The POLICEPAY Journal®

Thursday, November 2, 2006

www.policepayjournal.net  

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

POLICEPAY.NET NEGOTIATION TRAINING                     

                     JANUARY 18-19     -      Orlando, FL 

                    JULY 26-27            -      Santa Fe, NM        (click here for information)

 

POLICEPAY.NET

NEW CONTRACT NEGOTIATION SERVICE

NEW YORK CITY

Mike & cops clash in contract standoff

SAN ANTONIO, TX

Proposal includes leeway to fill top cop spots

LONG BEACH, CA

Police At Ease With New Pay Incentives

TAMPA, FL

Police union votes against contract

FREEMONT, CA

Police, city settle new contract

McALLEN, TX

Finger pointing continues in police contract dispute

                                             BACK ISSUES OF THE JOURNAL

 

Mike & cops clash in contract standoff

October 25, 2006

 

Mayor Bloomberg and the city's largest police union attacked one another in a war of words yesterday, soon after the dispute over a new contract headed to binding arbitration.

 

"Every other union has had creative, intelligent, hardworking, honest, open leadership that's been able to come up with a contract with the city," Bloomberg said. "I have no idea why this union repeatedly has not been able to do that."

 

Mediation between the city and the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association to settle the contract covering August 2004 through July 2006 ended Friday without an agreement.

Bloomberg again cast blame on the PBA for the cops' low starting pay - $25,100 - a controversial result of the last round of talks.

 

The last arbitration decision was "forced on all of us by the PBA who deliberately sold the unborn," the mayor charged.

 

"That was their choice," Bloomberg said. "And then they tried to blame others for it."

 

PBA President Patrick Lynch accused the mayor of lying. "Once again Bloomberg thinks that if he repeats a lie often enough, people will believe it," Lynch said. "Reduced starting salary for police officers was in the city's demands from day one. They wanted it, testified for it and the arbitrator gave it to them, and now they have to live with it."

 

Lynch has said the city's offer of 3% and 3.15% raises over two years is "lower than inflation" and "completely unacceptable."

 

The city has offered the union several proposals that would increase salaries to $40,000 a year in the first year on the job.

 

"The real issue is that people thinking about becoming police officers look at the potential for earnings over the long run and without competitive salaries at all levels - starting and critical top pay - no one is going to take this dangerous and difficult job," Lynch said.

 

 

Proposal includes leeway to fill top cop spots

From the Express-News, October 31, 2006

 

Passage of a new police contract this week could mean more freedom for the police chief when choosing among officers to fill some of the department's top positions.

 

Other major changes outlined in the contract — an agreement between the city and police force that ensures fair working conditions and hammers out details like overtime pay, educational bonuses and disciplinary processes — include an across-the-board pay raise for officers but a significant increase in their monthly contributions to a retiree health plan.

 

Voting on the contract started Tuesday and ends Thursday. Results are expected by Thursday night, said San Antonio Police Officer Association Secretary Ervey Banda.

 

The proposed contract would allow any officers with rank of captain for at least one year to apply for or be appointed to one of the department's two assistant chief positions. Previously, only the department's five deputy chiefs were eligible to become assistant chief.

 

Such were the circumstances when Police Chief William McManus made his first major appointment in September following the retirement of Assistant Chief Jerry Pittman.

McManus appointed then-Deputy Chief Rudy Gonzales to the spot.

 

For officers themselves, probably the most significant change in the proposed contract involves the increase in their monthly contributions to the prefunded health care trust. Officers and firefighters jointly contribute to the fund to guarantee health insurance when they retire.

 

The city will pay two-thirds of a monthly contribution to the benefit. Officers will pay one-third, the proposed contract states.

 

For the first time, officers with a spouse will pay a $20 monthly premium for their active-duty health benefits, if the contract passes, said Teddy Stewart, president of the police association.

 

"Health care costs have skyrocketed," Stewart said.

 

A number of officers at one substation voiced their plans to vote no Tuesday.

 

"Sometimes you're better off staying where you are," said one Central Substation patrol officer who voted against the contract because he felt proposed pay raises would not sufficiently cover the retiree health care payments.

 

If passed, the contract would also provide pay increases of 5 percent, 2 percent, 3 percent and 4 percent for all officers spread over two years.

 

A new provision would require retired officers who take another job after leaving the force to primarily use the insurance provided by their new employer.

Retirees cannot vote on contracts.

 

"I feel helpless," said retired officer and former union president Ronnie Welch. "I stayed almost 33 years (with the department), thinking I don't have to worry about health care premiums for the rest of my life."

 

If passed, the contract will be effective immediately through Sept. 30, 2009.

A no vote means police negotiators will reconvene with city officials and the current contract will remain in place, Stewart said.

 

Police At Ease With New Pay Incentives

From the Long Beach Gazette, October 26, 2006

 

 

Members of the Long Beach Police Officers Association overwhelmingly approved a mid-contract raise package last week, and tensions in the department already have eased.

 

“The day they approved it, you could just feel the pressure being let out,” Police Chief Anthony Batts said. “It feels different already. I’ve had officers come up to me; we’ve had folks who were leaving say they are staying; I’ve even heard from one officer who went to Huntington Beach say he wants to come back.

 

“We definitely hit the target.”

 

Incentives for police officers have been a hot topic since August, when Mayor Bob Foster pushed for an enhanced retention and recruitment package as part of his budget recommendations. Nearby cities had been recruiting experienced LBPD officers with promises of higher pay and benefits.

 

A package first suggested in September included immediate raises for the entire department as well as a 4% hike for officers with more than 15 years of seniority.

 

But that offer was turned away, and City Attorney Robert Shannon ruled that even a one-sided offer constituted reopening of contract negotiations and required union approval.

 

On Oct. 6, the City Council endorsed a new plan that offered more to senior officers early in the remaining three years of the contract. The new deal gives officers with more than 10 years’ service an additional 5% now, with another 5% on Oct. 1, 2007, for officers with 15 years or more of service. It also accelerates raises for the entire force, with a 2% hike (on top of an already-scheduled 3% raise) on April 2008 and 3% in April 2009. The current contract also calls for a 6% across-the-board raise in April 2007.

 

Steve James, president of the POA, conducted a series of meetings and votes last week. He said the vote was 95% in favor, with just 28 no votes.

 

The entire package is expected to cost an estimated $10 million, including $2.1 million this fiscal year. The council formally approved the deal Tuesday night, but also indicated they are aware the city’s other unions also are looking for — and deserving of — raises.

 

At the request of the personnel and civil service committee, the council asked City Manager Jerry Miller for a review of the city’s recruitment and retention strategies for all city employees, including extending a mortgage assistance program now offered to police officers to all employees.

 

Police union votes against contract

From the Times, October 20, 2006

 

Tampa's police union voted this week to reject a contract that would have raised their pay by 4½ percent next year, and 4 percent for each of the two following years.

 

The vote took place Tuesday and Wednesday and failed by 539 to 268, nearly 2-1.

 

It applies to officers, detectives, corporals and sergeants, said police spokeswoman Laura McElroy.

 

In a separate 16-5 vote, police lieutenants approved a contract for themselves that's nearly identical to the one the police union voted down.

 

Police Benevolent Association president Kevin Durkin said he hasn't talked to enough officers to be certain about the reasons for the rejection, but speculated it had to do with pay and officer evaluation procedures.

 

The previous contract, negotiated in 2003, expired Sept. 30.

 

Under the previous contract, officers made $40,456 to $65,728 and sergeants

$65,728 to $80,662.

 

Under the contract rejected Wednesday, salaries would have increased over three years to $45,108 to $73,287 for officers and $73,287 to $89,938 for sergeants.

 

 

Police, city settle new contract

Fremont City Council set to approve agreement Tuesday

From Inside Bay Area, October 20, 2006

 

FREMONT — A tentative labor agreement reached between city staff and police likely will be approved by the City Council next week, Fremont officials said.

 

Fremont Police Association members earlier this week voted to accept the contract, albeit "very reluctantly," said Officer Glenn Miller, the union's president.

 

"We're not happy about it because we feel there were no other options, given the city's take it or leave it attitude," Miller added. "So we took (the deal) for the benefit of the (association) members."

 

The terms include a 2.9 percent cost-of-living adjustment, effective immediately; a 10 percent increase in medical benefits, effective Jan. 1; and a one-time allowance of $800 for safety equipment for each officer.

 

The deal will draw more than $550,000 from the city's general fund this year, said Kathy Ito, Fremont's labor relations officer.

 

Except for the equipment allowance, the terms match what city staff members initially offered police officers in June, and it also equals what other city bargaining units received in their new contracts.

 

"The bottom line is that we got what everybody else got," Miller said.

 

He has argued that lower-than-average salaries for Fremont officers and rising crime has hurt morale in the department. He said that Fremont officers' salaries and benefits have lagged behind their colleagues in 10 other Bay Area cities, including Santa Clara, Hayward and Pleasanton.

 

This year, most Fremont employee associations agreed to a one-year deal, leaving the police union as the last employee group to reach labor peace with the city. Its seven-year contract expired on June 30.

 

The labor agreement ended several months of squabbling between police and city staff members, including a declared impasse in July that later led toa failed bargaining session with a state mediator.

 

When talks further stalled, officials said the City Council might be forced to impose contract terms on both sides — which would be unprecedented in Fremont. But negotiations finally paid off last week, when they forged an agreement.

 

"Both sides can be commended for staying with it," Ito said. "It was tough, but we just kept plugging away. We're glad to be working together with them."

 

But the labor peace might not last long.

 

The contract for the department's roughly 175 officers expires in less than six months.

"Due to the city's financial uncertainty, we wanted to do something short-term until we had a better understanding of the situation," Ito said.

 

City officials have said that Fremont's finances will improve at least slightly if voters on Nov. 7 pass Measure L, a utility users tax that may generate about $8 million annually over six years.

 

But Ito said that none of the short-term labor contracts this year was connected to next month's election results. "It doesn't factor in to my role as a negotiator," she said.

Calling the protracted negotiations "a sign of the times," Mayor Bob Wasserman said he expects council members to approve the tentative contract at their meeting on Tuesday.

 

Finger pointing continues in police contract dispute
From the Monitor, October 20,2006

McALLEN — Seven hours of court-ordered mediation Wednesday failed to break the six-month impasse in the contract negotiations between the city of McAllen and the police union.

 

Tensions were clearly running high Thursday as each side sought to put its spin on the situation during a news conference Mayor Richard Cortez called at City Hall.

 

City officials claim the last offer they put on the table Wednesday included a 3 percent annual pay increase in each of the next two years and a retroactive increase in retirement benefits beginning Jan. 1, 2007.

 

That retroactive increase would be achieved with updated service credits that would apply the current employer-employee retirement contribution rate of 18 percent to the salary at which an officer retires — as if the officer had earned that same salary and had that same contribution rate throughout his or her entire time as a McAllen police officer.

 

"The cost to the taxpayers of this offer is over a million dollars of new money," said Cortez, who was not at the negotiating table Wednesday. "Unfortunately, the members of the police union bargaining team rejected this offer, which the city considered to be very reasonable."

 

The union, however, disputed that the city made that offer — and said it wasn’t very attractive even if the city did make it.

 

"Their last offer was a 3 percent raise the first year, updated service credits the second year and no raise the second year — which is different that the last written offer I got," said police union president Sgt. Mike Zellers.

 

That written offer included a 3.5 percent pay increase the first year, a 3 percent pay increase the second year and updated service credits that would take effect Jan. 1, 2007, according to the Sept. 26 letter Zellers received from City Manager Mike Perez.

A total of 218 officers, or about 84 percent of all McAllen officers, voted on that offer, Zellers said. All but one of them voted against it.

 

Even assuming the city’s final offer Wednesday was the one it said it made, it’s still less than the earlier written offer that the officers voted down, Zellers said.

 

"If they voted against that, I can’t see how they would vote for less than that," he said, explaining that retirement contributions remain the sticking point in its negotiations with the city.

 

Under the current plan, officers contribute 6 percent of their salary to the retirement plan, and the city contributes 12 percent, for a total contribution of 18 percent. The officers have been pushing to increase their contribution to 7 percent, which would boost the city’s 2-to-1 contribution to 14 percent, for a total contribution of 21 percent.

 

Cortez disputed that the city came down from its earlier offer.

 

Zellers explained that the union is seeking a commitment from the city to increase retirement contributions to the same level as other cities in the McAllen area. Cortez, however, asserted that the retroactive effect of the updated service, coupled with the higher retirement contribution rate, would add up to a very costly proposition for McAllen residents — in an amount estimated to be $310,000 per year for the next 25 years, or $7,750,000 total. That $310,000 amounts to about 0.4 percent of the city’s current operating budget.

 

The two groups started collective bargaining talks 10 months ago but have been deadlocked since an April 27 meeting.

 

The union sued the city on Aug. 24, claiming the city broke state law by not engaging in "substantive and meaningful" contract negotiations and mediation.

The current contract ran out Sept. 30 but was extended until Oct. 24 by state district court Judge Aida Salinas.

 

"We’re going to court Monday," Zellers said. "We’re going to ask the judge for a permanent injunction to keep our current contract in effect — the terms of it in effect — until a new contract is signed."

 

So what does the sequel to this ongoing saga have in store?

Well, for starters, the police officers plan to take their case directly to the people, Zellers said.

 

The officers are putting together a petition for a city charter amendment that would establish an impasse procedure for the city’s contract negotiations with the police and fire departments.

 

"If we come to impasse like this where we can’t agree on a contract, then a panel of independent hearing examiners would come in, and they would decide the contract, and their decision would be final and binding on both parties," Zellers said.

 

To get the charter amendment on the ballot as a referendum, the officers must gather the signatures from 5 percent of the city’s registered voters, or at least 4,000 signatures, he added. He hopes to put the question to voters during the May election.

 

 

CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS

 

POLICEPAY provides complete contract negotiations for your bargaining unit.  We will:

 

  • Do all of the research work – wage survey, costing analysis, financial ability-to-pay
  • Train your executive board how to lobby and politic (at your place)
  • Meet with the key decision makers in your city – Chief, Mayor, Administrator
  • Provide all preparation for contract negotiations
  • Serve as your lead negotiator

 

Our fee will be a fixed amount that is agreed to up front.  The fee will include all costs, even travel and hotels.  There will be no surprises.  We offer options with no up front payment.  You can make equal monthly payments.  If your contract is 36 months, you will make 36 monthly payments.

 

During the term of the contract, we will:

 

  • Update your wage survey whenever there is a change
  • Update ability-to-pay reports annually
  • Provide monthly reports on major revenue (if data is available)
  • Meet with you annually to review strategies

 

If we are not able to reach an agreement with your city, we will provide arbitration services at no additional cost.  We intend to get an agreement.

 

Our approach to contract negotiations is different than what you are probably used to.  We engage in non-confrontational negotiations that rely on developing relationships.  However, we do not use so called “win-win” negotiation.  It’s a loser for you.  There will be no unfair labor practice complaints filed by us or lawsuits and grievances.  If that is what you are wanting you need to call the usual knucklehead lawyers that have been screwing up police negotiations for years.  Intimidation and blustering are not in our arsenal.

 

If you prefer to negotiate yourself we can provide any of the services listed above, with the same payment plans, only at lower rate.  If this is the way you want to go, you need to attend one of our negotiation seminars.  The upcoming seminars are listed on our website.

 

For more information, give us a call at (405) 234-2235, or contact Matt Barnard on his cell phone at (405) 413-6517. You may also email Matt at matt@policepay.net.

 

 

POLICEPAY.NET

 

Your Ultimate Solution For Contract Negotiations

 

www.policepay.net

 

 

 

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