|
|
POLICEPAY.NET
SEMINAR’S click here for more info Seminar on October 20-21, Only 4 weeks until
the Seminar, SIGN UP TODAY
Police officers give up
pay, benefits From
the Star Press, September 22, 2005 MUNCIE
- Muncie police officers gave up as much as firefighters in a new 3-year
contract that guarantees a $38,670 base pay in 2006 while more than doubling
out-of-pocket health care costs. The
last of three labor contracts with city workers and public safety employees
would save taxpayers $485,166 next year, mainly by reducing police manpower
by five to 115. Overall, municipal employees will give up more than $1.5
million in pay and benefit costs next year, helping to erase a $5.5-million
budget deficit. Mayor
Dan Canan said the spending reductions could bring
the city within its maximum tax levy of $23.2 million next year. "This
was a tough one to take," said police investigator Jason Webber,
president of Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 87. "We understand there
was an economic problem with the city." While
overall manpower was reduced, police maintained minimum manning at eight
officers for each shift. Police
Chief Joe Winkle said the public would see no difference in policing as a
result of five fewer policemen. "Any
cutbacks will not be in law enforcement," Winkle said. "It will be
in the service part of the job." That
means fewer officers for special events, although the department is still
supplemented by 45 reserves who fill in for regular
officers. Webber
said police officers would still get a big hike in base pay, an extra $3,630
next year, but see longevity pay cut in half. The
new base pay would be closer to the statewide average of about $38,500.
Muncie now ranks 95th in base pay for police officers, well below Anderson
and Lafayette, among 140 cities and towns. Attorney
Jennifer Abrell, the city's labor negotiator, said
the higher base pay would help recruiting efforts because some prospective
officers found other law enforcement jobs with higher pay. Police
officers who now pay $780 and $900 yearly co-pay for single and family health
insurance coverage could see those costs double or triple under the new city
plan. City
employees and officials pay a percentage of premium costs which would
translate into $1,300 to $4,500 a year in out-of-pocket costs. And police
retirees, like their firefighter counterparts, also will pay more of their
health insurance costs to maintain coverage. "We
realize the city's financial position and are willing to step up and pay
more," said Leroy Hahn, a retired police officer. However,
retirees, who mostly voted against the contract, were not willing to shoulder
more burden than active officers. Retired police officers will only see a
$545 yearly increase in the pension next year, but pay an extra $1,362 in
Medicare reimbursement and other health insurance costs. The
city's third-party administrator, Key Benefits, has estimated more a $1
million savings in the new program. Linda
Michael, a tax remonstrator, said public safety employees made a good effort
to cut expenses, but felt the city administration has "a ways to
go" to cut spending and satisfy taxpayers. "We
know several small business owners who no longer offer insurance plans to
their employees," said Michael. Michael,
and her husband, Bill, who run MIchael's Shoe
Repair, dropped their health insurance coverage two years ago because they
could not afford it. "If
the city is in the hole, they should not grant pay raises," she said. Pay
day Muncie
police officers are some of the lowest paid among police officers in Indiana
second class cities. 2005
pay Anderson
$38,482 Bloomington
$39,638 Elkhart
$40,492 Fort
Wayne $42,905 Kokomo
$41,331 Lafayette
$44,829 Muncie
$35,040 New
Albany $41,519 Terre
Haute $36,664 By
the numbers Muncie
Police Department 120
officers $9.3-million
budget base
pay $36,040 with $3,630 increase in 2006 Anderson
Police Department 120
officers $10.3-million
budget base
pay $38,482 with 3-percent raise in 2006 Bloomington
Police Department 84
officers $7.4-million
budget base
pay $39,638 with $1,500 raise in 2006 South Bend OKs police,
fire pacts From the South Bend Tribune, September 20, 2005 SOUTH
BEND -- After a long summer of negotiations and about six hours before a
state-mandated deadline, the South Bend Common Council passed contracts for
police and firefighters' salaries during a special Common Council meeting
Monday night. The
Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 36 approved its contract with the city while
the firefighters rejected theirs. Municipal salary ordinances are required by
state law to be passed by Sept. 20. The
city and unions have been in negotiations since July. During the regular Common
Council meeting on Sept. 12, the council passed 2 percent pay increases in
2006 for city employees not covered by collective bargaining agreements. The
ordinances for police and fire were tabled until negotiations were complete. In
a 6-2 vote, the council passed the Fire Department contract, which was
rejected by the Firefighters Local 362. The union voted 177-27, with one
abstention, against the contract which increases firefighters' salaries 2
percent in 2006, 2.5 percent in 2007 and 3.5 percent in 2008. The
firefighters union and FOP were offered an extra 1 percent the first year if
they ratified their contracts. The
council can approve and pass police and fire wages without agreements from
the unions. Firefighters and police officers cannot strike or engage in most
other work actions according to state law. Council
Member Al "Buddy" Kirsits, D-at large,
said he couldn't vote in favor of the ordinance because it penalizes the
firefighters for wanting a different wage package and for voicing their opinions
through this vote. "I
don't think that's good in public employee negotiations. I think it's
detrimental to public safety and to the city," Kirsits
said. Council
Member Derek Dieter, D-District 1, echoed Kirsits'
reasons for voting against it. 170 IPD,
fire jobs left out of budget Mayor says jobs can be
saved by consolidating governments From
the Indy Star, September 20, 2005 The City-County Council voted largely along party lines to
approve city and county budgets Monday that set the stage for layoffs of
police officers and increases in the price of parking tickets. The combined budgets will spend more than $900 million in 2006
and leave the county fund nearly broke at year's end. To help pay for city expenses, the price of parking tickets will
increase to $20 from $15. Republicans pushed a series of failed amendments to restore
funding for public safety, attempting to find money from various sources so
the city could hire for 122 unfilled police and firefighter positions and
avoid laying off 48 police officers. The council scrapped a number of other proposed fees, including
a controversial plan to charge a rescue fee of up to $2,500 for the
Indianapolis Fire Department to respond to vehicle accidents. Some GOP council members suggested using an unexpected windfall
in income tax revenues, while others favored raiding the reserves of other
agencies to find the necessary $5 million. "My feeling is we have revenue streams available so that we
don't have to lay off cops," said Jim Bradford, a GOP council member
from Broad Ripple. "There's a lot of pressure in my district -- when
we're building a new stadium for the Colts -- to find money for public
safety." Council President Steve Talley, a Democrat, said Republicans
were "last-minute grandstanding" because the council doesn't have
the authority to raid the reserves of municipal corporations such as the
Capital Improvement Board, which operates the RCA Dome and Conseco Fieldhouse. City Controller Bob Clifford said the extra income from tax
collections already had been spent to plug holes in the county budget and to
avoid borrowing against future income. Democrats, who control the council 15-14, used their advantage
to push through a series of budget ordinances nearly identical to what Mayor
Bart Peterson proposed in early August when he presented city and county
budgets together for the first time. Earlier in the day, Peterson had a news conference to announce
his intention to resuscitate his local government consolidation plan, known
as Indianapolis Works. Several Democratic council members cited the plan, which the
General Assembly largely failed to pass earlier this year, as their reason
for rejecting Republican proposals. "I appreciate (Bradford's)
creativity, but we have a proposition on the table and should let
Indianapolis Works have a chance before we consider this," said Jackie Nytes, a Democrat. City and county budgets have been spending down fund reserves
for the past five years as tax collections in the older part of Indianapolis
have not kept pace with expenses, especially for public safety. In June, Peterson reduced expenses by $28 million by leaving 122
public safety positions unfilled and by reducing city services such as mowing
in parks and street sweeping. The budgets the council passed retains
those cuts in 2006 and also assumes that another 48 police officers will be
laid off. Peterson said the initial cuts would be restored if Indianapolis
Works passes next year, and the 48 officers would not be cut if the council
merges city and county police forces. Clifford said the city would pay for those officers with the
projected $9 million savings from the merger, an amount disputed by
Republicans. A council study committee projected savings of about $3.5
million. Talley introduced a formal measure to consolidate the
departments during Monday's meeting, and it was assigned to the committee for
further consideration. A number of Peterson's proposed fee increases, including the
rescue fee and others for false fire and burglar alarms and hazardous
materials cleanup, never made it to a final vote before the council. Vernon
Brown, a Democratic council member, said he and others opposed charging for a
service that should be paid for with taxes. Clifford said the city would have to make up about $2 million in
lost revenue from the proposed fees by cutting spending elsewhere or raising
other fees. He said the mayor's goal was to maintain spending on the criminal
justice system to relieve jail overcrowding that leads to early release of
prisoners. Property
taxes likely to rise Even though the city budget will decrease 1.6 percent next year,
property taxes are still likely to rise. That's because a state-run,
county-funded child welfare program has requested a $30 million increase. The additional funding could translate into an $80 annual tax
increase on a $100,000 home. The council rejected that proposal, but the
agency can turn to the state for its tax increase. Marion County's proposed budget, which funds services such as
the Marion County Sheriff's Department, county courts and child welfare, is
roughly $376 million, up from about $300 million in 2005, with much of that
jump due to child welfare. The city budget, compiled separately, includes the Indianapolis
Police Department, parks and public works; that budget would decrease from
$543 million to $534 million. The council also voted to keep the Indianapolis-Marion County
Public Library at the same budget level. Library officials had requested a
$1.5 million increase, but council members cut that and expressed concerns
about the Central Library expansion project that has gone 40 percent over
budget. County expenses do not include child welfare costs. Public-employee unions
governor's next target Schwarzenegger endorses
Prop. 75 From
the UNION-TRIBUNE, September 18, 2005 ANAHEIM
– Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger yesterday transformed his Nov. 8
special-election agenda into a titanic struggle over the exercise of
political power in California by formally embracing a plan aimed at curbing
the influence of public-employee unions. Schwarzenegger,
who has been locked in a ferocious battle with state workers' unions all
year, yesterday endorsed Proposition 75, which would require public-employee
unions to obtain the written permission of members before using their dues
money for political purposes. "Public-employee
union members should not be forced to contribute to causes, candidates and
controversial issues that they don't believe in," Schwarzenegger told a
luncheon at the California Republican Party convention in Anaheim yesterday.
"That is not a contribution. That is a tax." Because
the Republican governor has said he favors Proposition 75 "in
principle" and some of his key supporters were instrumental in
qualifying the initiative for the ballot, yesterday's endorsement was no
surprise. By
making Proposition 75 an official part of his November ballot agenda,
Schwarzenegger made it clear that he intends to try to strike at the heart of
the financial wherewithal of the unions whose withering attacks have
contributed heavily to the sharp erosion of his popularity over the past six
months. "Big
government union leaders should not use their members' money as a personal
kitty to fund political campaigns and political advertising," he said. Schwarzenegger
has been campaigning for three Nov. 8 initiatives. Proposition 74 would
extend from two to five years the time it would take teachers to become
permanent employees. Proposition 76 would tie state spending to a three-year
average and give the governor power to make midyear cuts if revenue falls
behind spending and the Legislature fails to act. Proposition 77 would strip
the Legislature of the power to redraw congressional and legislative district
boundaries and give it to a panel of retired judges. At
his town-hall-style meetings, the governor would lead the crowd in chants of,
"Yes on 74, 76 and 77!" Yesterday it became, "Yes on 74, 75,
76 and 77!" Proposition
75 also became part of the 2006 campaign for governor. In his speech,
Schwarzenegger reaffirmed his declaration in San Diego on Friday that he will
run for another term next year. "I
promise you I will continue the fight; I will continue the struggle," he
told the cheering convention. "I will continue our cause to rebuild
California in a second term as governor." State
Treasurer Phil Angelides, a candidate for the
Democratic nomination for governor, was waiting at a hotel across the street
to denounce Schwarzenegger's endorsement of Proposition 75. "This
is really what they're after. Everything else is a mask," Angelides said. "What Governor Schwarzenegger wants
to do is he wants to make it almost impossible for working men and women to
participate in the politics of our state while his large, corporate,
special-interest friends go unfettered and can line his campaign coffers with
tens of millions of dollars." Schwarzenegger
has already been hammered in television ads by the coalition of labor unions
opposing his ballot agenda as the unseen presence behind Proposition 75.
Having already taken a political hit over the initiative, the governor's
political team figures it has little to lose by his so emphatically embracing
it. Officials of the Yes on 75 campaign arrived at
the convention with several public employees who objected to their unions'
spending of their dues money and contended that existing protections are
inadequate. Allan
Mansoor, an Orange County sheriff's deputy, said he
had "opted out" of a $5 contribution to the political action
committee of the Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs, but has no
idea if the rest of his dues money is going to political causes he opposes. "Our
union just increased our dues by 50 percent," Mansoor
said. "I don't really know where the money goes." Deputies get raise, pay
more for benefits From
the Post-Crescent, September 17, 2005 APPLETON
— The Outagamie County Deputy Sheriff’s Association will get a 3.25 percent
raise retroactive to January, but a 4 percent increase in its health
insurance premiums is backdated, as well. City, police close to a deal From
the Coloradan, September 16, 2005
That would mean a new contract for roughly 150
members of the Fort Collins police department and could settle a court
dispute rising from ballot language that city voters approved in 2004. The
proposal covers everything from grievance procedures to permission for
employees to wear pins representing Northern Colorado Fraternal Order of
Police No. 3. The deal provides cops with $1.43 million in
salary increases in 2006, and $664,000 in 2007. "I believe the agreement is fair,"
Mayor Doug Hutchinson said Thursday. "It's a positive situation. I'm
very pleased." Fraternal Order of Police President Scott Goff
did not return a call seeking comment. City Council is scheduled to vote on the deal
Tuesday. It was ratified late last week by an "overwhelming
majority" of the local Fraternal Order of Police, according to its
attorney, Steve Bukaty. "I think there were good-faith compromises
on both sides," he said. "There were a lot of issues that got
resolved." Bukaty wouldn't characterize what those issues
were or how the breakthrough in negotiations was achieved. "I don't think there was a single issue
here," Hutchinson said. "It was a combination of things." The deal came roughly a month after the city and
Fraternal Order of Police brought in fresh negotiators - Bukaty for the
police and Denver attorney Martin Semple to
represent the city - to handle the contract talks. Bukaty and Semple have
successfully negotiated contracts before, including a 2002 deal between the
county of Denver and its sheriff's deputies. In the Fort Collins negotiation, the two men
appear to have bridged disputes regarding the police contract and helped
reconcile a legal challenge. Last year, voters approved a ballot measure that
granted local police the power to negotiate as a group for future contracts
and working conditions. The measure stipulated, among other things, that an
impasse would be declared and binding arbitration sought if no agreement was
reached after 60 days. When that designated negotiation time lapsed in
July, the Fraternal Order of Police declared an impasse. The city countered
by filing a legal challenge against the ballot measure and seeking a district
court injunction that would declare parts of the measure invalid. Specifically, the city argued - and still does -
that the binding arbitration provision violates Fort Collins charter by
assigning decisions of pay and benefits and conditions of employment to an
authority other than City Council and the city manager. Also challenged by the city, one part of the
measure prohibits Fort Collins officials from lowering the pay and benefits
of police officers without their agreement. While awaiting a ruling, the city and police
voluntarily returned to the negotiating table in early August. The challenge remains in court. But as part of
the newly reached agreement, the Fraternal Order of Police would ask the
court to rule in favor of the city and invalidate the two challenged ballot
provisions. Hutchinson said he's pleased to see a tentative
resolution to the contract dispute and is glad talks didn't stretch longer. "I believe the agreement is fair," he
said. "This is, I think, a success story." Arbitrator awards police raises Although
issues from the 2004 contract are settled with the decision, the city and
police union still have to negotiate 2005 and 2006 contract points. September
15, 2005
NEWPORT -- A protracted labor dispute between the city
and the police union took a small step forward this week when an arbitrator
ordered the city to provide the officers a 4-percent pay hike and to continue
offering them health coverage for free. The
raise awarded to members of Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 8 is retroactive
to fiscal 2004. City Solicitor Joseph Nicholson yesterday could not
immediately calculate how much the retroactive pay will cost. Union
president Christopher Hayes estimated that most of the department's 85
members would receive between $2,000 to $4,000 depending on
the amount of details and overtime they worked. If the estimate is
correct, the award could cost the city $170,000 to $340,000. Nicholson
said he was disappointed that the police union won't have to share in the
cost of its health coverage. The city had demanded union members shoulder 20
percent of the cost of their premiums. Hayes,
however, said the decision was "no surprise because no one co-shared at
that time, not any union in the city. Obviously we're pleased with
that." The
Teachers Association of Newport last week became the first union in the city
to accept cost-sharing, rising gradually, over three years, to 10 percent. "Circumstances
have changed" since fiscal 2004, said Nicholson. "We will continue
to seek that through collective bargaining or arbitration. It's too important
to the city." The
union had sought a 7-percent raise, asserting that comparable departments in
the state were better paid. The city had argued for a 3-percent hike. [Last
year, the arbitrator awarded the union a retroactive 5-percent raise.] "I'm
satisfied with that," said Hayes. Said
Nicholson, "I'm not too happy with the raises." As
agreed by the city and the union, arbitrator Craig Overton did not provide a
written explanation of his decisions on salary and insurance cost-sharing.
The 97-page decision does summarize the arguments made by the two sides. Hayes
said the union was pleased with a requirement that the police chief must now
offer a written explanation to officers who are passed over for promotion
despite being ranked at the top of an eligibility list. Hayes said that two
cases headed for arbitration involve complaints by top-ranked officers who
have been repeatedly passed over for promotions. Despite
the ruling, the rift between the city and the police union remains. Union
members continue to work without a contract. The dispute began with fiscal 2003,
which an arbitrator settled last year. Meanwhile, the city and the union must
still resolve 2005 and the current fiscal year, 2006. Both
Nicholson and Hayes expressed hope -- as they did following last year's
arbitration decision -- that the remaining disputed years could be settled
through negotiation. "From
a stability standpoint, the union's goal is to have a long-term collective
bargaining agreement with the city. It not only benefits the union, but it
benefits the city," said Hayes. "The reason why people try to avoid
this process is because it's excruciating for everyone," he said. It's
also expensive. Craig Overton, the neutral arbitrator, is paid about $1,000
for every meeting, and there were more than 10 sessions, said Hayes. The
union must also pay its representative on the arbitration panel. Nicholson
said he was optimistic an agreement could be reached. "We
have come a long a way," he said. "We are talking." City counters in M.V. police negotiations From
the Daily Nonpareil, September 15, 2005 MISSOURI
VALLEY - To no one's surprise, the city of Missouri Valley's initial police
contract proposal offers less than one proposed by the Missouri Valley Police
Protective League, the police bargaining union. The
MVPPL's proposal is a three-year plan calling for
annual raises. The city offers a one-year agreement. The city's proposal
calls for a $16.75 per hour salary for sergeants,
and $13.25 to $15 per hour for officers, depending on their level. The
police union proposes a $21.68 per hour base pay for sergeants and $18.07 for
officers, with annual increases over the three years. Under
the police proposal, officers would work 12-hour shifts and be paid time and
a half for any time over that. The city calls for eight-hour shifts and
time-and-a-half pay for any hours over 171 worked in a 28-day period. The
two proposals' vacation packages are also at odds. Both plans call for 40
hours after one year and 80 hours after two. MVPPL's
plan would give officers 120 hours after three years, 144 after six and 156
after seven years of service. The city, by contrast, would offer 88 hours
after six years and 96 after seven. MVPPL's contract proposal lists 14 paid holidays, three
less than the city's. The union would add Good Friday, Columbus Day and the
employee's birthday to the holiday list. The
agreement is scheduled to take effect July 1, 2006. MVPPL
negotiators are Sgt. Lee Lange and Officer Troy Liebe.
The city's negotiating team consists of Mayor Doris Stillwell, Police
Advisory Chairperson Connie McWilliams, City Council Member Dan Kougias and Attorney Derrick Franck. Franck
said negotiations have not yet started and no date has been set. Under Iowa
law, sessions are private unless both parties agree to make them public,
which is unlikely, he said. Franck
said when both sides have reached a tentative agreement it will be made
public and, hopefully, ratified by the police and approved by the city. He
would not speculate as to when that might happen. The
MVPPL recently organized as the police bargaining
unit, and this is its first contract negotiation. Lange
was out of town and not available for comment. City police contract OK'd MARQUETTE
- A spokesman for the Marquette City Police Association expressed relief
Wednesday that an agreement between the union and the city of Marquette was
reached without arbitration. "The
association is thankful we were able to reach a voluntary settlement with the
city," said Emil Kezerle, business agent and
coordinator with the Upper Michigan Law Enforcement Agency, which represents
the union. "We appreciate the support we received from other local
unions and from numerous members of the community." The
Marquette City Commission on Monday approved a new contract with the union,
nearly 14 months after the old one expired. The
agreement is retroactive to July 1 and lasts until June 30, 2008. It provides
for annual wage increases, typically between 1 percent and 3 percent, as well
as new health insurance and pension language. The
union covers 38 members of the police force - all personnel except Chief Phil
Siegert and Capts. Mike Angeli and Russ Kilgren. "I'm
very pleased that the officers and city staff were able to get this
negotiation taken care of," Commissioner Joe Lavey
said. "These are difficult issues, especially an agreement of health
care and pension contributions, but it looks like an excellent agreement for
both sides." In
an agenda supplement provided for Monday's meeting, interim City Manager Judy
Akkala thanked the commission for standing behind
its bargaining team during the negotiations. "We
feel confident that we have negotiated a contract which is fair to the
employer and employee," she wrote in a supplement provided with Monday's
agenda. Under
the agreement, police officers will receive a 1.24 percent wage increase
retroactive to July 1, a 1.24 percent increase effective July 1, 2006, and a
2.5 percent increase effective July 1, 2007. Parking,
clerical and animal control workers will receive a .55 percent increase
retroactive to July 1, a 2.6 percent increase effective July 1, 2006, and a
2.5 percent increase effective July 1, 2007. In
addition, a part-time clerical worker for the department will receive a 1
percent lump sum payment based on wages from July 1, 2004, to June 30, 2005,
a 2.9 percent increase retroactive to July 1, a 2.6 percent increase
effective July 1, 2006, and a 2.5 percent increase effective July 1, 2007. For
health insurance, employees will be responsible for any premium increases
over 8 percent in the first year of the contract, 16 percent in the second
year and 24 percent in the third. The
pension enhancement is comprised of an increase in the multiplier from 2.5
percent to 3 percent, with a maximum of 80 percent. The police association
will help fund the increase in the multiplier by selling back 2,692 hours of
accrued sick leave, equating to $49,672. To
help fund the normal cost of the multiplier, the police association will
contribute a 1 percent lump sum and 3.02 percent in wages based on sworn
officers' base wages from July 1, 2005, to June 30, 2005. The association
will also contribute a 1 percent lump sum and 2.35 percent in wages from July
1, 2005, to June 30, 2006, from clerical staff. The
police union contract expired on July 1, 2004. The slow progress of
negotiations prompted the union to hold an informational picket in front of
city hall in August. The
new contract was ratified by the union on Aug. 30. Bridgeport's
Police Pact Vetoed Binding arbitration next step following lopsided union vote From the Connecticut Post, September 13, 2005 BRIDGEPORT — By a 4-1 margin, the local police union has
rejected the city's final contract proposal, forcing the deadlocked talks on a
new pact into binding arbitration. "The membership has spoken. Obviously, they weren't happy
with what the city was offering," Sgt. Donald Jacques, the union
president, said Monday. "The city said it was its best offer, but the
membership decided it wasn't good enough." Officers rejected the proposed contract by a 180-45 vote in
Friday balloting. Police officers have been working without a contract for a
year and a half. Mayor John M. Fabrizi said he was
disappointed with the vote, but said the city is prepared to press its case
in the state's binding arbitration process. "The tentative agreement was reached after many hours of
negotiation over the past several months. I felt it was very fair and
equitable," the mayor said. There are 419 uniformed police officers with starting pay at
$37,964 in the police union. While the proposed agreement called for salary increases of 2.5
percent, 2.5 percent, 3 percent and 3 percent over the course of the
four-year pact, it also would have required larger payments by union members
for health insurance, something they were not prepared to accept, according
to union officials. "Because of the spiraling cost of health benefits, it just
can't remain status quo," the mayor said of the city's demand that the
officers contribute more. Under the family plan rate, a police officer currently pays 7.5
percent of the health-care premium with the city paying the remainder.
However, under the proposal, the percentage the employee would pay would have
risen to 10 percent this year, 11 percent next year and 12 percent in 2007. Co-payments would increase from $5 to $20 for a doctor visit and
prescription co-payments would be $5, $10 and $25, depending on the
medication. "I felt the proposal was extremely fair and equitable and
in line with the private sector," the mayor said. Jacques, who has led the union for the past year, also said
Monday he will not run for re-election. Meanwhile, the city's firefighters are also without a contract. Fabrizi said city negotiators had been delaying work on a
new fire pact until the police contract was complete. Police Vote Down Proposed
Contract From
the NEWS-TIMES, September 10, 2005 DANBURY
— Danbury police rejected the city's latest offer to settle a two-year contract
dispute Friday in a 117-9 vote. Now
the matter will likely be decided by the state Board of Mediation and
Arbitration, which could prolong the dispute for another year. "It's
disappointing," said Mayor Mark Boughton.
"I think this contract was negotiated in good faith between the city and
the negotiating team. I think it's unfortunate, but the bottom line is that
this contract provided a 12 percent salary increase over four years and for
the first time in 23 years put the cost of living adjustment back into the
pension. "The
rank and file isn't following their own
leadership," Boughton said. "You
can't sit down and keep negotiating. The only way we're going to get a
contract is to go through the arbitration process," he said. Boughton said the arbitration process starts Sept.
23 and can take from eight months to a year. Tony
Mahr, president of Local union 891, said the
biggest sticking point was the medical insurance. "What
I'm hearing is that they don't want to go with the standard medical and keep
what they have even if they have to pay the difference," Mahr said. "The medical is a big deal." Mahr said the proposal called for a change in medical
plans that would increase co-payments and offer less coverage. Members, who
pay 5 percent of the premium now, would have faced an increase of 10 percent
this year and 12 percent the following year. "They're
paying more and getting less," Mahr said.
"They feel the contract is all give-backs." Mahr said, despite the looming arbitration, there is
always a chance of settlement. "I
don't think negotiations are over. It's all a matter of when we agree to sit
down and talk again," he said. The
latest proposal came after six weeks of renewed negotiations, following the
unprecedented unanimous rejection of the city's previous offer last May. The
proposed four-year contract would have replaced the pact that expired in July
2003. The union's negotiating committee voted 7 to 0 to recommend the
agreement to its members. One
of the major reasons the agreement was unanimously defeated in May, union
leaders said, was that the officers' pension contributions, in addition to
the cost of a new medical insurance plan sought by the city, would have wiped
out any pay increase for most of the members. Previous
contracts had no COLA for the post-1983 officers, who now constitute a
majority of the department. The pension plan for those who began working
prior to 1983 does include a COLA. Under
the latest proposal, the city's previous offer of a 12 percent pay increase
over the life of the pact remained essentially unchanged. What was altered
was the amount officers contribute to a revised pension plan that for the
first time provides a cost of living adjustment in retirement pensions for
those who joined the department after 1983. The
mayor said Friday that the cost of living pension increase would have cost
taxpayers an additional $500,000 a year and the entire proposal would have
cost an additional $800,000 a year for each of the next three years of the
contract. "We
want to invest in our public safety personnel, but I also have a
responsibility to the taxpayers in the city," Boughton
said. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Copyright ã POLICEPAY.NET,
Inc. 2005 All Rights Reserved |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The POLICEPAY Journal
Published
by:
POLICEPAY.NET,
Inc.
(405)
234-2235