MCO Impasse Position



(In the capacity of the Impasse Panel)



Much of our discussion and many of our recommendations may be familiar. Some aspects of this report are new. But the tragedy is that others before this Committee have studied the same or similar fact situations, have exercised the same or similar judgments and the public reaction has been short-lived and incomplete. Those who inhabit or work in prisons are a tiny constituency. Public attention paid to their problems is transitory. But the importance of solving those problems is great.

• Special Committee on Prison Disturbances, Report to Governor Milliken, investigating the May 1981 Riots. August 4, 1981, at 1 [Emphasis added].

The Michigan Corrections Organization represents the security forces of the Michigan prison facilities and the Center for Forensic Psychiatry (located in Saline, Michigan). The Security Unit is the police force for the institutions. They police the prisoners and patients who have been incarcerated precisely because they pose a threat to our free society.

There are approximately 5,100 Corrections Officers and Forensic Security Assistants employed by the State of Michigan. This is approximately 1,000 positions short of full staffing.

Every day of their public-sector career, they enter facilities detaining individuals who have been convicted of or alleged to have committed the most horrific crimes imaginable. Armed with only their wits and personal communication skills, they must maintain the good order and security of state facilities. They are duty bound to confront and quell riots and disturbances. They are sworn to protect their colleagues, inmates, and patient populations, as well as the public from the dangers that lurk within the walls of prisons, detention facilities and psychiatric wards.

Daily, throughout these institutions, violence and mayhem occur, in many cases to lethal and fatal degrees. When prisoners and patients fall victim to this violence, or the depression from isolation overcomes the will to live and a suicide is attempted or undertaken, MCO’s members respond. When a worldwide pandemic fell upon us, these unsung heroes did not work from home. Instead, they entered the bowels of the institutions, just like any other day, being subjected to the death and destruction of the virus which rampaged through the institutions.

These forgotten faces of law enforcement and of forensic hospitals do this, despite the prison system being deprived of sufficient staffing levels. Understaffed and over worked, mandated to double shifts day in and day out, these gatekeepers continue to do their duty until they are physically and mentally exhausted. Sacrificing their very lives to the corrosive and deteriorating effects of such working conditions.

Sound familiar? Of course, it does. The Michigan Corrections Organization was before this very Impasse Panel in 2018 arguing these very same issues. And after hearing our plight, this Panel responded with recommendations which sought to heal our troubles. However, the Office of the State Employer asked the Commission to reject the Panel’s recommendations and convinced the Commission that the Employer had a plan to alleviate the MCO’s struggles1.

The Employer failed in that attempt. Pure and simple. In fact, the onset of the pandemic had only increased the pressure of an already stressed workforce because of quarantines, isolations, sickness, and long-term post-infection illness.

But, even before the pandemic, the Employer’s efforts, no matter how well-intended, fell short. Its efforts in filling the ranks of an exasperated workforce back then are no better now, in that they cannot even keep up with annual attrition2. All along, our members suffer and labor under working conditions which if applied to a corporate setting would be untenable, let alone found in a prison environment.

Just this year, the Director of the Department of Corrections testified to the legislature in February 2023 that the ranks of the Corrections Officers are short by seven hundred officers.3 By September, that number climbed to 900.

The alarm must be sounded! The workforce of the prison system is in dire need of replenishment. It can only be done through mechanisms that reinvigorate our current membership, enticing them to stay on board and invite others to join the profession. Nothing else will serve to stem the flow of staff from leaving the workforce as if it were an arterial bleed. Other states suffering from the same dire staffing issues have determined there is no other way out of the dilemma other than to significantly raise wages.

The staffing problems facing the Michigan Department of Corrections do not require a post-graduate degree from Harvard or the Wharton Schools of Business. The OSE does not have to conduct classification studies, as in the words of the MCO President, “We are the study!” The employer’s attempt to unwind this Gordian Knot with non-economic solutions has dragged on too long.

It is a simple calculation. When it comes to washing the windows of a Manhattan Skyscraper, nobody is climbing one hundred stories for $15.00 per hour. However, at $35 or $40 per hour the calculation changes.

A Corrections Officer’s position is on point with the analogy. It is a job in a prison environment. Nothing can be done to the work environment to induce employment- attraction except increasing the pay. Other States recognize this stark realization and are acting.4

The Director of the Michigan Department of Corrections knows this all too well. She is on record, stating: “The labor market has also become more competitive, with many potential candidates looking for increased flexibility in their work, which … isn’t really an option for the Department of Corrections.”5

It is worth noting that in the last five (5) years, there has been a loss in Corrections Officers – by resignations alone – to a staggering tune of 1,694 voluntary quits. The cost of training these officers and paying them a wage during this five-year period is just as staggering: forty-four million dollars ($44,000,000.00).6

Had circumstances been in place to retain just one-half of those exiting employees, we would not be facing a staffing crisis. Yet, MCO, to this day, has not been invited to join any committee aimed at curbing this crisis.

The proposals put forth at the bargaining table by MCO and rejected by the employer are measured steps to begin a rejuvenation of the workforce at a time when it is desperately needed.


Civil Service Rule 6-9.4, Impasse Resolution, sets forth the criteria to be used by the Impasse Panel in making its recommendation to the Civil Service Commission. That criterion is:

(1) Stipulations and agreements.

• The parties have no stipulation or agreements.

(2) The interests and welfare of the public.

• The very nature of the Corrections Officers’ duty is to protect the public. The conditions regarding the prison system have placed the officers at great risk. Employees suffering fatigue because of the mandatory overtime (caused by short staffing) literally has them: 1) in the very least, walking off the job and utilizing FMLA to combat the dire conditions of the State Corrections system, 2) leaving the bargaining unit for other classifications and pay cuts, 3) in worst case, leaving the State Classified system for the private sector.

(3) The financial condition and ability of the state.

• It is without dispute that due to approximately a $550 million State surplus, the State of Michigan’s financial condition has not been better in over twenty years. These revenue figures are projected to cover the next four years.

(4) Comparison of the rates of compensation and other conditions of employment of classified employees with other governmental and private sector employees.

• Comparable rates of compensation have been provided in Exhibits #7 through #12. As to other comparable government sector Correction Officer classifications, States are improving rates of pay for Corrections at astounding rates. In the private sector, rates of pay are within a few dollars MCO’s proposal to raise entry wages to $25.00. However, although a few dollars less than MCO’s proposal, exiting employees are not subjected to the massive mandatory overtime.

(5) Appropriate economic indicators and forecasts

• Despite increasing interest rates resulting from the Federal Reserve’s attempts to head off inflation, the economy continues to grow at a healthy pace. Employment levels have continued to grow both nationally and in Michigan since the huge decline in jobs that followed the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Nationally, employment now exceeds pre- COVID levels, and in Michigan employment has finally returned to those levels. Importantly, inflation has also started to moderate with year- over-year inflation now at half the rate it reached in mid-summer 2022; this increases the likelihood that the economy will reach a “soft landing” where inflation returns to a more normal level, allowing the Fed to ease off interest rate hikes and reducing the likelihood of a recession.

  1. (6)  Total compensation, including fringe benefits, presently received by employees.

• Respectfully, factor six should not be considered given the unique problems concerning officer recruitment and retention.

  1. (7)  Such other factors that are normally taken into consideration in determining rates of compensation and other conditions of employment.

• Just like private sector employers, public sector employers have traditionally used recruitment and retention programs – often and primarily including monetary incentives – to target specific needs.7 Unfortunately, while the private sector can offer other incentives such as flexible schedules and remote-work-from-home arrangements8, the Michigan Department of Corrections has no such options. Prison facilities must be staffed all day and all night, every day, and every night. And prison facilities must be staffed in person. Corrections Officers cannot, for example, break up a fight between inmates through Zoom. It is precisely the dangerous and demanding nature of the Corrections Officer’s work that has predicated the attrition crisis at the MDOC.


The current bargaining cycle is a re-opener for FY 2025. By letter dated March 6, 2023, MCO notified the OSE of its interest to begin bargaining.


  1. Michigan’s Economical Forecast Supports the Union’s Proposal

All monies spent funding MCO’s proposal will be for FY 2025. As such, the pay increases would occur on October 1, 2024. MCO’s proposal to give a fourteen (14) percent wage increase is supported by the budget.

This wage increase would be an expenditure of approximately $41,045,871.00. This amount is calculated by taking the average hourly wage of the membership at $28.18 multiplied by 2,040 hours and equating to $57,487.20. Then, multiplying the $57,487.20 annual salaries by 14% amounts to an $8,048.21 raise for the membership. Finally, Multiplying the $8048.21 by the 5,100 members gives us the $41 million.

While this would be a healthy cost to the state, please consider the following. The Michigan Department of Corrections is in an unprecedented staffing crisis, and it must be fixed. Michigan is in a financially sound economical state and needs to act now.

According to the Citizens Research Council of Michigan, even after General Fund / General Purpose revenue estimates declined in May – due to tax relief legislation passed in March – the January estimates still exceed the States ongoing spending budget by over $550 million. Furthermore, the prior January estimates of the General Fund and General-Purpose revenue estimates show that the GF/GP funds were up between $800 million and $1 billon over the forecast period.9 These numbers are not in dispute. In short, despite major tax relief, there is still significant room to grow the State budget.

In addition, while the OSE may point to the current strike in the automotive industry as being problematic, it is not. Michigan is in better shape to weather a financial storm than it has ever been in the last 25 years.

In fact, the Budget Stabilization Fund received an additional $200 million from the budget in FY2024 to bring its balance to $2.0 billon.10 The BSF is also known as the “Rainy Day” Fund, and the large increases in this fund over the last several years provide the State with the largest revenue buffer to protect it against economic downturn that it has had in over two decades. Corrections officers around the State will tell you that we are facing monsoon rains of mandatory overtime, and at the same time, there is a drought on corrections officers.

Nothing about the characterization of the Corrections staffing crisis, or the financial numbers reported by MCO, or the CRC of Michigan is in dispute or embellished. For a prolonged period, trouble has been brewing in maintaining correctional staff to operate our prisons. That trouble is now upon us, and a healthy dose of reality tells us that raising wages is the only way out.

Prison officers of this State have been toeing-the-line long enough under these oppressive conditions. For well over five years, their plaintive wails have fallen upon deaf ears. They are now taking matters into their own hands and abandoning their positions. Who can blame them? When will enough be enough? What tragedy will occur because of understaffed, overworked, and exhausted gatekeepers of our prison system?

B. The Rationale of the MCO’s Last Proposal

The MCO’s proposal is configured in a three-prong approach, centered on recruiting new employees, while at the same time retaining the current work force, whose numbers dwindle daily. This proposal would attract candidates from the private sector, incentivize members to stay because of a substantial pay increase, and allow them to top out on the pay scale 30 months earlier.

In short, retention requires a “hook.” Current candidates for this job do not have a defined benefit pension, or retirement healthcare. Nothing about making a career as a prison officer can incentivize staying-on-the-line other than premium wages. This is not rocket science.
` Before examining the three-prong approach to MCO’s proposal, consider the following:

MCO, prior to the current negotiations tipping off, became aware that the recruitment division of the MDOC were engaged in negotiations with prospective employees concerning entry wages.

Specifically, utilizing Civil Service Rule 5.01, MDOC offered different starting wages to new recruits, within the same academy, to bring them on board with the Department. This process, the employer argues, is a mechanism to recruit employees from the private sector. Strangely enough, the Department did not advertise to prospective employees that this incentive was available. However, if a candidate was astute enough to bargain his current wage at his/or her existing job, then the Department, through 5.01, would offer a higher wage than the candidate was currently receiving.

Aside from the fact that MCO considers this to be a violation of its right to exclusively represent its bargaining unit, it is evidence that the employer realizes that money is the carrot to entice people into the workforce.

  1. Prong 1: Increase the Entry Wage to $25.00 Per Hour.

First, the proposal raises the entry level pay to $25.00. This is not an arbitrary or capricious number. Exhibit 3, discussed, infra, at Section C1, details several positions offered by private sector companies which have starting pay beginning higher than $20.00 per hour.

These positions do not have the untenable working conditions now facing our Corrections Officers: daily interaction with dangerous cliental, massive mandatory overtime, stress-induced medical conditions (i.e., PTSD & substance abuse11), physical and mental/emotional exhaustion.

Many of the staff that have left the ranks of the Security Unit took significant cuts in pay just to be able to have a family life.12 In addition, they could no longer take the deleterious physical and emotional effects of working under the constraints now facing the MCO membership.13

2. Collapsing of the Pay Scale from 66 months to 36 months

Currently, it takes an officer over five (5) years to reach top pay as a Corrections Officer. In that period there are ten (10) step increases. In these terrible times of staffing crisis, this 10-step path to top pay is too long.

Data provided by the Michigan Department of Corrections shows, without dispute, that between 2018 and 2022, the average time a corrections officer stayed on the job before resigning was 3.96 years. Under current pay scales the officers would have had to work 15 more months to reach top pay, all the while suffering under mandatory 16-hour shifts three, four, and sometimes five days in a row.

MCO members no longer have the protections of the “32-hour” rule to protect them from the cruel nature of the mandatory overtime. At one point, the “32-hour” rule was a contractual promise wherein if a person worked four hours of overtime or more of mandatory overtime in the last 32 hours, he or she was exempt from the next mandate.

Now that language exists in a Director’s Office Memorandum and is violated so often, the language is not worth the powder it would take to blow it to hell.

Consider the MCO Exhibit14 concerning daily staffing sheets at the Reception and Guidance Center located in Jackson, Michigan. This exhibit highlights the number of 32- hour violations which occurred daily on three different shifts from September 10 through September 23, 2023. Daily, there are between 4 to 9 officers mandated, per shift and in violation of the so-called 32-hour protection.

There are no protections any longer. The understaffed prisons are chewing up the staff and spitting them out, only to subject them to the same treacherous mandibles of mandatory overtime the next day. The characterization of this as a “crisis” is not overly dramatic.

3. A 14% Wage Increase to Attract a Large Drove of Recruits to Fill the Ranks

and Keep Staff from Leaving.

While the proposed wage increase may seem substantial, however, it pales in comparison to the amount of overtime being paid out to employees. In fiscal years 21, 22, and 23, over $233,081,063.00 were spent on overtime costs.15 That is almost a quarter of a billion dollars spent at time-and-one-half the rates of pay of a Corrections Officer. These costs were attributed to mandatory overtime being the rule, rather than the exception.

Consider this: the Security Unit’s ranks are so depleted, that any other classification in the prison system – so long as they had prior correctional officer training – are being allowed to work voluntary overtime, in lieu of mandating a Corrections Officer. This includes shift command, Inspectors, Assistant Deputies, and Deputy Wardens. It is worth noting that positions working this voluntary overtime – again, caused by the staffing crisis – is paid at a much higher rate than that of a Corrections Officers’ rate of pay.

In fact, at the Alger Correctional Facility – where the vacancy rate is at a staggering 40% – Warden Cathy Bauman enters the facility on the weekends, regularly, and assumes a position in the Security Gates rather than mandating another officer. It bears repeating: the Warden of the facility partners up with her subordinate staff to get the job done.

Interestingly, MDOC staff who are assigned to the recruiting office regularly work voluntary overtime at the Cotton Correctional Facility in Jackson, Michigan. If staffing conditions were not so horrible, one might find it odd that those in charge of recruiting new employees are receiving a pecuniary benefit because of not being able to fill positions.

Let us examine the expenditure of overtime costs in the last three years juxtaposed against the MCO proposal now before the Panel. Recall that the overtime spent in the last three years exceeds $233,000,000.00. From another view the MDOC has averaged overtime costs of $7,000,000 per month for two straight years (’22 and ’23).

If the Department raised the starting wage of a corrections officer to $25.00 per hour ($52,000 annually) – as proposed by MCO – the overtime costs for ’23 alone, would pay for 602 new recruits (This calculation includes the cost of training16 and full benefit package).

Going a step back, had the Department done this in 2021, overtime costs – alone – would have hired 488 new corrections officers. Furthermore, 2022’s overtime costs would have hired another six hundred new officers.

Had the employer sought to do back then, what many states are doing now – raise C/O wages – the ranks would have been filled by October of 2022.

In fact, the $84 million of overtime in 2023 would have paid for collapsing the pay scale and provided a double-digit percentage salary increase. These measures would have served to entice the corrections officer’s workforce to stay on board, rather than leave the classified service.

It is essential that the ranks of the Security Unit are filled quickly. The men and women of the Security Unit have held-the-line for well over five years under these conditions. Time has eroded their will to continue; this is evident by the mass exodus to other classified-service positions and to the private sector.

4. MCO’s Request for Salary Increases Above Other State-Classified

Employees is Justified, Essential, and Required.

As shown below, other States have dramatically raised the rates of compensation for Corrections Officers. In addition, because the workforce of these States’ prison systems is so woefully understaffed, the pay increases for Corrections Officers is dramatically different from their colleagues in other State Departments.

The Michigan Civil Service has historically granted wage increases equally – across the board – to all exclusively represented employees in separate bargaining units. Normally, that same amount of wage increase is then granted to the non-exclusively represented employees (NERE), as well.

These are not normal times and have not been for an exceptionally long time. It is not overly dramatic to point out that in the State classified service, no other Department sees its employees walking off the job in droves, as does the Department of Corrections. And, specifically, in the Department of Corrections, it is the classification of the Corrections Officer that is suffering far beyond any other classification in terms of understaffing and the crippling effects of mandatory overtime.

Justification for the granting of MCO’s proposal lies within the numbers themselves.

These numbers reflect: 1) a mass exodus from the ranks of the Corrections Officers; 2)

ballooning costs attributed to mandatory overtime; 3) unprecedented action in requesting staff – outside the Corrections Officer classification – to work voluntary overtime rather than mandating a corrections officer, regularly, for three or four consecutive 16-hour shifts; and 4) the onslaught of officers needing and qualifying for Family Medical Leave just so they can find time to rest.

The proverbial can has been “kicked down the road” far enough. Action must be taken immediately.

C. Comparable Rates of Pay

1. Private Sector, State of Michigan, Entry Pay

A five-minute Google inquiry will reveal that Michigan private-sector employers are starving for workers. And this hunger has placed them in a position to pay incredibly competitive wages.17 In fact, the entry-level wages offered by the private-sector employers is higher than the entry-level wage of the Corrections Officer.

It may be successfully argued that private-sector jobs may not pay as much at the top scale compared to a Corrections Officer. However, the deleterious effects of the staffing crisis are chasing away the MCO membership because: 1) the ranks cannot be filled, and 2) there is no incentive to remain employed in the prison environment when other work is available without the crushing mandatory overtime.

Recall that over 1,600 of MCO’s members have resigned from the ranks in the last five (5) years alone. This number is a testament to the reprehensible work conditions are and the need to fill the ranks is essential.

MCO contends that its proposal to raise the entry wage to $25.00 per hour is the “hook” needed to attract new employees. This entry level wage, coupled with the collapsing of the pay scale to thirty-six (36) months, incentivizes prospective employees to enter the work force, and current officers to remain.

2. Public Sector, Other States, Salary Increase

For far too long now, MCO has had to contend with being told “this staffing problem is not unique to Michigan. It is occurring in Correctional settings nationwide.” That answer simply rings hollow for a couple reasons.

First, it is not an answer to the problem, at all. It was simply a response that is in someway easier than throwing up one’s hands in a fashion meant to say, “We don’t know what to do.”

Second, legislatures and governors around the nation are beginning to take serious and focused action – substantial action – in defeating the staffing crises in which their officers are facing. And it is not by way of offering a four (4) or five (5) percent wage increase.

Consider the State of Alabama.18 Facing a federal lawsuit for, none other, its state’s understaffing crisis, it has raised starting correctional officer pay, minimally, to $50,000 per year. In medium security facilities that number has gone to $53,000 per year. And maximum- security prisons are almost $56,000 per year.

Michigan’s starting range for Corrections Officers is approximately $42,500 per year in every prison, no matter its security classification. It is noted that in level IV and V prisons, officers are afforded a high-security premium of an extra .50 cents per hour ($1,040.00 annually). However, an employee must have worked for two (2) years to qualify for this payment.

Next, is the State of Georgia.19 Governor Kemp and the Legislature approved a $5,000.00 a year raise for Corrections Officers. And if Kemp has his way, that will be boosted by an additional $2,000.00 before the end of 2023.

Prior to this boost, a Corrections Officer in Georgia made $35,000.00. The $7,000 raise will increase C/O pay by twenty (20) percent.

Next in line is West Virginia.20 Facing a vacancy rate of 1,050 officers, the state had to activate its National Guard to help the struggling prison officers. Moreover, the pay increases initiated are focused on giving Correctional Officers a higher raise than other prison staff. The pay scheme advanced in WV gives a $5,000.00 raise initially, and after completion of the second year there is an additional $8,000.00 raise.

In Michigan, historically, raises in the classified service have been given equally to all bargaining units. MCO recognizes that its proposal goes beyond what the OSE is offering across the board to other bargaining units. But it is undisputed that within the prison industry, no other classification is suffering from the awful staffing crisis to the degree and length than what MCO has been laboring under. It is with this in mind that the Impasse Panel should understand why MCO believes that now is the time to break from the historical trend and recommend a package that supports the Corrections Officers of Michigan.

Finally, the State of Wisconsin.21 In its attempt to combat a 19% turnover rate in DOC staff, the legislature bumped Wisconsin C/O starting pay from $20.29 (Michigan’s is $20.48) to $33.00 per hour (MCO proposes $25.00). Other State employees, not facing the hardships of Corrections staff, received a six (6) percent raise.

In addition, other pay incentives were authorized to attract staff to prisons with high vacancy rates. Where vacancy rates are more than 40% officers receive a bonus of $5.00 per hour. In Maximum Security prisons, staff received a $3.00 per hour raise. In medium security prisons staff received a $1.00 per hour bonus.

Both Wisconsin and West Virginia have recognized that pay increases for Corrections staff must go beyond that of their fellow state employees. Given the unprecedented staffing crisis in the Corrections field, states are recognizing that higher pay is needed to attract prospective employees into the workforce.

D. The OSE’s Position of “We Do not See Money Being the Answer,” Is Inconsistent with the 20% Increase Given to the Sector of Classified Service who held State-Professional Licenses.

During negotiations, the OSE pointed out that the prior monetary incentives that were offered to the membership to incentivize working a full 80-hour pay period (LOU: Security Unit Recruitment and Retention Pilot for FY2022) did not achieve its intended goal. “We don’t see money as being the answer,” was how it was framed to the MCO bargaining team.

Attempting to drive home its point, the OSE informed MCO that the LOU had derived about 54% participation at its peak. However, OSE failed to appreciate the reason for that number.

The LOU was intended to incentivize persons to work a full 80-hour pay period without utilizing leave time during the same period. The concept contemplated that $250 per-pay-period would incentivize members to work the entire pay period, thus reducing the mandatory overtime.

However, what OSE fails to accept is that the workforce is so depleted that members were mandated to work excessive overtime in the first week of the pay period, causing two things to occur. First, after having been regularly mandated three (3) or four (4) times in the first week of the pay period, employees made far more than the $250.00 that was paid under the LOU. Secondly, after having endured such mandatory overtime, members needed rest. As such, the need to utilize sick leave for rest nullified their ability to meet the threshold requirement of the LOU.

Yet, as OSE opined at the table that money was not the answer, it must have failed to recall that it gave other classified employees, who held certifications or state-certified licensing, a whopping 20% salary raise, because why? These employees were leaving the classified service and entering the private sector for HIGHER salaries and benefit packages.

How is it that a certain sector of the classified service employees could gain a 20% raise to keep them on board, yet when it comes to keeping Corrections Officers on board “money is not the answer?”


Daniel Patrick Moynihan is credited for the quote, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”22

The facts that are undisputed, and before this panel are: 1) There is a staffing crisis within the Michigan Department of Corrections, specific to Corrections Officers, 2) this crisis worsens on a monthly, if not daily, basis, and 3) all attempts by the employer, over the last five years, to utilize non-economic measures to stem the crisis, has failed.23

MCO recognizes that the Impasse Resolution procedures should not be a goal of a party. Indeed, a party should recognize that a voluntary agreement should be the goal. However, our plaintive wails falling upon deaf ears, coupled with a crisis with no end in sight, leaves us no choice but to plead our case to this panel.

Criticism can be cast upon us for not having reached a voluntary agreement when other units have. However, other units will openly admit they are not suffering like the Security Unit has.

History, and a dose of reality, respectfully, should be the barometer in which this Panel makes its recommendations to the Civil Service Commission. Every criterion within the impasse procedures of the Civil Service Rules bends in favor of the Security Unit, without question. There is more than sufficient funding available. The conditions of employment in the Security Unit screams for assistance. Other States facing the same crisis have adopted legislation that exceeds the proposals of the MCO.

Wherefore, MCO’s prayer-for-relief is not just an outdated legal expression. It is in fact a prayer that someone will recognize that the Security Unit needs assistance immediately. It is with this request in mind that we ask the IP to recommend that MCO’s proposals be adopted.

Respectfully & on behalf of its membership,

J. Martin Foldie, (P-70379) Director, MCO LEGAL
Shawn P. Davis,
Labor Relations Representative Michigan Corrections Organization, SEIU 526M.