By Kerry Graber
For a full text of Union Management Communications Committee (UMCC) notes and agendas for April, May, and future meetings check the blog address above.
Since Ecology management declined to continue talks with the UMCC Budget Ad-hoc committee, the regular UMCC committee meetings have been largely taken up with discussions about implementing Ecology’s Book 2 budget. Committee members, with the addition of Scott Mallery, Budget Ad-hoc Committee chair, continue to question Pat McLain and Polly Zehm about potential lay-offs, the health of various dedicated accounts, and the impacts of further general fund reductions and furloughs. It has been a mutually frustrating experience as we try to navigate terminology and understand each other’s point of reference.
I have been personally challenged over the tone of one of the articles in this newsletter that reflected the level of frustration over the lack of transparency in budget matters at Ecology. I understand this is the reason that future meetings with the Ad-Hoc Budget Committee were declined by management.
Reflecting on this I told the UMCC committee that we have to strive to be clear, and if possible, more straight forward when we ask for something, including why we are asking for it. We have to realize that the perspectives from the staff level are very different than those at the management level. We have to continue a respectful dialogue, even when we are frustrated. Even so, the refusal to meet with the ad-hoc committee feels retaliatory.
For my part it makes the UMCC meetings less effective because we have been denied our request to have the more budget-savvy members also present. In this case the contract is being used by management to limit the membership to seven, with a concession of adding only one additional person (Scott).
I’ve had time to take a deeper look at the dynamics of the UMCC process in light of what we’ve all been through in these tough budget times. I asked myself, why would our management be surprised that we express frustration and rancor?
We’ve asked Ecology’s management to trim their investment in the WMS/EMS system and save staff level jobs. Their response to this has been negligible. Ecology remains one of the biggest users of the two management systems, with 16% of staff at Ecology either WMS or EMS.
They have told us they must lay off people; we’ve been through two waves and are approaching a third wave. Now we are asked to make a public sacrifice of 5% of our salary through furloughs. They are surprised that we want to know how they are spending money?
The bulletin article on budget asserted there were two possible explanations for the lack of detailed information. One possibility was a deliberate withholding of the information we asked for. The other was that the people in charge of the overall budget actually do not know the answers when they should.
I have come to believe the truth is something far more complicated. It is clear from recent discussions at the last UMCC meeting that the Programs hold the information we are looking for. Our assumptions that the top managers would know the answers, would need to know the kinds of information we want to know in order to run the agency, are incorrect. The big budget picture is held, I am sure, with great care and accountability by Pat and the management team. They believe it is all they need to operate the agency because their concerns are big picture concerns that do not involve detail. They simply do not need to know on a daily or even weekly basis how many funded vacancies there are in the agency or even how they are funded.
The program budgets that roll up into the big picture are the domain of each program manager. It was stated to the UMCC in our last discussion that system works on the basis of trust. Trust that the program managers, and their WMS budget planners, are managing allotments correctly and for the greater good of the agency. While this apparently feels natural to the managers we meet with in the UMCC meetings, it has caused me to wonder about accountability.
Would a system of trust pass an audit from the State Auditor’s Office...if they could get someone to explain it to them?
The concerns I have are not without basis. The first wave of layoffs were caused by over spending in the Water Quality Program, and underperformance of their permit fee fund. Conveying concerns about whether there is anyone at the wheel of this supertanker is our challenge both as communicators and representatives of Ecology members.
Your UMCC representatives remain resolved to push for a transparent budget, an “open-book” system, so we can all know with a degree of certainty that yes, sacrifices are necessary and yes, all alternatives to our sacrifice have been employed. Please encourage and support your elected representative, this is really hard work. ■
No comments:
Post a Comment