Budget Team’s Impact On Lay-off Subtle but Tangible

– By Kerry Graber

A team of five member volunteers have been meeting informally with members of the management team to exchange information and explore options to lay-offs.  A smaller subgroup of three then negotiated with the Governor’s labor relations team to mitigate impacts. Their work is nearly done now that this lay-off cycle is complete.

Members of the budget team include Scott Mallery, Tryg Hoff, Tammy Hall, Helen Pressley, and Charles San Juan. 
------------------------------------------------------------

The budget team’s efforts are nearly complete after holding a number of informal talks with the goal of sharing ideas and advancing the ideas of employees for mitigating lay-offs from the recent budget cuts.

Negotiated Accomplishments - Reflecting on how the reduction-in-force (RIF) unfolded, the team agreed that we could take credit for a number of accomplishments, including:

• An agreement to slightly modify the collective bargaining agreement (contract) procedure for the benefit of members identified for lay-off
• A more objective and fair process as a result of the team’s advocacy
• As a result of the engagement with management more effort was made to find places for RIF’d folks
• Without the additional time to talk to management and the expanded process many of these improvements would not have been discussed.

Another win was that Polly Zehm agreed to scrutinize each management position before it is filled to determine the right size of management in relation to a reduced work force.  She also agreed to   look at any newly created management positions.

Unanswered Questions -  The budget team is still seeking answers to remaining questions that were raised during informal talks, including:

1. What are the functions of WMS 2 section managers within the agency? 
2. Why did the Water Quality Program take the TMDL program supervisors from Natural Resource Specialist 5s to WMS 1s?
3. Why is Ecology’s percentage of managers the highest among natural resource agencies?  (See table next page – OFM website source data.)
4. Will Ecology roll out a “budget 101” to clearly explain to employees where the money goes, and why?
5. Why did it take so long for Program Managers to provide the number of vacant, funded positions to Polly when she asked for it?  Why isn’t this information readily available?


What’s Next – Now that the first wave of lay-offs is complete the team is trying to evaluate the workload impact on the bargaining unit.  The team is asking for another 30 days to evaluate how employees are coping with the workload left from the cuts so that we can discuss any problems with management.

The team is concerned about getting a clearer sense of direction from Polly and possibly the new director on just how employees prioritize their work and “do less with less.”  Most people are going through their work plans during evaluation time and having these kinds of discussions with their supervisors.  However, the team feels that clearer direction and leadership is needed from the top to help employees and supervisors in the midst of making some tough decisions.   In the absence of clear direction this process is made more stressful for everyone involved.

The team expects to discuss the outstanding questions and the lingering workload issues at an additional informal meeting.  The team expects that a “budget 101” session will also be scheduled, and possibly expanded to the rest of the agency.


More Budget Reductions Likely - There is an expectation that more budget reductions and possibly lay-offs are in our future, however it is important to complete the process on this first round and close-out the bargaining before opening a new negotiation.  We anticipate Ecology will notify us as soon as they know whether another round of lay-offs will be necessary. We are hoping to continue the trend of open and frequent talks with decision makers as they craft another set of cuts.  ■