We wanted to clarify a point in our previous interest arbitration update with respect to location pay as it relates to the recruitment and retention issue.
At the interest arbitration hearing, our argument was clear: The State’s own data suggests that there are recruitment and retention issues not only at three DOC facilities for a few job classifications, but for all members at all facilities due to a number of factors.
As a result, we told the arbitrator that all members should receive premium pay, not just some members at three facilities.
In summarizing your Union’s closing argument, I wrote in my email that there was “no justification for geographic pay.” A more complete and accurate phrasing would have been this: “The State has no justification for exclusively paying DOC employees working in specific job classifications at specific institutions a location pay premium. Given the DOC’s recruitment and retention issues statewide, all members should receive premium pay.”
We hope that clarifies our position on this issue – apologies for the misunderstanding.