Fraudulent Adverse Actions.

A question recently arose which suggests that a form of adverse action for California state employees, known as a "suspension" should be illegal for Correctional Peace Officers, who are able to sign up for overtime on their Regular Days Off, if the term of the suspension excludes RDOs instead of being for continuous calendar days.

Correctional Peace Officers, up to and including the rank of Lieutenant, are considered hourly employees and, through agreements between CCPOA and the State of California, have the right to sign up for overtime on their RDOs. Failing the minimum FLSA hourly requirement or modified hourly requirement through collective bargaining, the employee signing up for work will receive straight time instead of premium pay.

The problem arises when the Warden places a "Denial Of Entry", for a suspension calculated on working days exclusive of RDOs, at the gates which denies employees on suspension the ability to work, as per their respective agreements, on their Regular Days Off by denying them access to the worksite for this purpose. The logic that the State employer seems to endorse is that the suspended employee's suspension is lifted during their RDOs, so the suspension only covers "working days".

This theory may work for salaried employees, but it fails when administered against hourly employees with the negotiated right to work during their RDOs. By agreement of CCPOA and the State employer, the employee determines whether or not their RDOs will be working days, through the overtime sign-up process. As per the calculation of the term of suspension which excludes RDOs, the suspension is lifted during the RDOs. However, the Denial Of Entry remains in place during the suspended employees RDOs, denying him/her the right to work on his/her RDOs by denying him/her access to the worksite.

Exemplary of this is the following way in which the State employer would calculate a 60 day suspension where the employee has Saturdays and Sundays off:

Suspension starts Monday, July 3, 2006 and ends September 25, 2006.

The duration of this 60 "working day" suspension includes 24 RDOs (potential working days for Correctional Peace Officers), that are not accounted for in the term of the suspension, for a total of 84 calendar days and, for an hourly employee with the ability to work his/her RDOs, this suspension totals 84 working days - not the 60 working days fraudulently asserted in the Notice of Adverse Action.

As CalDORC becomes more punitive in an effort to displace culpability for their failings to the politically powerless in their ranks, adverse actions will reach an epidemic proportion. You may be next, finding the dictates of progressive discipline an anachronism, as you receive your Preliminary Notice of Adverse Action.

Anyone up for a lawsuit?

NOW - TAKE THE POLL
(There will be one pop-up advertisement after you vote. Just click the "X" in the upper right hand corner to make it go away. This keeps the voting process FREE.)

Should suspensions for hourly CPOs be for continuous days or "working days"?
	Continuous days.
	Working days.
	I don't know.
Free polls from Pollhost.com

Everything old is new again!

Unresolved blasts from the past.

"THE WARDEN MADE ME DO IT!"

and

The More Things Change, The More They Remain The Same.

and

TMTCTMTRTS - Part 2


OPEN LETTER TO M.E. POULOS, WARDEN, CALIFORNIA INSTITUTION FOR MEN.


A BELATED “NOT THE SHARPEST TACK IN THE BOX” AWARD.


Must Another Correctional Officer Die?

Wardens, read this before you take action!

Below is a copy of an, unrecinded, 1998 Department of Corrections memorandum which firmly establishes a non-retaliation policy for employees participating in "public forums".

If any CalDORC employee believes that they have, in the past, or are now a victim of retaliation for communicating with reporters or speaking in any other public forum, regarding non-security matters (matters which do not effect institutional security), you may file a "Report of Employee Misconduct" against your retaliator.

This report is mandatory and pursuant to DOM §31140.7.1.

Date: April 17, 1998


To: Wardens
Regional Parole Administrators
Executive Staff
Health Care Managers


Subject: RETALIATION


How the Department of Corrections (CDC) ensures that employees are able to freely participate in public forums without fear of retaliation has been a question asked frequently during the last several months.

This letter is to reaffirm the CDC's policy on retaliation prevention. Retaliation of any kind for participating in public forums, discrimination complaint processes, litigation, or in union activities is prohibited. Retaliation can take many forms all of which are unacceptable. Staff must feel safe in coming forward with complaints. whether the complaint alleges discrimination, harassment, abuse of power, misuse of state resources or other wrong doing. Our employees must be able speak freely and candidly in all public forums. Of course, employees have a responsibility to be honest and factual.

I intend to issue a revised, comprehensive policy on CDC's expectations for preventing retaliation in the near future. In the meantime, it is my expectation that you will all use your best efforts to assure that employees who exercise their rights under any process are protected against retaliation.

C. A. TERHUNE
Director
Department of Corrections



CLICK HERE FOR A COPY OF THE ACTUAL MEMORANDUM

Reporting Employee Misconduct at CIM.

CLICK THE CAN

The 28 Hypocrisies

From time to time, there are issues of inmate concern which parallel issues of staff concern within the prisons. Usually, these issues involve safety concerns, procedural or physical plant, because, for a minimum of five days a week, eight hours a day, staff and inmates share the same living conditions.

However, there are issues, other than safety, that should be of concern to both inmates and staff alike due to their impact on one and the potential this impact will have on the other. The inmate living conditions imposed by prison administrations, coupled with insufficient staffing, have always been a hotbed of prison strife and unrest which has, historically, been one of the major causes of rioting inmates throughout the country's penal system. Apart from inmate casualties and injuries, the resulting staff injuries and deaths are a grim testimonial that more humane living conditions for the inmate populations can further ensure that staff will walk out of a prison at the end of their shift rather than be transported by ambulance. From an employee standpoint, humane living conditions for inmate populations within the country's penal system, is probably the single most important safety feature for staff within the prison setting.

Overcrowding, understaffing, improper housing and lack of inmate medical attention are some of the component parts of the ever-present bomb that awaits within the prisons.

If there is one single prison that has become the icon for these deficiencies, it has to be the California Institution for Men in Chino and it would seem, from the administrative magniloquence, that the Warden at CIM is taking care and treatment quite seriously.

So it is being reported on the unofficial CCPOA Bulletin Board, in CIM's July In-Service-Training Bulletin, Warden Poulos published a proposed 28 Standards and Beliefs he wishes to adopt, all of which, ostensibly, show a concern for the welfare of the inmates. However, consider the plight of one who finds himself living in the shadows of, what is rapidly becoming, the Warden's "28 Hypocrisies".

Reports streaming from CIM state that, through a misadventure while on parole, Inmate Cathers, Jeff; V-38221 found himself harboring three 9mm slugs within various parts of his body and, while having been returned to custody at the Reception Center West over a month ago, this walking crime scene has yet to be scheduled for surgery to remove them. In fact, it is being reported that the medical folks are stating that he will not be scheduled for surgery because the wounds are not "life threatening" even though Inmate Cathers reports suffering from "excruciating pain" related to his injuries. Further, some medical staff report the possibility of lead poisoning from lead leeching from the rounds. Incredibly, it is the powerless Custody Staff who are most disturbed by this situation, since they are incapable of relieving the suffering of Mr. Cathers without a little cooperation from the Medical Department.

It is this type of callous indifference to human suffering that has the CalDORC Medical Division under federal receivership, not CCPOA, and it is the failure to correct these deficiencies, by the CalDORC administration which may bring the entire Department under receivership.

Mr. Poulos, grandiose platitudes and grandstanding will not relieve his suffering.

Lorraine Bradley

NOW - TAKE THE POLL
(There will be one pop-up advertisement after you vote. Just click the "X" in the upper right hand corner to make it go away. This keeps the voting process FREE.)

Are Federal Receiverships of CalDORC caused by failures of Administration or Line Staff?
	Administration
	Line Staff
	I don't know.
Free polls from Pollhost.com