Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Election Workers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debates job‑share pilot and stricter vote‑center worker contracts
Summary
Members reviewed a proposed pilot allowing pairs to split a vote‑center worker shift and new contract language that requires workers to remain the full day or forfeit pay. Supporters called the pilot a reasonable test; others warned of reliability, equitable pay, and legal risks if workers are later denied pay for partial attendance. The contract was tabled pending review.
The St. Joseph County Election Board on Aug. 7 revisited two related personnel proposals: a pilot "vote‑center worker partner" (job‑share) program and updated vote‑center worker contract language clarifying attendance expectations.
A board member said the pilot would let two committed partners share a single vote‑center worker slot so each could work a half day after both complete required training. "It's like job sharing on election day," the presenter said, describing a flexible schedule aimed at recruiting people who otherwise could not work a full day.
Supporters suggested starting small — one or a few pairs — to test logistics. "I think 6 pairs would probably be about as high as we'd wanna go at the outset," one board member said; another proposed three Democratic and three Republican pairs for balance.
But several members raised practical and legal concerns. One board member outlined a scenario in which a worker arrives late or leaves early and then is later told they will not be paid, calling that a possible contract‑law risk if the board accepts the work and later withholds pay. "If an employer accepts the work of the employee after a contract has been breached...then in fact they do continue to work — what does that mean?" the member said.
Staff argued the purpose of the contract is clarity: "People need to know the expectation...we can't run elections with people who are gone for an hour in the middle of the day," a staff member said, noting inspectors and clerks rely on full‑day coverage.
The board reviewed updated contract language that would make attendance requirements explicit and withhold pay for workers who do not remain for the full day (except in emergencies). Several members asked for a grievance or review process so workers denied pay have an opportunity to explain mitigating circumstances.
Board members asked staff to resend the proposed contract by email and table formal approval until members can read the text and consider suggested remedies for equitable treatment. The pilot job‑share program discussion likewise was treated as a possible later test, with several members recommending waiting until after the general election or trying a single pair in a municipal election first.
No formal approval of the contract or pilot program occurred at the Aug. 7 meeting; staff will circulate the contract draft and return to the board for formal action.
