Employee Compensation Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
Date: 11/30/12 at 10am
Present: Gareth Backhaus, Muriel Lazzarini, Mickey Jervas, Maynard Forbes, Melissa Noe and Larry Klein
Absent: Daniel Moriarity
- The minutes from 11/9/12 were approved as written.
- The Committee reviewed the responses from Attorney Collins sent in by the Committee and discussed the following:
Summarized Question:
Can the town enter into contracts with their employees? And by entering into a contract does this make us a bargaining unit?
Summarized Answer:
Signing employment contracts with 2 or more employees does not make them a bargaining unit. Under MGL the Town is legally allowed to enter into contracts without a town meeting vote with police and fire chiefs, town administrators, town accountants/auditors and library directors. In a non-unionized town it is not uncommon for a group of employees (such as the highway department) to negotiate informally terms and conditions of employment and reduce them to a memorandum of understanding.
The Committee wants to make sure that “community of interest” is defined which is referred to in the attorney’s response quite a bit. It was agreed that it meant job description/functions.
Summarized Question:
Can we offer a “benefits menu” where employees could choose benefits that best meet their needs (i.e. one employee may pay a higher percentage of health insurance premiums in return for more vacation).
Summarized Answer:
Since our vacation, holidays and sick time are bylaws voted on at town meeting, they are non-negotiable unless changed at town meeting however all other benefits not adopted as a town bylaw do not require uniformity and can be negotiated. The attorney stated that there may be some room for the Town to take a flexible approach to benefit packages.
Summarized Question:
The Committee wanted Section 5 of the Monterey Bylaws clarified and also wanted to know who is charged with setting the health insurance contribution split and do benefits such as clothing allowances and on-call pay have to be across the board.
Summarized Answer:
Section 5 appears to delegate to the Select Board the implementation of policies on non-pay matters which are not otherwise governed by specific language of our bylaws. The Select Board is charged with setting the contribution rates for health insurance under MGL c. 32B. The law does not require the Town to offer an equivalent benefit to all employees just because some are subject to an on-call requirement or get a clothing allowance.
Summarized Question:
Under the FLSA is the Inter-Departmental Secretary’s position exempt or non-exempt? Is it important that this be classified? Are all salaried positions exempt and should the designations be listed in the employee handbook?
Summarized Answer:
Not all salaried positions are exempt, the law presumes that an employee is covered by the overtime laws and the employer has the burden of proving that the employee is exempt.
After reviewing the Inter-Departmental Secretary’s job description and speaking with Ms. Noe it was determined that this position should be classified as non-exempt and would be entitled to overtime pay for hours worked over 40. The attorney also stated that compensatory time is allowed with the agreement of the employee.
Summarized Question:
Are there advantages/disadvantages for part-time employees being paid either hourly or with an annual salary?
Summarized Answer:
Part time employees ordinarily work a fixed number of hours and are paid on an hourly basis.
Summarized Question:
Is it necessary to include a recruitment section in our employee handbook?
Summarized Answer:
No.
Summarized Question:
Committee members had 2 interpretations of the attorney’s response on what is considered a bargaining unit and asked for clarification.
Summarized Answer:
Bargaining units are formed under MGL c. 150E OR by an informal recognition procedure at the Town level. DPW workers could form one unit not including the department head who ordinarily is a managerial employee. The Inter-Departmental Secretary could conceivable be a one person Administrative bargaining unit however she is legally eligible under MGL c. 41 §108N to negotiate an employment contract. The police department, excluding the Chief who is permitted under MGL to enter into a contract, may be included in a bargaining unit. If the employees form a union for purposes of bargaining under MGL c. 150E there are certain filing and financial disclosure requirements.
The formation of what amounts to Department Head bargaining units is not common and the Police Chief is almost never included but conceivable the Director of Operations and Inter-Departmental Secretary could form a bargaining unit.
The highway department as a whole could have a contract with the Town.
Summarized Question:
What terms and conditions are typically outlined in a Memorandum of Understanding? What are the legal ramifications and enforceability of them and what are the benefits and pitfalls for the Town and employee?
Summarized Answer:
In a few towns with non-union employees, a committee of employees meet with the Select Board to negotiate terms and conditions of employment and agreements are reduced in writing to a memorandum of understanding. In Monterey this would not include leave benefits already governed by our bylaws. This model of informal negotiations with non-union employees is not prevalent in the Commonwealth. Such a memorandum if supported by adequate consideration and appropriation as required would be an enforceable contract, the breach of which would be actionable in civil court. It is beneficial as it is a more comprehensive approach to leave and other fringe benefits. No pitfall per se except to warn that like all contracts proper legal review and drafting is critical.
The Committee would like to know if a Memorandum of Understanding is good for one year or can it be for multiple years.
Summarized Question:
Since MGL c. 41 §108A-C have not been adopted by Monterey does this mean that uniformity of our benefits is not required.
Summarized Answer:
If we have a personnel bylaw then it has acted under the authority of c. 41 §§108A-C, no local acceptance vote is required and therefore, uniformity is required on those matters covered by the bylaw.
Summarized Question:
Is it accurate that the Town is legally obligated to offer every single employee the exact same health insurance at the same employer/employee split?
Summarized Answer:
The Town is legally obligated to offer all employees who regularly work 20 hours or more the same insurance and contributions. The OPEB Commission is looking at some pro-ration proposals. The Town however, is allowed to institute a tiered system for new hires, having the new hires pay a larger share.
The Committee would like to know if the most recent new employee would fall under this as the Town had been advised otherwise on this matter.
Summarized Question:
We have adopted MGL c. 32B sections 9A, 9E, 10 and 18 and it has caused some confusion as some seem to conflict.
Summarized Answer:
9A allows a 50% contribution to retiree health insurance, no more, no less. Section 9E allows a contribution to retiree health insurance in excess of 50% up to 90% for HMOs. 9E supersedes 9A. Section 10 is the basic acceptance of the guts of c. 32B and section 18 is the mandate that Medicare eligible retirees enroll in Medicare.
Summarized Question:
What would an employee who is eligible for retirement receive for health insurance and at what percentage retiring before 65 and after 65?
Summarized Answer:
Plans available depend on whether the employee is Medicare eligible, in which event, under section 11c of c. 32B, the retiree is offered an optimal Medicare extension plan.
Contribution rates for retirees will not differ by age (this does not apply to deferred retirees). Employees and retirees can have different contribution percentages and the Select Board makes this determination.
Summarized Question:
Upon the death of an employee/retiree, will the spouse continue to receive health benefits at the same cost?
Summarized Answer:
The surviving spouse of a retiree/current employee the spouse may continue coverage at 100% of the premium until death or marriage. If we adopt c. 32 section 9D it would allow the town to continue to pay the 50% (for a retiree) for the surviving spouse. Sections 9, 9D, 9D1/2 and 9D3/4 address current surviving spouses.
Summarized Question:
If a retired employee moves out of state, what are his/her health insurance options?
Summarized Answer:
According to a Blue Cross representative there isn’t an out of state benefit available with the HMO plan, the out of state benefit is traditionally available only for PPO or Medex plans.
Summarized Question:
What are the mandatory retirement requirements for Police & Firefighters, are they rigid and are there any exceptions?
Summarized Answer:
Mandatory retirement at age 65 applies to both police and firefighters. See Chapter 415 of the Acts of 1987. The attorney made mention of exceptions for special police officers however it was noted that Monterey does not have a special police officer designation. Part timers are Intermittent Reserve Officers and must also retire at the age of 65.
Committee members are going to compile any additional questions for the attorney and Muriel will follow up with Attorney Collins on how much time has been spent on our questions to date.
- The Committee will meet next on 1/11/13 at 10am.
Submitted by:
Melissa Noe, Inter-Departmental Secretary
| 
