NorCo Administrators Respond to Staffing Crisis Story at Juvenile Justice

Yesterday, I told you that the Express Times has awarded well-deserved turkeys to Northampton County Council members Kevin Lott and Tara Zrinski. They've thrown up roadblock after roadblock to Court Administrator Jermaine Greene's attempt to resolve a staffing crisis at the Juvenile Justice Center (JJC). This has real world implications. One juvenile who should have been detained after a carjacking committed the very same offense the next day, driving off a car he stole with a girl in the back seat. It's only a matter of time before something far more serious happens. Instead of helping to solve a staffing crisis, Lott and Zrinski are endangering public safety. 

In March of 2022, Executive Lamont McClure told County Council this staffing crisis could be resolved. Subsequently, he made the largest three-year contract offer in the history of the county to the union representing JJC staff  - 4 1/2% step, 4 1/2% step and 2 1/2% COLA. There would be no increase in the cost of medical care. But union negotiators declared an impasse, primarily because the senior members were not given a new step or some other increase until the final year. They wanted it now.

Northampton County has submitted a rare reply to my story. It comes from Information Officer Brittney Waylen. Since it starts with  "As a matter of law," I presume the actual author is Executive Lamont McClure, who is an attorney. 

As a matter of law, the County is the bargaining agent of the court system with respect to collective bargaining. In negotiating with the YDC workers, we have held multiple meetings seeking to find a fair funding formula. Like the Commonwealth, the County bargains wages and health care on a pattern basis meaning that it tries to generally treat all employees identically when it comes to cost of living adjustments.

Despite that pattern, the County made an offer to the YDC workers based on what the Court system informed the County the YDC workers would agree. That did not result in an agreement and the YDC workers chose instead—as is their right—to seek arbitration. That arbitration is scheduled for June 29th and will result in a new contract and some degree of retroactive wage adjustment. In the interim, the Court system has also unilaterally proposed the creation of supervisory positions which cannot be imposed but must instead be bargained. Moreover, the Court’s proposal will have an effect on the wages of the YDC workers—the majority of whom would be out of a job under the Court’s proposal.

While the County is the bargaining agent for the Court system, the County also has an obligation to follow applicable Pennsylvania labor law. That means that, while the Court’s idea regarding supervisory positions is extant, it is left to the County to work with the union to attempt to bring the Court’s proposal into line with the law. This is what the County is attempting to do.

I appreciate your suggestion regarding tweaking the prior offer to the YDC workers. I would respectfully point out that the YDC workers have yet to accept any offer made by the County despite prior tweaks and adjustments. In addition, in the wake of the unilateral creation of these supervisory positions, this further complicates the matter. Why accept the frontloading of these positions when the supervisory positions pay more? (even though they are not self-executing and cannot simply be imposed without bargaining)

At the end of the day, the County has the duty to the taxpayers to find the right combination of expenditure and service regarding all employees in an effort to create a model sustainable for the future. The most effective forum for doing so is in front of a neutral arbitrator who will hear both sides and help the parties reach an equitable solution. While we cannot go back to the beginning of bargaining, we can prepare for the future secure in the knowledge that a process designed to resolve these disputes will address all the equities you mention and a solution will be found. I have great confidence in the wisdom of the arbitrator—working with the Union and the County in properly litigated forum designed to resolve industrial disputes—will reach a fair outcome.

The county likes to take a cookie cutter approach to union negotiations, and this pattern approach has benefits. But no two bargaining units are the same. What works with one union is unacceptable to others. In fact, the county deviated from its own approach with Gracedale by offering bonuses to hire and retain workers. The county itself has failed to follow its own pattern approach. 

I agree that the County is the bargaining agent for the courts and offered the same salaries that the courts recommended. But the stumbling block had nothing to do with the salarie. It was instead a trivial disagreement whether more senior youth care workers get a raise or a new step in the first or last year. The amount in dispute really is a pittance, and in view of the threat to public safety resulting from a staffing shortage, the county really should have just agreed to pay the money. 

The county and union both have allowed this unresolved contract to languish in spite of the staffing crisis at JJC.  Nearly every month, Court Administrator Jermaine Greene has made you aware that no arbitration was scheduled. Neither you nor the union bothered to contact the PLRB to learn why this was taking so long. When you learned that it was because an arbitrator had retired, you took no action with PLRB to urge a prompt resolution. When the arbitration was finally scheduled, it was not until the end of this month, meaning the crisis will continue with no resolution until weeks or months later. 

Greene tried at first to hire more part-time workers. Then he proposed more supervisors. Now he wants assistant supervisors because he needs bodies. I'm sure he would have been happy if he had a contract, but this has been delayed for far too long. Lott and Zrinski have resisted Greene every time he attempts to get more badly needed staff. . 

You indicate that, as a matter of law, these assistant supervisory positions should be union. You may be right, and all you need do is file a unit clarification petition. But you also have an obligation to follow the County Council resolution authorizing these new positions. I agree you have an obligation to taxpayers, and that includes their public safety. This has gone on long enough. You could solve this impasse tomorrow if you wished. Why not do that instead of letting Lott bray about union bustin' and Zrinski accuse Greene of being a liar?

Finally, I disagree that the majority of youth care workers will be out of a job. Those positions eliminated are all vacant. Nobody is going to be out of a job. 

Thanks for the reply.