Are there any um is this look at it?

All 60 days all sixty chair number on my back in this commission, do we have a motion to approve?

Motion to approve.

Do we have a second?

Any abstentions or objections?

Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Item number three A under rule amendments is an introduction of an amendment to rule two sections 4.9, 4.11, A and B, 5, 11.1 relative to the alternative dispute resolution process.

Do you want to take this?

This is um related to item number eight.

Um so if we want to talk about that uh along with the proposed rule amendments, this might be a good thing.

Okay.

Uh basically we had a meeting yesterday of the subcommittee, and uh this was a very very productive meeting.

Uh, a couple of the people are on the subcommittee are here.

Aaron, Ashley, and Will talk about it, but I I greatly appreciated everyone being there.

We were discussing how we might be able to use alternative dispute resolution going forward.

Uh we're always we as a commission always cognizant of trying to uh work with the parties so that our process and procedures are as efficient as effective as possible, cognizant of the rights of the parties.

So we had a really good open discussion as to how we might be able to use alternative dispute resolution uh going forward.

Uh one of the things that came out of the subcommittee meeting was the thought that we as a commission or the subcommittee was going to propose to the commission uh changes to our rules that deal with ADR, and uh that's what is before you, and I'm gonna let Christy who is part of the subcommittee who did an excellent job yesterday kind of uh right after the subcommittee meeting putting together the proposed changes.

So uh Christie, why don't you uh explain and then if Aaron or Ashley or Will wanted to comment about the subcommittee meeting, I I welcome their comments too.

And just as a reminder, this is the introduction of these rule changes, and so they will lie over until the next commission meeting where they'll be considered for approval.

So if anyone would like copies of the rules, please email us at CSNO at NOLA.gov.

We're happy to provide um copies of the proposed changes and take any any uh public member of the public's feedback on the proposed changes.

Okay, the general outlines of what the rules are intended to do is to allow parties to elect to have an alternative dispute resolution with no review by the commission and no review by the fourth circuit, and but you get in the hearing room with um what we've called an arbiter that um either one of our hearing officers or a commissioner, and you get a decision and it's over.

So there's no six-month or um process, and so that's what um these changes are meant to do, and also it's amended to reflect that any sort of discipline can go through ADR.

Um we will expect both parties to acknowledge that they're giving up those appeal rights.

That's the main thing.

But um if you see 4.11, it has to be done within 30 days and before the first hearing date.

Um they the parties also talked about pre-hearing conferences, so while we're at it, I put something in there saying that they could conduct a pre-hearing conference.

Um I also added subsection C because it's the current practice for um the hearing examiner reports to contain legal analysis and citations to the record, and so they need the transcript or the briefs.

Um so that rule was kind of outdated.

So while we're making changes to 4.11, uh um put in there that it's tied to the briefs or the transcripts.

So that's 4.11.

What's next?

Okay, 11.1.

Just adds that um the decision by the arbiter is the final decision.

So that had to be changed 4.9 or 8.1.

Okay.

So we're getting 4.9 up.

Um we also talked about having a union representative authorized to basically act in the role as the law of the lawyer in this ADR procedure.

And so that's in 4.9.

Um and also I I didn't print out a copy of five, but that's really the whole procedure.

This just recognizes that the union representative can attend the the formal hearing, but and to advise the employee, but can't represent the employee in that hearing.

Yeah.

I'll send you that.

Okay.

Um so this is the whole thing that says that we're amending the ADR procedure that we currently have.

So we took out the um application to only you know suspensions of 10 days or less.

Um, and we put a deadline in.

We say that you must pick the arbiter from our current hearing officers or commissioner, they have to agree to the to who the arbiter is.

And um you can see in 5.5, we say that a union representative may um represent the employee and to give the appointing authority um the same like relaxed rule.

I said that a human resources person could represent the appointing authority in ADR.

I don't know how we didn't really discuss that at the subcommittee hearing.

Um those are the the highlights.

I think I've covered it.

So Christy, procedurally, um just a refresher.

Will the um party still be go before the commission and then agree, or do they need to ask permission to go into ADR, or would they agree prior to the hearing to go to ADR, like procedurally, just kind of how is this woven?

Okay, hearings are usually set 60 days from when the appeal is filed, and so we've we've put a deadline of 30 days, so within 30 days after the appeal is filed, the appointing authority and the employee have to agree that we're gonna do ADR.

And then it's they pick an arbitrate, they pick an arbiter, they sign an agreement, they schedule the hearing, they have the hearing, and then the arbiter issues a decision within five days.

Okay, and so it's just like a fast track.