LOCAL 229—Probation Officers
Associate Probation Officer Seniority List as of April 12, 2011
Probation Budget “Best Possible Outcome”
Acting Commissioner Corbett Thanks NAGE for Strong Support
July 6, 2011
In an historically contentious budget debate this year, the Office of the Commissioner of Probation was able to secure the House’s proposed $116 million in funding for the Probation Department. The Senate version of the budget included almost $9 million less for probation. Acting Probation Commissioner Ron Corbett gives tremendous credit to NAGE.
“Commissioner Corbett contacted us for help knowing that NAGE has the longtime relationships at the State House that you need to get things done,” said NAGE Trial Court Director David Bernard. “We were constantly up on Beacon Hill meeting with legislative leaders and the budget conference committee to urge the adoption of the House dollar figure. I’m very happy for our members that we were successful at achieving the best possible outcome we could have expected.”
Director Bernard later received a call from Commissioner Corbett, thanking NAGE for supporting his office and for working with him so diligently to get the House funding through.
NAGE had long been working together with OCP and Commissioner Corbett to secure the House version of funding in order to avoid layoffs.
A similar scenario played out two years ago, when inadequate funding threatened members’ jobs. With the threat of layoffs and furloughs looming, NAGE was able to secure the funding necessary to protect the livelihoods of NAGE members and their families. Over 70 probation officers saw their layoffs rescinded because of NAGE’s funding victory.
In fact, NAGE Trial Court members are notably the only group of state and/or municipal employees not to be hit with furloughs and layoffs during the most recent economic downturns.
“NAGE continues to be at the forefront of legislative action to protect members’ salaries and benefits,” National President David Holway said. “We’re able to accomplish what no other union can, and we back up our promises with action and success.”
The Contract Process: Our Next Steps
June 27, 2011
NAGE wants to make sure all of our members clearly understand the next steps in the contract administrative process.
THE NEXT STEPS ARE REQUIRED BY LAW FOR EVERY STATE CONTRACT
Step 1: The office for Administration & Finance approves the contract.
NAGE has been meeting with A&F from the very beginning, and because of our strong relationship with them, they authorized the contract.
Step 2: A&F submits the contract to the governor’s office for processing.
NAGE started talking to the governor’s office a long time ago and made sure they had no issues with the contract. In effect, they authorized it, too.
Step 3: The governor’s office submits the contract to the legislature, which votes to approve it.
NAGE has been meeting with legislative leaders to get their commitment to approve the contract, and they are with us.
Step 4: The governor signs the contract.
The governor’s office has already indicated approval of the contract,
so the signature needed is a given.
As you can see, NAGE is committed to getting this contract approved as quickly as possible, and the required last steps are already underway.
NAGE’s experienced leaders and legislative staff, solid contacts and resources made it possible.
NAGE Files Federal Lawsuit Against Trial Court over Hiring/Promotion Fraud
Eminent Attorney Charles Ogletree Joins Plaintiff Legal Team
June 22, 2011
The following press release was issued June 22
The NAGE Legal Department today (June 22) filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts against the Trial Court and the Probation Department, alleging the Trial Court’s promotional process was fraudulent and violated members’ First Amendment right to be free from discrimination based on political affiliation.
The union retained renowned civil rights attorney and Harvard Law School Professor Charles Ogletree, and the prestigious Washington, D.C. labor law firm, Bredhoff & Kaiser, to work with NAGE General Counsel Richard L. Barry, Jr., Deputy General Counsel Jean Zeiler, Attorney Michael Manning and the NAGE Legal Department.
The lawsuit comes after the report of Independent Counsel Paul Ware revealed massive hiring fraud within the Probation Department. A report issued shortly thereafter by a commission led by former Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger indicated similar hiring and promotion abuses in the Trial Court.
The remedy NAGE seeks is the reopening of the process for filling the positions that were filled on the basis of candidates’ political affiliations. More than 100 probation officer employees have filed claims with the union indicating they believed they were illegally denied promotion.
“We will hold accountable the individuals and departments who systematically engaged in a conspiracy to deny members their right to hiring and promotion within the Probation Department and the Trial Court,” said National President David J. Holway. “The depth and breadth of the corruption here is almost beyond comprehension and its reach extends beyond just the member. We owe it to our members and their families to seek justice to the fullest extent.”
At NAGE’s Urging, Labor Board Schedules Election
June 22, 2011
Early this week, NAGE sent letters to NEPBA and CJAM Mulligan urging them to consent to an election in order to give our members the right to vote on who they want to represent them.
We are pleased to report that the parties have agreed with us to move quickly toward an election.
We have been working with the Division of Labor Relations to get an election scheduled, and the DLR has today informed us of that schedule.
THE DLR WILL MAIL BALLOTS ON JULY 25.
Ballots will be counted at the DLR on August 15.
We look forward to giving members the opportunity to vote and to moving through the election process quickly and smoothly. We have important work to do and we need to get it done by working together as a cohesive and united front.
NAGE Calls on NEPBA and CJAM to Move Forward with Election as Quickly as Possible
June 17, 2011
Yesterday, you and your fellow members ratified your contract by an overwhelming majority, sending the clear message that you want the 10% raises you have earned and deserve.
Our top priority now must be to get that contract funded.
Unfortunately, before we can move forward as a union and get down to the important business of contract funding, we must deal with the nuisance petition that NEPBA has reactivated.
For this reason, NAGE has sent letters to the NEPBA and the CJAM to urge them to go to an election as quickly as possible. A quick election will ensure that we get back to the important work that we have to do.
Call the NEPBA today at 866-577-2251 and tell them that you want an election now!
CONTRACT APPROVED
June 16, 2011
NAGE Trial Court members voted overwhelmingly to approve a collective bargaining agreement that gives members a 10% increase in pay over the next 13 months. Ballots were counted today at NAGE headquarters in Quincy.
“I am very proud of the outcome of the vote and proud of the membership for not being deterred by negative influences and unnecessary drama,” said Local 229 President Margaret Thompson.
Local 228 President David Abbott was similarly pleased by the ratification.
“I’m happy to see that members will start getting money in their pockets,” he said. “We’ve all worked very hard for these raises and they’re long overdue and much-deserved.”
Voter turnout—85%—was exceptionally high throughout the commonwealth, seeming to indicate members’ desire to move forward quickly with the raises and stronger contract language.
“We voted for our financial futures in a very difficult economic time,” said President Thompson. “The 10% raise we approved today will be in our paychecks for as long as we work for the Commonwealth.”
Labor Board Soundly Rejects NEPBA Attempt to Stop Contract Ratification Vote
June 15, 2011
The Division of Labor Relations has issued a decision denying the bizarre motion NEPBA filed on June 13th to try stop the contract ratification vote.
Because of the severity of NEPBA’s reckless actions, the DLR considered the motion on an “emergency basis” and expeditiously denied the motion.
It’s extraordinarily unusual for anyone to attempt to disrupt a ratification vote and it’s very disconcerting that NEPBA would do so.
It is unclear why NEPBA would attempt to harm union members by putting their contract and a much-deserved 10% raise in jeopardy, and we are pleased that the DLR considered the case on an emergency and issued an immediate decision.
Please be assured that the contract ratification cannot be disrupted or blocked by the NEPBA.
CONTRACT HIGHLIGHTS
WAGE INCREASES TOTALING 10%
Memorandum of Agreement (Effective July 1, 2007 through June 30, 2008)
3% increase effective 01/01/12*
Memorandum of Agreement (Effective July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2012)
1% increase effective 6/30/10 with retroactive payment of the increase
3% increase effective 01/01/12*
3% increase effective 06/30/12
* The 3% and 3% increases (total 6%) effective January 1, 2012 could be made effective sooner than January 1, 2012. As with all contracts, the timing of increases is heavily dependent on supplemental funding. If we are successful in lobbying the legislature to pass a supplemental funding bill, we will receive the 6% increase sooner than January 1, 2012. It will take all of us lobbying our legislators to make this happen. We will contact you as soon as possible with information about lobbying for the supplemental budget bill.
INCREASED UNIFORM ALLOWANCE
Employer agrees to increase the uniform allowance by $25 effective February 2012.
IMPROVEMENT IN VACATION LANGUAGE
Employees will be eligible for a 5th week of vacation upon reaching 17.5 years of service instead of upon reaching 19.5 years of service.
PROTECTIVE LANGUAGE CONCERNING EMPLOYEE EVALUATIONS
An Employee Performance Review instrument will not be implemented without impact bargaining, and will not be implemented until such time as a Management Performance Review instrument is implemented for all managers.
INCREASED EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION TO THE NAGE/TRIAL COURT HEALTH & WELFARE TRUST FUND
The Commonwealth will increase its contribution to the NAGE Health & Welfare Trust Fund to maintain existing benefit levels. The Trust Fund provides benefits such as dental, optical, and dependent care coverage.
Never Forget Your Union Rights on the Job: "Weingarten Rights"
Most employees think it could never happen to them, but ... if you are ever called into an interview meeting with your supervisor or manager so that they can investigate a situation that might result in discipline, you have specific representational rights. These rights are called Weingarten Rights and are based on a 1975 Supreme Court decision (NLRB v. J. Weingarten).
WEINGARTEN RULES TO REMEMBER
Under the Supreme Court’s Weingarten decision, when an investigatory interview occurs, the following rules apply:
RULE 1: You have the right to have a union steward or union representative present, and you have the right to speak privately with your representative before the meeting and during the meeting. Your steward has the right to play an active role in the meeting and is not just a witness.
You must make a clear request for union representation before or during the interview; management is not obligated to inform you of your right to representation.
If your manager refuses to allow you to bring a representative, do not refuse to attend the meeting, but do not answer any questions either. Take notes. Once the meeting is over call your representative at once.
RULE 2: After you make the request, your supervisor or manager can do one of three things:
1. Grant the request and delay questioning until your union representative arrives and has a chance to consult privately with you; or
2. Deny the request and end the interview immediately; or
3. Give you a choice of (a) having the interview without your union rep or (b) ending the interview.
RULE 3: If your request for union representation is denied and your manager/supervisor continues to ask you questions, he or she is committing an unfair labor practice and you have a right to refuse to answer. Your manager or supervisor may not discipline you for such a refusal.
This statement could save your job!
"If this discussion could in any way lead to my being disciplined or terminated I respectfully request that my steward be present at the meeting. Without representation present, I choose not to respond to any questions or statements."
Executive Board
President
Margaret Thompson
Essex Superior Court
mthompson@nage.org
Executive Vice President
Maria Simone
Ayer District Court
Executive Secretary
Raymond Loughlin
Worcester Superior Court
Treasurer
Michael King
Worcester Probate Court
Master-At-Arms
David Powers
Attleboro District Court
Superior Court Representative
Emilio Cruz
Worcester Superior Court
Juvenile Court Representative
Ambrozine Snowden
Springfield Juvenile Court
Associate Probation Officer at-Large
Ellie Ussow
Barnstable Probate Court
Probate Court Representative
Elizabeth Chabot
Worcester Probate & Family Court
District Court Representative
Robert Manning, Jr.
Waltham District Court
Probation Officer at-Large
Lynn Dadekian
Framingham District Court
