Someone Explain why so many Unions?
Printed From: MiddletownUSA.com
Category: Middletown City Government
Forum Name: City Manager
Forum Description: Discuss the city manager administration including all city departments.
URL: http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2059
Printed Date: Nov 22 2024 at 4:59am
Topic: Someone Explain why so many Unions?
Posted By: wasteful
Subject: Someone Explain why so many Unions?
Date Posted: Oct 07 2009 at 7:17am
|
Why is the City dealing with so many Unions, 8 I believe they said last night? It would seem that the Unions have the City over a barrel when it comes to negotiating. Why can the city not layoff unioinized employees and why must they only look at 63 of 400 employees when it comes to layoffs?
Why does the city not take a tougher stance with the Union employees in times like these and in future negotiations? Personally as someone that is footing the bill for all of these Union employees, I am tired of the guaranteed 3-4% raises when the rest of the world is getting no raise and pay cuts, higher than average health care costs to the residents for union employees, etc. It is time the Union employees are brought to the table and the real world and realize that the Citizens of a city come first not unionized employees.
|
Replies:
Posted By: lrisner
Date Posted: Oct 07 2009 at 9:45pm
Once again you speak without knowing.
Your continued displays of hate leveled at Unions is obviously rooted in your own delusions about unions.
What is the Contract Language concerning the issues you brought up? Oh, you don't know! Then maybe you should find out and THEN speak.
Your perpetual whining about the Union Workers only paying ? what ever portion of their Medical Insurance rather than the "normal' 25% you mention is an example. How do you know than the Union somewhere did not waived raises, perhaps, in exchange for smaller Insurance contributions by the workers? Do you know they did not do that? maybe some other concession for better Medical. It is about TOTAL Compensation, not pick and choose and complain the way you do!
In my tenure at AK, the Union on two different Contracts WAIVED any Wage increases in exchange for better Retirement Benefits. Now, please tell me what is wrong with that?
Total Compensation...look it up if you have to!
You are just a whiner!
P.S. Look up my Post. In the first few I stated that my way of fixing Middletown would involve a 30% cut in Staff, including Union Workers. Cuts need to be made, Contractually LEGAL cuts.
|
Posted By: wasteful
Date Posted: Oct 07 2009 at 10:43pm
|
Irisner in the 8 years I have been here the Union has yet to waive a raise that I have seen. You have less of a clue as to what is in the contract than the average citizen. If you can not answer the questions above I would suggest you not bother to post at all. So do me a favor Irisner please tell us the last time the Public Safety Unions refused a raise to get or keep better health care benefits.
As you r ranting and raving did little to answer any questions, to be polite buzz off.
P.S.
The unions have absolutely no reason to even consider a cut under the current state laws for Public Safety Unions. The City makes a proposal the Union says yea or Nay, they go back and forth and the City gives in because it is a pretty good bet that if it goes to Conciliation the City will lose. When they go to Conciliation the two proposals are looked at and once the Conciliator makes a decision it is final the proposal ordered can not be changed.
The city has little leeway in Contract negotiations with it largest Union Fire & Polce.
" Position of the City
The City has two goals in health insurance. The first is to get the various bargaining units into the same health care program under the same conditions or as close as possible. The second is to shift some part of the increasing cost of health care to the employees.
They note that Middletown employees pay a much smaller share of health care than do most other Ohio public employees and they point to the SERB health care survey to support this claim." The employees’ share of monthly premiums shall be as follows:
|
Item |
Single Plan Member Cost ($) |
Family Plan Member Cost
($) |
|
Monthly Premiums (based upon the 5% formula |
|
|
|
For calendar year 1/01/04 to 12/31/05 |
$15.74 |
$39.36 |
|
For calendar year 1/01/05 to 12/31/06 |
Not to exceed $25.47 |
Not to exceed
$49.36 |
|
For calendar year 1/01/06 to 10/31/06 |
Not to exceed $35.74 |
Not to exceed
$59.36 |
|
Item |
Member Cost under new contract
($) |
|
Co-Pays |
|
|
Physician Visit Co-Pay (In Network) |
10.00 |
|
Physician Visit Co-Pay (Out of Network) |
15.00 |
|
Prescription Co-Pay (generic) |
8.00 |
|
Prescription Co-Pay (brand name with no generic equivalent or prescribed “dispense as written” |
15.00 |
|
Prescription Co-Pay (other brand drugs – the difference in cost between the brand name and its generic equivalent |
10 plus the difference |
|
Prescription Co-Pay by mail order (generic) |
10.00 |
|
Prescription Co-Pay by mail order (brand name with no generic equivalent or prescribed “dispense as written” |
25.00 |
|
Posted By: wasteful
Date Posted: Oct 07 2009 at 11:08pm
|
http://74.125.113.132/u/serb?q=cache:0JKFcJNQGcIJ:www.serb.state.oh.us/sections/research/web%2520fact-finding/07-MED-02-0095.pdf+Middletown+oh+health+care&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&ie=UTF-8 - http://74.125.113.132/u/serb?q=cache:0JKFcJNQGcIJ:www.serb.state.oh.us/sections/research/web%2520fact-finding/07-MED-02-0095.pdf+Middletown+oh+health+care&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&ie=UTF-8
|
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Oct 07 2009 at 11:44pm
|
Of course the Fact Finder always sides with the unions in Middletown.
All they have to do is talk to anyone on council or in City Hall, or pick up any copy of The Middletown Journal and they will "find" that the "facts" are that "Middletown is booming!"; There is nothing wrong in Middletown; Middletown has a bright future; Middletown has MILLIONS to waste on gateways, beautification, and the like; the only thing Middletown lacks is a few more flowers; and Middletown is a mural, balloon, festival, etc., etc., capital of the WORLD.
After talking to our City Hall and others who purport to represent our city, why would ANYONE think we should get concessions from ANY union???
-------------
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012
|
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Oct 08 2009 at 7:45am
|
When negotiating, the city always has the option of not signing the contracts in each union contract discussion, don't they? How do other former union companies bust the unions and tell them either we reduce your hourly pay and you start paying more on your premium for benefits or we'll get replacement workers in here, train them and start them at $10/ hour? Been done before, right? If private industry can do it, why can't the city governments do it? Unions are good and justified if management and ownership is impossible to work for. Unions get a bad rap if they immediately start asking for the world as to pay and benefits, not realizing they are helping to "bleed the company dry". 8 companies and over 40 years later, I have never worked for a union company, but have been in them and observed the union environment. Union shops do have their little quirks about them.
|
Posted By: Bobbie
Date Posted: Oct 08 2009 at 8:01am
|
I really don't think the problems with the city's financial situation should all boil down to the unions. Unions have good and bad issues. Personally I don't see a problem with unions standing up to get what they deserve. Wasteful I do know for a fact that some contracts that were negotiated last year was give and take. When they were negoitated last year, management knew what problems they were in, if they didn't they don't deserve the job they have. But I think we should put aside union or non union and look at everything as a whole - I mean all city employees. There are 400 employees - look at the positions we don't need - how many management positions to non management positions. Are there places were admin asst could be shared - or a novel idea can some management do some of there own work till we are back on our feet. It needs to be in every dept not just the unions. Personally I think there is so much waste in the city that they could cut a lot of fat and not touch anyone personally. Such as do we really need to pay someone to come in an water flowers?
|
Posted By: lrisner
Date Posted: Oct 08 2009 at 4:47pm
The bottom like is, that some are so self involved, they can't see past their noses about issues that don't benefit them personally.
Waste idiot did nothing to answer my questions. Posting of the Health Plan was for what reason?
"Somebody has something better than me and I am mad!" Waa! Waa! That is what it is all about! God it is so Childish!
There are problems in this City and if Staff has to be cut, Fine! I am just sick of uninformed Idiots taking the conversation in a stupid direction.
The debate between myself and Waste Idiot started when he referred to Binding Arbitration (as mandated by State Law) when Unions and Cities could not come to contract Terms,as "unfair" to the Cities as they seldom won. Think about that.....The Man is calling something unfair because it doesn't go the way HE wants.
Could it be that the Unions actually are being reasonable in their contract Position such that the unbiased Arbiter rules in their favor?
My positon is pretty along the lines of Bobbie, but I can't get past the Jerks who do nothing but cry about the Unions. "The Unions get too much, Waa, Waa!"
One more thing....Buzz off, Waste jerk.
See, any one can be Childish.
|
Posted By: missmisc
Date Posted: Oct 09 2009 at 11:41pm
I don't know if anyone is still interested in this, but if so, I wanted to respond to the part of the original post regarding 400 vs 63 employees. More than 3/4 of those 400 employees are the union protected people, which include fire fighters, police and most of the public works people, who are the ones that fix the streets, plow in the winter, etc. The 3/4+ include people from water and sewer departments who are actually paid from the funds the city takes in. The small remainder, the approximately 63 are the rest of us who aren't covered by unions, and who can get laid off without the clout of a union behind us. There aren't many of us left to be either the "workers" or "management". In general, these departments don't have an imbalance of too much "management". Over the same last few years, a lot of consolidation of departments has been done, and has included a lot of not filling vacated jobs that someone left, or retired from. As far as I could tell, that process never really got reported in the paper.
Over the last 5 years or so, the Fire department has received a cost of living increase of 3% each year. One year they did accept a 0% increase, but the following year took a 6% one. I'm not sure about the other unions. Over the same period the rest of us got either a 2% or none, with one of the 2% starting in mid year, around June or July, and not retroactive. This isn't to suggest the good or bad of the % increases for city employees, just to show perhaps that it isn't perceived as being fair.
So, again, no one may be reading this anymore, but this has bothered me and this post seemed like it would fit.
|
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Oct 10 2009 at 10:55am
|
missmisc.-Thank you for explaining the "inner workings" of the city building. This type of information should be reported to the citizens by the city manager in her reports or in the Journal by Richter and is usually omitted. It is appreciated when one of the actual particpants such as yourself reports on what is actually happening internally.
|
Posted By: Bobbie
Date Posted: Oct 11 2009 at 4:51pm
|
Is there anyway to get the actual count of how many individuals work for the city that are part of a union. Looking at a previous post that seems an extremely low amount for non union employees (63). There are individuals that work in sewer, water, streets, fire and police that are not part of the union. Such as any administrative person in that area as well as supervisors. It just sounds odd that we have 337 fireman, policeman, streets, water and sewer employees and only 63 covering the supervision, admin and all the other areas for the city.
|
Posted By: missmisc
Date Posted: Oct 13 2009 at 12:26am
Bobbie, you are correct. Leaders and administrative people, including the secretaries, aren't part of the unions. I know there aren't very many secretaries, and I don't know the ratio of Leader(or whatever it's called) to the laborers. I don't actually know what the exact number of union people is, and other than the City Manager using the number of 63, I don't know what the exact number of non-union is. Still, the gist of the numbers is about 3:1. There are a bit under 400 employees right now; in the 380-390 range. Last years number of Police was around 120, Fire around 85, and Public Works around 100+. Taking out a few secretaries, and administration, it would be slightly less than 300. I don't know if there are any other union people not in those groups. This year I believe there are a bit fewer even. That is what I have come up with, and I do think it's pretty close.
Regarding, I think it was, Viet's comment of wishing someone would share information more clearly, I'm not sure it is the City Manager's role, but I'm not sure whose it would be either. Possibly Council, possibly the newspaper, possibly just some of the departments responding to requests for information on an as-asked basis. This is all public record, and actually any of you can go and ask for the numbers. Nothing is hidden. It does tend to be a bit hard to figure out though. But that's my opinion about balance sheets in general. (ha) I do wish that the paper would do some plain and simple old fashioned journalism style reporting ... here's the numbers,... and then write in a way to let the readers see for themselves. It seems like so often the reporting is done in more of an editorial fashion to make the city look bad, or the writer look good, but ends up without complete information. I do apologise if I'm showing any bias, I am trying not to, although I may be too close to my own words.
|
|