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