is in statute - the guiding law for CAL FIRE - and is now an integral part of the working conditions for our members”
The 66hr work week is adopted as a budget item. How WE get there will be a vote of the membership.
I remember when, several years ago, the contract needed to be voted on and the state was on fire. Retirees took the ballots to the ICPs and impromptu meetings were held in the chow tent at breakfast.
Overall I am concerned with what we stand to lose to gain one extra day off a month. I have heard the phrase " Reduction of work hours without loss of Compensation" mentioned a lot in all of the propaganda information. That specific phrase has always bothered me. Lets look at the the core issue, Compensation is an exchange of payment for a commodity or service. such as $15 and hour. If you work 10 hours, I will give you $150. If you only work 8 hours, I will give you $120. That is reduction of hours worked without loss of compensation. You have performed less work, so you earn less money but have been compensated the same. The headlines should read " Reduction of work hours without loss of INCOME" . I fear that the majority of our union body will look at the preverbal shiny object on the end of the string and Vote " Yes I want to work less" without seeing the sharp metal hook hidden in plain sight. What is the unions Core objective for survival I ask? To increase its membership and grow its tax base. To shake hands and kiss baby’s, to obtain an extra 30% in membership as with another $300,000 a month in revenue (roughly). Hopefully I am completely wrong but this is exactly how Government entities have been working for hundreds of years. Smoke and Mirrors. I hope each and every one of us reads all the material objectively and makes an informed decision when It comes time to cast our Votes.