Walton Deputies To Unionize.
- Thread starter Bob Wells
- Start date
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
Lets not facilitate rumors. No one knows for a fact who EITHER candidate will appoint in command positions. The only one that I know of for sure is Dennis Ward as Griffith's Chief Deputy.
I was not aware that Adkinson worked under a PBA contract. I was aware that he was a member. I was aware that Griffith, being a highway patrolman, did.
Again, folks, don't let the adversarial posts on either side sway you. I myself am pro PBA. Any thing that protects officers from politics is good in my book. But you have to make that decision yourself. www.flpba.org.
I was not aware that Adkinson worked under a PBA contract. I was aware that he was a member. I was aware that Griffith, being a highway patrolman, did.
Again, folks, don't let the adversarial posts on either side sway you. I myself am pro PBA. Any thing that protects officers from politics is good in my book. But you have to make that decision yourself. www.flpba.org.
Again some are trying to side step the issue and take it in another direction.
Deputies, If you get a good and solid contract, why should it matter if the contract was negotiated with the current Sheriff or a newly elected Sheriff? The end result will be the same.
It might be because the the current Sheriff and the soon to be elected Sheriff are two different people and may have different views. Who knows, the next Sheriff may want to negotiate something more into the contract which would benefit the employees.
I'm not against it, but I don't like to be rushed. This sounds like it should've been done years ago.
Wow!!! At the false information being placed hereFirst off, why would other deputies, be trying to intimidate and scare other deputies into making a decision not to unionized based on what you think might happen??? Both Candidates for Sheriff have enjoyed the benefit of working under a contract provided by the PBA, I don't think either one ever turned down any pay raise or benefit that they received as being part of the Union. In fact I believe one of the candidates has even used our services when he had an issue happen. Deputies you will be given the chance, so you will not have to live in fear of who ever the sheriff may be from this vote on.... You no longer serve at the pleasure of the Sheriff, so you do not have to secretly support whom ever you please. You don't have to worry about coming to work in January and the NEW SHERIFF saying you no longer work for this agency. How fair is this to you and your family? The Sheriff will have the pleasure of putting anyone of the fear-mungers here on this blog as a Captain or higher in his administration without the PBA saying anything. We are not adversarial with either of the two candidates for Sheriff, but having said this we will stand up for the Deputies, Investigators, Sergeants, and Lieutenants when it comes to their rights being violated or being unfairly terminated. Ask yourself this question if the incoming sheriff wanted to take care of his people, why would he be opposed to his deputies having the right to collective bargaining? I'm quite sure that both candidates will read this blog and I hope they do. For who ever is using scare tatics, bullying, and threating other employees, Stop it. How many deputies have heard the story that so and so is gone when the new sheriff comes in office? What if it is you next? VOTE IN THE UNION AND THE FEAR WILL GO AWAY!!! Again, I can't stress this enough, the Sheriff can't just come in and say, you no longer work here. Both Candidates know this. I read in an earlier entry that one candidate is going to fight us (PBA) in the courts, I would hope that he would not, but if he so chooses bring it on... But it will be him not us, being adversarial not the PBA. It will be a binding contract that will benefit his employees, so if he wants to waist money that he could use to pay his employees better, that's his right as Sheriff.
When the Vote happens, NO ONE WILL KNOW HOW YOU VOTED UNLESS YOU TELL THEM, NO ONE WILL EVER FIND OUT UNLESS YOU TELL THEM. You will be able to come in go to a booth, that has a curtain all the way around it, then you will vote and place your own ballot into a sealed box with only a slot cut into the top, you will place your ballot into this box. Then the PERC Elections Officer will shake the box up after the polls close and the Sheriff's representative, PBA Representative will observe while the PERC Employee counts the YES votes and NO votes. If you vote the PBA in we will be your collective bargaining Agent and you will no longer have to worry about a job every 4 years. I hope this has cleared up some of your concerns and false information that has been put out. If you want to talk with me my number is 1-800-733-3722 or ask around in the Department my cell number is on my business card. VOTE YES FOR THE UNION
Not if you Voted Early, I have been told that early voting is Public Record and if this holds true, I'm not real happy about it.
Yes....YEARS ago. I don't like the idea of rushing a contract....or leaving the sheriff-elect out of the loop. That being said, I will be voting for the PBA.
I do want the bargaining unit, but I want it done right. If we include the sheriff-elect's concerns at the table, we can dismiss any worries about sabotage.
If that does not happen , however, the new Sheriff can negotiate changes on a need basis. He and the unit can negotiate amendments to a contract. So, either way, a sheriff elect will have his say.
For example, if the out going sheriff says, "I'm going to give you guys a 20% raise." Likely, the actual budget won't allow that. So the new Sheriff would come in with the negotiating unit and come up with a number everyone can live with, within budget constraints. This is called a memorandum of agreement and amends the contract, so I'm told. It will also have to be agreed upon by both parties to amend the contract, though. It works the same way if the new sheriff decides, "hey, you guys deserve a better raise next year than the contract states".
I do want the bargaining unit, but I want it done right. If we include the sheriff-elect's concerns at the table, we can dismiss any worries about sabotage.
If that does not happen , however, the new Sheriff can negotiate changes on a need basis. He and the unit can negotiate amendments to a contract. So, either way, a sheriff elect will have his say.
For example, if the out going sheriff says, "I'm going to give you guys a 20% raise." Likely, the actual budget won't allow that. So the new Sheriff would come in with the negotiating unit and come up with a number everyone can live with, within budget constraints. This is called a memorandum of agreement and amends the contract, so I'm told. It will also have to be agreed upon by both parties to amend the contract, though. It works the same way if the new sheriff decides, "hey, you guys deserve a better raise next year than the contract states".
I certainly question the timing/motivation of the proposed unionization - especially wanting an agreement in place with the departing sheriff that the new one will have to comply with or can only get amended w/ the union's approval.
In the scenario above, it sounds like the departing sheriff can obligate the sheriff's department to financial and contractual things that cannot be changed if the union doesn't want to change them. Seems like a sneaky way to cause trouble and undermine the new sheriff.
What happens in the scenario WhoDat1 mentions when the departing Sheriff agrees to a 20% raise and the union doesn't agree to the new Sheriff amending it?
In the scenario above, it sounds like the departing sheriff can obligate the sheriff's department to financial and contractual things that cannot be changed if the union doesn't want to change them. Seems like a sneaky way to cause trouble and undermine the new sheriff.
What happens in the scenario WhoDat1 mentions when the departing Sheriff agrees to a 20% raise and the union doesn't agree to the new Sheriff amending it?
If thats true, the issue has not been taken up in federal court. It would immediately be dismissed as unconstitutional and corrected.
However, I beleive PBA rep was speaking of employees voting in a union at the Sheriff's office.
I have an idea. One week from today (Wednesday), we will know for sure who the next sheriff will be. Many of the specific questions surrounding this issue can then be asked and answered without all the ifs, ands or buts.
I believe the papers said MA use to be
a member in the past for 13 yrs. And the word is he has picked Chapman. They need to wait to do this PBA thing. Current sheriff should have no say so. And it is just unfair for the new one to have to go by what the old sheriff did.
a member in the past for 13 yrs. And the word is he has picked Chapman. They need to wait to do this PBA thing. Current sheriff should have no say so. And it is just unfair for the new one to have to go by what the old sheriff did.