|
|
POWER, INFLUENCE & PERSUASION POLICE CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE 21ST CENTURY OCTOBER 25 & 26, 2007
POLICEPAY.NET
SERVICES (Click on service name for information and
pricing) Failure
to set the expectations of your membership makes successful contract
negotiations virtually impossible. No
matter what you are able to obtain, it will not be seen as sufficient unless
it meets your members’ minimum expectations.
Most negotiations begin with the membership thinking that some huge
increase will be achieved at the negotiating table. When that does not occur, which is most of
the time, they become angry and vote down the
agreement. The time to deal with this
problem is well in advance of the first negotiating session. For
a further explanation of this and many other negotiating tips, plan to order The Police Negotiator's Handbook,
POLICEPAY's new book, which
will be available later this summer. This book is written by Ron York, POLICEPAY.NET
president, and is based on nearly forty years of experience with public
safety negotiations. Supervisors block police contract with 25% pay raise Union head accuses board of playing
politics, may request arbitrator in future From The San Francisco Chronicle, June 20,
2007 The San Francisco Board of Supervisors
blocked a contract for city police officers that would have raised wages 25
percent over the next four years, a pay boost the police union and Newsom
administration say is necessary to stay competitive with other departments in
the region. Led by supervisors who have been at odds
with the mayor over budget priorities and law enforcement strategies, the
board voted 7-4 to send the contract back for a committee hearing. Supervisor Chris Daly questioned whether
money should be "slated to go into the pockets of cops" while the
board is being asked by the Newsom administration to accept $6 million in
cuts to public health programs. He also questioned the timing of
negotiations by the Newsom administration that led to the proposed police
contract, noting that this is a mayoral election year. Supervisor Tom Ammiano,
who also voted to delay the contract, noted the city needs to find a way to
lower the crime and murder rate. "Police are definitely part of the
equation, but there are other parts of the equation," Ammiano said. Supervisors Bevan
Dufty, Sophie Maxwell, Ross Mirkarimi,
Aaron Peskin and Gerardo Sandoval voted to delay
consideration of passage of the contract to allow for more hearings. The contract would have averaged out to
about a 6 percent pay increase each year over the course of the contract for
2,600 positions in the department. In addition to the increases, the police
union agreed in the contract to limit the amount of sick pay officers could
convert to cash and also eliminate overtime pay for police captains. It would
also lower the number of hours one could accrue in comp time. Under the pact, an entry-level The increases are needed to keep pace with
salaries in other Bay Area departments like Delagnes disparaged the supervisors who voted to block the
contract. He called it an example of "the absurdity of "Every one of them had been briefed on
this contract prior to having it at the board," said Delagnes.
"It's gotten to be a very old,
pathetic game for me," he said. "You try to do the right thing and
deal with people with a sense of integrity and fairness and then you get
repaid like this. These were not easy negotiations. We gave a lot back."
If the board ultimately does not pass the
contract, Delagnes said the union would request an
independent arbitrator to negotiate between the city and the union. Micki Callahan, employee relations director for the city's
Department of Human Resources, said she was surprised by the supervisors'
action Tuesday. "I believe very strongly this is a
good contract for the city," Callahan said. She said Daly's suggestion that the mayoral
election cycle impacted the budget negotiations is off the mark. There were
three other contracts previously negotiated and passed Tuesday, including one
that gives nurses a 19 percent pay increase. "We were pushing reforms that were in
the interest of the department and the city -- to pay a competitive pay rate
and to not waste money. We're proud of what we did," she said. Police Get
New Contract From the Norwalk Citizen, June 14, 2007 The Norwalk Police Union's new four-year contract, which was
decided by an arbitration panel and unanimously approved on Tuesday by the
Common Council, is retroactive to July 1, 2006, and contains wage increases
totaling 14 percent. According to Personnel Director H. James Haselkamp,
the city largely prevailed in the arbitration hearings, with the panel
accepting five out of six of its "last best offers" over the union's. Haselkamp said this did
not surprise him since the union Local 1727, Council 15, AFSCME,
AFL-CIO previously had tentatively agreed to the city's offers on the issues
at stake but later rejected them. The arbitration panel took this into
consideration when making its decision, he said. Haselkamp called the
contract "a very fair package" compared with others in the state. However, the union's president, Officer William Curwen, on Wednesday said, "I think my membership is
a little upset that we couldn't come to an agreement on the same type of
medical deductibles and eye protection that other city workers were
receiving." Under the new contract, he said, police officers receive
"considerably less coverage" and have higher deductibles than other
city employees. These issues were discussed with Mayor Richard Moccia, but not brought before the arbitration panel,
said Curwen. Curwen said that
prior to his taking over as the union's president in February,
the membership had rejected two tentative agreements with the city. Once he
was elected, he met with Moccia to discuss the
disputed items in the contract. "At first he was receptive, and then he
reneged on his agreement with us," Curwen
said. The union and the city ended up going to binding arbitration in
February on six disputed issues. Moccia could not be
reached for comment before press time. According to Haselkamp, the
arbitration process requires both parties to submit their "last best
offer" on each contested issue. The panel must then pick one offer or
the other it cannot compromise. Haselkamp explained
that two of the issues involved wage increases. The city prevailed in
obtaining a 3 percent increase retroactive to July 1, 2006, while the union sought
a 3.5 percent increase. The union then prevailed in getting a 3.5 percent
increase effective July 1, 2007, while the city again offered 3 percent. Haselkamp noted that the increases in the third and
fourth years were not disputed by the two groups. For year three, the union
members will increases of 2 percent on July 1, 2008, and another 2 percent on
Jan. 1, 2009. In year four, which begins on July 1, 2009, they will receive a
3.5 percent raise. Where health insurance is concerned, the city prevailed again on
co-pays for medical office visits. According to Haselkamp,
the union members previously were required to pay $15 for some office visits,
but certain other types, most notably for preventive care, were exempt from
the co-pay. The new contract extends the $15 co-pay to all office visits, as
the city proposed. Similarly, the city prevailed in getting
a $100 emergency room co-pay into the contract. The union had proposed a $50 co-pay. The new contract also limits health care coverage for dependents
and spouses of retired members. Haselkamp explained
that under the previous agreement, if an officer got divorced after he
retired, then remarried and had children 20 years later, the city was
obligated to pay for insurance for the new spouse and children. "And we
think that is not reasonable," he said. Under the arbitration panel's
decision, the city is required to cover only those dependents and spouses who
are on a member's plan at the time of retirement. Lastly, the city won the ability to stretch out terminal leave
pay over three years for employees on the deferred retirement option plan.
Previously, officers who retired under the DROP received a lump-sum payment
at the time of retirement. Haselkamp also noted
other changes in the contract that were not disputed and therefore not raised
at the arbitration hearing. Most notably in the new contract, he said,
officers receive increases in their allowances for the purchase and cleaning
of uniforms and in the lump-sum payment they receive for having earned a
four-year college degree or a master's degree. In addition, said Haselkamp, the new
contract requires employees to contribute to a pension fund for retiree
health insurance, beginning July 1, 2008. This makes Police Chief Harry Rilling could not
be reached for comment before press time. PV council
OKs funds for police pay, benefits From The PARADISE VALLEY - Paradise Valley police will soon see an
additional $439,240 in salary and benefits, staving off a feared wholesale
move of many of the town's officers to better-paying law enforcement agencies.
Patrolmen,
firefighters near pact; 9.1 percent over three years From the The town expects to sign contracts with the unions representing Police labor talks From the With labor talks still at an impasse, the The city offered Teamsters Local 381 workers a total 11- percent
salary adjustment over two years, according to Lompoc Police Officers
Association representative Dale Strobridge, of Asked about the Teamster pay package, Lompoc Human Resources
Director Bill Yanonis, city's chief negotiator,
defended the offer to the police union. In the past, he said, police have received larger increases than
other city workers. “We went back and did a study over the last 10 years of wage
increases to different groups, and the management, the unrepresented and the
teamsters received an average wage increase of 40.4 percent,” Yanonis said. “The police, over that same period,
received a 62-percent increase in salary. Over the last 10 years, we've given
more to the police department.” In another development Tuesday, Strobridge
said the union wants the city to pay for a professional mediator from the
American Arbitration Association to help stalled negotiations. That would
cost about $1,000 per day. Normally, a mediator is provided by the state for free to help
in negotiations that have reached impasse. However, Strobridge
said police union members do not believe a state mediator would be helpful. Strobridge said Yanonis “denigrated state mediators with the comment ‘You
get what you pay for.'” The comment, made during negotiations, would make it
difficult for a mediator to be impartial, Strobridge
said. When labor negotiations reached impasse on April 25, the city
had offered police an across-the-board average pay raise of 6 percent for a
two-year contract. The union's “last, best and final offer,” was a 14.68-percent
increase for police officers, 16.38 percent for dispatchers and 19.78 percent
for community service officers. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Copyright ã POLICEPAY.NET, Inc.
2007 All Rights Reserved |
||||||||||||||||||
The POLICEPAY Journal
Published
by
POLICEPAY.NET,
Inc.
(405)
701-8616