Ecology UMCC Report

Prepared by Jim Wavada, W2R-ERO and Dolores Mitchell, TCP-HQ

Union Members who participated in Ecology’s April 30th meeting of the statewide Union Management Communications Committee, and with union advocate Debbie Brookman, said the event at Headquarters had a new feel to it.

The principals had agreed at the earlier meeting to limit Agenda items to concerns and questions not covered by contract provisions.  Both groups brought guests to define or respond to specific items on the Agenda; nothing was tabled pending consultation with absent parties.  This gave the entire meeting a new, productive feel. The Director engaged in discussion of all the major items on the agenda.  He listened carefully and responded directly.

• SB 6211 the Brownfield Bill - Privatization/Contracting OutSenate Bill 6211, based on the Brownfield Recommendation purchased with public funds would privatize site-cleanup-oversight and regulation.  Executive Management invited TCP Program Manager Jim Pendowski to respond to economic, environmental, and ethical concerns we’d voiced about the bill—and to hear how we will react to re-introduction of the bill when the legislature reconvenes next January.
  
  UMCC Member Dolores Mitchell laid out our explicit concerns about the substance of the bill—and particularly the scheme that would delegate to “licensed site remediation professionals” (private sector contractors) authority to sign-off on the adequacy of independent site cleanups.  Members see the transfer of duties from Ecology’s expert and committed staff to profit-driven corporate contractors as a move away from public service and accountability.  Pendowski promised communications on this issue will be more transparent in future; he said meetings would be scheduled in all of the Regions.

• Field Staff On-The-Job Safety - Bargaining Unit member John Blacklaw described inadequacy and incongruence among current program-by-program or region-by-region Field Safety guidance and the Agency’s Safety Plan.  He observed a lack of definition and transparency in the relationship between the decision-making Safety Council –composed of paid Safety Coordinators— and Program volunteers on the various regional safety committees.
  
  Janet Hyre heard the concerns.  She explained the difference between the Agency’s “Safety Manual” and “Field Safety Guides” and Hyre pledged to work with an ad hoc group of bargaining unit members to resolve any redundancies and fill any gaps between the program safety plans and the agency safety plan.
  
  Blacklaw encouraged the agency to use the LEAN process (1) to identify and fill gaps in field safety manuals and processes, and (2) to coordinate and update the guidance, across agency programs and regional offices.  He pointed out that we also need to make staff trainings (based on those manuals) a priority.  Management agreed to work with Blacklaw on this project.  So now we have a joint project coming out of a UMCC meeting.  Everyone I talked to after the meeting sees this as a significant improvement in our shared understanding of the role of the UMCC.

• Layoff Notification Process - UMCC discussed the recent layoff notification practices and Members supposed it could be improved by letting employees know, even during the informal notification, about their contract rights as the process progresses.  Management rejected any role in giving employees union information; but did agree to advise potentially affected employees that they are at risk and to tell them where in their building a list of stewards can be found.
  
  HR conceded failure to provide regional area representatives with timely notification of proposed layoffs.  Amy Heller resolved to eliminate such notification delays in future, because employee must exercise some contract-rights within five days, in response to a formal notice.

• Facilitation Services - UMCC Member Jim Wavada again expressed members’ concerns about the routine practice of contracting out for facilitation services, despite investments of employee time and public dollars to train Ecology staff in facilitator skills.  He asked for a status report on the work of the Facilitation Ad Hoc group.  Executive Management acknowledged our interest and concern.

• Facility Use Protocols - UMCC Member Bob Penhale explained that policies seem inconsistent, between the Regional Offices and between the Regions and Headquarters with respect to events of common interest to Management and Employees.  Members believe some cooperative /co-sponsored events would benefit the whole agency.  UMCC Member Jim Wavada cited as an example, member interest in a presentation about the Blue-Green Coalition.  Management asked us to send a short list of such ideas.
  
  Altogether, this UMCC meeting seemed more focused on clear responses and cooperative solutions than previous meetings.  It doesn’t mean we don’t have to continue to be vigilant; but it does demonstrate that focusing on the “Communication” in the committee’s title may yield some long-term results.  Stay tuned!