Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council February 25, 2002 <br />Regular Meeting Page 12 <br /> <br />Mayor Sonterre indicated Council has tried to keep its sites on how the personnel policy reads <br />presently and make decisions based on following the procedure as it exists today and focus on <br />being consistent. He then indicated there has been a debate as to whether change is necessary but <br />Council has agreed to base its decision on the facts before Council at this time. <br /> <br />Mr. Serfling indicated the letter of the word of the Collective Bargaining Law states that the <br />employer cannot unilaterally change benefits. He then suggested the City negotiate a <br />memorandum of agreement that would apply until negotiations are finalized. <br /> <br />City Attorney Riggs clarified that Council has before it a situation that was not authorized by <br />Council and could not be authorized by Council because it is in violation of the master contract <br />with HealthPartners. He then stated that, with due respect, it is a situation that the City cannot do <br />and that is why Staff took steps to rectify the indiscretion of a previous staff member. <br /> <br />Mr. Serfling indicated there is still a way to resolve this if Council would direct Staff to sit down <br />with the union and HealthPartners to discuss it. <br /> <br />Mayor Sonterre explained that, even with a memorandum of agreement, if the City made a <br />provision for one staff member to be compensated for supplemental insurance it would then <br />afford that right for other staff to request supplemental insurance. <br /> <br />Mr. Serfling said he did not believe continuing Ms. Norquist’s supplemental insurance by way of <br />a memorandum of agreement would afford other City employees the same rights if the document <br />were drafted properly. <br /> <br />City Administrator Miller indicated she has information that the City cannot discriminate against <br />employees whether in favor of age or by providing a benefit to one employee that is not provided <br />to other employees. She then indicated the actions were taken to correct a situation that should <br />not have been. She further indicated that, if Council wishes to direct her to do so, she could <br />amend the personnel policy. <br /> <br />Council Member Thomas stated this is not a matter for negotiation and is not part of the union <br />negotiations. She then stated it is nice to say “let’s sit down and work something out” but, for <br />right now, this is an action to correct something that should not have been allowed to occur. She <br />further commented that Staff and Council have been dealing with corrections in several other <br />areas and it has not been pretty but corrections have to occur. She also indicated the matter of the <br />City providing supplemental health insurance could be discussed at a later time but, based on <br />information and policies in place right now, this is how Council is required by law to act. <br /> <br />Mr. Serfling said “what about state law?” <br /> <br />Council Member Thomas indicated that state law actually has binding agreements on the City <br />with regard to the health care contract. <br /> <br />Mr. Serfling indicated the City changed a benefit without discussing it.