HomeMy Public PortalAbout04-15-1999 nny�J
BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS AND SAFETY OF
THE CITY OF RICHMOND,INDIANA,APRIL 15,1999
The Board of Public Works and Safety of the City of Richmond,Indiana,met at 5 p.m.Thursday,April 15,
1999,in the Community Room in the Municipal Building. Chairperson Bob Goodwin presided with Robin
Henry,Bruce Metzger and Assistant City Attorney Steve Rabe present.The following business was
conducted:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Metzger moved to approve the minutes for the meeting of April 8, 1999,second by Henry and the motion
was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
CLAIMS FOR PAYMENT
Claims for payment submitted by the City Controller's office were read by Henry who reported that they
totaled$95,793.08 and moved for approval,second by Metzger and the motion was carried on a unanimous
voice vote.
REQUESTS
Chairperson Goodwin explained that the Board has had proposals by two companies to handle the City's
insurance.These are the Wayne County Insurance Service and Aon.
Speaking on behalf of the Wayne County Insurance Service was Russ Turner who said Board members had
that service's proposal in front of them.He said he felt it was self-explanatory,noting that it is the same
program the City has had in the past but with a couple of optional changes this year.
Turner said the big thing this year is stated on page 4 of the proposal,adding that in the past the City had
seen fit not to maintain physical damage coverage on other than selected vehicles.He said that this year the
local service is in a position to offer to the City physical damage on its total fleet of vehicles,which is
currently a total of 297.He said those premiums include the physical damage coverage along with a couple
of options offering a different deductible.He said the other proposal from Aon may or may not include the
physical damage coverage.
He said the local service's proposal is based on the$55,244,684 of total property value and it is his
understanding the other proposal has a value of$54 million so there's about a$1 million difference in total
values on owned city property. He pointed out that the local service has always provided the backup of
sewers as part of its liability coverage.He said he has seen some other policies that do not include the
backup of sewers and drains as a third part claim,adding that some view it as a pollutant and all pollution
in a lot of policies are excluded.
Turner said since the first of 1999,the local service has paid in excess of$140,000 in claims for sewer
backups.He said the local service also includes some pollution coverage for activities with chemical use
that the City might have at its wastewater treatment plant,the municipal swimming pool,herbicides and
pesticides at the golf courses and the parks.
He said there are six independent agencies in the City involved in the Wayne County Insurance Service
which are RMD-Patti,Cutter,VanVleet Bartel,Lyons,Harrington-Hoch and Gaylor in Greens Fork.He
introduced Rollie Cutter and Rick Niersbach in the audience representing the local service.
Board of Works Minutes Cont'd
April 15, 1999
Page 2
Turner said these agencies act as a group to service and handle municipal-type business,adding that the
local service has been in existence since 1949 and takes some of the politics and hopefully gives some of
the continuity through changes of the administrations.He said the offices are located within the City and
deal with the local City departments pretty much on a daily basis,adding that they can call directly to any
of the local offices with their problems.
He explained that over the years the insurance company has been the USF&G,which has merged with St.
Paul and now goes under that name.He said the service has maintained constant and ongoing coverage for
the City without interruption and it has not experienced any of those heartaches that some other
municipalities have had over the years.He said the service has come a long way,adding that its loss
activity with the City is much better than years ago.He said the cooperation of the City and the Safety
Committee is reflected in those premiums.
City Attorney Bob Bever asked if the package also includes the law enforcement liability and Turner said it
does.He also asked about the defense costs and Turner said he would have to check that out and get back
to him on that.Turner said the public entity liability also includes all the employment related practices type
liability coverages,be it discrimination or A.D.A.Bever commented that not only is this local service
submitting this bid abut it also acts as the City's consultants to review all the potential bids.
Chairperson Goodwin asked if there was anyone in the audience representing Aon.There was no
representation.He stated that City Controller Shelley Miller and Human Resources Director Jan Hibner
were preparing a spreadsheet comparing the proposals of the two companies,adding that at some point they
would be prepared to make a recommendation.He said this Board would take the proposals under
advisement until the review was completed and recommendation was made.
BID OPENING
A. Chairperson Goodwin said only one bid had been received for the contractual concrete project
for 1999 and it was from Bowlin Construction of Losantville for$122,945.He gave the bid to
City Engineer Bob Wiwi for review and recommendation before the end of the meeting.
BID AWARD
GRIEVANCE HEARING
Chairperson Goodwin announced the opening of the Grievance Hearing filed by Ginni Bellew through
Local 1474 of the Amalgamated Transit Union AFL-CIO/CLC.Speaking on behalf of the local unit was
Javier M.Perez Jr.,one of the international vice presidents of the Amalgamated Transit Union with
headquarters in Kansas City,Mo.
Perez stated that he feels it is a misinterpretation,which has led to a dispute between the local union and the
Roseview Transit Co.as to the interpretation of the clauses of the collective bargaining agreement.He said
in looking at the City's policy,it is very clear that the collective bargaining takes precedence when there is
any controversy between the two documents.
He said the issue here is whether Bellew had seniority and should have been called back to work instead of
an individual junior to her who was called back.He asked the Board members to look at the collective
bargaining agreement,Section 1,Page 2,which he said makes clear that the contract is in place and is
binding and that the provisions take precedence over the City's policy.He referred to Section 4,Page 4,on
the coverage of the agreement,which refers to that agreement covering all present and future except those
listed in subsection B that refers to management employees and their secretaries.
Board of Works Minutes Cont'd
April 15, 1999
Page 3
Perez continued,pointing out that the part-time temporary position which is the position Ginni Bellew held,
was negotiated into the agreement by the current president of the local union quite some time ago.He
added that it is his understanding that in reviewing some of the bargaining history,that clause has been in
the contract for quite some time as well as other clauses that refer to seniority.He added that the dates those
were negotiated into the contract precede the employment dates of the current management staff so they
may be unaware of the negotiation history.
He referred to the language in Section 8,Page 6,which states"with full regard to years of service,"which,
he said,is another term for seniority.Specifically,Perez said,the language does not exclude temporary part
time positions,and subsection C states"seniority of employees will be recognized."He said David Leffel,
president of Local 1474,then and now,negotiated that language and that is for all employees of the
bargaining unit.
Perez said subsection C-1 refers to furloughed employees and the language in that subsection talks about
recognizing the years of service and the seniority of employees. Section 9,Page 7,he said discusses items
and notations and adverse notes that may be given to employees upon their job performance,not to be put
in their file,without the employee being notified in writing that those are being placed there.
He said when Bellew was laid off she received a letter from her supervisor,Terri Quinter,thanking her for
her years of service and her dedicated service to the transit system.He said at no time had she ever been
apprised or given any copies of any letters that would say she had any adverse notations placed in her file.
She had no reason to believe that any of her activities during her employment with the transit company
were contrary to the established rules and procedures or to the wishes of the employer.He added that at no
time was she told she needed to improve in any areas or that she was considered below a set standard
compared to any of the other employees or the general level of the employees.
Perez referred to Section 10,Page 8 of the collective bargaining grievance said"seniority will be computed
from the date of the first assignment"and that does not exclude part-time temporary employees.Section C
of that same portion refers to"fill-in"which is what Bellew actually did and,again,he said,it refers to the
actual seniority.Section 22,Page 11,he said,refers to part-time temporary employees as"fill-in"
employees.
He said you can go back and forth in a variety of places in the contract and one section supports the other
that,in fact,these employees do have seniority.Page 12 of that same section,he said,refers to part-time
seniority temporaries and it refers to their"seniority pay differential"which they do follow as do other
employees.He said it is his understanding,due to past practice,is that there has never been any employee
not promoted based on the basis of their seniority hire date to those positions.
He said Section 31,Page 14 uses the term"driver vacancies,"and"employees shall have the right to those
determined by their seniority."He said Bellew was hired October 14, 1997 and received her layoff letter
January 7, 1999,to be effective January 15, 1999.He said he represents both people,Bellew,and the other
person who actually received the job,and he did not wish him any adverse reaction but it is his
responsibility to hold to the issue of seniority.Perez said he happens to be a man who is 10 years her junior
who was promoted over her to the job.
The letter,he said,dated February 25, 1999,from Greg Stiens who is the Assistant City Engineer and is in
charge of the Roseview Transit,refers to the City's personnel policies to say that those policies were
followed.However,Perez said,one of the policies in the front portion of that personnel policy was not
followed and it states that the collective bargaining agreement takes precedent.He said he would like to be
able to resolve the issue.
Board of Works Minutes Cont'd
April 15, 1999
Page 4
Perez said Bellew has been off work since February 1999 and has lost 35 hours a week,minus the
unemployment compensation she has been collecting,lost access to the City's paid portion to medical
care,vacation accrual and other benefits.He said he is willing to try to work with the City to negotiate a
fair settlement on those issues,but on the seniority issue she wishes to be placed back on the job to where
she would have been had she not been adversely affected.
Perez answered a question asked by Metzger about Bellew's hire date,commenting that she worked to the
satisfaction of her employer,filling in on an"as needed"basis,which is his understanding that was
negotiated to help keep costs down of hiring another full-time employee with the full expectation that based
on her continuing service and her years of seniority when a vacancy occurred,she would be promoted on
that seniority.
Assistant City Attorney Steve Rabe distributed copies of the contract to Board members along with copies
of Stiens' letter.
Rabe said it is obvious that there is a disagreement of interpretation as far as the contract is concerned,but,
he said,Board members will hear tonight that what happened was that there were two people who were
classified as temporary part-time employees.He said that means that they are not full-time employees.He
said these two were laid off at the same time and as far as call back procedures go,Section 8 of the contract
does say that whenever there is a vacancy that seniority will be recognized.However,if the vacancy is not
filled in this manner then it provides a procedure which is followed whereby it provides for furloughed
employees to be called back.It does not state that they should be called back in order of hire date.
Furthermore,he said,in Section 10 b,which already been alluded to but not in its entirety,it does say
"seniority of employees will be computed from the date of first assignment provided their employment is
continuous."By definition,he said,a temporary employee's employment is not continuous.The City
personnel policy,Rabe said,yes,the bargaining agreement is controlling except where the bargaining
agreement is silent and the City personnel policy would come into play.He said in Section 2.2 on Page 9 of
the City personnel policy,it does state that temporary employees are hired as interim replacements and
employment assignments in the category are of limited duration.During that year,he said,in which Bellew
was employed,there was at least one occasion there were a couple of weeks that they did not have work for
her.He said her employment was not continuous and she was a temporary employee and by the nature of
the job was not continuously employed.
Ralie said the City was in a situation where there were two employees both furloughed to temporary
employees,people who had worked for Roseview Transit,both of whom are laid off.He said the contract
states that if the vacancies are not filled by seniority,meaning the full-time employees who might otherwise
want that position,then the next section of the contract would be referred to which states that furloughed
employees will be called back provided that they have not been off for more than a year.There was a
situation,he said,with two furloughed employees which gave management a choice who to call back.Over
the course of both employees' employment,he said,stating that he felt Quinter would testify that she had
no problems with either one in terms of their driving ability.However,he said,in weighing all factors
involved between the two employees it was clear that the person she did retain for the job was the best fit.
Rabe said in that the contract is silent and in that the contract does not state that furloughed employees have
to be returned on the seniority basis and in that the contract is clear that seniority does not begin to accrue
until employment is continuous and considering the definition of a temporary part-time employee,who was
hired on an interim basis and not continuous permanent basis,the City's position therefore is that the
aggrieved had no seniority and that not having seniority,being furloughed,management had a decision to
make as to which employee to call back and therefore had to weigh all factors involved and made the
decision that they felt was best for Roseview Transit.
/\\
Board of Works Minutes Cont'd
April 15, 1999
Page 5
Rabe invited questions.Chairperson Goodwin asked if what Rabe was saying is that a person does not gain
seniority until they are hired full-time.Rabe said that is true.Then,Chairperson Goodwin,directing his
comment to Perez,asked if the bargaining agreement differs from what Rabe was telling the Board.Perez
said one of the easiest way to do that is to have David Leffel,the president of the union,explain his
understanding and interpretation of the agreement since he was on hand when the wording was put in.
Answering questions directed to him by Perez,Leffel said he had been a driver for Roseview Transit for 30
years.He said he has been with the union for 27 years and has been president all but three of those. He said
he was union president and business agent during the negotiations.Perez,referring to Page 6,Section 8 of
the collective bargaining agreement,entitled"increase or decrease in forces,"said he wanted to bring
Leffel's attention to subsection C which both he(Perez) and Rabe had referred to and asked him to take a
few minutes to read.
Perez said Rabe has stated the position that that particular subsection allows the City to use either one of
those two,listing them as options.He asked Leffel if that was also his understanding.Leffel said it was not.
He said that option is if the union drivers did not want the jobs they would be posted for the whole City to
take those jobs.Perez asked if there was an exclusion of full-time,extra board or temporary,part-time.
Leffel said there was not.Perez said it was his understanding that Leffel believes that the second portion
kicks in if no existing employee wants the job.Leffel said that is correct. In effect,he said,there could be a
temporary,part-time employee that does not want a 35-hour week job.Leffel said that is true.In that
situation,Perez said,it would be advertised and filled as stated in the agreement.Leffel said that is true.
Metzger said it is his understanding that the City considers Bellew to be a furloughed employee,but Perez
did not.The City says she is not a continuous employee,Metzger said,but Perez considers her as a
continuous employee.He asked if that was where the differences in interpretation are.Perez responded,
saying that Bellew was clearly a furloughed employee,but just by the definition given there is a provision
in the contract referring to a furloughed employee.It calls a person who is furloughed from their job an
employee and those people have callback rights.And,he continued,it is the position of the union that as an
employee,even a furloughed employee,that those people who may be furloughed have callback rights
based on their seniority and that none of the seniority provisions in the agreement exclude part-time
temporary employees from having seniority.
Perez said,in fact,many of the provisions he has cited are clear that they include by reference they do have
seniority.If you read the language you would come to the clear understanding that seniority provisions do
apply.There is no specific exclusion of anybody who has the title of"employee."Metzger then stated that
everyone agrees that Bellew was a furloughed employee but there is a dispute as to whether or not the
seniority provisions should have applied in this situation.Perez said that is correct.
Perez asked Leffel when that part of the bargaining agreement was negotiated and Leffel answered that it
had been in place for quite some time and neither the current administration or the current City Attorney's
office were involved.Perez said the current management team was not in place nor the legal employees and
he could understand why the interpretation could come out differently,but Leffel was in those negotiations
and negotiated this.Perez asked whose proposal was this issue on seniority,the company or the union.
Leffel answered that it was the union.Perez said it is clear that Leffel was the person who made the
proposal and he knows what his intent was when the language was placed in the agreement.
Referring to Page 7 of the collective bargaining agreement,Perez pointed to Section 9 in the management
clauses,stating he wanted to particularly address subsections d,e and f.Those sections,he said,state rather
clearly if an employee has an adverse record as to how they are to be handled and be provided notice.He
said he wanted to bring to the attention of the Board the January 7, 1999 letter from Quinter to her,bringing
attention to the last line.
Board of Works Minutes Cont'd
April 15, 1999
Page 6
He said it seems hardly fair,given the statement of that letter,the language of the agreement here,that after
the fact,there is an argument here that she was not a good overall employee.He also referred to Page 8 of
the agreement which is Section 10,subsection c,specifically the first sentence which reads: "the City
agrees to recognize the seniority of drivers that fill in driving schedules as much as possible."He added that
the statement was made that she was a temporary fill in driver but they don't have seniority.This language,
he said,speaks to the opposite.
Perez said he wished to call attention to Section 22,Page 11 of the agreement which is a provision of how
these part-time temporary employees are brought into place and it is clear that the Transit Manager and the
union,through the president of the union,must agree to the City hiring temporary employees under the
following terms and conditions.He said it is his understanding,after talking with Leffel,that seniority was
part of the deal and he stated that on the other portion of the agreement.
He said in subsection iii,on either Page 11 or 12,it talks about the employees in question having to go
through the seniority pay differentials as does everybody else.Again,he said,this is another example
where this contract ties them in and references that ties them into their seniority.He said,adding that they
are doing further research,that this has never been handled in a past practice,and added that he thinks that
is on their side.
Rabe asked to see the letter written by Quinter to Bellew which was referred to by Perez.Rabe asked Leffel
whether or not he could recall when the sections they have been referring to were negotiated.Leffel said
they had been in effect quite awhile,but he could remember no specific date.Rabe said that there is
something that applies in a court of law which says that if you have a written agreement which is intended
to be the final agreement between the parties then evidence of past agreements,past discussions,
conversations and negotiations during the negotiation process are inadmissible in order to add to the
contract.He said his point is that referral is made to negotiations which took place long before most of us
were in the positions we are in and he feels those conversations are irrelevant and had they been important
they should have been reduced into writing and incorporated into the contract which was negotiated
between the parties and agreed upon.In that they are not there,he said,my position is allowing and taking
into consideration the testimony of what was meant and what else was said that this should not be taken
into consideration to add to the contract.
He said that looking at this contract and the City's personnel policy it becomes very clear that temporary
employees are on an interim basis,not full-time,not continuously hired and then,again,Section 10b said
that seniority is computed from the date of first assignment provided the employment is continuous.He
said he thinks that is the key phrase.
Perez said he could understand from looking at the language why the position is taken that we want to deal
with what is here and provide our today's interpretation.But,he said,he thinks you have to look at what
the parties meant. Clearly,he said,if the City had meant to exclude these people,they could have done so a
number of times in other sections which they chose not to do.He said the fact that the argument is made
that we don't want to go back to those situations,clearly is trying to run away from the negotiations history,
not a made up history,but the exact negotiations history.It is not the union's fault,he said,with tenure and
staying on those jobs for a long length of time that they have been able to work for the City's transit system
longer than some of the people in this room.He added that he is willing to listen to what the City's intent
was if those people who negotiated this agreement are still available.He said he feels it would support the
union's position.
Perez called Ginni Bellew to the microphone and asked her to tell the Board her name and what she does.
She did so,stating her name,that she lives in Richmond and until the first of January she drove a bus for
Roseview Transit
Board of Works Minutes Cont'd
April 15, 1999
Page 7
Perez asked Bellew if,at the time of her layoff was she advised that there were any adverse notations in her
file. She answered that she was not.He asked her if at any time during her service for Roseview Transit
was she advised that her service was substandard to any of the other employees.She answered that she was
not.He also asked if she had received any commendations.She answered that she had not,with Roseview,
but with others.
She said she drove a bus for 15 months and her original date of assignment was October 14, 1997.She said
that because of this action she lost her income,the chance of going into a full-time position where she
would have health benefits and insurance and the chance of having holiday pay and different paid
vacations.Basically,she said,she lost her job.He asked her if this Board decided in her favor would she be
willing and able to go back to work immediately. She answered that she would.
She said she liked her job a lot and liked the people she moved around.
Rabe asked if,during her tenure as a driver,was she ever disciplined in any way. She answered that
probably no more than anybody,and its hard to judge what he called discipline.He continued,asking if she
was ever talked to or was her conduct or attitude ever discussed or did Quinter ever speak to her about
problems between her(Bellew) and passengers on the bus.She answered that Quinter said she was hyper.
Metzger asked when the position was filled that Bellew felt she should have received.Bellew answered that
the date was February 15, 1999.
Perez referred to the contract again,in response to the recent questioning,that Section 9,Page 7,is clear
about how people are disciplined, what information they are given so that it can appear in their record and
clearly there are people here,that if they are provided the documentation that is required,they could be
asked and could testify to that and produce documentation.He said he believes none exists because it
wasn't given.He said it is not unusual for supervisors to have conversations with employees,adding that if
that didn't occur we could supervise ourselves.
Rabe asked Quinter to step to the microphone and she identified herself as Terri Quinter,Operations
Manager for Roseview Transit.She said she has been employed for the past 10 years and nine years of that
in her current position.Rabe asked Quinter if she had found Bellew to be most cooperative during her
period of employment with Roseview and she answered"most generally."He asked Quinter if she had
occasion to ask Bellew to come into work to call her in and ask her to volunteer to work when she needed
someone to fill in.
Quinter answered that she did.Rabe then asked if she was generally willing to do that. Quinter said there
were three or four times she had something else to do around the holidays and said to go ahead and call the
other part-timer and if he couldn't do it she would be glad to come in then.Quinter said she had no problem
whatsoever with Bellew's driving.Rabe asked if Quinter had any problems with her conduct or her
attitude. Quinter said she(Bellew)tended to like to do things her own way,stating that the system has been
operating since 1972 and 'we have ways of doing things and handling the certain types of people who get
on the bus and she felt that on occasion she wanted to direct how she thought people should act to them and
just outright tell them."She said she felt that on occasion Bellew was"a little abrasive."Rabe asked
Quinter if she had ever discussed this with Bellew and Quinter answered that she had,on one occasion,
when a young passenger's mother called her about a bus driver harassing her daughter.She said she talked
to her about it,telling her job was to drive the bus,not to lecture the kids,and her response was if you want
us to let these kids run all over us,then so be it.She threw her arms up and walked out of the office.
Board of Works Minutes Cont'd
April 15, 1999
Page 8
She said there was no discipline and nothing marked on her record.Rabe commented that Quinter did
receive a complaint from a citizen and did speak to Bellew about that. Quinter said she always documents a
citizen's complaint,writes it down that it occurred,speaks to the person involved and writes what their
response was.She said she feels it is important to do this because they work for the public and this was a
mother's daughter and the mother wanted her to be aware that she didn't think it was the appropriate thing
to do nor did Quinter.
She said it was her understanding that the following transpired: A younger girl was on the bus and she had
a baby and a lot of bags of groceries and she had a friend with her. She said it took them awhile to get on
the bus,then they sat down,and they must have taken up two seats. On down the road,she said,Bellew
told the girl with the baby that she was only allowed to have so many bags and she was taking too long and,
Bellew was going to be behind.The girl smarted off to her and Bellew said you're a child having a child.
Bellew admitted she had said that.
Quinter said she didn't feel that this was serious enough to put in her personnel file.She explained that
when she was faced with having to decide which of the two drivers to call back she called her supervisory,
Greg Stiens. She said since there were two she asked him to check into the seniority thing.She said she felt
that,as manager of the system,it was her responsibility to select the person best suited to fit in that position
dealing with the public,transporting people and mixing with the other drivers.She said she felt like she
selected the correct candidate after she found out there was no seniority ruling for a part-time employee.
Rabe said it was fair to say that she inquired as to whether or not seniority applied and management told
her it did not.He said she had to decide,adding that she had two good employees and in weighing the two,
neither had problems in their personnel files,and she looked at the two and picked the one that was the
better fit.
Perez asked Quinter if she had the opportunity to provide other part-time temporary employees a full-time
position during her tenure. She said she did have one,but this is the first instance where there have been
two.She said she made the decision.She said she knew the seniority provisions but not definitely for a
part-time person because there are not that many part-time clauses in the contract.Perez asked if she was
unclear. She also stated that she had called Bellew and she had said for her to call the other part-timer and
if he wouldn't come in,she would.
Perez asked her if she viewed that as an adverse statement by Bellew. Quinter said it was over the holiday
period within two weeks like three times.Normally,she said,when she calls an extra board driver,which is
what they are called,they drive. She said a fill-in driver in that contract does not mean a part-time person,it
means extra board and they are full-time drivers and guaranteed 35 hours.She said part-time drivers are not
guaranteed any type of hours and there might be three weeks go by and there would be nothing. She said
when she calls a person to come in,it is general knowledge that they are to come in because that is their
job.She said they are to come in as fill-in because they are extra board. Since they are guaranteed only 35
hours,she said, it gives them an opportunity to get up to 40 hours.Perez asked her if,at the time Bellew
told her that,did she tell her she had to come in. Quinter answered that she did not,but called the other
driver.
Perez asked to see the letter Quinter wrote to Bellew. She said she did not place an adverse in her file.He
asked her to read from it,but before she did she said she does a fine job driving.Then,she read: "your
services and dedication to the transit system have been greatly appreciated."She commented that she
would probably put that on anybody's letter for future reference or if there were no problems with their
driving abilities. Quinter said she had a choice to make between two people and as manager of the system
she was instructed that she could do so and she made the decision based on,basically,personalities.
Board of Works Minutes Cont'd _
April 22, 1999
Page 9
Perez said he appreciated that sometimes supervisors feel they need to take other factors into consideration
and certainly the collective bargaining agreement is open from time to time for re-negotiations.He said that
clearly the language of the contract does not state that.It supports their position,he believes,that Bellew
has seniority. Clearly the language of the contract,he said,states that the things Quinter just discussed,if
they were such that they were going to be adverse notations,there should be a notation in her file.He said
at some point of time the supervisor does have a responsibility to supervise and make clear to those people
that that is the case and if an employee is not a good employee then he would suggest that sentences such as
the last sentence on that page should not be put on an employee's record.
He said he supposed the argument could be made to bring these things up now is actually a violation of the
collective bargaining agreement.He told the Board he would appreciate its due consideration in favor of
the union's position.He said they were open to some discussion to try to resolve this because from their
perspective it does not make any sense to go further.He said the union has had a good relationship with this
City and he hopes to resolve this within this room.
Summarizing,Rabe said what exists here is a contract dispute and a few things that need to be reiterated.
He said the contract needs to be looked at and we have to decide what someone meant years ago when that
someone is not available and that is not fair to either side.He said you have to look at what's in the contract
and it says that seniority begins to accumulate from the first date of assignment,provided the employment
is continuous. Again,he said,that is provided the employment is continuous.He said temporary employees
are not by definition continuously employed.
Rabe said in looking at the personnel policy which does apply when the contract does not,it does give a
definition of employees and does say that they are hired on an interim not a permanent basis,hence their
employment is not continuous.He said when you have two temporary employees laid off,there is nothing
that requires a decision to be made based on seniority alone. Given that,he said,Quinter had to look at the
facts before her. She had two people,both good drivers.
Yes,he said,she had discussions with Bellew, which she didn't feel it was necessarily warranted,that a
notion be placed in her personnel file.He said she felt the problem was not serious enough to document.He
said Quinter evaluated the two drivers,but one was a better fit and she hired that one.She has testified,he
said,that there is no past practice over the past 9 years of hiring temporary employees based on seniority.
He said she had never encountered a situation where she had two drivers laid off at the same time.
Rabe said it is the City's position that she did not have to base her determination on seniority and
management has to have the discretion to hire the one most fit.Perez responded that management does
have a time to say that and that is called a probationary period and that period had expired.
Metzger asked when Bellew was laid off and Quinter answered that it was January 7, 1999.He asked if that
meant she was not subject to be called in anymore for temporary driving. Quinter said that was correct. She
said she had two part time drivers and Roseview Transit had an influx of illness and disabilities with the
other regular full-time drivers and that warranted hiring the two part-timers.She said when the regular
drivers came back to work she had to lay off the two part-timers because there was no other work available.
She added that if had to have fill-in work done she would have used the extra board drivers that were
already there.She said they have 12 full-time drivers.Eight of them,she said work 8 hours a day,40 hours
a week.Four,she said,are 35 hours and just fill in wherever they are needed.They don't have a regular
route, she said.Metzger then commented that after January 7, 1999,Quinter was looking for the other 35
drivers to fill in and not looked to Bellew and the other part-time temporary driver. Quinter said that was
correct.
Board of Works Minutes Cont'd
April 22, 1999
Page 10
Chairperson Goodwin said this grievance would be taken under advisement and brought back at a future
meeting.He said perhaps they could come back next week,hopefully,for a decision or additional
testimony.
BID REVIEW REPORT
Wiwi said he had reviewed the bid by Bowlin and found it was complete and after discussing it with City
Controller Shelley Miller had found that the funds are available.He recommended the bid be award to
Bowlin for$122,925.Metzger moved to approve,second by Henry and the motion was carried on a
unanimous voice vote.
MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
Captain Farmer stated that he had some information pertaining to the construction of the new Main Street
Bridge.He announced that South West 1st Street,along with its National Road intersection and extending
on down into Hub Etchison Parkway for a little distance,would be closed to public traffic at approximately
7 a.m. starting April 22.He said this would cause some problems for those attempting to get to the high
school.However,he said,by moving this closure ahead they are hoping it will allow the City to have the
traffic patterns in that area for the high school open and in full operation prior to the starting of school in
the fall.
He said hopefully it would reduce the amount of time being closed for Sim Hodgin Parkway also.He said it
is to the City's advantage to allow this to start now while people have already made adjustments to the
traffic patterns of getting the students to the high school and getting through that area rather than starting
with an entire new class next fall trying to find their way to the school.Also at that same time,he said,
National Road would go down to two-lane traffic locally only 3rd and National eastbound for the access of
the businesses in that area.He added that there will be one lane in and one lane out and they will probably
be on the same side of the road as the construction work proceeds there.
Captain Farmer said the Police Department would attempt to the keep the Board as current as they can.In
answer to a question by Chairperson Goodwin as to the simplest and the best detour,Captain Farmer said
those going to the high school should use South 5th Street and G Street Bridge.Another option,he said,is
to use West Main to South West 3rd Street south and access the school from South West 2nd Street in the
Joseph Moore area.He said that is not going to make a lot of the residents happy but there are no other
options.At this point,he said,we have to make the best of limited resources and it's going to be this way
for the next six weeks until school is out.
Captain Farmer said in case of problems on the interstate where that traffic is routed into town via U.S.40,
the route they are going to use is to bring them straight in on National Road to South West 5th and send
them straight back north on to North West 5th Street so they can get the eastbound interstate ramp.He said
RP&L has also been in contact with the City Engineer,Bob Wiwi,and the Traffic Division is working on
checking the timing on the West 5th and Main Street traffic light.He added that that is probably going to be
the most populated intersection in town over the course of the next 12 months at least.He said other
options are the 201 Century Bridge,South G Street Bridge and Test Road in some instances.He said due to
the size of the commercial vehicles coming off I-70,no other route provides the needed widths in the
roadway and turning radiuses to accommodate those multiple trailer vehicles.
Board of Works Minutes Cont'd
April 15, 1999
Page 11
Wiwi said he has been working with INDOT and local businesses to minimize and keep this change in
traffic the least disruptive as possible. Captain Farmer said it will be an ongoing process and he invited the
public to call his department because they probably will see these things before he does and that will give
him a chance to address them.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business,on a motion duly made,seconded and passed,and carried on a unanimous
voice vote,the meeting was adjourned.
Robert Goodwin,Chairperson
ATTEST:
Norma Schroeder,Clerk