Police union votes down proposed contract

The city's police union recently voted down a proposed contract with the city by a little less than a 2-to-1 margin. A majority of the roughly 100 officers voting on the pact were apparently concerned with contract changes rather than the pay hike proposed by the city.
Details of the deal remain uncertain, but the fact that police voted it down is both unusual and a sign that Mayor Art Ward may be pushing for reforms that might well impact other municipal unions.
Copyright 2012. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Cockayne, McCauley differ on potential conflict of interest

I forgot to mention this after the City Council meeting this month, but, hey, better late than never, right?
At the end of the meeting, councilors were preparing to go into executive session to discuss some boring topics and get an update on contract negotiations with the police and fire unions.
Democratic city Councilor Kevin McCauley, a firefighter, said he would not participate in the session about the fire pact because it posed a conflict of interest.
Republican Ken Cockayne asked if McCauley planned to be involved in the closed-door talk about the police contract since it shared many of the same issues and terms.
McCauley said he would because it did not pose a conflict.
Cockayne said he disagreed, clearly stating that in his view, McCauley had a conflict.
But McCauley brushed aside the concern and did, in fact, participate in the executive session about the police contract.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Union deal OK'd be a split City Council

Without shouting or even much posturing, city councilors Wednesday approved a new union contract for many City Hall workers that increases their pay slightly but opens the door to major cost-cutting down the road.
Only the two Republican councilors, Ken Cockayne and David Mills, voted against the pact with Local 233 of Council 4 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, which generally includes most of City Hall’s “inside” workers.
They said with the economy in the dumps, state and federal aid likely to sink and more financial troubles ahead, the city should have taken a harder line. Click here for the full story.
******
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

McCauley explains his position on proposed union pact

Statement read by city Councilor Kevin McCauley at tonight's City Council session about the proposed deal with Local 233:
As many know, I took considerable heat on my position last week to postpone the vote on this Tentative Agreement for one week.  After having a week to review the documents that contain some major changes in the contract, I am more than happy to state that I believe we made the right decision.
Last week, we were given the Comparison Document two days before the special meeting.  Upon reviewing it, I knew, in my experience as both a union member and a City Council member, that this document would require more than 48 hours of consideration and analysis before I felt comfortable to render a decision on the ratification of it.
The two-page Comparison Document is extremely complex. It includes highly technical and specialized legal and tax language, the implications of which would take time to fully consider.
This is a very difficult contract and tough to comprehend, both from a management standpoint and I am sure from a member’s standpoint.  I think that Local 233's membership, along with the skillful negotiating of their leadership, should be commended for the fact that they are willing to take a reduction in pay, give back vacation days when it comes to doing their retirement calculation, not demand any code increases, nor take any step increases. But most of all, the major change with regard to the pension policy in agreeing to pay for a portion of their own post-employment healthcare benefits deserves our gratitude.
In fact, this pension policy change gives the City of Bristol the precedent and ability to negotiate with all other City unions and secure the same concessions. Essentially, Local 233 has now provided the City with the key to open the door to fully implementing a GASB 45 plan.
The Tentative Agreement also establishes a City pension “prerogative” that is not subject to grievance or arbitration procedure, and may set precedents that will give the City an upper hand in securing similar concessions in future negotiations with other City unions.
I want to thank the membership of 233 and their leadership for their efforts during the negotiations, and the efforts by the City negotiating team.  By working together, the City and 233 clearly did a good job in saving taxpayer dollars in the future by giving unprecedented concessions and not demanding anything in return from the City.
The Tentative Agreement was approved by Local 233 membership and represents the will of the majority of Local 233’s members, and I will vote to ratify it because of their vote, and because of the benefits it provides to the City. 
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Union pact likely to be approved Wednesday

The proposed union contract at the center of a spat that erupted last week between Mayor Art Ward and the City Council is likely to win approval Wednesday.
In a showdown with the mayor last week, the Democrat-controlled council postponed consideration of the pact in order to have more time to study its details and to give first-term Republican David Mills a chance to participate.
Ward, who is also a Democrat, opposed the delay, calling the agreement a good one for the city and its taxpayers.
It appears that a majority of the council is ready to support the tentative deal with Local 233 of Council 4 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, which generally includes most of City Hall’s “inside” workers.  Click here for the story.
Contract changes health care provisions
A proposed union contract between the city and its biggest union would require for the first time that employees funnel money into a fund to pay for post-retirement health care.
The proposed deal between the city and Local 233 of Council 4 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees also includes a provision aimed at lowering the long-term cost of providing health care to retirees.  Click here for the story.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Copy of the city's tentative labor agreement with Local 233

To read a copy of the tentative deal for yourself, here is a PDF of it. Have fun.
******
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Paying for post-retirement health care mentioned in new contract proposal

I was going to plow into this Tuesday but someone commented about it in an oblique way so I think it's best to get the facts out.

The proposed deal between the city and Local 233 of Council 4 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees includes a couple of provisions that clearly aim to reduce the city's cost for post-retirement health benefits.

Most obviously, it would give new hires only five years of benefits rather than the 10 currently offered to city retirees. Right off the bat that saves a lot of money... eventually.

The other thing the contract provides is that union members will pay 6 of their salary, pre-tax, for pensions and retiree health benefits.

I'm not sure, but I think they only pay 5 percent now.

Here's the key section, though: "Effective upon the city's creation of a retiree health account in the pension trust as soon as is practical, one and one-half percent (1.5 percent) of the employee's contribution shall be applied to such retiree health account."

That would only happen, though, if the pensions are fully funded and the city itself continues to have to pay nothing into the pension funds.

That means for the first time that employees will be paying into a health benefits trust -- but they're paying at least some money that would, under the current contract, flow into the pension fund.

The wording is a little awkward, however.

Strictly speaking, paying 1.5 percent of the employee's contribution -- as opposed to 1.5 percent of the employee's salary -- would mean that all that would flow into the health fund is a tiny amount of money, less than one-tenth of 1 percent of salary. I assume everyone understands what's really intended so maybe that doesn't matter.

Anyway, that's the relevant section. Make of it what you will.

*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

City administration splitting as council, mayor clash

A growing rift between Mayor Art Ward and city councilors threatens to tear apart the fragile peace that has held the city’s government together.
The open skirmish began late Wednesday afternoon when city Councilor Kevin McCauley, the senior member of the six-person council, met with Ward in his office to tell the mayor councilors did not want to vote on a proposed union contract the following day.
Ward said McCauley told him, “‘I’m not here to piss you off. I’m just the messenger.’”
Rather than postpone the vote, however, Ward opted to move ahead.
At Thursday’s special session, where a large crowd of union members and officials had gathered, the council voted 5-1 to delay the vote until next week, when every councilor could be there and so everyone would have time to absorb contract details before taking a stance on the pact.
Ward was the sole critic of the move. “It’s not rocket science,” the mayor told colleagues.
McCauley said Friday he is “baffled that a simple procedural matter turned into a circus.”   Click here for the story.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

McCauley says he's baffled at how last night's meeting turned into a circus

City Councilor Kevin McCauley sent along his thoughts on what happened last night. Here they are:
I am baffled that a simple procedural matter turned into a circus.  This was strictly about courtesy and respect for the city council, due process and, most importantly, our constituents.  It was a simple request to postpone the discussion to ratify a contract by one week, which is within the September 14th deadline, to allow ample time to review all the associated information of the Tentative Agreement and to ensure all council members are in attendance.
At the time I met with the Mayor to request that he consider rescheduling this agenda item, we had not yet received all the pertinent information requested by council members. We were expected to take action without having all of the information to do so, nor ample time to review what we had received. We were also given conflicting answers as to the deadline date.  I now understand that if no action is taken on this T.A. by September 14, 2010, it will automatically be ratified with the July 1, 2010 retroactive date taking effect.
There have been requests to the Mayor in the past to consider dates and time of meetings so that the full council can be in attendance. There was no reason why a week postponement or a time of 6pm could have been considered in light of the fact we were not supplied all of the information or that there were conflicts with council members on the date selected.
A quick time line of events is as follows:
Negotiations since January, 2010
T.A. signed August 2, 2010
Council notified August 21, 2010
Rec’d T.A. highlights of changes/additions August 31, 2010
Met with Mayor September 1, 2010
Rec’d cost share/co-pay comparisons September 2, 2010
Special city council meeting scheduled for September 2, 2010 @ 5 pm.
As far as the blindsiding, I am confused as to why, when I do give the Mayor a courtesy visit and explain the concern, even with 24-hour notice, that I am blindsiding him.  He said he would “get back to me” and had ample time to do so, but instead chose to spend his time orchestrating the fiasco of last night.
The Mayor’s version of the events that unfolded in his office on September 1st is in conflict with what actually took place.  That being said, I wish to reiterate that I also expressed to the Mayor at that meeting, as I did last night, that I was in favor of the T.A. based on what I had received thus far, but would support a postponement of the agenda item to further review new information provided and to ensure all council members are in attendance if the deadline date would allow. That has now been confirmed.   *****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Union intimidation or just guys who don't like each other?

City Councilor Ken Cockayne said Friday that Ward allowed an atmosphere of intimidation at the special council meeting last night.
He said that union leaders put a poster on the wall of the council chambers headlined something akin to “For or Against Labor Wages” and then listing the four Democratic councilors, with boxes beside them marked YES or NO.
When city Councilor Kevin McCauley spoke of the need to delay a decision on a proposed contract, someone got up and marked a big X through the NO box next to McCauley’s name, Cockayne said.
When city Councilor Kate Matthews indicated her support for McCauley’s position, an X was marked in the NO box beside her name, too, according to Cockayne.
As the meeting proceeded, getting ever more heated, union officials began screaming at McCauley, Cockayne said. They yelled “you’re all done” and “you’re through,” said Cockayne and a number of others.
“It got really out of control,” Cockayne said.
Cockayne said Ward “would never have let any other group or person do what was being done last night. Ward would have thrown them out or called the police.”
“Instead, he sat there doing nothing,” Cockayne said.
“It was thug mentality and union intimidation at its finest,” Cockayne said. “We have a lot of great people working at the city. It’s a shame the union leadership is making them look bad.”
The head of Local 233 of Council 4 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees said the confrontation between the mayor and McCauley should never happened at the meeting.
“They stuck us in the middle. They stuck our contract in the middle,” said Mayra Sampson, the union chief and a former city Democratic Party chair who has worked on Ward’s campaigns.
“They need to settle their respect issues outside” and not in public , she said.
Sampson said that some union people were angry last night.
“When you mess with peoples’ livelihoods, they tend to get upset,” she said.
Cockayne said that he can’t help wondering if Ward got so angry because he had negotiated the deal with Sampson, his last campaign treasurer.
“If this isn’t a conflict of interest, I don’t know what it,” Cockayne said.
But Sampson said the contract terms show that her union “considered the economic times and the city’s financial status.”
She said Local 233 gave up a 3 percent pay hike last year to help out the city – money she doubts the union will ever see again – and is getting just 3.3 percent more over two years now, along with paying more for health care and other measures that will save the city money.
Sampson said the bottom line for the union is that “we’re thankful we have jobs” in these hard times so even though her members are the lowest paid city workers, they didn’t push for more.
She said the proposed deal is “more than fair” for taxpayers and a great deal for the city.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

What actually happened at last night's City Council session

Thanks to the city clerk’s office’s willingness to scramble to let me hear the recording of last night’s meeting, I can tell everyone what happened more clearly now.
At the start of the session, city Councilor Kevin McCauley said he would ask for a postponement of the vote on the proposed contract for the union representing the city’s “inside workers.”
“This is about courtesy,” McCauley said
He said the mayor provided information about the proposed deal only two days before the special meeting even though he’d signed the tentative agreement on August 2.
Some councilors, McCauley said, “felt strongly they just didn’t have enough time” to go over the material before Thursday night’s session.
McCauley said he told the mayor on Wednesday that councilors wanted more time.
He also said that the special meeting was slated for a time when two councilors, David Mills and Cliff Block, were out of town. Block, in the end, returned from Vermont for the meeting but Mills could not make it.
McCauley said Mills specifically asked for a chance to be heard before the vote. He said he wanted to give Mills that opportunity and to provide the entire council “the time to read through this information” before making a decision.
“I am speaking for my colleagues,” McCauley said.
City Councilor Ken Cockayne said he agreed with McCauley. He said any other night this week or next would have been fine with everyone.
“I echo those sentiments,” added city Councilor Kate Matthews.
At that point, Mayor Art Ward said he asked the council in an email “a week ago” whether to hold the meeting on Wednesday or Thursday of this week. Everyone said Thursday except for Mills, the mayor said.
“And me,” Block interjected.
Ward said he told Mills he would be happy to read a statement to the council if Mills wanted to write something up before he left.
Until 4:30 Wednesday, the mayor said, he thought things were fine.
Then McCauley came to the mayor’s office to speak to him.
According to Ward, the senior councilor told him, “I’m not here to piss you off. I’m just the messenger.”
He said that McCauley told him the council had reached a consensus to delay action on the proposed contract.
The mayor said he wondered “how did they get a consensus?” He said McCauley needs to explain how that could happen in the absence of a meeting.
Ward said there was no reason to delay because a decision was easy to make.
“It’s not rocket science,” the mayor said. He said that Local 233 is “trying to preserve jobs and work for the betterment of the city” by accepting a deal that is generous for taxpayers.
At that point, Cockayne leaped in.
Having tracked down Ward’s email on his Blackberry, he read the note the mayor originally sent to the council, which did not offer them a choice of days. It simply said the session would be held Thursday, Sept. 2.
Mills wrote back within hours to say he couldn’t make it that day, Cockayne said.
This past Monday, Cockayne said, he asked the mayor directly to make it possible for Mills to attend.
“Why can’t he have the opportunity to sit here like the rest of us?” Cockayne said.
McCauley told Ward that “I gave you the courtesy of walking into your office” to tell you what the council wanted rather than simply springing it on the mayor.
He said the two disagreed during their meeting and he walked out. The mayor argued immediately that in fact he had walked out on McCauley.
McCauley disputed it, then said, “I’m very disappointed in your leadership.”
He said he came to the mayor out of courtesy and respect.
“Next time you do that, it will be a first,” Ward fired back.
I need to interject here that, according to many people who attended, the council chambers were packed with union members and officials, many of them growing angry as the council argued.
McCauley referred to it during the meeting as “this dog and pony show that you created.”
Ward said he would file a Freedom of Information Act complaint against McCauley and the council for illegal collusion to reach a decision outside a public meeting.
“When I file the FOI complaint, we’ll deal with it,” Ward said.
“That’s your prerogative,” McCauley answered.
The council then voted to postponed the decision until next Wednesday.
On the tape, you can hear some people shouting but their words are unclear.
However, Cockayne and several others said that union leaders were yelling at McCauley such things as “you’re through” and “you’re all done.”
The mayor ignored it as he plowed into the next agenda item.
But Cockayne said there ought to be order in the room before proceeding and Ward called for quiet.
It’s not clear exactly what happened from the tape, but apparently McCauley got up to go into executive session on an unrelated issue before the council had officially adjourned from its public session.
Ward took note.
“Kevin, get back to your seat. We’re still in session,” Ward thundered.
And that was that.
After the meeting, however, McCauley and some union officials, including Mike Petosa, were going to toe to toe over the whole thing. A number of people told me they thought punches were going to fly because it got so heated.
But that didn’t happen.
Still, by all accounts, it was a brutal, ugly atmosphere.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Local 233 contract terms outlined

In the tentative contract between the city and Local 233 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees’ Council 4, which Mayor Art Ward and union representatives signed on August 2, the union appears to have made significant concessions.
In terms of wages, union members agreed to a 1.5 wage hike backdated to July 1 and to a 1.8 percent increase next July.
That comes after accepting a pay freeze a year ago.
In addition, the union agreed that anyone hired after the contract takes effect will receive only 5 years of post-employment health care for themselves and a spouse instead of the 10 years that existing employees will get.
They'll also be able to accumulate only 175 sick days before retirement instead of the 200 now allowed. The city shells out for unused time at the end of someone's employment -- payments that swell pension checks.
In addition, union members will see a hike in the percentage of their health care premium that they must cover. Instead of paying 5 percent, as it is now, they’ll pay 6 percent this year and 7.5 percent next year.
That’s still much less than firefighters, however, who are now paying 9.75 percent following an arbitration ruling that generally favored the city.
Union members assigned to work second and third shifts will get less money after the contract takes effect. Instead of receiving a 12 percent shift differential payment, they’ll get 6 percent more for working early or late shifts.
If I get a chance later, I’ll scan the paperwork so that all of the terms are available.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Ward vs City Council - Campaign 2011 is underway....

Mayor Art Ward is not very happy.

I caught up with him as City Hall opened this morning and found him still seething a bit over last night’s strange City Council session.

From the mayor’s perspective, members of the council have been “blindsiding and undermining” him instead of working with him to deliver the best possible government for the people of Bristol.

He said he was concerned that city Councilor Kevin McCauley came to him the day before the council meeting to tell him that he was “a messenger” for the council and that a consensus existed among councilors to put off a decision on the proposed contract for Local 233 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

Ward said he’s not sure how McCauley knew that a consensus existed. He said he’s thinking of submitting a Freedom of Information request to obtain any emails that passed among the council on the issue.

Given that a consensus actually existed at the meeting to oppose Ward, the mayor said it was “pretty obvious it was pre-arranged.”

Ward said he doesn’t understand why councilors made such a fuss that one member of the council, David Mills, could not make the meeting.

He said he told Mills he would be happy to read the councilor’s comments into the record in either executive session or in public.

Ward said the city has to act soon because the contract is “time-sensitive.”

If the city fails to act on it by Wednesday, Sept. 8, he said, it automatically takes effect.

The contract, whose terms are pretty tough on the union, were “bargained in good faith,” Ward said, and it’s wrong “to play politics” with City Hall’s workers.

“I consider this to be a fantastic contract for the city,” Ward said. He said the negotiators for the union “stepped up to the plate” and did what was best for the community.

“To go through these unnecessary political hoops is not, I think, justified,” Ward said.

The mayor said he is “really concerned about the approach” taken by councilors, particularly McCauley, who has largely shunned Ward since a September 2007 primary in which Ward defeated Ellen Zoppo to capture the Democratic Party’s mayoral backing.

Ward said McCauley has been in his office only four times since he took office in 2007.

He said McCauley, the most senior councilor, never tells him what’s going on. “I mostly learn after the fact or at the time of” what McCaulely is up to, Ward said.

Though Ward placed McCauley in charge of some key city committees, it’s not clear that the veteran councilor’s positions are secure anymore.

“You can only extend your hand so long,” Ward said.

He added that some councilors who sided with Zoppo “have gotten over it” and talk with him regularly.

City Councilor Cliff Block said recently he figures it’s better to work with Ward than to fight with him because it’s the only way he can get things done.

Ward said he’ll clear whatever hurdles the council erects and do what’s necessary to guide the city through tough economic times.

Ward also handed me a copy of a four-page outline of all the changes made to the Local 233 contract in the draft deal. I’ll post them soon.


*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Vote on union pact postponed

After a wild and crazy session, city councilors tonight agreed to postpone a vote on the proposed contract for Local 233 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Workers.
Councilors said they didn't want to take a vote on the proposal until Republican David Mills could be there, too.
In the end, the entire council except for the missing Mills voted to put off the vote until next Wednesday. Mayor Art Ward opposed the delay.
I couldn't make the meeting -- because I had to cover a story for The Herald this morning -- but I hear it was pretty loony, with much shouting and anger.
Another special council session on the pact will be held at 5 p.m. Wednesday.
I understand Ward mentioned during the meeting that he really didn't want the terms of the deal posted on this blog so I'll endeavor to make sure they are soon.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Union contract on special council meeting agenda

City councilors will hold a special meeting at 5 p.m. Thursday to consider whether to back a contract negotiated between Mayor Art Ward and Local 233 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Workers.


Local 233 represents most of the workers at City Hall.

The terms of the deal remain a secret, but Ward said the union has already signed the pact. He said the city has to act before its next regular council meeting in order to meet mandatory time requirements.

At least one councilor, Republican David Mills, said he can’t make the meeting because he had already planned to be out of town.

In addition to the union contract, councilors also plan to appoint a fair housing officer and perhaps deal with a property tax dispute over watershed land in Harwinton.

The special meeting will take place in the council chambers on the first floor at City Hall.


*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Firefighters lose big on contract arbitration

City firefighters got burned in a long-awaited arbitration decision on their pending union contract.

Over a four year period stretching back to July 2007, firefighters will get raises totaling 6.5 percent – half of what they were looking for.

They will also see their cost-sharing for health care rise from 5 percent of the tab to 9.75 percent in the final year, by far the highest of any city workers. The police union, the next highest, is due to pay 8.25 percent in the same fiscal year, which begins July 1.

In addition, new retirees in the fire department will also have to pay the same percentage of their health care as active duty firefighters.

Mayor Art Ward said the arbitrators clearly “recognized the economic crisis that municipalities are faced with at the present time” and took it into account in awarding contract terms.

City Comptroller Glenn Klocko said the city had socked away about $600,000 to pay off the firefighters’ back pay in the worst case scenario. Because the city won most items, about half the money will likely be returned to the rainy day fund.

Firefighters failed in their bid to change their work schedule so they would work 24 hours in a row and then get three straight days off.
The city has 25 days to reject the decision, but Ward has no plans to ask the City Council to consider it.

The city spent at least $130,000 on lawyers to handle the case.

Here is a summary of the decision prepared by Diane Ferguson, the city's personnel director.

I'll have more on this Wednesday.

*******
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

City hands out pay hikes to its 'outside' workers

The city’s public works and water employees snagged a two-year contract this week that provides them a 4.7 percent pay hike over the course of the deal.

The pact, which is retroactive to last July, provides a 2.8 percent pay hike in the first year and 1.8 in th second year, applies to  about 100 workers in Local 1338 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Workers’ Council 4.

For the first time, the employees will have to pay a portion of their health insurance premium as part of the agreement. They’re on the hook for 5 percent of the tab now.

City councilors unanimously endorsed the deal. The union itself split 2-1 in favor of signing the pact, officials said.

Mayor Art Ward said the pay hikes were already negotiated before the Wall Street collapse in the fall. Otherwise, he said, they may have been lower.

He credited the union with understanding the difficulties facing city budget makers trying to cope with sinking revenues and rising costs during a recession.

“They recognize the economic times,” Ward said.

City Councilor Ken Cockayne, who has voted against union deals in the past that he thought were too generous, endorsed this one despite some misgivings about the health care cost-sharing percentage.

He said Local 1338 “stepped up to the plate” in its dealings with the city.

The most recent contract before this was a three-year contract between the Board of Education and teachers that offers teachers a 1.9 percent salary hike in the first year following by 2.5 percent annual increases in the remaining two years of the pact.

Local 1464 members also agreed to pay more of the tab for their health insurance, rising to 14 percent of the overall cost in 2011.

But just before that, in December, city councilors approved a new two-year contract for the union that represents most City Hall workers that provided 3 percent annual raises and also introduced employee cost-sharing on health insurance for the first time.

The pact, which was retroactive to July 2007, required workers to pay 4 percent of their health insurance premiums until this summer, when they’ll be required to cover 5 percent of the tab.

*******
Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Teachers accept less than expected pay hikes to help city weather fiscal storm

A three-year contract between the Board of Education and teachers will hold down costs and bolster instructional time for students.

The deal offers teachers a 1.9 percent salary hike in the first year following by 2.5 percent annual increases in the remaining two years of the pact.

Local 1464 members also agreed to pay more of the tab for their health insurance, rising to 14 percent of the overall cost in 2011.

“It’s fair to both parties,” said school Superintendent Philip Streifer.

Had the contract matched the 3 percent raises secured by most city workers, taxpayers would have had to shell out nearly $2 million a year extra, particularly given that the union agreed for delay any “step increases” for longevity for 18 months.

Streifer said the teachers also agreed to an extra 10 minutes of instructional time each day, which will lead to 30 extra hours in the classroom.

What the deal means is that the schools won’t face quite as big a hardship as officials feared because of sinking aid and rising costs.

Though it’s still unclear how the Board of Education ad the city will deal with the looming cash crunch next year, holding the line on pay hikes makes it less likely there will be layoffs.

City Councilor Ken Cockayne, a first-term Republican, hailed the agreement, offering his thanks to teachers for “forgoing huge raises” and agreeing to pay more for their health care.

“Our teachers, their union and the negotiating team for the Board of Education demonstrated their sensitivity by agreeing in these difficult economic times, to a minimal salary increase,” Cockayne said.

“The Bristol tax payers cannot afford to pay any more than they already are,” Cockayne said.

Cockayne took a shot at Democratic Mayor Art Ward as well, pointing out the mayor recently cut a deal with City Hall workers that gave them 3 percent raises while securing a 4 percent cost-sharing for health benefits.

That deal was approved by the City Council last week, with only Cockayne voting against it.

In June, the police union got a four-year retroactive pact that gave its members a 3-percent raise for 2007, 3.25-percent for 2008 and 3.5-percent in each of the final two years of the contract.

The contract also increased the share of health insurance costs paid by officers from the current 5 percent to 8.5 percent by 2010.

That’s the highest figure that any city union outside the school system has yet agreed to cough up.

A three-year union pact reached last year between the city and  the Bristol Professionals and Supervisors Association delivered its 54 members a 9.3 percent pay hike and required workers to cough up a 7.5 percent co-payment for their medical coverage.

I'll have more details on the contract posted here sometime Wednesday.

*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Teachers settle 3-year pact for less

Press release from city Councilor Ken Cockayne:

In a statement released today by Republican City Councilman Ken Cockayne, the councilman thanked the Bristol teachers of their sacrifice in forgoing huge raises in their new contract and increasing there health care cost sharing.

“Our teachers, their union and the negotiating team for the Board of Education demonstrated their sensitivity by agreeing in these difficult economic times, to a minimal salary increase. Year one will have a 1.9% increase with no step advancement, year two 2.5% increase with half year step advancement and year three 2.5%. Local 1464 members also agreed to an increased cost sharing for health benefits, 12% effective July 1, 2009, 13% July 1, 2010 and 14% July 1, 2011. The prescription co-pays have also been increased.

A 3% salary increase, added to their current salary account in the Board of Education’s budget, would have cost tax payers nearly $2million. The Bristol tax payers can not afford to pay any more then they already are. On behalf on my constituents in the Second District, I want to say Thank You.,” Cockayne said

By contrast, the Mayor recently awarded the City Hall workers a 3% pay raise and for the first time, the City got the Union to accept a 4% cost share on their health benefits.

“While getting city hall employees to pay even 4% of their health benefits is a step in the right direction, it will do little to have any positive effect on the budget”, Cockayne said.

Cockayne added that if the GASB 45 issue is handled properly by the Mayor, the city unions can save the tax payers an additional $2 million, added to the savings the teacher’s contract yielded, that could save tax payers about a mill. “Wouldn’t that be a novel idea for City government”, Cockayne concluded. 

*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Special City Council session today re a major union contract

NOTICE OF SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING

There will be a Special Meeting of the Bristol City Council to be held on Wednesday, December 3, 2008 at 5:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 111 North Main Street, Bristol, Connecticut.

AGENDA

1. To convene into Executive Session to discuss the tentative agreement between the City of Bristol and Local #233.

2. To reconvene into Public Session to discuss and take any action as necessary regarding the tentative agreement between the City of Bristol and Local #233 and referral to Board of Finance for any necessary action.

3. To adjourn.

Per Mayor Arthur J. Ward, Chairman

DATED this 2nd day of December, 2008.

*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com