Job Title and Duties change forced on new employee?

[distressed16]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

Hello,

I am doing research for my union. Here is what happened.

Employee "A" attended a meet and confer where the union and employer agreed on a side letter to allow:
1. A title change from Title "X" to title "Y".
2. Revision of the job summary to include,
A. The addition of duties to the job summary, essential functions and knowledge and ability sections.
B. Increasing the minimum qualifications from HS graduate to 2 year technical degree or equivalent, etc.
3. No negotiated salary increase.

Employee "B" is hired after the meet and confer, but under the old title "X". Months later employee "B" (still on probation) is called into a meeting, no HR or Union representation present, and his title is summarily changed to the new Title "Y" and the additional job duties summarily imposed on him. All this with no negotiated salary increase?

Since employee "B" was hired under the old title and job description, should there have been another meet and confer, and negotiation for the new employee to be involved in? Or, is the new employee obligated to take the new title and duties without the ability to negotiate a salary increase for the additional duties and minimum qualifications he brings to the table?

Employee "A" has since retired, leaving employee "B" with the new title and additional job duties he was not given the opportunity to negotiate. Is this legal?

I apologize if the information I provided is not easy to understand.

Thank you for any and all assistance.

 

[Zigner]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

Hello,

I am doing research for my union. Here is what happened.

Employee "A" attended a meet and confer where the union and employer agreed on a side letter to allow:
1. A title change from Title "X" to title "Y".
2. Revision of the job summary to include,
A. The addition of duties to the job summary, essential functions and knowledge and ability sections.
B. Increasing the minimum qualifications from HS graduate to 2 year technical degree or equivalent, etc.
3. No negotiated salary increase.

Employee "B" is hired after the meet and confer, but under the old title "X". Months later employee "B" (still on probation) is called into a meeting, no HR or Union representation present, and his title is summarily changed to the new Title "Y" and the additional job duties summarily imposed on him. All this with no negotiated salary increase?

Since employee "B" was hired under the old title and job description, should there have been another meet and confer, and negotiation for the new employee to be involved in? Or, is the new employee obligated to take the new title and duties without the ability to negotiate a salary increase for the additional duties and minimum qualifications he brings to the table?

Employee "A" has since retired, leaving employee "B" with the new title and additional job duties he was not given the opportunity to negotiate. Is this legal?

I apologize if the information I provided is not easy to understand.

Thank you for any and all assistance.

I would suggest that you consult with union counsel to help you interpret the contract.

 

[cbg]

As far as the law is concerned, everything that transpired is entirely legal. Nothing in the law gives the employee the guaranteed right to negotiate his title, his duties or his pay. They are what the employer says they are, and it's up to the employer whether to allow negotiation or not. As long as the employer complies with any state-mandated notices and does not violate any wage and hour or discrimination laws, the law is not going to interfere.

I have not read your union contract and therefore I cannot tell you what, if any, additional rights you hold through that contract. However, since no LAWS were violated, any recourse is going to be solely through your union.

 

[justalayman]

Employee "A" attended a meet and confer where the union and employer agreed on a side letter to allow:
1. A title change from Title "X" to title "Y".
2. Revision of the job summary to include,
A. The addition of duties to the job summary, essential functions and knowledge and ability sections.
B. Increasing the minimum qualifications from HS graduate to 2 year technical degree or equivalent, etc.
3. No negotiated salary increase.

that could be problematic if not properly dealt with. I have to presume it was allowed under the existing contract and was properly attached to the existing contract.

Employee "B" is hired after the meet and confer, but under the old title "X". Months later employee "B" (still on probation) is called into a meeting, no HR or Union representation present, and his title is summarily changed to the new Title "Y" and the additional job duties summarily imposed on him. All this with no negotiated salary increase?

well, there is a problem. An employee is not title X or title Y. The position is and if a title X remained then a new employee could be hired and installed under title X regardless of anything else. The duties etc would remain whatever title X was created as.

Since employee "B" was hired under the old title and job description, should there have been another meet and confer, and negotiation for the new employee to be involved in?

since B was hired as a title X employee, they are a title X employee.

Employee "A" has since retired, leaving employee "B" with the new title and additional job duties he was not given the opportunity to negotiate. Is this legal?

A's retirement cannot make B a title Y employee. B remains a title X employee with the duties and obligations of X until their classification is changed.

If B is being required to perform duties not within their classification, they need to speak to their union reps and possibly consider filing a grievance.

 

[distressed16]

Thank you to all for the responses, they are much appreciated.