October 26, 2007

Arbitrator upholds grievance against RAM

Guild wins on Techs’job rights

Technicians with the most seniority must get first crack at other, more secure jobs that are available when Tech jobs are being eliminated, an arbitrator concluded in a ruling that upheld a Guild grievance on all three of the contract violations it cited.

The decision by Arbitrator Marlene Gold set straight management’s contract violation in the summer of 2006 when it cut three New York City-based Technician jobs and refused to offer an available Hauppauge-based Controller job considered more secure to any Hauppauge-based Technician. The Controller job eventually went to the least senior Technician in the bargaining unit, who was then based in New York.

Reuters America (RAM) managers also violated our contract, Gold said, when they excluded Hauppauge Technicians from a 2006 contractual buyout offer that went only to New York City Techs and when they told the New York Techs that if they accepted the buyout, they would not be placed on a three-year rehiring list.

Employment security for Technicians was the last issue to get resolved in the three-and-a-half-year contract negotiations that ended in early 2006. Within six months, however, management had violated the newly negotiated provision (Article XVI, Section 1(d)(ii)) that required them to offer any suitable jobs that are available, including non-Guild jobs, to Technicians in order of seniority whenever Tech jobs are being eliminated.

“It is clear that the logic of this provision is that the most senior Affected Technician gets preferential opportunity to transfer to another position which is safer and, if successful, the planned layoff could be averted because the ranks of Affected Technicians would have been reduced,” Gold said in a 19-page binding decision that was dated Oct. 8, but released on Oct. 15. “Therefore, Hauppauge-based Affected Technicians should properly have been included as recipients of the posting for the Hauppauge controller position.”

Gold did not order the company to remove the Tech who got the Controller job last year, nor did the Guild ask her to do so. But, having found a contract violation, her ruling effectively requires managers to follow the contract the next time they cut Tech jobs.

The new contract provision requires management to give 60 or 120 days notice of Tech job cuts, depending on the seniority of the least-senior Technician facing layoff. During that time, management must offer suitable available jobs to all “Affected Technicians” listed in Side Letter 35 in seniority order. If the job is non-Guild, any Tech who gets it would stay Guild-covered. If a senior Tech is placed in one of those jobs, it creates an opening for a Technician job and spares a junior Tech from getting laid off.

“This ruling gives us what we bargained for – a chance for the most senior Techs to get off of what management told us was a sinking ship,” said New York Guild Secretary-Treasurer Peter Szekely, who was Reuters Unit Chair when the grievance was filed last year. “It’s too bad we had to go through all this to make managers live up to their word.”

Another victory for Hauppauge workers

In a second Guild victory for workers at the Hauppauge technical center, RAM has agreed to stop subcontracting “software builds” to Hewlett-Packard – an improper transfer of work out of the Guild bargaining unit. Of course management didn’t volunteer to fix this problem; the settlement was the result of a grievance filed August 13.

If you didn’t volunteer, it’s not voluntary

On the West Coast, Guild members were asked to “volunteer” to work weekend shifts – which means it wasn’t exactly voluntary. But they were only getting compensated for this time at the straight-time rate appropriate for voluntary work. After the Guild grieved the practice, West Coast Steward Steve Gorman worked with members to refile timesheets to claim the proper time-and-a-half and double-time pay for those shifts.

Collectively, nine Guild members earned 53 days worth of overtime – with 18.5 days to be paid in comp time off or cash. Schedule posting has been changed in West Coast Guild-covered locations so this shouldn’t happen in the future.

Job appraisals – again

Hard to believe it’s job appraisal season already – especially for those who have had to deal with “informal” mid-year appraisals last summer, as well as the annual appraisal process that is steam-rolling through RAM. It’s a bit earlier this year, with the whole process supposed to be wrapped up in December. The official reason for it is to clear the decks for the busy month of January. It may well be part of management’s push to get everything aligned for the Thomson merger. But whatever the reason, the Guild’s advice to members is the same as in previous years: minimize your active participation. Be civil, and sit through an interview with your supervisor if one is required but make it clear that this flawed process is not something sanctioned by the Guild or approved in negotiations. Don’t sign anything, don’t set ambitious goals. These can come back to haunt you – and appropriately enough the deadline for some staffers to respond to their appraisals is October 31, Halloween.

For a complete rundown on appraisal do’s and don’ts, take a look below at a Common Sense item sent last year at this season. This is also available online at http://www.nyguild.org, click “Reuters” on the right side of that page, click the red “for current news” button, then scroll down to “Dealing with Appraisals” from 11/20/06.

 DEALING WITH APPRAISALS

Participation can hurt Guild members

It's performance appraisal season at Reuters. Here are some tips on how to get through it. Tip No. 1 is to tell your manager from the beginning that the Guild discourages active participation in this process. Be civil, but don’t sign anything, don’t agree to any goals and if it looks like discipline is looming, you have the right to have a Guild representative present.

1.  Watch for signs that your appraisal meeting may be a step in the disciplinary process.

     Are your manager’s comments meant as constructive criticism or a warning that if you don’t improve you may be disciplined? Be sure before your appraisal interview gets under way. ASK YOUR MANAGER if this is part of the disciplinary process. If it is, any critical comments your manager makes in this conversation might be construed as a “verbal warning,” the first step in a process that can end in you getting fired. RAM management uses a so-called policy of progressive discipline in which firing is generally preceded by verbal, written and final written warnings.  If your manager assures you that your appraisal will not be used to discipline you, well and good. If you don’t get this assurance, ask to have a Guild representative with you.

      This is no casual request: RAM managers were placed on notice in recent years by the U.S. National Labor Relations Board not to interfere with employees’ rights to have union representatives, including shop stewards, at meetings with managers that may lead to discipline.

2. Anything you say can be used against you.

    Since management introduced appraisals in the 1980s, it has steadfastly refused to rule out using them as evidence in disciplinary proceedings. Yet they want us to bare our souls in appraisal meetings. Whoever conducts your appraisal – usually a supervisor – is powerless to change management policy. So, if you set overly ambitious goals in your appraisal that you fail to meet or make an unduly critical review of your own work, you could be giving management damning evidence against you. This can come back and bite you if you ever get in trouble.  

3. Beware when supervisors encourage you to be self-critical.

     If your supervisor asks you to discuss your biggest achievements, biggest disappointments, biggest obstacles to doing your job, areas that need work and career goals in your appraisal, proceed with caution. Even if your boss sincerely wants the appraisal to be a “collaborative effort,” once your comments are on the record, any future use of them is out of your immediate supervisor’s control – and yours. There’s no guarantee that your boss won’t be compelled to use these comments against you if his or her superiors decide to crank out more disciplinary letters. What if your boss’s successor doesn’t like you? It’s best not to answer such questions. Assessment is the supervisors’ job. Let them do it.

 4. Appraisal “scoring” at Reuters is fundamentally flawed.

     Most employees want to know how they’re doing, and in a perfect world, the appraisal process would be a great way to find this out. But it’s not a perfect world, and this is a deeply flawed process. The overall fix is in before you start: some managers have admitted that they have a limited number of top scores they can give and some have admitted they simply won’t give anyone a top grade. If you happen to be evaluated after all the top grades are dished out, you lose regardless of your performance. Some managers insist there are no hard and fast limits on scores, only “guidelines.” Even if that’s true, do you think any unprotected, bottom-rung manager would buck the “guidelines” set by top management just to help a subordinate? 

5. Your manager may engage in “horse-trading” with your appraisal numbers.

     These rules or guidelines appear to require that employee ratings follow a predictable curve, like a standard “bell” curve only more like a “wave,” with ratings slanted somewhat toward the high end of the scale. (In fact, in an analysis of all appraisals issued a few years ago, the Guild found 12 Ones, 140 Twos, 240 Threes, 30 Fours and 2 Fives.) To make the curve work, managers have been known to engage in horse-trading among themselves before they give their final appraisals of their workers – “Sorry, you’re giving too many 1’s, I’ll swap three 4’s for a couple of 2’s” – and you’re part of the game.

6. Appraisals have nothing to do with pay.

     We get across-the-board raises and “step increases” (within each job group) because of the contracts we negotiate with management. Then there are merit raises and bonuses, which have never been based on appraisals either. If management wanted appraisals to determine bonuses and merit raises – a significant expansion of the historic use of appraisals for Guild-represented employees at Reuters – they would have to negotiate over it with the Guild, as required by U.S. labor law. So far, they haven’t asked to negotiate with us over that. 

7. Appraisals have nothing to do with employment security.

     When management eliminates jobs by reducing the workforce, subcontracting work or replacing it with new technology, they must follow the procedures set forth in our contract. The question of who goes and who stays within a given department and job title is determined by seniority. Job appraisal scoring never enters into the picture. 

HERE’S WHAT THE GUILD RECOMMENDS YOU DO:

a) If your supervisor summons you for an appraisal meeting, don’t refuse to go.

b) Ask your supervisor to note on the appraisal form that the appraisal and accompanying meeting are not in and of themselves a form of discipline (i.e., a step toward getting fired).

c) If your supervisor refuses your request in (b), ask to have a Guild representative with you during your meeting.

d) If your supervisor refuses your request in (c) and makes any negative comments about your job performance during your meeting, alert your steward immediately.

e) Say and participate as little as possible. Remember, even if your supervisor declares that your appraisal and meeting are not a step in the disciplinary process, everything you say on the appraisal form and during the meeting still can be used as evidence against you later.

f) Don’t set ambitious goals. You might want to say that your goal is to continue to perform your job in a professional, knowledgeable manner and that you look forward to working with your supervisor toward Reuters' success.

g) Don’t list your weaknesses or anything else that could be used against you.

h) Respectfully decline to sign the appraisal, whether on paper or electronically.

Unfortunately, the only way to get top management’s attention that something is very wrong with the appraisal process is for large numbers of people to withhold participation. We’ve tried everything else. 

# # # # # #