Children Services strike looms as union rejects county offer

Montgomery County Children Services union workers voted on Wednesday to reject the county’s final contract offer. WAYNE BAKER/STAFF

Montgomery County Children Services union workers voted on Wednesday to reject the county’s final contract offer. WAYNE BAKER/STAFF

Children Services workers on Wednesday rejected Montgomery County’s final contract offer, setting up a Friday court-ordered session and a potential strike that could be felt by Monday.

The Professionals Guild of Ohio (PGO) represents about 270 child welfare workers who handle abuse and neglect cases for nearly 2,000 Montgomery County children. The two sides have negotiated seven months without an agreement.

Jane Hay, the union’s local president, said the county’s final offer wasn’t fair and doesn’t measure up with the county’s contract with workers represented by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) union, which included a 6% wage increase.

MORE: Children Services union votes today on contract offer as deadline looms

“It is our hope that the county will want to get back to negotiate an offer that we can take back as a tentative agreement to recommend to our membership,” Hay said.

Montgomery County spokeswoman Brianna Wooten said the county is “incredibly disappointed that a majority of PGO employees voted down our offer of a 5% wage increase. That being said, the county has been preparing for this possibility. We will implement a comprehensive contingency plan to continue services ordinarily provided by our PGO employees.”

The county offered lump sum pay for top-tier wage earners in lieu of a straight across-the-board pay increase.

MORE: Children’s Services Union Rejects Contract

When the process began, the union wanted a 6% increase for all its workers. The county originally offered a 1.5% increase.

The county later offered a 2% increase, then 4%. Most recently, it offered a 5% increase for all bargaining unit employees, retroactive to April 1, which resulted in a tentative agreement between the parties. That deal later fell through.

Attorney Nadia Lampton, who represents Children Services, said the sticking point was that PGO wanted to increase base pay of workers who had reached the top of the pay scale, instead of the lump sum the county offered.

“PGO representatives came back to the table and wanted the 5% increased in a way that violated the collective bargaining agreement,” Lampton said.

The union struck in July, but Montgomery County sought an injunction and Common Pleas Judge Richard S. Skelton ordered them back to work almost immediately. Skelton issued a 60-day injunction preventing the workers from walking off their jobs.

MORE: County, union divide grows in Children Services dispute

Both sides met in two recent private sessions on Sept. 6 and Sept. 11 as well as a public session on Monday.

Skelton asked the county to file a contingency plan in case a deal is not reached. He said both sides will have to meet at 10 a.m. on Friday in a public session, if no agreement has been reached.

Hay said that union members will prepare to go on strike barring a tentative agreement.

She did not disclose the Wednesday vote totals, saying, “We never divulge the numbers (of the vote) as management would try to use it against us.”

MORE: Montgomery County child welfare workers strike for first time

Hours before the vote, County Administrator Michael Colbert sent a memo to union employees about the offer.

“This means that 203 PGO members (75%) will receive a 5% increase to their current pay rate, and 40 members will receive a partial pay-rate increase in addition to a lump sum payment,” he stated. “The remaining 29 members (10%) will receive a 5% lump sum check. Again, all members will get a 5% increase if the offer is accepted”

Colbert wrote that the county rejected an additional paragraph under the “no reprisal” clause that was suggested by the union. Colbert said that came primarily because PGO leaders requested the county include language that would rescind disciplinary actions previously taken for legitimate reasons, including conduct that violates workplace policies.

About the Author