HealthPartners Bargaining Update for the Week of November 22nd

Since the last bargaining update, we have several dropped proposals and agreed to several Tentative Agreements.

The first is we reached a Tentative agreement on the 18.01 On call proposal from the Employer.  This counter states that the On Call employee must give their availability and should they not work for one month and has been called to work at least 3 times during period the employer may consider this employee to have voluntarily quit (if they have said they are available and refuse to work, unavailable time doesn’t count towards this). This means that On Call employees should be responsible in communicating with their supervisor about their availability. This also allows for On Call employees to not work for three consecutive months if needed instead of the current two.

The next Tentative Agreement was on 17.01 Seniority. This was the unions proposal. After a few counters back and forth the Employer finally agreed to our original proposal and felt that our language was best to begin with. The purpose of the seniority change is to make sure all members can earn seniority hours for their compensated hours.  With the current seniority language, members who work 80 hours per pay period, only earn 75 hours of seniority, while all other members earn seniority on all of their compensated hours (not including overtime).


The following is a list of the dropped proposals:


Employer Dropped Proposals:

3.13 Distribution Of temp additional hours/overtime (The Employer wanted additional power to force members to work additional hours even if they don’t want to or cannot).

8.12 Doctor time (The Employer wanted to eliminate this benefit).

8.13 Attendance incentive (The Employer wanted to make it harder to qualify for the attendance incentive).

19.01 Job bidding and promotions-postings (The Employer wanted to be able to have members work flexible FTE schedules where the hours are only guaranteed over a 3 month period, in practice this would mean that the Employer could prevent members from working for weeks at a time and have them work a lot to make up the rest of the hours before the 3 month period is up.  This proposal was dangerous for our members that need to be able to rely on income every pay period and there are already on call positions for those members who do would prefer to not have a set schedule to fit these needs).

19.04 Awarding positions (The Employer wanted the ability to award positions to whoever they choose which would allow for favoritism in the job bidding process).

20.08 Lay off procedures (The Employer wanted to make the layoff procedure more complicated and less advantageous for union members).

20.11 Trial Period

Article 22 Reassignment (The Employer wanted the ability to send members to other locations regardless of distance, without float pay, and without any time restrictions).

27.04 Step movement- This was a big win for us! (The Employer wanted to withhold anniversary step increases for anyone with a current discipline on their record).

27.20 Longevity- Another big win! (The Employer wanted to withhold longevity payments for anyone with a current discipline on their record).

Duties of leads (The Employer wanted two tiers of leads and the ability to use members as leads without paying them depending on the work they are doing).


The first dropped proposal was the Preamble. The union wanted to put in the preamble language that the union and the employer was responsible in creating an inclusive environment for all. The employer kept striking our new language and wanted to put in Language that included the HealthPartners Mission, Vision and Values. The bargaining team didn’t understand why the Employer wouldn’t agree to this especially after a 20-minute lecture on Thursday about how the organization is an anti-racist and inclusive organization. We honestly thought this would be the easiest language to agree to. Ultimately the union decided to drop this proposal as we have other fish to fry, and it’s evident that the Employer didn’t want to agree to the inclusive language we proposed. We told the employer across the table that we are disappointed that the employer wanted to fight this so much, as we thought we were all working towards the same goal of inclusivity.

The union dropped Proposals:

3.13 Distribution of Temp Additional hours/Overtime  

8.11 Time off w/o Pay- We dropped this to alter this language because it was added to the 8.07 Union counter. We are still waiting on final results on this.

8.12 Doctor time 

8.13 Attendance incentive

8.14 Payment upon Term- We tried to get sick pay paid out at terminations. It became evident that the employer would never agree to this, so we dropped.

Sick leave donation proposal- We tried to be able to donate sick leave to our colleagues when they needed it. It was also evident that the employer would never agree, so we dropped this as well.

Article 20 Lay off Severance pay- It was also evident that the employer was also unwilling to give any severance. We decided because they won’t agree it might be best to help our members on a case by case bases and dropped this proposal.

New Article- Furloughs- The employer also wouldn’t budge so we dropped this as well. Again, we hope to help our members on a case-by-case basis, should furloughs and layoff come up again.


While you see many drops above, this is a common practice in negotiations. Sometimes you need to get things off the table before you can make any real progress. Some of these drops were proposed in drop/drop proposals where the union or employer proposes that we drop our proposal if they drop theirs. The biggest win in the last week was the employer dropping the Step Movement and Longevity proposals. This was the employer’s proposal to stop step movements and longevity payments if the Member has a discipline on their record. We absolutely would not agree to this because we believe a discipline is supposed to be transformative not punitive, limiting our members pay increases for simply being loyal to the company only adds to the discipline and makes it that much worse. So please take a deep breath now that that is off the table!


Attached is also, the response Kelsie gave across the table after being lectured about how anti-racist the organization is but wouldn’t even meet the bargaining table with a compromise or counter on holidays. They just simply said no, after a 20-minute lecture. The union believes that social justice is also directly relating to workers rights. And if you need to scream at the top of the mountain about how anti-racist you are, there might be an underlining problem and it was great to call them out on this.


In Solidarity,

The Local 12 Bargaining Team for Negotiations with HealthPartners Team Members: Betty Jones, Mary Brown, Kelsie Anderson, Sue Kolias, Heather Neil, Peg Ledel, Donna Schnegelberger, Connie Brown, Stefanie Olson, Nile Mills, Andrea Crist and Janell Kelly. With Local 12 staff support from Traci Murphy and Lance Lindeman.



Categories: Health Partners