Laserfiche WebLink
<br />July 15, 2004 <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />6,6 Salary Basis, This language is acceptable provided that the proposed FLSA regulations <br />remain in their current form. The fInal implementation of these regulations will need to be <br />monitored to assure continuing compliance with the FLSA Prior to September 1, 2004, the City <br />should not suspend an exempt employee for disciplinary purposes for less than one full week as <br />the prior regulations still forbid this practice_ <br /> <br />6,7 Outside Employment. Compensation, The City should clarify whether there should be an <br />"or" between factors A and B, It appears that these are mutually exclusive and I suggest that <br />"or" be inserted between A and B. Since factor C appears to be unrelated, I suggest placing this <br />as a separate line that is not indented or lettered, <br /> <br />6,9 Solicitation, The Council should be aware that allowing exceptions to the solicitation <br />prohibition will result in employees who are attempting to organize unions to have the same <br />right, For this reason, many employers do not allow any exceptions whereas many other <br />employers permit girl scout sales, school fundraisers, etc, and understand that this may "open the <br />door" to other forms of solicitation, <br /> <br />8,2 PTO Accrual, The proposed accrual rate ofPTO appears to be extraordinary - particularly at <br />the top two accrual levels (11 through 15 years and 16+ years), The 10-15 year employee will <br />accrue and be able to use 32 days offper year (over 6 weeks), The 16+ year employee will <br />accrue and be able to use 35 days offper year (7 weeks), The only other plan that I am aware of <br />that provides similar amounts oftime off is Anoka County, Anoka County allows 30 days off <br />for 10-15 year employees and 33 days offfor 16+ years of service, This creates a significant <br />"payout" liability for terminating employes under Article 83, <br /> <br />9.2 Medical Leave, IntermittentlReduced Schedule Leave, The City may be required to provide <br />leave as an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The City currently does <br />not have enough employees (50) to qualify for the Family Medical Leave Act, One of the most <br />difficult scenarios to acco=odate is an employee seeking intermittent leave_ I suggest that this <br />not be liberally granted except as required by law and as approved by the City CounciL I suggest <br />the following language: <br /> <br />Employees may take leave on an intermittent basis or work a reduced schedule under <br />certain circumstances and subiect to Citv Council review and approval, <br /> <br />9,2 Medical Leave, This is not required of the City, Therefore the City would be doing this <br />voluntarily, In the event that the City wishes to have this benefIt, I suggest one change in Job <br />Restoration, I suggest limiting this to the instance where the job continues to exist. If the job <br />was eliminated, then the employee on leave would be in a better position than an employee who <br />was working, I suggest the following language: <br /> <br />When an Employee returns from medical leave, the City will restore the Employee's <br />original job or an equivalent job unless the Emplovee's iob was eliminated during the <br />leave, In this instance, the emplovee will be treated as laidoffllursuant to Section 5.4 <br /> <br />L <br />