The POLICEPAY Journal®

Thursday, June 15, 2006

www.policepayjournal.net  

Matt Barnard, Editor   matt@policepay.net    (405) 234-2235    

 

 

 

RETIREE HEALTH INSURANCE MEETS THE KNIFE

KISSIMMEE, FL

Tentative pay pact calls for better police pension

TUCSON ,AZ

City workers get best paychecks

HOLLYWOOD, FL

Hollywood, police agree on 12.5% raises in new pact

SHREVEPORT, LA

Shreveport City Workers to Get Pay Raise

GAUTIER, MS

Gautier weighs pay raises

POLICEPAY.NET

FED UP WITH NEGOTIATIONS FAILURE?

                                             BACK ISSUES OF THE JOURNAL

 

RETIREE HEALTH INSURANCE MEETS THE KNIFE

 

By

 

Ronald J. York, President

POLICEPAY.NET, Inc.

211 North Robinson, Suite 350

Oklahoma City, OK 73102

(405) 234-2235

editor@policepay.net

www.policepay.net

© POLICEPAY.NET, Inc. 2006

 

 

 

GASB-45 is about to descend on retiree health insurance.  This new rule requires cities to report the cost of fully pre-funding retiree health insurance.  For most cities this means that the amount reported will be about double the currently reported cost.  The key thing to remember is that reporting and paying are two different things.  Nothing requires any city to actually pay this additional amount.  They must only show it in the annual financial statements.  However, this has not stopped a stampede of local finance directors that are claiming that it must actually be paid into some type of a trust plan.  They are wrong.  They know that they are wrong.  But, when did being wrong ever stop people.  Full funding of retiree insurance is the new erotic and seductive fetish being pushed by the municipal finance people.

Unfortunately, most police unions are taking the Rhett Butler position – “Frankly my dear, I don’t give a damn.”  This too is not hard to understand.  If you are not currently impacted by this, then why should you care?  Most unions only have voting members that are currently employed.  Retirees have no portfolio on these issues.  Based on the feedback I have received, most police unions are not going to resist this impending, but irrational, funding plan.

Okay, where does this leave us?  There are five options for dealing with this loss of cash flow as a result of pre-funding retiree insurance:

 

1 - The city eats the entire amount (fat chance of that happening)

2 - The contribution by the city for retiree insurance is cut in half

3 - The benefits provided retirees are cut in half

4 - Current employees eat the increase in the form of reduced pay raises

5 - Current employees eat the increase in the form of payroll deductions

 

I know, you pick door number 1, but you will be forced to choose between 2, 3, 4, and 5.  If you want my guess, you will settle for 2 or 3.  Selling 4 and 5 will be impossible.  There are two more options - 6 and 7.

 

6 - Do not pre-fund retiree insurance (this should be your goal)

7 - Eliminate retiree insurance (most cities real goal)

This issue has elicited almost opposite reactions from cities and police unions.  City finance directors are behaving like evangelical zealots while police unions are consumed with apathy.  I am surprised by the reactions of both sides.  When this rule was first announced, I figured it was just another non-starter that would only be dealt with by the geeky inner-circle of municipal auditors.  I was wrong.  When I discovered that municipal finance directors were actually going to promote full funding, I assumed that there would be a big uprising by police unions.  I was wrong again.  Hey, I hear you now.  To avoid being caught in the “three strikes and your out trap” I will drop the subject.

For those of you already retired, don’t be surprised to receive a letter saying that your benefits have been cut in half or that your contribution is going up dramatically.  It did not have to be like that but sometimes reality bites.  Ouch!

 

Tentative pay pact calls for better police pension plan

From the Osceola News-Gazette, June 9, 2006

 

The city of Kissimmee and its police officers reached a tentative agreement Wednesday on a new contract.

 

A key element of the proposed agreement calls for the city to use reserve funds to increase the amount that an officer would receive when he retires. The proposed contract also reduces the amount that officers would contribute toward the pension plan.

 

The proposed contract, if approved by the Kissimmee City Commission, would go into effect Oct. 1.

 

The city views a cut in employee contributions to the pension plan as a good recruiting tool.

 

“Through mutual compromise we were able to come to that agreement,” said Kissimmee Police Officer Ralph Herrera, spokesman for both the city police department and the police union.

 

The city had declared an impasse in April. The next likely step was to bring in a state mediator to make a recommendation on how to resolve the contract dispute.

 

But declaring an impasse did not prevent both sides from trying again, said City Manager Mark Durbin.

 

The city and representatives of the Central Florida Police Benevolent Association reached an agreement Wednesday.

 

“We kind of let things cool down a little bit,” Durbin said, referring to a period after declaring the impasse.

 

The city will use nearly $1 million in a state cash reserve pension fund to increase the benefit multiplier from the current 3.25 percent to 3.50 percent. At retirement, an officer with 10 years of service would receive 35 percent of his annual salary in pension benefits rather than 32.5 percent.

 

Increasing the multiplier by 0.25 percent will consume the entire cash reserve fund plus an additional $99,091 annually. But because the fund is set to receive $308,614 annually from reserve fund sources, there would be a remaining annual amount of $209,527. Those funds will be used to reduce the employee contribution from 7 percent to 3.7 percent this coming fiscal year and then gradually to 2 percent.

 

The multiplier change will mean officers will pay less out of their paychecks toward retirement and more money in their pocket, city officials said.

 

Of the 71 officers voting, 69 agreed on ratifying the contract with two voting against it.

 

The Kissimmee City Commission still must approve the agreement.

 

“We believe that we, the citizens and the city were best served by working on that agreement,” Herrera said.

 

A policy on which officers can take home their patrol cars remains the same.

 

Officers can take patrol cars home at no charge if they live within city limits. If they live within a 10-mile radius from the police department but outside city limits, officers will pay $10 per pay period. They’ll pay $20 if they live within a 20-mile radius.

 

Officers hired after Oct. 1, 2003, cannot take cars out of the city, a situation that union officials said could be addressed later.

 

“I want to personally thank everyone involved for the extra effort to reach this agreement,” said John Park, president of the Central Florida Police Benevolent Association. “This certainly shows that we can really do the seemingly impossible.”

 

 

City workers get best paychecks

County, private sector jobs lag Tucson in pay, benefits by a lot

From the ARIZONA DAILY STAR, June 11, 2006

 

While city employees grumble about meager 2 percent raises and eroding benefits next year, a comparison of local public and private jobs indicates that if you're looking for work, the city of Tucson will feather your nest the best.

 

The survey by the Arizona Daily Star indicates working for the city gives you more money in many jobs, and much better benefits — hands down — than anywhere else in the region.

 

On Tuesday, the City Council is expected to finalize the annual pay and benefits for all of the city's employees.

 

City Manager Mike Hein originally proposed raises of 3 percent for public-safety workers and 2 percent for others, with no raises for highly compensated employees and no merit raises for anyone.

 

A new report from Human Resources Director Cindy Bezaury recommends increas-ing that to 4 percent for public-safety officers and 2.5 percent for all others, including the highly compensated.

 

The recommendations have sparked criticism from some city employees, who traveled to the latest council meeting to express their displeasure.

 

"What I'm hearing in the halls and at the water cooler is that city employees are overpaid and that employees don't need merit raises for five years because they are paid more than county employees," Anita Lange told the council.

 

She questioned why city workers should be penalized for making more than county employees, adding "apparently there is no democracy when you are a city employee."

 

The Star compared pay and benefits for police officers, firefighters, equipment operators, secretaries, landscapers and garbage-truck drivers with five years' experience, using records from the city, Pima County and Northwest Fire/Rescue District, along with a regional pay report from SalaryExpert.com.

 

The analysis found city workers in three categories — police officer, firefighter, and secretary — far outpace the competition in wages and benefits.

 

Police officers make 68 percent more than the Tucson regional average, while firefighters are 56 percent higher. A city survey used to set public-safety pay doesn't consider Tucson pay scales, however. It's based on selected Phoenix-area cities, where the pay is higher.

City secretaries make 27 percent more than the Tucson average.

 

Two other jobs — garbage-truck driver and equipment operator — eclipsed the average paychecks by 19.5 percent and 7 percent, respectively.

 

The only job where city pay didn't come out on top is for parks maintenance workers, who are paid 22 percent less than the regional average.

 

With one exception, benefits provided by the city easily outstrip those provided by other employers, with only a county sheriff's deputy better off.

 

The cost of paid days off, health and life insurance premiums and retirement plans averages about 35 percent of the employee's pay in the city.

 

County benefit packages average about 28 percent of the employee's pay, except for sheriff's deputies, who receive 39 percent.

Most regional employees, many of whom work for private businesses, receive between 14 percent and 17 percent.

 

City employee Jill Moreno said that when compared to the region, it is likely that city workers do make more. But she said what concerns her is the inequity with which raises are spread in the city.

 

She said public-safety workers are compared to the Phoenix area, while all other jobs are compared to the Tucson region. Moreno said that skews salaries higher for public safety. "What's the logic behind that?" she asked.

 

Jyl Maratea, a project manager for the Transportation Department, said the city compensation study doesn't take into the account all the other jurisdictions the city compares itself to, such as the University of Arizona and Pima Community College, which she said provide educational opportunities to their employees.

 

The city does reimburse its employees for educational classes, but Maratea said it does so at a lower percentage than the colleges.

 

"Our benefits package is being continually eroded," Maratea said, citing an increase in the share of health insurance premiums retired city workers have to pay.

 

County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry said city pay is usually higher than the county's, and that the city "offers a much richer benefit package."

 

A county report nearly two years ago showed city personnel services are 28 percent higher per employee than the county's, and if the county had the same personnel expenses as the city, its budget would balloon 9 percent — or $98.6 million.

 

Hein said when employees have come into his office complaining about the lack of merit raises, he asks them how many people in their neighborhood got a 7 percent raise last year. He said most employees never come back after that.

 

Hollywood, police agree on 12.5% raises in new pact

From the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, June 10, 2006

 

A bitter struggle between Hollywood city leaders and the police union came to an end this week after both sides agreed on a new police contract that would give officers a 12.5 percent raise and let them retire earlier.

Officers will have to contribute more for health benefits and more toward their pension plan while receiving less pay after they retire, all measures that would benefit the cash-strapped city.

Representatives from both sides said they each agreed to concessions rather than face a potentially costly stalemate. The sides had been negotiating since June 2005. Union leaders said they signed off on the deal Tuesday, and elected officials approved the three-year contract the next day during the regular City Commission meeting.

Police officers had been working without a contract since Oct.1. At the height of the negotiations in March, talks became so strained that both sides considered coming up with a one-year contract. A number of officers also returned certificates and decorative lapel pins that were awarded to them from the city in appreciation for their service during last year's hurricane season.

The most contentious issue involved changes to the police pension plan, said union representative Lt. Jeff Marano.

The city wanted the union to give up money supplied by the state to provide additional benefits to police officers. This money, called Chapter 185 funds, is collected from a small tax levied against casualty insurance companies.

City leaders, struggling to balance their annual budget, insisted on returning the money to the city and warned that taxes would be raised to cover the pension costs of all city employees.

The union agreed to return the Chapter 185 funds -- about $1.1 million to the city's coffers.

Another part of the new contract allows police officers to retire with 80 percent of their pay after 22 years of service, rather than the current 25 years. The most recent contract allowed them to retire with 88 percent. City negotiators were insisting on 76 percent after 22 years.

The officers agreed to a 200-hour cap on the overtime hours that count towards their pension. Police are also not allowed to work for the city for more than 30 years.

 

Shreveport City Workers to Get Pay Raise

From KTBS.com, June 13, 2006

 

Nearly 3,000 city workers will soon have bigger paychecks.

Tuesday night, the Shreveport city council approved two resolutions which will give classified city employees, police officers and firefighters and annual salary increase of $1,800. That breaks down to $150 a month.

"I was very pleased to vote for this," said councilman Monty Walford. Walford says an extra $5 million in sales taxes made the pay raises possible. "A comment was made a couple meetings ago about how we met the average pay or something like that, but we don’t have average workers. We’ve got good workers," Walford added.

The pay raise comes as a pleasant surprise to Shreveport police officer Joshua Pettigrew who told us, "every time I get more money in the bank without having to work more hours, I spend more time with my family."

The pay raises will take effect July first. City workers should see the difference in their July 15 paychecks.

 

 

Gautier weighs pay raises

From the SUN HERALD, June 16, 2006

 

The City Council next week will take up the issue of funding pay adjustments for city employees.

 

City Manager Christy Wheeler said the adjustments, which would equal two years of 3 percent increases for all employees, would cost about $600,000 a year.

 

Wheeler and the officials have talked about pay adjustments during the last several council meetings, and this week she and finance personnel provided the officials with an in-house study designed to rectify problems with the city's pay structure.

 

Wheeler said there is no consistent pay scale for employees to move across a pay table, there is no pay scale at all for the Police Department, and that workers have not been placed on a pay table based on experience.

 

"We've been trying to come up with something that would address all of these concerns, in addition to trying to stop the loss of personnel, particularly in our patrol division of the Police Department," she said.

 

She said part of the pay adjustments could be funded by excess sales taxes. The council could also opt to provide merit pay.

 

"It's almost $700,000 for the next four months and next year, and that becomes cumulative," Wheeler said. "We believe our revenue base will support that long-term if they're willing to use the sales tax we've gained this year to initially pay for it."

 

Mayor Pete Pope and Councilman Hurley Ray Guillotte have pushed for pay raises for several months, and during budget hearings last year. Councilman Jeff Wilkinson agrees with raises but defended health benefits provided last year that he said more than equaled a pay increase.

 

Wheeler said two pay studies were done within the last five years but neither was followed, which left the city with significant issues in its pay structure for employees

 

 

Fed Up With Negotiations Failure?

 

Are you wondering why you are failing even though you are doing all the things the "big boys" do or following the advice of the negotiations "experts?" The answer is easy. They are wrong - plain and simple.

Negotiating like the "big boys."

  1. Start with a frugal negotiations budget, saving all of the money for grievances and arbitration.
  2. Rent billboard signs that call the mayor a "bum."
  3. Open negotiations with outlandish proposals.
  4. Hire hard-nosed lawyers to serve as negotiators who think they can intimidate the city's negotiators.
  5. File Unfair Labor Practice complaints when the city doesn't play ball the way you want. (ULP complaints are for sissies)
  6. Have 50 negotiations sessions over a two-year period.
  7. Constantly lash out at the mayor during the negotiations marathon.
  8. Motivate your membership by keeping the hostilities at the highest crescendo possible.
  9. Fold and head to arbitration to salvage a deal.

Alright, that's "kickin' their butts." The only problem is - it does not work. If it did, New York and Philadelphia would be the highest paid departments in the country.

Negotiating like the "experts."

  1. Spill your guts to the city.
  2. Give the city all of your research.
  3. Drop your pants.
  4. Hope that the city does not take advantage of you.
  5. Compromise, compromise, compromise.
  6. Lose big time, either at the table or at arbitration.

In case you did not recognize this method, it is the trendy "interest based" or "win-win" method. It is actually good stuff. The only problem is that it usually fails for police associations. It is too tempting for the city to "jump ship" and retreat to positional bargaining after you "drop your pants." When you finally end up in arbitration, the city has every document, idea and concept that you have, but you have little or nothing from them. Under the "expert method," negotiations are nothing but a deposition of you by the city.

There is a better way. We can teach you how. Read about our courses.

Click here for a printable brochure.

 

 

 

BACK ISSUES OF THE JOURNAL

 

 

Copyright ã POLICEPAY.NET, Inc. 2006 All Rights Reserved

 

 

The POLICEPAY Journal

Published by:

POLICEPAY.NET, Inc.

211 North Robinson Ave, Suite 350

Oklahoma City, OK 73102

(405) 234-2235

www.policepay.net