Regardless of the name-calling, Mr. Minn's points about the federal law
(otherwise known as the Fair Labor Standards Act or FLSA) are essentially
correct. The City didn't seek to harm employees by putting this change into
place. It started this process so it could become in compliance with
federal law before it got sued. I also appreciate the position it puts the
employees in, opening them to potential abuse and reducing salaries of some
individuals. The problem, however, is with FLEA, which was somewhat loosely
written by Congress and has been defined by the courts and not Congress.
Given recent court cases, it would appear that the City could be sued for
non-compliance with FLEA and could be potentially liable for a substantial
settlement against it if it doesn't change. I would hope the City and MPEA
could come to some resolution that would both be legal and provide
safeguards for the employees.
Carol Becker
Longfellow
Former MPEA member
----- Original Message -----
From: ferma001 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Minneapolis Issues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Mpls] Niziolek on MPEA negotiations...
> That Minn is against Niziolek for 10th ward council member is excellant
> reason to work hard for Dan's election success.
>
> >Dan Niziolek's comments on the MPEA negotiations portend a huge conflict,
> >should he be elected to the City Council. Taxpayers should be concerned
> >that biased decision-making on labor contracts would work to taxpayers
> >disadvantage.
> >
> >Having initiated the comp time battle during my tenure on the Council, I
can
> >state that no single issue is more costly to taxpayers than politics
> >interfering with sound labor practices. The Minneapolis Professional
> >Employee Association (MPEA) position is patently absurd, violating the
very
> >definition of "exempt employee" under federal labor law. Allowing MPEA or
> >any other "exempt representational bargaining unit" to jeopardize years
of
> >careful contract negotiation with other unions to eliminate the expensive
> >and illegal practice of paying salaried employees extra for overtime is
just
> >not sound policy. The Council, Mayor and City Coordinator have made comp
> >time elimination the number one goal of labor policy, to comply with
federal
> >law. Niziolek, would, at a minimum, have to recuse himself from the MPEA
> >contract.
> >
> >By federal law, only hourly or "non-exempt" employees are entitled to
such a
> >pay structure. The State of Minnesota paid a $30 million dollar fine two
> >years ago on just this issue. The concept of "salary" as opposed to
> >"hourly" work is that a professional is being paid for the work product,
> >regardless of the time it takes to complete the work. As an accounting
> >convenience, the salary is calculated on the basis of an average 40 hour
> >week, but essentially, they are being paid for the work product, not the
> >hourly work. An hourly employee has a much different set of obligations,
> >responsibilities and burden of accountability than a salaried employee,
as
> >DEFINED in federal law.
> >
> >Steve Minn
> >Minneapolis
> >
> >----------
> >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>Subject: Mpls digest, Vol 1 #108 - 17 msgs
> >>Date: Mon, Mar 12, 2001, 12:01 PM
> >>
> >
> >> Message: 7
> >> Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 09:40:40 -0600
> >> From: "hkdjn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Subject: [Mpls] MPEA negotiations...
> >>
> >> Niel - Very good questions.
> >>
> >> Given that I am a MPEA member, I have had some time to think about this
> >> issue and talk with council members regarding their role.
> >>
> >> 1.) Should the city council intervene in the MPEA negotiations? Why or
> >> why not?
> >>
> >> The City Council should only be involved in MPEA negotiations in
regards
> >> to policy issues and to insure their bargaining team is negotiating in
> >> good faith. The latter is good management and should occur behind the
> >> scenes and not be a public discussion. As a rule, the city council
> >> should not be in the role of micro-managing staff engaged in labor
> >> negotiations.
> >>
> >> In reference to the current MPEA contract, there is a policy issue that
> >> involves the council. The policy deals with whether exempt employees
> >> should receive compensatory time at the rate of one hour for one hour.
> >> As an exempt employee, I can only wonder what the city expects to gain
> >> by exempt employees not receiving compensatory time.
> >>
> >> As I see this issue, the city can gain from eliminating compensatory
> >> time in one of two ways:
> >> 1) City employees will be working more than 40 hours per week on a
> >> regular basis without being compensated for the additional hours.
> >> or
> >> 2) The new system will eliminate potential abuse that was occurring in
> >> the old system. In reference to this point, I would comment that abuse
> >> of compensatory time should have been dealt with by management. Given
> >> the new system is more complicated, how will managers who could not
deal
> >> with abuse in the old, simpler system address abuse issues in the new,
> >> more complicated system? Everybody generally knows who is abusing the
> >> system, we just need management to address the issue.
> >>
> >> Given this, I disagree with the city's position to take compensatory
> >> time from exempt employees. Removal of compensatory time will only
> >> weaken the city's position to compete with the for-profit market in
> >> hiring and retaining employees and its ability to complete work when
> >> short staffed. Just as important is the potential path the city is
> >> travelling. The word about salaried people (at least those without
> >> compensatory time) in the for-profit world is that they are regularly
> >> working well in excess of 40 hours per week. As a community organizer
> >> and a supporter of families, I am always concerned about policies that
> >> seem to point in the direction of making people work more hours. Our
> >> families and community will not be strong if the people who make them
up
> >> do not have the time to invest in them.
> >>
> >>
> >> 2.) Should salaried employees receive the same compensatory time as
> >> hourly employees? Why or why not?
> >>
> >> Yes, I believe that employees should be compensated for work over 40
> >> hours per week at a rate greater than regular compensation. Ironically,
> >> MPEA exempt employees receive a lesser compensatory rate than
non-exempt
> >> employees. Exempt employees receive hour for hour compensation while
> >> non-exempts receive time and a half.
> >>
> >> As a person who has been a union member for 9 years, I value unions and
> >> good management. Through my efforts as a shop steward, I have worked to
> >> ensure that me and my co-workers receive fair compensation and have a
> >> quality work environment. In return, I know that a vast majority of
city
> >> employees give more than their 40.
> >>
> >>
> >> Dan Niziolek
> >> Lyndale Resident
> >> MPEA Member
> >> 10th Ward City Council Candidate
> >_______________________________________________
> >Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
> >Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
> >http://e-democracy.org/mpls
> >
>
>
> John Ferman
> Harriet Avenue
> Kingfield Neighborhood
> Minneapolis
> Ward 10 Pct 10
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> _______________________________________________
> Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
> Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
> http://e-democracy.org/mpls
>
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
