March 1, 2005
FIRST INSTALLMENT OF SURVEY COMMENT RESPONSES
MAPE members rate job aspects,
additional comments listed
In an effort to better engage the membership in the negotiations survey process, Bob Haag, assistant executive director and negotiations coordinator/consultant, will prepare responses to the various comments that were placed on the surveys. This will be done over time as installments so that the information is not too overwhelming.
*****
There were several comments asking that we share the results for this year's contract negotiations survey. Due to negotiation strategy needs, there are some comments and responses that cannot be placed on the non-secure portion of the MAPE Web site. There is some survey data that will not be shared at all here. As the process moves forward, your elected negotiators will be able to share some information, as permitted by the team, at local meetings and at informational meetings.
The protected information provided on these survey forms will serve to give the elected team members some direction from the membership at large. Some questions that were placed on the survey that can be shared are the responses to the portion titled, “Terms and Conditions of Employment” as it relates to the current working climate. The cumulative data from the surveys was compiled by the University of Minnesota - Measurement Services Unit. The questions and the outcome of those questions are as follows:
- Respectful treatment by supervisors and top management.
| EXCELLENT 23.5% |
GOOD 40.2% |
FAIR 20.2% |
| POOR 9.8% |
VERY POOR 6.2% |
|
- Reasonable work load.
| EXCELLENT 8.8% |
GOOD 39.2% |
FAIR 27.9% |
| POOR 16.3% |
VERY POOR 7.8% |
|
- Timely feedback on quality of work.
| EXCELLENT 9.6% |
GOOD 35.5% |
FAIR 29.1% |
| POOR 17.1% |
VERY POOR 8.7% |
|
- Resources needed to complete work.
| EXCELLENT 8.8% |
GOOD 39.0% |
FAIR 31.2% |
| POOR 15.4% |
VERY POOR 5.5% |
|
- Input on decision making.
| EXCELLENT 7.9% |
GOOD 31.5% |
FAIR 28.9% |
| POOR 19.1% |
VERY POOR 12.7% |
|
- Communications are both top-to-bottom and bottom-to-top.
| EXCELLENT 6.6% |
GOOD 24.7% |
FAIR 29.7% |
| POOR 22.4% |
VERY POOR 16.6% |
|
Other: Overview of specific comments from professional bargaining unit employees:
- My direct supervisor is decent. Administrative management is not – poor communications. Everything seems hush, hush.
- Morale, in general, is pretty low these days – most of us feel we are under siege, thanks to the Pawlenty administration.
- I work at a call-center hell hole. Does that explain anything?
- Get rid of the deputy commissioner and they can keep their money.
- MSRS is a great place to work. Great people and great service because of David Bergstrom.
- Since Dennis Yecke joined DEED, it has been the worst state department I have ever worked in (out of five others due to promotions in about 15 years with the state.)
- There are too many layers of management in my unit. Our director never interacts with the staff. I am a health professional.
- In all my years of service to the state, I have never witnessed such a dictatorial environment where free speech is not permitted and, if exercised, the employee is punished. When loyal, hard-working employees offer ideas on how to use resources more efficiently so that better services can be provided to citizens, they should be met with appreciation, not sanctions. We work in a hostile environment. You can beat people down for only so long ...
- Controlling and demeaning management. Does not build staff morale or confidence.
- (There were a few other comments that are similar to those above.)
GENERAL PROFESSIONAL BARGAINING UNIT EMPLOYEE COMMENTS AND RESPONSES, WHEN APPROPRIATE, FROM BOB HAAG:
Comment: The biggest frustration I have is that the older workers (0-10 years from retirement) are lazy and, although they think they are overworked, they actually have a disproportionately small amount of the work load. That leaves us younger workers to pick up the slack. Since the union basically protects their jobs and their laziness – many of us are not interested in being full members. Since these workers have such little contributions to the work, they should be fired and the budget problems would be solved.
BH: There are some generalizations here that are unfair to those who have invested considerable life work with the State of Minnesota. No employer should be allowing laziness/non-performance. When the supervisor carries out his/her duty to give clear direction, clear expectations and constructive performance reviews annually, many of these issues can be addressed and resolved. There is no language in the MAPE/State of Minnesota employment contract that allows, protects from or ignores non-performance.
*****
Comment: I think you guys could at least pay the postage for this survey. There were other similar statements, including calling us tightwads.
BH: It was a very conscious decision not to frank the return envelopes provided to mail back the surveys. We determined that there has to be a small investment in this process in order to have it taken more seriously. In the past when we did frank envelopes, our support staff had to endure many vulgarities scrawled across the surveys. The support staff should not have to receive such mail, and, certainly, the MAPE office should not have to pay $1 to receive it. This year there were no such returns with vulgar comments. Every written comment can actually be repeated comfortably.
*****
Comments regarding survey: The positive comments about the survey structure overwhelmingly outweighed the negative comments. Most were – “great survey, thanks for doing this leg work, meaningful, good survey, great idea, comprehensive, appreciate,” etc.
*****
Comment: I really don’t care for this method of input. I would prefer the option of commenting or explaining my decision on each point and my opinion will change based upon what is offered, this is not something I just decide once on. I go back and forth.
BH: I have no doubt that this particular comment would apply to many who responded to this survey. As we prepared the survey and sought consultation about it from the University of Minnesota experts, this same discussion took place. The survey is simply one tool to gauge where the membership stands at a point in time. Negotiations is a process within the cycle, and from cycle to cycle. It is expected that some positions will change based upon the outcome of upcoming meetings with the governor’s negotiators. That is why it is important to attend meetings and to provide ongoing input to your elected negotiation representatives. The process works best when there is membership engagement.
*****
Comment: This was the most seen combination of comments on the survey, “unsure of region" or, "we have regions? " or, "don’t know this information,” etc.
BH: All members of the professional bargaining unit, MAPE, should be getting announcements either by e-mail or post mail that announces upcoming local meetings. The first two numbers of the four digit number represents the region number. For instance, 0301 is Region 3, Local 1. Some regions have more than one local such as Region 13 with locals 01 (1301), 02 (1302), 03 (1303) and 04 (1304). Many who are making use of the ACCESS to Discounts membership card should be noticing that when you log in, you are welcomed by your name and by region and local number.
