18 CIR 319 (2012)

NEBRASKA COMMISSION OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL ) CASE NO. 1280
WORKERS, LOCAL 1521, )  
) FINAL ORDER
                                  Petitioner, )  
         v. )  
)  
 METROPOLITAN UTILITIES DISTRICT, )
  )  
                                  Respondent. )

APPEARANCES:

For Petitioner: Robert E. O'Connor, Jr.
2433 South 130th Circle
  Omaha, NE  68144
 
For Respondent: Patrick J. Barrett
  Fraser Stryker PC LLO
500 Energy Plaza
409 South 17th Street
  Omaha, NE  68102
   
  Ronald E. Bucher
  Senior VP/General Counsel
  Metropolitan Utilities District
  1723 Harney Street
  Omaha, NE  68102

Entered November 29, 2012

Before:  Commissioners McGinn, Lindahl, and Spray

MCGINN, Commissioner

NATURE OF THE CASE

            On October 9, 2012, the Commission entered its Findings and Order determining wages and fringe benefits for employees represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1521 (“Union” or “Petitioner”) and employed by the Metropolitan Utilities District (“MUD” or “Respondent”). On October 19, 2012, both Petitioner and Respondent filed a Motion for Post-Trial Conference pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-816(7)(d), which allows the Commission “to hear from the parties on those portions of the recommended decision and order which is not based upon or which mischaracterizes evidence in the record and to allow the commission to correct any such errors after having heard the matter in a conference setting in which all parties are represented.” Each Motion submitted issues for correction and clarification, and said issues were heard at the Post-Trial Conference held October 30, 2012.

            Having convened, the Commission finds as follows:

WAGES

Flat Pay Plan

            In its Findings and Order, the Commission ordered 19 job classifications to be placed on a flat pay scale: Chart Technician, Gas Distribution Crew Leader, Gas Leak Assistant, Gas Leak Detector Operator, Gas Leak Technician, Gas Maintenance Trainee, Gas Maintenance Worker, Gas Plant Engineer, Gas Plant Operator, Industrial Gas Meter Mechanic, Industrial Gas Meter Technician, Industrial Water Meter Mechanic, Night Customer Service Technician, Odorant Technician, Senior Customer Service Technician, Senior Gas Plant Maintenance Mechanic, Senior Instrument & Control Technician, Chief Welder, and Welder. Only one job classification, Chief Welder, had a flat pay plan and flat pay scale, while the remaining 18 job classifications noted a minimum and maximum rate of pay instead of a flat pay scale. Following the precedent established in General Drivers & Helpers, Union, Local No. 554 v. County of Gage, 14 CIR 170 (2003), we determined the flat pay for each job classification by calculating the midpoint of the minimum and maximum of each pay range of each array member’s pay rate.

Petitioner argues that instead of creating the flat wage, the Commission should have placed those classifications determined to have a flat pay plan at the maximum rate for that classification. Respondent contends that the Commission determined the flat wage rates appropriately and that no change should be made. After consideration of Petitioner’s argument, we decline to order any change to the flat pay rate ordered for the 19 job classifications ordered to be placed on a flat pay scale.

Regarding progression on step, Petitioner contends that the Commission could order no change from MUD’s current practice of 4 years between minimum to maximum pay because there was no mode. We do not agree. The very nature of a flat pay plan involves only a single rate of pay with no minimum or maximum pay rate and without a time element or progression along any pay line. We did not order any progression for these 19 job classifications for that reason, and therefore no change shall be made.

Step Pay Plan

            Respondent contends that it is impractical and near impossible to have step pay plans composed of fractional steps and years, and requests that the Commission allow it to round the number of steps and years to the next highest or lowest number. Petitioner counters that the Commission can only order what has been found to be prevalent and that allowing Respondent to unilaterally round without an agreement with Petitioner would go against comparability. Respondent argues that rounding would not undermine comparability determinations, as the Commission is under no requirement to be so mathematically precise that rounding would not be allowed.

            Upon consideration of the arguments presented, we agree with Respondent that allowing Respondent to round the number of steps and years to the next highest or lowest number would not undermine comparability. In fact, the Commission has rounded similar figures in the past. See International Ass’n of Firefighters Local Union No. 647 v. City of Grand Island, 15 CIR 324 (2007); Professional Firefighters Ass’n of Omaha Local 385 v. City of Omaha, 16 CIR 35 (2009); City of Omaha v. Omaha Police Union Local No. 101, 16 CIR 120 (2009); Professional Firefighters Ass’n of Omaha Local 385 v. City of Omaha, 16 CIR 408 (2011). Therefore, we shall follow our past practice and round the number of years and steps where appropriate. Those numbers that are .49 or lower shall be rounded down to the nearest whole number, and those numbers that are .5 or higher shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. The new figures shall be reflected in the appropriate revised table.

 Wage Administration and Alignments

During the Post-Trial Conference, Petitioner noted several issues with regards to wage administration. We shall address Petitioner’s concerns in turn:

Petitioner states that Tables 15 and 15A Building & Grounds Maintenance Worker, Tables 16 and 16A Building Engineer, and Tables 17 and 17A Building Engineer Trainee did not have a median, mode or midpoint and that the positions should have been left as they existed. The wages and administrations ordered for these positions were ordered based upon the agreed-upon evidence submitted in Joint Exhibits 16, 16A, 17, 17A, 18, and 18A.  The Building & Ground Maintenance Worker and Building Engineer Trainee positions were aligned with the Building Engineer, and therefore only report a midpoint wage based upon the midpoint wage of the Building Engineer position. We see no reason to deviate from the agreed-upon evidence, and shall therefore make no change to Tables 15, 15A, 16, 16A, 17, and 17A.

Additionally, Petitioner requested that the Commission realign certain job classifications within the bargaining unit to more appropriate classifications within the array. Specifically, Petitioner has requested that the Commission realign the following job classifications: Chart Technician, Compliant & Damage Investigator, Customer Account Clerk V, Customer Account Clerk Instructor, Instrument Technician, Chemical Equipment Mechanic, and Senior Maintenance Mechanic. Respondent argues that Petitioner’s request for realignment is an attempt to supplement the record, which included evidence of the appropriate wage rates for the Commission to use in its determinations. The parties submitted joint exhibits in which the alignments were already completed by their experts, who had access to job descriptions and survey information in order to align these positions as closely as possible with those job classifications which existed in the array. The Commission was not presented with any evidence that would assist us in comparing job classifications for alignment purposes, and we find no reason to deviate from the stipulated evidence. We therefore order no change.

            Finally, Petitioner requested that the Commission change the alignment rate for the Plant Maintenance Person found on Table 101 from +4.48% to +4.5%. Joint Exhibit 102 shows that the alignment used to create the stipulated wage amount for this job classification was +4.48%. Petitioner has not directed us to any evidence showing that the rate percentage is incorrect. We therefore order no change to the rate used to calculate the wage for the Plant Maintenance Person ordered in Table 101.

 Accrued Vacation Leave

            The Commission’s Findings and Order found that the maximum amount of vacation leave that a MUD employee could accrue was above the prevalent. We therefore ordered a reduction in the maximum number of hours from 440 to 265. Petitioner argues that any hours accrued over 265 cannot be taken away, and should instead be paid out to the employee. Respondent argues that vacation pay accrual is a function of the contract and is moot.

            Vacation accumulation has a carryover effect to the following year, and is therefore not moot. We have found vacation leave carryover not moot in the past. See Professional Firefighters Ass’n of Omaha, Local 385 v. City of Omaha, 16 CIR 461 (2011); Lincoln Firefighters Ass’n Local 644 v. City of Lincoln, 12 CIR 248 (1997); General Drivers & Helpers Union Local 554 v. Darlene Robertson and the City of Scottsbluff, 12 CIR 120 (1995). We now order that any vacation hours that have been accrued and carried over by the employee prior to this Final Order shall be paid out in a lump sum to the employee. Vacation leave hours accrued by an employee shall be retroactively calculated back to the beginning of the contract year in determining an offset of the total amount due to the employee.  

“Time in Service” Definition

            In the Findings and Order, the Commission ordered that certain employees in the bargaining unit be placed on their respective pay line and progress along that pay line based on their “time in service.” Petitioner seeks a clarification for the definition of “time in service,” and argues that “time in service” should mean the overall amount of time that an employee has worked for MUD. Respondent argues that “time in service” should mean the amount of time that an employee has been employed in a particular position.

            In Washington County Police Officers Ass’n/F.O.P. Lodge 36 v. County of Washington, CIR Case No. 1266 (2012), we held that “time in service” was defined as “time in service on a step” and that “longevity” meant the duration of employment with the employer. Additionally, in Professional Firefighters Association of Omaha Local 385 v. City of Omaha, CIR Case No. 1251 (2012) we agreed with the parties that “time” was defined as “individual years of service in the classification.” We shall continue with this precedent, and shall define “time in service” as time that an employee has been employed in a particular position. 

Educational Assistance- Books and Fees

            Page 9 of the Findings and Order orders MUD to eliminate assistance for books and fees, but then Page 33 orders MUD to offer assistance at 75% for both books and fees. Respondent sought clarification of the Commission’s Findings and Order regarding its obligation, and contends that educational assistance for books and fees is not prevalent in the array. Petitioner contends that the assistance is prevalent and that the Commission should order Respondent to continue to provide such assistance.

We agree with Respondent that educational assistance for books and fees are not prevalent in the array. Table 152 illustrates that it is prevalent to offer an educational assistance program, but only 4 of those array members offer assistance for books and fees. We therefore find that the language on Page 33, paragraph 152, second sentence shall be amended to read as follows: “152)…Respondent shall eliminate assistance for books and fees, and shall set the maximum dollar amount for assistance at $3,451.00 per year.” 

Overtime- Vacation and Sick Leave as Hours Worked

            Petitioner sought a correction of the Commission’s Findings and Order regarding whether vacation and sick leave are counted as hours worked when computing overtime pay. Petitioner states in its brief that MUD currently counts vacation and sick leave as hours worked for purposes of overtime, and that the collective bargaining agreement states that any hours worked outside of regularly scheduled hours are paid at the overtime rate. Respondent argues that the Commission was correct in its finding because the collective bargaining agreement was not entered into evidence.

The parties provided the Commission with Joint Exhibit 173, which clearly states that MUD does not count vacation, sick leave, or holidays as time worked for purposes of calculating overtime. The only hours category found to be prevalent in the array were holiday hours, and the Commission ordered Respondent to begin counting holiday hours as time worked when computing overtime. No other evidence, including the collective bargaining agreement, was presented that contradicts MUD’s practice as listed on Joint Exhibit 173. We therefore order no change to the Findings and Order as it relates to hours worked in computing overtime.

 457 Deferred Compensation Plan

            Regarding the 457 Deferred Compensation Plan, both Petitioner and Respondent argue that the other party carried the burden of proof to show that either the employer contribution to the plan was prevalent or not prevalent within the array. In our Findings and Order, we declined to make a finding as to the prevalence of employer contributions to such a plan because we were not provided with sufficient evidence.

            In a §48-818 case, the burden of proof is on the moving party to demonstrate that existing wages, hours and conditions of employment are not comparable to the prevalent. See Douglas County Health Department Employees Ass’n v. County of Douglas, 8 CIR 208 (1986), aff’d 229 Neb. 301 427 N.W.2d 28 (1988); City of Omaha v. Omaha Police Union Local No. 101, 5 CIR 171 (1981). The burden of proof is satisfied by actual proof of the facts, of which proof is necessary, regardless of which party introduces the evidence. Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge No. 12 v. County of Adams, 3 CIR 585, aff’d 205 Neb. 682, 289 N.W.2d 535 (1980).

            We agree with Petitioner that the burden of proof was on Respondent to show that its contributions to the 457 Deferred Compensation Plan were not prevalent in the array. Respondent did not meet its burden to show that the practice was not prevalent, and therefore no change shall be ordered to the 457 Deferred Compensation Plan. MUD shall continue to contribute to the plan for those employees in the bargaining unit who choose to participate in and contribute to the plan.

Offset

In the Findings and Order, the Commission declined to order any change in the contribution percentage to the employee pension plan or an offset for contributions to either the pension plan or 457 Deferred Compensation Plan in excess of the prevalent practice due to lack of evidence. Respondent argues that it is entitled to an offset for both its voluntary contributions to the 457 Deferred Compensation Plan and contributions to the pension plan. Petitioner argues that the Commission lacks sufficient evidence to calculate and order an offset for either plan.

The pension plan is in the nature of a long-term contract which extends beyond the one-year period over which the Commission has jurisdiction in this case. The Commission has no general jurisdiction over contractual disputes. Transport Workers of America v. Transit Authority of City of Omaha, 205 Neb. 26, 286 N.W.2d 102 (1979). The Commission does have jurisdiction to offset favorable and unfavorable comparisons of current to prevalent when reaching its decision establishing wage rates; however, pension contributions cannot be offset if such an adjustment is based on speculation, surmise, or conjecture. Professional Firefighters Ass’n of Omaha, Local 358 v. City of Omaha, 16 CIR 408 (2011). In Professional Firefighters, Omaha requested an offset for pension contributions due to what it saw as an overpayment of retirement benefits to employees. The Union argued against an offset, stating that there was insufficient foundation for the figures that went into calculating the necessary contribution rates. The Commission declined to order an offset, stating that the benefit could not be quantified without engaging in speculation that the contribution rates in evidence were sufficient and that the Commission was not going to engage in such speculation. See also Douglas County Health Dept. Employee Association v. County of Douglas, 229 Neb. 301, 315 (1988); General Drivers & Helpers Union, Local No. 554 v. County of Douglas, 13 CIR 202 (1999). In Lincoln Firefighters Ass’n Local 644 v. City of Lincoln, 12 CIR 248 (1997), aff’d 253 Neb. 837 (1998), the Commission offset wages only after an actuary arrived at the theoretical cost of the benefits, equalizing the percentage of contributions.

In the present case, no actuarial evidence was presented as in Lincoln Firefighters, and we do not have enough evidence in the record to adequately quantify the benefit. We decline to engage in such speculation, and therefore shall order no offset for pension contributions or contributions to the 457 Deferred Compensation Plan.

Shift Pay Differential

            Respondent sought clarification regarding whether the Commission was ordering Respondent to make no changes to shift differential or if Respondent should increase the amount of shift pay differential. Petitioner states that there is no inconsistency, noting that shift pay differential was listed under “Comparable Benefits” because it is prevalent to provide the benefit, while it was also listed under “Non-Comparable Benefits” because the monetary amount provided is below prevalent.

Petitioner’s argument is accurate. Page 8 of the Findings and Order lists “shift differential- provided” as a comparable benefit because the Commission found that it was prevalent to provide such benefit to employees. The Commission listed shift differential payments as being non-comparable benefits on Page 9 of the Findings and Order because the amount of shift differential pay was found to be below the prevalent. Page 32 clearly states the Commission’s intention, and orders Respondent to continue to offer shift differential pay but to increase the amounts provided. No changes shall be made to the Findings and Order.

            Additionally, Respondent sought a correction of the ordered shift differential pay for second shift, stating that the amount of pay should be $1.04 and that the amount was transposed incorrectly from Table 138 into the Findings and Order. We disagree. Pages 9 and 32 of the Findings and Order state the correct increase in shift differential pay for second shift from $0.75 to $0.86, and this increase is reflected in Table 138. Therefore, we shall order no change in shift differential pay for second shift.

Call Back Pay

            Petitioner sought a correction of the minimum amount of call back pay ordered, from 1.4 to 1.5. The parties’ Joint Exhibit 168 was the basis for the Commission’s order. Upon further review of this joint exhibit, the midpoint of the mean and median is indeed 1.4. The mean is actually 1.28 and the median is actually 1.5, which would lead to a midpoint calculation of 1.39. Each of these figures was rounded either up or down and those rounded figures were what were recorded on Joint Exhibit 168 and Table 137. As these figures were stipulated to by the parties and confirmed by our own calculation, we shall not order any change in the minimum amount of call back pay.

Life Insurance

Respondent argues that life insurance should not have been found to be moot in the Findings and Order. Petitioner argues that life insurance is a moot benefit or, alternatively, the Commission should find that the amount of coverage should be increased to meet the prevalent if the benefit is found to not be moot.

We have found certain benefits to be moot when the benefit is impossible or impractical to change retroactively for a contract year already expired or where a decision would be merely advisory and have no carryover value. Nebraska Public Employees Local Union 251 v. Otoe County, 12 CIR 177 (1996). Upon further reflection and examination of the evidence, we find that the percentage paid by employer for life insurance is not moot. Joint Exhibit 163 shows that Respondent is currently paying 100% of life insurance premiums for employees in the bargaining unit, which is above prevalent in the array. We therefore order that Respondent shall continue to offer life insurance as a benefit to employees but shall decrease its contribution percentage from 100% to 93.7%. See Table 153. Respondent is therefore entitled to an offset.

Health and Dental Insurance

            Petitioner sought a clarification of the Findings and Order regarding health and dental insurance benefits categories. The Findings and Order calculated prevalent premium percentages to be paid by MUD within three tiers of coverage- family, 2/4 party, and single. Petitioner contends that MUD actually offers four tiers of coverage- family, couple, single parent, and single- and that the Commission’s Order should clarify how the three tier coverage ordered by the Commission will affect those with single parent coverage since MUD did not meet a burden of proof to show that single parent coverage was not comparable.

            After review of the evidence, we do not agree with Petitioner’s characterization of the evidence. All joint exhibits, and specifically Joint Exhibits 152 and 153 cited in Petitioner’s post-trial conference reply and supplemental brief, show clearly that MUD offers insurance in three tiers- family, 2/4 party, and single coverage. No evidence was presented before the Commission to suggest the existence of the categories which Petitioner states are currently offered by MUD. As we have no evidence to the contrary of what the Commission has ordered, we shall order no change to the Findings and Order regarding health and dental insurance.

 Specific Corrections

            The parties each submitted inconsistencies between the Order and the values listed on the corresponding tables. We agree that these are typographical errors and therefore order the following corrections to the Order only, as the values listed on the corresponding tables are correct:

1.      Page 19, Paragraph 59, hourly wage for Gas Distribution Crew Leader should be $36.477.

2.      Page 20, Paragraph 63, hourly wage for Gas Maintenance Trainee should be $22.568.

3.      Page 21, Paragraph 70, hourly wage for Industrial Gas Meter Mechanic should be $29.083.

4.      Page 27, Paragraph 106, hourly wage for Senior Gas Plant Maintenance Mechanic should be $30.778.

The parties also submitted typographical errors of the values listed on certain tables. These errors do not change the calculations performed for each table. We agree with the corrections and therefore order the following revised tables:

5.      Table 2A Accounting Clerk II- the number of steps for Memphis Light Water and Gas should be 5 steps and not 6 steps. See Revised Table 2A.

6.      Table 37A Crew Leader-Water, the number of steps for the City of St. Paul should be 3 steps and not 8 steps. See Revised Table 37A. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner’s and Respondent’s requests to amend the Findings and Order issued October 9, 2012, are sustained in part and overruled in part and such Order shall be as stated herein. It is the Final Order of the Commission that:

1.      The wage administrations for the following job classifications ordered to be placed on a step pay plan shall be amended to reflect rounding of the number of steps and/or years to maximum to the nearest whole number as follows:

a.       Accounting Clerk I- page 10, paragraph 1: round the number of steps from 7.4 to 7 and the number of years to maximum from 7.8 to 8 years. See Revised Table 1A.

b.      Accounting Clerk II- page 10, paragraph 2: round the number of steps from 6.7 to 7 and the number of years to maximum from 6.8 to 7. See Revised Table 2A.

c.       Accounting Clerk III- page 10, paragraph 3: round the number of steps from 8.1 to 8 and the number of years to maximum from 8.3 to 8. See Revised Table 3A.

d.      Administrative Clerk I- page 10, paragraph 4: round the number of steps from 8.3 to 8 and the number of years to maximum from 9.6 to 10. See Revised Table 4A.

e.       Administrative Clerk II- page 10, paragraph 5: round the number of steps from 8.1 to 8 and the number of years to maximum from 8.3 to 8. See Revised Table 5A.

f.        Administrative Clerk III- page 10, paragraph 6: round the number of steps from 7.1 to 7 and the number of years to maximum from 9.1 to 9. See Revised Table 6A.

g.       Administrative Clerk IV- page 11, paragraph 7: round the number of steps from 9.6 to 10 and the number of years to maximum from 12.8 to 13. See Revised Table 7A.

h.       Administrative Clerk V- page 11, paragraph 8: round the number of years to maximum from 10.3 to 10. See Revised Table 8A.

i.         Administrative Clerk VI- page 11, paragraph 9: round the number of steps from 12.5 to 13.0 and the number of years to maximum from 12.5 to 13. See Revised Table 9A.

j.        Apprentice Customer Service Technician- page 11, paragraph 10: round the number of years to maximum from 4.9 to 5. See Revised Table 10A.

k.      Apprentice Electrician- page 11, paragraph 11: round the number of steps from 8.9 to 9 and the number of years to maximum from 5.2 to 5. See Revised Table 11A.

l.         Apprentice Mechanic- page 11, paragraph 12: round the number of steps from 6.1 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 4.4 to 4. See Revised Table 12A.

m.     Apprentice Meter Mechanic- page 12, paragraph 13: round the number of steps from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 13A.

n.       Auto Service Person- page 12, paragraph 14: round the number of steps from 6.1 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 4.7 to 5. See Revised Table 14A.

o.      Building Services Clerk- page 12, paragraph 18: round the number of steps from 8.3 to 8 and the number of years to maximum from 9.6 to 10. See Revised Table 18A.

p.      Cashier I- page 13, paragraph 21: round the number of steps from 5.2 to 5 and the number of years to maximum from 3.8 to 4. See Revised Table 21A.

q.      Cashier II- page 13, paragraph 22: round the number of steps from 5.2 to 5 and the number of years to maximum from 3.8 to 4. See Revised Table 22A.

r.        Cashier III- page 13, paragraph 23: round the number of steps from 5.2 to 5 and the number of years to maximum from 3.8 to 4. See Revised Table 23A.

s.       Chemical Equipment Mechanic- page 14, paragraph 25: round the number of steps from 6.2 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 25A.

t.        Chemical Equipment Mechanic II- page 14, paragraph 26: round the number of steps from 6.2 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 26A.

u.       Collection Service Representative- page 14, paragraph 28: round the number of steps from 6.3 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 4.2 to 4. See Revised Table 28A.

v.       Communications Clerk I- page 14, paragraph 29: round the number of steps from 5.1 to 5 and the number of years to maximum from 6.9 to 7. See Revised Table 29A.

w.     Communications Clerk II- page 14, paragraph 30: round the number of steps from 5.1 to 5 and the number of years to maximum from 6.9 to 7. See Revised Table 30A.

x.       Compliant & Damage Investigator- page 15, paragraph 31: round the number of steps from 4.5 to 5 and the number of years to maximum from 2.5 to 3. See Revised Table 31A.

y.       Computer-Aided Drafting Technician I- page 15, paragraph 32: round the number of steps from 5.4 to 5 and the number of years to maximum from 3.8 to 4. See Revised Table 32A.

z.       Computer-Aided Drafting Technician II- page 15, paragraph 33: round the number of steps from 5.7 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 4.7 to 5. See Revised Table 33A.

aa.   Water Distribution Crew Leader- page 16, paragraph 37: round the number of steps from 5.2 to 5 and the number of years to maximum from 6.8 to 7. See Revised Table 37A.

bb.  Customer Account Clerk I- page 16, paragraph 38: round the number of steps from 7.5 to 8 and the number of years to maximum from 8.9 to 9. See Revised Table 38A.

cc.   Customer Account Clerk II- page 16, paragraph 39: round the number of steps from 6.5 to 7 and the number of years to maximum from 6.9 to 7. See Revised Table 39A.

dd.  Customer Account Clerk III- page 16, paragraph 40: round the number of steps from 6.2 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 7.6 to 8. See Revised Table 40A.

ee.   Customer Account Clerk IV- page 16, paragraph 41: round the number of steps from 6.2 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 7.6 to 8. See Revised Table 41A.

ff.      Customer Account Clerk V- page 16, paragraph 42: round the number of steps from 6.2 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 7.6 to 8. See Revised Table 42A.

gg.   Customer Account Instructor- page 17, paragraph 44: round the number of steps from 7.5 to 8 and the number of years to maximum from 8.9 to 9. See Revised Table 44A.

hh.   Customer Service Clerk I- page 17, paragraph 45: round the number of steps from 5.7 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 4.2 to 4. See Revised Table 45A.

ii.       Customer Service Clerk II- page 17, paragraph 46: round the number of steps from 7.6 to 8 and the number of years to maximum from 6.2 to 6. See Revised Table 46A.

jj.      Customer Service Clerk III- page 17, paragraph 47: round the number of steps from 8.7 to 9 and the number of years to maximum from 13.3 to 13. See Revised Table 47A.

kk.  Customer Service Clerk IV- page 17, paragraph 48: round the number of steps from 8.7 to 9 and the number of years to maximum from 13.3 to 13. See Revised Table 48A.

ll.       Customer Service Technician- page 18, paragraph 50: round the number of years to maximum from 4.9 to 5. See Revised Table 50A.

mm.           Customer Service Technician/Fitter- page 18, paragraph 51: round the number of years to maximum from 4.9 to 5. See Revised Table 51A.

nn.   Customer Service Technician Trainee- page 18, paragraph 52: round the number of years to maximum from 4.9 to 5. See Revised Table 52A.

oo.  Electrician- page 18, paragraph 53: round the number of years to maximum from 4.7 to 5. See Revised Table 53A.

pp.  Engineering Print Room Operator II- page 19, paragraph 54: round the number of years to maximum from 2.8 to 3. See Revised Table 54A.

qq.  Engineering Technician- page 19, paragraph 55: round the number of steps from 6.5 to 7 and the number of years to maximum from 4.3 to 4. See Revised Table 55A.

rr.     Engineering Technician Corrosion- page 19, paragraph 56: round the number of years to maximum from 3.3 to 3. See Revised Table 56A.

ss.    ERT Variance Reader- page 19, paragraph 57: round the number of steps from 6.6 to 7 and the number of years to maximum from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 57A.

tt.      Gasoline Truck Driver- page 19, paragraph 58: round the number of years to maximum from 13.8 to 14. See Revised Table 58A.

uu.   General Maintenance Mechanic- page 20, paragraph 68: round the number of steps from 7.1 to 7. See Revised Table 68A.

vv.   Investigator- page 22, paragraph 76: round the number of steps from 4.5 to 5 and the number of years to maximum from 2.5 to 3. See Revised Table 76A.

ww.           Laboratory Field Technician- page 22, paragraph 77: round the number of steps from 6.2 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 77A.

xx.   Lead Chemical Equipment Mechanic- page 22, paragraph 78: round the number of steps from 6.2 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 78A.

yy.   Lead Water Plant Maintenance Mechanic- page 22, paragraph 79: round the number of steps from 6.2 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 79A.

zz.    Leak Detector Operator- page 22, paragraph 80: round the number of steps from 7.1 to 7. See Revised Table 80A.

aaa.            Machine Operator- page 22, paragraph 81: round the number of steps from 6.2 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 7.8 to 8. See Revised Table 81A.

bbb.          Maintenance Mechanic Helper- page 23, paragraph 82: round the number of years to maximum from 8.8 to 9. See Revised Table 82A.

ccc.            Maintenance Mechanic Trainee- page 23, paragraph 85: round the number of steps from 9.3 to 9 and the number of years to maximum from 5.3 to 5. See Revised Table 85A.

ddd.          Mechanical Service Helper- page 24, paragraph 88: round the number of years to maximum from 4.9 to 5. See Revised Table 88A.

eee.            Meter Mechanic- page 24, paragraph 89: round the number of steps from 7.4 to 7 and the number of years to maximum from 7.8 to 8. See Revised Table 89A.

fff.    Meter Reader- page 24, paragraph 90: round the number of steps from 6.6 to 7 and the number of years to maximum from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 90A.

ggg.            Meter Reader Car Route- page 24, paragraph 91: round the number of steps from 6.6 to 7 and the number of years to maximum from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 91A.

hhh.            Meter Reader Reread- page 24, paragraph 92: round the number of steps from 6.6 to 7 and the number of years to maximum from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 92A.

iii.      Painter- page 25, paragraph 97: round the number of steps from 4.9 to 5 and the number of years to maximum from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 97A.

jjj.    Receptionist- page 26, paragraph 102: round the number of steps from 5.8 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 4.6 to 5. See Revised Table 102A.

kkk.          Route Control Clerk- page 26, paragraph 103: round the number of steps from 6.6 to 7 and the number of years to maximum from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 103A.

lll.      Senior Electrician- page 26, paragraph 105: round the number of steps from 7.1 to 7. See Revised Table 105A.

mmm.      Senior Mechanic- page 27, paragraph 109: round the number of steps from 7.8 to 8 and the number of years to maximum from 7.1 to 7. See Revised Table 109A.

nnn.            Senior Painter- page 27, paragraph 110: round the number of steps from 4.9 to 5 and the number of years to maximum from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 110A.

ooo.          Senior Computer-Aided Drafting Technician- page 27, paragraph 111: round the number of years to maximum from 3.8 to 4. See Revised Table 111A.

ppp.          Senior Water Plant Maintenance Mechanic- page 27, paragraph 112: round the number of steps from 5.5 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 7.8 to 8. See Revised Table 112A.

qqq.          Stores Clerk I- page 28, paragraph 114: round the number of steps from 6.3 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 6.8 to 7. See Revised Table 114A.

rrr.   Stores Clerk II- page 28, paragraph 115: round the number of steps from 8.2 to 8 and the number of years to maximum from 6.7 to 7. See Revised Table 115A.

sss. Utility Locator- page 29, paragraph 119: round the number of steps from 6.5 to 7 and the number of years to maximum from 4.6 to 5. See Revised Table 119A.

ttt.    Utility Locator/Drafting Technician- page 29, paragraph 120: round the number of steps from 6.5 to 7 and the number of years to maximum from 4.6 to 5. See Revised Table 120A.

uuu.            Valve Maintenance Mechanic- page 29, paragraph 122: round the number of steps from 7.1 to 7. See Revised Table 122A.

vvv.            Water Laboratory Technician- page 29, paragraph 123: round the number of steps from 8.5 to 9. See Revised Table 123A.

www.      Water Maintenance Trainee- page 30, paragraph 124: round the number of steps from 8.8 to 9 and the number of years to maximum from 13.6 to 14. See Revised Table 124A.

xxx.            Water Plant Engineer- page 30, paragraph 126: round the number of steps from 6.3 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 7.8 to 8. See Revised Table 126A.

yyy.            Water Plant Maintenance Mechanic- page 30, paragraph 127: round the number of steps from 6.2 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 127A.

zzz. Water Plant Maintenance Trainee- page 30, paragraph 128: round the number of steps from 6.2 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 5.5 to 6. See Revised Table 128A.

aaaa.        Water Plant Operator- page 30, paragraph 129: round the number of steps from 6.3 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 7.8 to 8. See Revised Table 129A.

bbbb.      Welder II- page 31, paragraph 132: round the number of steps from 8.7 to 9 and the number of years to maximum from 7.9 to 8. See Revised Table 132A.

cccc.        Large Boring Machine Operator- page 31, paragraph 133: round the number of steps from 6.2 to 6 and the number of years to maximum from 7.8 to 8. See Revised Table 133A.

2.      Vacation hours that have been accrued and carried over by the employee prior to this Final Order shall be paid out in a lump sum to the employee. Vacation leave hours accrued by an employee shall be retroactively calculated back to the beginning of the contract year in determining an offset of the total amount due to the employee.

3.      “Time in Service” shall be defined as the amount of time that an employee has been employed in a particular position.

4.      Page 33, paragraph 152, second sentence of the Findings and Order shall be amended to read as follows: “152)…Respondent shall eliminate assistance for books and fees, and shall set the maximum dollar amount for assistance at $3,451.00 per year.”

5.      Respondent shall continue to contribute to the 457 Deferred Compensation Plan for those employees in the bargaining unit who choose to participate in and contribute to the plan.

6.      No offset shall be ordered for Respondent’s contributions to either the 457 Deferred Compensation Plan or the Pension Plan.

7.      Respondent shall continue to offer life insurance as a benefit to employees but shall decrease its contribution percentage from 100% to 93.7%. See Table 153. Respondent is entitled to an offset.

8.      Page 19, Paragraph 59 of the Findings and Order shall be amended to reflect that the hourly wage for Gas Distribution Crew Leader should be $36.477.

9.      Page 20, Paragraph 63 of the Findings and Order shall be amended to reflect that the hourly wage for Gas Maintenance Trainee should be $22.568.

10.  Page 21, Paragraph 70 of the Findings and Order shall be amended to reflect that the hourly wage for Industrial Gas Meter Mechanic should be $29.083.

11.  Page 27, Paragraph 106 of the Findings and Order should be amended to reflect that the hourly wage for Senior Gas Plant Maintenance Mechanic should be $30.778.

12.  Table 2A- Accounting Clerk II- the number of steps for Memphis Light Water and Gas should be changed from 6 steps to 5 steps. See Revised Table 2A.

13.  Table 37A Crew Leader-Water- the number of steps for the City of St. Paul should be changed from 8 steps to 3 steps. See Revised Table 37A.

14.  All other terms and conditions of employment for the 2011-2012 contract year shall be as previously established by the agreement of the parties and the Findings and Order of the Commission.

15.  Adjustments and compensation resulting from this Final Order shall be paid in a single lump sum payable within ninety (90) days of this Final Order.