| 84% of
CT reclassification requests approved Of the 184 requests for reclassification reviews of CT positions in 1999, Human Resources granted 151, or 82 percent, according to Lauren Marinez, Human Resources Assistant Director in Compensation. Four of the 33 remaining requests—an additional two percent—resulted in new positions being established. Because a CT position cannot be reclassified into another bargaining unit, such as the APA, a new position must be created in those cases. The CT can then apply for the position. The CTU obtained these figures, and other information about reclassification procedures at a July 25 special conference with Marinez and Human Resources Professional Jeff Brodie. So, what’s
the problem? Part of the problem may rest with CTs’ misconceptions about the process. In addition, some individual units, departments and colleges have contributed to the confusion by making the process appear slower and more intimidating than it actually is. — "For three months I was told that my reclassification request was being considered," said one CT. "Finally, I called Human Resources, and they told me that they never received the request. When I confronted my supervisor, she said that she had recently sent the paperwork through. I later saw that she sent it through on the day I confronted her." — "I do a lot of work that is outside of my level, but when I asked my supervisor about the possibility of a reclassification study, he said it was more likely that it would result in my being demoted," said one caller to the CTU office. "We do not classify down," Marinez said. "If we determine that a position is overclassified, we keep track of the posting. When it becomes vacant, we ask to look at it." Only if the CT in the position agrees will it ever be reclassified so that the grade level decreases, Marinez said. This could happen, for example, if medical or personal reasons caused a CT to avoid duties associated with a position in the higher grade level. The position could be reclassified down only if it were the CT’s voluntary decision to give up the duties. — "Human Resources agreed that the CT was under- classified. But rather than giving him the increase, the department took away the part of the job he liked best," reported a UR. While it is up to a unit to distribute and assign duties according to its personnel and budgetary needs, Marinez said that the Compensation Office will closely review and follow up on situations where a department removes duties from a position in order to keep it at a lower classification. "For the most part, the work still needs to be done," Marinez said. "If the duties are removed from the position, we want to know who is going to be doing them." How
the process should work Ideally, your department agrees that you are performing duties outside or above your current classification level, fills out the reclassification request and, as quickly as possible, submits it to the Compensation Office, the unit charged with maintaining the University’s classification system. Compensation then reviews the position. Anything from telephone interviews of department administrators and/or the employee to a physical on-site audit of the position may be used to help in the determination. A request does not necessarily result in a grade level increase. The request can be denied, or Compensation can determine that the duties fit into a different classification at the same grade level. For example, a Secretary III might be reclassified as an Office Assistant III—both level 9 positions. The Compensation Office might even decide that the duties are unique and need to be placed in a new classification. Once the decision is made, your supervisor or department administrator is notified by Compensation of the decision, and your supervisor then informs you. If the decision results in increases in your grade level, the CTU contract provides that you will receive a 5 percent increase for moving up one grade level and 10 percent for moving up two grade levels or more. Amounts higher than 5 and 10 percent must be approved by the Compensation Office. You may also receive retroactive pay. If you use the Staffing Request form to request reclassification, the maximum retroactivity pay you can receive is 30 days from the date that the Compensation Office received the form with the appropriate signatures. The department determines the actual retroactive date within this 30-day window. Using
the CTU grievance procedure Filing a classification grievance is one way to protect yourself and your paycheck. CTU’s classification grievance form is used by members to formally grieve that their current classification is inappropriate and to determine if a change in classification is warranted. It is simply another way to request a classification review by the Compensation Office. Almost all supervisors realize this and do not take offense when one is filed, sometimes even encouraging CTs to use it. At the July 25 special conference, Brodie repeatedly referred to the classification grievance as a way for CTs to get a position reviewed if the department moves slowly or does not agree that a review is necessary. If you decide to file a classification grievance, follow the directions on page 1 of the form and contact your union before submitting it. One especially important protection provided by the classification grievance concerns retroactive pay. If your reclassification review results in your moving up in grade level, retroactive pay begins 30 days prior to the day you filed the grievance, a factor which can speed the process along considerably. Other
news on classifications The last time such a study was conducted was in the 1980s. During our most recent negotiations, the CTU and MSU came away from the table with an agreement to discuss—during the first year of our current contract—the possible need for another classification study. The CTU has observed that every year that goes by results in CTs taking on more and more responsible work. While employees in the Compensation Office might work hard to appropriately classify a position once it is brought to their attention, CTs should not be penalized because they do not understand the system or because they are intimidated from using it. A study like the one conducted in the 1980s, with input from the Clerical-Technical Union, would be a very effective way study possible inequities in the system and bring it back into line. |
|
Copyrighted ©
1998-2006 Clerical Technical Union of MSU. Clerical Technical Union
of MSU Please send comments or questions here
|
