AFSCME Local 88

AFSCME Local 88 Management Bargaining Update 7 (July 9, 2025)

The County and the Union met for bargaining on June 26 and July 3, 2025.

Here is where we are in brief:

7 Articles Pending with Union

12 Articles Pending with County

3 Addenda Pending with Union

8 Addenda Pending with County

Article 9 - Sick Leave

This was a counterproposal following the County’s March 13, 2025, proposal.
The Union proposed that all sick leave be protected leave, eliminating the 40-hour protected leave cap and tightening the situations in which the County can verify the appropriate use of sick leave.
The Union proposed doubling the amount of sick leave accrued to .1 hour per each paid hour and removing that sick leave is accrued on County-paid hours.
The Union proposed striking all excessive absenteeism language.
The Union proposed that employees can take unpaid leave prior to using their paid leave accruals.
The Union proposed that vacation leave accrued in excess of maximum caps will be automatically donated to a catastrophic leave bank.
The Union proposed that catastrophic leave can be used for immigration and citizenship leave.

Article 25 - Safety and Health

This was a counterproposal following the County’s March 27, 2025, proposal.
The Union proposed that employees fill out incident report forms as determined by the departments, rather than the countywide forms currently in use.
The Union proposed a new committee for joint staffing review with the County, where the Union would give recommendations on current workloads, anticipated service demands, and potential safety hazards.
The Union also proposed that they be notified whenever there is a change to workload expectations and be provided an opportunity to offer feedback.
The Union proposed adding “refusal to work” language.

Article 5 - Union Security

The County proposed a counter to the Union’s May 29, 2025, proposal.
The County proposed that information provided to the Union will align with PECBA and will be shared only if available to the County.
The County re-proposed language about the Union maintaining a list of designated representatives.
The County accepted language setting the Union’s bargaining team at 12 members but proposed clarifying when attendees will be on Union paid time.
The County proposed that Union communications must be provided to Central Human Resources or Labor Relations, changing the language from requiring the communications to be “approved.”
The County proposed clarification that Union stewards may be released for "reasonable" time and upon written notice to managers.
The County proposed that Union reimbursable time be counted in hours rather than days and be pro-rated by FTE.
The County proposed clarification that visits by Union reps will abide by PECBA.

Article 18 - Settlement of Disputes

This is a counterproposal to the Union’s June 12, 2025, counterproposal.
The County presented the same proposal as the County’s March 6 proposal while also accepting the Union’s language that grievance responses will be sent to both the employee and the Union.

Addendum F - Library Department

This was a counterproposal to the County’s June 12, 2025, counterproposal.
The Union proposed accepting the County’s June 12 proposal except for the language that maintains an employee’s qualifications must be considered in the shift bid process.
- The parties reached a tentative agreement on this Addendum with the County clarifying that it believes the Library already has a right to consider whether an employee is qualified for a shift when allowing employees to shift bid.

Article 19 - Modification of Work

This was a counterproposal to the County’s May 15, 2025, counterproposal.
The Union maintained its proposal that the County cannot contract out services if it has any negative impact on bargaining unit members.
The Union modified its proposal that the County cannot use volunteers if they replace bargaining unit positions, prevent the filling of positions, or result in layoffs.

Article 20 - Workloads and Standards

This was a counterproposal to the County’s June 12, 2025, counterproposal.
The Union proposed that any significant changes to workload be subject to impact bargaining.
The Union accepted most of the County’s June 12 proposal regarding providing written summaries of non-disciplinary notices within 14-days.

Article 25 - Safety and Health

This was a counterproposal to the Union’s June 26 counterproposal.
The County accepted the Union’s proposal regarding employees using the department’s incident report forms.
The County proposed striking staffing language from this proposal and told the Union it would address staffing in Article 13 - Work Schedules.

Addendum H - Drug and Alcohol Policy

The County rejected the Union’s proposal of expanded Garrity rights
The County accepted the Union’s clarification that a second testing would be used for an employee appeal but added that it has to be a SAMSHA certified laboratory.
The County modified a Union proposal that upon request, a manager will provide to an employee the written specification of the circumstances surrounding reasonable suspicion testing.