AFSCME Local 88

AFSCME Local 88 Management Bargaining Update 16 (November 5, 2025)

The County and the Union last met for bargaining on October 23rd and October 30th, 2025.

Here is where we are in brief:

5 Articles Pending with Union

8 Articles Pending with County

7 Addenda Pending with Union

0 Addenda Pending with County

16 Articles TA’ed

7 Addenda TA’ed

This is what went across the table on October 23rd:

Proposed by the Union:

The union put forward a package consisting of Article 2, 15, 22, and Addenda K and L

Article 2: Definitions

The Union accepted the County’s language on extending trial service if an employee is on intermittent leave but rejected the County’s proposal on backfilling for employees on leave.

Article 15: Job Profiles

The Union again struck the County’s language on ensuring compliance with Oregon Equal Pay Law, and again proposed that the Reclassification start date (for purposes of backpay) be recognized as the date the employee emails their manager or supervisor requesting a reclassification even if other required information is not yet complete

Article 22: Shift and Work Assignment

The Union and the County are mostly in agreement here but the Union proposed that all Work out of Class assignments are up to six months in duration and be posted internally first

Addendum K: Limited Duration Appointments

The Union proposed using “Limited Duration Position” as standard nomenclature
The Union also proposed that LD assignments into non-bargaining unit positions must be filled on basis of seniority as well as posted first internally

Addendum L: On-Call and Temporary Employees

The Union is reproposing language that would grant temporary employees protections under most articles of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, as well as provide a path for temporary employees to purchase their own health insurance through the County’s group plan

Outside of the package, the Union also presented:

Article 5: Union Security, Representation, and Business

The Union accepted the County’s language on what new employee information is shared and that visits to County sites by Union representatives be in compliance with PECBA
The Union struck the County’s proposals that the 12 members of the Union’s bargaining team include the Union president and Union staff (the Union seeks to have the President and Union staff in addition to the 12 members previously agreed upon), and also that Supervisors are noticed of Union leave prior to the leave occurring

Addendum E: Auto Reimbursements and Transit Subsidies

The Union has struck the County’s proposal that travel time during the Workday must be approved in advance by the supervisor

Proposed by the County:

The County did not present any proposals on October 23rd as many articles from our last packages (presented on September 25 and October 2) remained pending the Union response.

This is what went across the table on October 30th:

Proposed by the Union:

Article 8: Vacation Leave

The Union reproposed what they had proposed on August 28, which would establish a system for excess accruals to automatically go into a new “Catastrophic Leave Bank.”

Article 9: Sick Leave, Fitness for Duty and Disability Insurance

The Union proposed that any sick time be treated as “protected leave” and that medical verification would not be required until all paid leave is exhausted.
The Union also proposed striking disciplinary action for excessive absenteeism when using other paid leave or unpaid leave

Article 13: Work Schedules

The Union accepted that management may establish minimum operational requirements

Article 21: Seniority and Layoff

The Union has again proposed a new method of establishing seniority for on-call workers who move into regular status effective June 30, 2025 (so that those who had moved into regular status prior to that date would have original methodology honored for their seniority date)

Article N: Shelter Staffing

The Union proposed having an employee’s cultural or bilingual KSA premium follow them to shelter pay, and also proposed having employees be paid at least 3 hours if their shift is canceled with less than 3 hours notice

Proposed by County:

The County presented a package proposal consisting of Articles 2, 10, 15, 22, 24, and Addenda E, K, L, M, and N

Article 2: Definitions

The County accepted the Union’s language around extending trial service for intermittent leave when the employee has been out for 14 or more days
The County again proposed that temporary employees be allowed to backfill for employees on leave, as this measure should help with workload concerns, but proposed a cap of 18 months or length of leave, whichever is longer

Article 10: Other Leaves

The County accepted the Union’s language around only viewing documents related to immigration leave (rather than obtaining a copy)
The County rejected the Union’s proposal for a new Critical Incident Leave. Instead, acknowledging inconsistency with the “admin leave” process following exceptionally challenging incidents in the workplace, the County has proposed action outside of this successor bargaining, which would be a broader policy review and update, over which the unions could demand to impact bargain

Article 15: Job Profiles and Pay Ranges

The County proposed moving some language from here to Article 22
The County rejected the Union’s proposal that the reclassification process be officially “started” with the date the employee emails their manager or supervisor. Instead, the start date would be when the Position Description is done, acknowledged (not necessarily approved) by Supervisor, and then shared with HR and the supervisor

Article 22: Shift and Work Assignment

The County accepted the Union’s language about employees leaving position but includes job abandonment for vacancy, as well as their proposed language that Work out of Class opportunities be posted first internally

Article 24: Non-Discrimination

The County accepted the Union’s language around a commitment to inclusivity
The County rejected the Union’s language on “power imbalance” in microaggressions, as it may imply that managers, supervisors, or other leaders cannot be microaggressed by subordinates

Addendum E: Auto Reimbursements and Transit Subsidies

The County again proposed that travel done by employee choice during the workday must have supervisor approval

Addendum K: Limited Duration Appointments

The County accepted the Union’s language on using “Limited Duration Position”
The County rejected the Union’s proposal to have LD appointments be filled by seniority; instead, the County proposed posting internally and externally at the same time

Addendum L: On-Call and Temporary Employees

The County rejected the Union’s proposal to allow temporary employees to purchase their own insurance through the County’s group rate, as this is not permitted by our carriers.
The County also rejected the Union’s proposal that would require just cause to terminate any temporary employees who have been in their positions for 1040 hours or more and proposed current contract language for on-call rights

Addendum M: Jail Side Premium

This proposal would add MCSO Records Tech to the list of positions eligible for this premium; otherwise it is the same as what we proposed on September 25th

Addendum N: Shelter Staffing

The County accepted the Union’s proposal on a bilingual premium but on an ad hoc basis only
The County rejected the Union’s proposal to pay employees 3 hours if shift is canceled with less than 3 hours notice; instead, the County proposed that if an employee experiences any loss of pay due to having volunteered for a shelter shift and then the shelter closing, that the employee would be made whole

What’s next?

The County is waiting on the Union to come back with an updated wage proposal (Article 14). The County proposed its wage counter on October 2. Knowing the Union’s priorities on wages will inform our responses on several other open articles.

Our next bargaining session is scheduled for November 6.