Washington Evening Journal
111 North Marion Avenue
Washington, IA 52353
319-653-2191
Fired Iowa prison workers could get jobs, back pay
IOWA CITY (AP) ? The Iowa Department of Corrections will have to reinstate and award back pay to some prison supervisors laid off in 2009 after a state board ruled last month they should have been able to displace union workers, attorneys said Wednesday.
The Iowa Public Employment Relations Board ruled Aug. 29 that 18 supervisors at correctional institutions around the state should have been given ?bumping ...
N/A
Sep. 30, 2018 7:50 pm
IOWA CITY (AP) ? The Iowa Department of Corrections will have to reinstate and award back pay to some prison supervisors laid off in 2009 after a state board ruled last month they should have been able to displace union workers, attorneys said Wednesday.
The Iowa Public Employment Relations Board ruled Aug. 29 that 18 supervisors at correctional institutions around the state should have been given ?bumping rights? if they had more seniority than union workers when they were let go. The board gave the department 60 days to craft remedies to make each employee whole, which could include reinstatement plus back pay and benefits depending on each individual situation.
The employees had been members of American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the state?s largest public employees union, before they accepted promotions to management positions that took them out of the union. Union contracts at the time of their promotions and a state rule allowed them to retain their seniority if downsizing became necessary.
But with state agencies facing deep budget cuts in 2009, then-Gov. Chet Culver and AFSCME reached an agreement to save the jobs of 479 union members facing layoffs in exchange for five unpaid furlough days and a suspension in contributions to workers? retirement savings plans.
The deal specified that supervisors would not be able to bump union employees, and the department laid off the supervisors in December 2009. They filed grievances alleging their layoffs were improper because they should have had bumping rights.
The board agreed in its 23-page decision, ruling the state failed to comply with its seniority rule and must award bumping rights retroactively to any of the 18 who should have been eligible. State and AFSCME lawyers argued the seniority rule was no longer valid because of the revised AFSCME contract, but the board said it did not have the authority to decide that issue.
?They are relieved and do feel vindicated that their position was correct and they were not fairly treated with respect to the layoffs,? said Des Moines attorney Charles Gribble, who represents the supervisors. ?While they understood that some sacrifice was called for by all state employees due to the state budget situation, they felt they shouldered a disproportionate share of the burden by losing their jobs entirely.?
He said he hoped to reach agreements with the department on how each employee should be made whole in the coming weeks. Each case will be different based on how long they were out of work, whether they have returned to state jobs and other factors, he said. Gribble said he is collecting details on each employee?s situation before upcoming negotiations with state officials.
A search of a state employees? directory shows that 10 of the 18 supervisors have returned to state jobs, including at prisons in Fort Madison, Anamosa, Mitchellville, Anamosa, Oakdale and Mount Pleasant. Some of the others may have retired.
Corrections spokesman Fred Scaletta said state officials were reviewing the decision.
AFSCME attorney Mark Hedberg said the board punted on the core issue -- whether the seniority rule remained valid -- but the union has not decided whether to pursue the issue in district court. He said the union has not learned whether any of its members will be displaced and ?that might make a difference? in the decision.
?It?s my understanding that anyone affected by this is already back to work,? he said. ?If they were laid off, they may be entitled to back pay. But at this point, I don?t think it affects our membership.?