MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION OF SOUTH FLORIDA 2010 Collective Bargaining Negotiations. June 30, 2010 Meeting Minutes Prepared by MCASF

Transcription

1 MCASF Negotiation Spokesperson - Julie Dietrich, Executive Director MCASF MCASF Negotiation Committee Members - Wade Helms, Ed Llosent, Frank Williams Absent: Mark Kerney, LU 725 Negotiations Spokesperson - Jim Taylor, acting spokesperson in lieu of Kenny Scott LU 725 Negotiation Committee Members - Ralph Marinello, Richard Falkman Absent: Kenny Scott, Business Manager, UA Local 725 MCASF spokesperson Julie Dietrich began the meeting at 2:30pm. The Union and the Association exchanged minutes and approved of the minutes as provided without changes. Julie then provided the Union with a hard copy as well as an electronic version of the Association s proposals and corresponding revised Collective Bargaining Agreement and wage and benefit package. She then explained that the MCASF Negotiation Committee members had crafted the proposals to achieve the following goals: 1. To increase the amount of work obtained by member contractors through an aggressive market recovery program, thereby reducing the number of out of work Employees. 2. To increase the number of hours worked by Local Union 725 members, thereby increasing the contribution hours and improving the funding level of the Employees Pension, Health & Welfare, and Education Trust Funds. 3. To improve the ability for MCASF construction contractor members to compete against non-union contractors, it is necessary to reduce crew costs by providing new work classification, relaxing ratio requirements, and removing other unnecessary limitations. 4. To improve the ability for MCASF service contractor members to compete with nonunion shops by adhering to wage scales as defined in the National Service and Maintenance Agreement Florida Schedule A. References to rules, wages, working conditions and any other such reference to service work as defined by the National Service and Maintenance Agreement have been removed to eliminate any redundancies and conflicts. 5. To improve the ease of use of the current agreement by simplifying, clarifying and / or removing repetitive, confusing, redundant or unnecessary language, therefore facilitating future organizing efforts and adherence to the agreement. She explained that due to high number of Union Members out of work, the resulting decline in contribution hours to fund the various Union Members Pension, Health & Welfare and Education trust funds, as well as the decline in contractors ability to win jobs, the Association believes it is necessary to make effective, strategic changes to the existing collective bargaining agreement. Specifically, she noted that the Association had worked to craft a new three year agreement that would help put more men back to work, build up contribution hours to keep trust funds well funded, and would help contractors regain market share lost to open shop 1 of 5

2 contractors. Further, she noted that streamlining the agreement would diminish open shop contractors ability to use the CBA as tool to persuade potential customers not to do business with signatory Contractors who must abide by such a complex, stringent agreement. Last, she noted that a simplified agreement would serve as a positive tool for the Union as they work to organize more Contractors, increasing the number of Union Members, putting more Union Members to work and thereby increasing contribution hours to the various benefit trust funds. She explained that the corresponding revised collective bargaining agreement would cover both construction and service work. However, she noted that references to rules, wages, working conditions and any other such reference to service work as defined by the National Service and Maintenance Agreement had been removed. She noted that, unless specifically stated, the NSMA would prevail. She explained the proposal s section on Market Recovery, noting that the Association s economic proposal is contingent upon the Union establishing an aggressive Market Recovery Program. She explained that the contractors believed that forming a Market Recovery program was paramount in putting more men to work. She explained the proposal s section on Wage Reallocations, noting that the Association had taken great care to impact the wage and benefit page as little as possible, and only in a manner that would benefit Union Members either in generating more work, or supplementing the funding of their benefit trust fund contributions. She explained that the current total economic package amount for A Journeymen will not change during the first year of this agreement. She explained that, as they worked to avoid reducing wages, the Association proposed reallocating current employer contributions to the Defined Contribution Trust to the Employees taxable wage to serve as a contribution to fund a Market Recovery Plan for the life of this agreement. She explained that for legal reasons, contributions to Market Recovery programs must be made from the Employees wages, not through direct contributions from the Employer. She noted that the Association wanted to be certain that Union Members were aware that the Defined Contribution plan would continue to exist, and Employees would still, at their option, continue to be able to fund their own personal investments in the Defined Contribution Trust Fund. Continuing the proposal on Wage Reallocations, she explained that the Association proposed the creation of what was essentially a rainy day fund that would serve to help fund the Union Members Pension, Health & Welfare and Education Trust Funds as needed. She noted that for the first year of the agreement, this dollar, which was moved from base wages, would be used to fund the Market Recovery Program. She explained that the Association believes that contributing this second dollar during the first year of the new agreement would help give the Market Recovery Program the strong start needed to make an immediate impact, bringing much needed work to out of work Union Members. 2 of 5

3 She explained that, following the first year of the agreement, this Floating Benefit Fund would no longer be allocated to the Market Recovery Program, and would reallocated for the expressed purpose of improving the reserve levels of the benefit programs provided for in the collective bargaining agreement; specifically the local Pension, Health & Welfare and the Education Trust Funds. She explained that each February, the Union and the Association would meet for the purpose of deciding where these contributions would be allocated. She explained that this dollar would float, and could be applied as needed (either in part, or as the whole dollar) to the fund(s) that the Union and the Association felt was most in need of additional funding in order to maintaining existing benefits. She emphasized that the Association felt that it was very important to take a proactive stance to protect and ensure adequate funding of the Union Members benefit trust funds. She explained that, at the start of the second and third years of the agreement, if the Association and the Union could not agree on how to allocate the Floating Benefit Fund, the contribution would automatically be allocated to the Education Trust Fund. She noted that the Association established this caveat because it asserts that the education and continued training of the Union Members is preeminent, and is the Association and Union Members single most important endeavor. Next, she explained the proposal s section on Wage Increases. She continued by explaining that, during this economic downturn, it was difficult to fathom the idea of providing increases in wages, however, the Association sought to create a equitable way to provide for future wage increases during the life of the agreement if hours increase. As such, she explained that the Association proposed obtaining a report from the Health & Welfare Trust s administrators of all hours worked for each of the last five years. She explained that the Association selected a five year period since that time frame would include extremes in both highs and lows in total hours worked, and would therefore, when averaged, create a fair benchmark of hours to serve as a point of comparison for the life of the agreement. She explained that in subsequent years, an annual report of hours would be provided by the Health & Welfare Trust s administrators. If this annual report reflects a total number of hours lower than the established benchmark, no increase will be made to the wage and benefit package. However, if this annual report reflects a total number of hours higher than the established benchmark, the Journeyman classification would receive a two percent increase on the taxable base wage with appropriate percentage application for all other classifications. She then addressed the proposal on Reallocation of the wage and benefit package. She explained that, as noted in the provided revised agreement, the Association proposes that any portion of the wage package may be reallocated, by mutual agreement between the Association and the Union. She explained that currently the Union had the sole authority to reallocate. She explained that the Association members wanted to form a partnership in the allocation of the wage package, to ensure that taxable wages remain as high a percentage of the total package as possible, while safeguarding the funding of the various benefit trust funds, which contractors have a vested interest in. 3 of 5

4 Next, she addressed Mediation. She noted that establishing a mediation process is a permissive subject of bargaining and requires both the Union and Association s agreement in order to be included in the CBA. She stated that the Association does not agree have the Industry Relations Council (IRC) serve as mediators in the new agreement, therefore it has been removed from the proposed revised agreement. She then proposed mediation language, which is included in the revised CBA Section She pointed out that the proposed language included joint selection of mediators by both the Union and the Association, and she explained that this was yet another way that the Association was working to create a new CBA that is fair and equitable. Then, she noted the Association s proposal on Fringes, as included in the provided revised agreement Section 3.6, which states that On all overtime hours worked the fringe benefits will be paid at the straight time contribution rate. Next, she explained the Association s proposal on Overtime, as stated in the provided revised agreement Section 3.6, which notes that all hours will be paid at time and one half after the Employee has worked forty straight-time hours in a work week. Continuing on, she read the Association s proposal on Removing Ratios. As noted in the provided revised agreement Section 6.3, the Association proposes that There shall be no limitations on the amount of classifications per job site or the type of work they can safely perform. Classifications shall be allowed to perform all work limited only by their capabilities. She then explained the Association s proposal on Classifications, as indicated in the provided revised agreement Section 3.1(a). She stated that the Association proposes that construction wage classifications be limited to the following: 1. A Journeyman, with a wage equivalent to current R1 wages. 2. I Journeymen (Industrial), with a wage of $2 above A Journeyman. 3. Foreman, with a wage of 115% of an A Journeyman. 4. General Foreman, with a wage of 125% of an A Journeyman. She noted the Association s proposal also established a new wage classification: 5. B Mechanic. She explained that the classification was established to enable construction contractor members to compete against non-union contractors by reducing crew costs. She explained that the Association proposed this classification for newly organized Employees, resulting in an increase of the Union s membership, and bringing in more contributions to fund the Employees various benefit trust funds. Jim then asked how the Association s proposal to remove ratios would be applied to the B Mechanic classification. Frank Williams addressed the question stating that it would depend on the nature of the job, and that contractors would use B Mechanics judiciously to establish a crew mix that was appropriate for the scope of work at hand. 4 of 5

5 Continuing with her explanation of the Association s proposal on Classifications, Julie explained that the new agreement would include the four Service work and wage categories as defined by National Service and Maintenance Agreement: 1. Service Journeyman (MESJ). 2. Servicemen (MESS). 3. Service Apprentice (MESA). 4. Service Tradesmen (MEST). She noted the Association s proposal also established a new wage classification: 5. Service Tradesmen (MEST-R). She explained that the classification was established to enable service contractor members to compete against non-union contractors in the residential market. She explained that the Association proposed this classification for newly organized Employees, resulting in an increase of the Union s membership. Last, she explained the Association s proposal on establishing a means for the Industry Fund to simultaneously collect Association dues as an administrative procedure. She explained that these dues were not to be considered assets of the ACRA Industry Promotion Trust Fund. She then explained each classification in the corresponding Wage and Benefit packages. She explained that the Association had provided the Union with two copies of the corresponding proposed Collective Bargaining Agreement. She noted that one copy showed all edits made to the current CBA, including all removed, revised and amended language. She explained that the Association was providing this because it was their desire to negotiate with the Union in a transparent manner, having made all changes to the current CBA evident. She noted that many changes were minor (i.e. to clarify an issue, or remove redundancies). She also said that the Association was providing a new revised CBA (without any marked out text) so that the Union could easily review the resulting proposed new CBA in its proposed final form. She asked the Union if any aspects of any proposals were unclear, and if so, if she could help clarify those proposals. The Union expressed that they did not, at present, have any questions, but would need time to review the proposals and corresponding CBA and wage and benefit package provided. At that point, Jim advised that the Union would need time to review the Association s proposals. He recommended a tentative date of July 7 th for the next meeting. Julie thanked Jim, Ralph and Richard for the meeting. This meeting adjourned at 3:15pm. -- Respectfully submitted by Wade Helms & Julie Dietrich 5 of 5