|
LETTER 32 Interpretation and Administration of Article 8, Sections 8(a) and 8(b) and Article 29, Section 3(c)
Mr. James M. Parent Assistant Directing Business Representative District Lodge No. 26 I.A.M.A.W., AFL-CIO 365 New Britain Road Kensington, Connecticut 06037
Dear Mr. Parent: This is to confirm the understanding and agreement between the Company and the Union regarding the interpretation and application of Article 8, Section 8(a) and (b), and Article 29, Section 3(c). During the 1998 contract negotiations, the parties agreed to meet and attempt to reach a common understanding with respect to the meaning of specific terms and language from our Collective Bargaining Agreement, as it relates to the promotional process. The parties have met on a number of occasions and have reached a common understanding on most of the issues outlined in Letter 32, as identified below: · The process to be used for the selection of employees’ promotion: For promotions made on the basis of the “most senior qualified” employee, the following process will be used: The open position will be defined from the job description and the promotional pool will be defined by supervision in accordance with Article 8, Sections 8(a) and 8(c). The term “qualified” is defined in terms of the ability of the most senior employee to satisfactorily perform the key duties/responsibilities of the higher-rated job based upon performance in the current job or in previous jobs. There are two additional points relative to defining a “qualified” employee. Employees who have not attained standard rate of their current job are not considered to be “qualified” for promotion to the next job in the line of progression. Employees transferred into a new line of progression will not be qualified for promotion for up to 12 months. Supervision will be responsible for training during that period. Supervision will assess the employees in the promotional pool in seniority order to identify the first qualified candidate. For promotions made on the basis of the three co-equal factors of seniority, ability and fitness, the following process will be used: The open position will be defined from the job description and the promotional pool will be defined by supervision in accordance with Article 8, Sections 8(a) and 8(c). The term “qualified” is defined as the employee who is determined to be the best “qualified” candidate for the position on the basis of the co-equal factors of seniority, ability and fitness. Supervision may elect to survey employees in the promotional pool to determine interest in the promotion. Those not interested will be issued appropriate documentation recording this fact through an employee memorandum or completing an interest form. No further action will be required for those employees who have no interest in being considered for the specific promotion. In determining who is qualified for these promotions, supervision will utilize a matrix as a tool to assist in the assessment of employees for the open position in seniority order. This tool consists of three separate documents, described below, with copies attached: Co-equal Factor of Fitness, which contains four separate descriptors: “Strong Interpersonal Skills”, “Organization Skills”, “Judgment” and “Flexibility & Adaptability”. For each of these descriptors, supervision will rate the employee in one of three levels – “Below Expectations” (1 point), “Meets Expectations” (2 points), and “Exceeds Expectations” (3 points). (Leadership traits are covered under some of the elements that make up the “fitness” factor.) Co-equal Factor of Ability, which also contains four separate descriptors: “Experience”, “Skill Level”, “Quality” and “Productivity & Efficiency”. For each of these descriptors, supervision will rate the employee in one of three levels – “Below Expectations” (1 point), “Meets Expectations” (2 points), and “Exceeds Expectations” (3 points). Summary Matrix for Promotion by Co-equal Factors of Seniority, Ability and Fitness, which contains a listing of all the employees considered for the promotion. The list is compiled in seniority order, with the most senior at the top of the list. The separate scores ratings for Fitness and Ability are entered in the columns provided. Assessment is based on supervision/management’s personal knowledge of the employee’s work through a variety of means, e.g., personal; observations, company records and feedback with first hand knowledge. The company will be responsible for providing information that supports the judgment that an employee is “below”, “meets” or “exceeds” expectations. In general, documentation for the “Ability” and “Fitness” co-equal factors will be greater for the employees who are either “below” or “exceeds” expectations. Supervision will make their assessment on the basis of the three co-equal factors to find the best-qualified candidate. · The definition of “fitness” and “ability”; The definition of “Fitness” and “Ability” is outlined in the following two documents, copies of which are attached: Co-equal Factor of Fitness, which contains four separate descriptors: “Strong Interpersonal Skills”, “Organization Skills”, “Judgment” and “Flexibility & Adaptability”. For each of these descriptors, supervision will rate the employee in one of three levels – “Below Expectations” (1 point), “Meets Expectations” (2 points), and “Exceeds Expectations” (3 points). Co-equal Factor of Ability, which also contains four separate descriptors: “Experience”, “Skill Level”, “Quality” and “Productivity & Efficiency”. For each of these descriptors, supervision will rate the employee in one of three levels – “Below Expectations” (1 point), “Meets Expectations” (2 points), and “Exceeds Expectations” (3 points). Leadership traits are covered under some of the elements that make up the “fitness” co-factor. · The definition of “Co-equal factors” as a “relative ability clause” or a “hybrid clause” (Elkouri & Elkouri, How Arbitration Works) The Company adopts the “hybrid” clause as defined in How Arbitration Works, as a modified seniority clause for evaluating the three co-equal factors of seniority, ability and fitness of the employee. · The definition of “qualified” as it relates to “most senior qualified” for promotions within an established line of progression The term “qualified” is defined in terms of the ability of the most senior employee to satisfactorily perform the key duties/responsibilities of the higher-rated job based upon performance in the current job or in previous jobs. There are two additional points relative to defining a “qualified” employee. Employees who have not attained standard rate of their current job are not considered to be “qualified” for promotion to the next job in the line of progression. Employees transferred into a new line of progression will not be qualified for promotion for up to 12 months. Supervision will be responsible for training during that period. · The definition of “qualified” as it relates to “most senior qualified” for the purpose of selection under Job Posting and Bidding The open position will be defined from the job description The term “qualified” is defined in terms of the ability of the most senior employee to satisfactorily perform the key duties/responsibilities of the higher-rated job based upon performance in the current job or in previous jobs. Supervision will review the applicants who bid for the hourly job posting and initially identify them as either “qualified” or “not qualified”. Supervision will interview some number of the qualified applicants in seniority order (depending upon the total number of applicants). The “qualified” candidates will be placed in seniority order and the most senior offered the position (which means it could result in a promotion, lateral transfer or demotion). · The circumstances under which Article 8, Section 8(a) and (b) relate to promotions under Article 29 Any promotions arising from the hourly job posting program will fall under Article 8, Section 8(a) and Section 8(b).
Sincerely, James R. Miller Vice President, Industrial Relations Accepted this 6th day of December 2004
Employee Name: __________________________ Seniority Date: ____________________
CO-EQUAL FACTOR OF ABILITY
Business Unit: ___________ Date: _____________
Employee Name: __________________________ Seniority Date: ____________________
CO-EQUAL FACTOR OF FITNESS
SUMMARY MATRIX FOR PROMOTION BY CO-EQUAL FACTORS OF SENIORITY, ABILITY AND FITNESS
The following employees were reviewed for promotion to Grade ___, Job Title ________________________
Business Unit:___________
|