June 22, 2005

Most of the two days were spent waiting for management to respond to two of the interpreters’ most critical issues: Guarantees of jobs at the end of the transition period and assignments by seniority. After literally hours spent supposedly working on those issues, the Court put a proposal on the table that contained no change whatever from its previous positions. And those positions are unacceptable to the bargaining team and to any interpreter we’ve talked to.

Almost as bad, considering the experience of interpreters in this region, is that the Court insists that it maintain complete and total control over who is assigned to a permanent courthouse, who floats, and where anyone is sent. According to Court negotiators, management knows what is best for its employees and treats them fairly. In a Region rife with examples of favoritism in assignments, that assertion has a very hollow ring.

Management also claims that no other employees in the region have seniority rights for assignment and that they know of no employees in any court that do have those rights. Evidently, Region 4 negotiators have chosen to remain blissfully unaware of other union contracts with state courts or even with tentative agreements reached in CFI bargaining in other regions. Assignment-by-seniority clauses exist in both. 

On Tuesday afternoon, management indicated to Union negotiators that it would offer a “comprehensive proposal” on a full MOU – something the Union has sought for months. But what was actually put on the table was simply a compilation of previous Court proposals stapled together in one document. After that apparently exhausting exercise, the management team decided it was time to go home. It was a little after 3:00 p.m.  

Adding insult to injury, the Court decided to add a little extortion to its proposal. The Union’s proposal that the contract go into effect on July 1 was rejected unless we reach a full agreement by then. In that case, they would make the contract retroactive for the period it takes to ratify and sign. But if there is no agreement by then, there would be no retroactivity. 

To be fair, some progress was made in the actual language to be used in describing the benefits regular employees will receive. But there were no major breakthroughs in this area, either.  

The Union team will spend Thursday developing its own comprehensive proposal, a real one, for a final MOU. The proposal will be presented to the Court on Friday. 

One positive effect of the Court’s glacial movement on Monday and Tuesday is that the Union had plenty of time to plan motivational actions to be used should there not be a full MOU in place by July 1. We’re going to do our best to reach an agreement in time, but with only two days of bargaining scheduled between now and July 1 (The Union has offered to bargain on any day, including over the weekend.) it seems very likely that the planning will be valuable. CFI is determined that a fair contract be reached by July 1 or it won’t be business as usual for the region’s courts this summer. 

Sessions are scheduled for Friday in Orange County and next Wednesday in Riverside.

Bargaining team: