Agenda Packets - 2002/03/11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council February 25, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 11 Mayor Sonterre indicated Council and the City are not treating employees as adversaries and absolutely do not treat employees, union or not, as adversaries because they are assets. He further commented that there is no adversarial mentality from his perspective. Council Member Thomas indicated she found it disingenuous to talk about negotiations when this situation has nothing to do with union negotiations. She commented Council is looking at all details and found out things were being done incorrectly and against the personnel manual since the day this was begun. She commented Council is addressing correcting the problem in accordance with the personnel manual. She then commented that a significant issue has been raised with the City’s current health insurance because the very fact that the City has supplemental health insurance jeopardizes the City’s current health insurance contract. Council Member Thomas commented that it would not be cheaper for the City to continue to offer this supplemental insurance because, if Council were to decide to continue with the supplemental insurance, the City would have to provide the benefit to all employees because the benefit is currently only being offered to one employee and treats the other City employees unfairly. She further commented that this is not an issue of primary health insurance but supplemental insurance and, as set up, it goes against the personnel manual and the City’s insurance policy contract. Mr. Serfling indicated he felt the matter could have been resolved in negotiations and said the City was in negotiations and the Minnesota Public Employees Labor Relation Act makes health insurance a negotiated item and the City is acting in deference to its own policy. City Administrator Miller indicated that the grievance filed today she interpreted to be a difference of opinion as to how the union and Ms. Norquist interpret the personnel policy versus how the City interprets the personnel policy. She then cautioned against any discussions of the contract because it is currently under negotiation. City Administrator Miller indicated that any employee who works 20 or more hours can participate in the City’s health care and there is no provision for any alternative for that. She then indicated she had spoken with the City Attorney, representatives from the League of Minnesota Cities, and Mr. Burn who administers the City’s health care program. She further indicated that the City’s health care contract precludes the City from utilizing another health care provider and that is in order to keep costs down for the City. The program is dependent on a certain number of people participating in the program. She also commented that Mr. Burn did say that the City could decide to amend the personnel policy to state that employees do have an option to elect to take a cash payment in lieu of participating if they have health care elsewhere but the way the personnel manual currently reads it does not give that option. City Administrator Miller indicated the City is correcting a decision made by the Finance Director to give one employee of the City a benefit not provided to any other. She then commented that if the City does make an amendment in the personnel policy she has been told the City would have to provide the benefit to all but, there is a cost to do so.