City PEU/PMSA News & Updates

Grievances Filed

Multiple grievances have been filed regarding the City Manager’s failure to utilize the contractually mandated layoff procedure. Two grievances have been elevated to arbitration and mediation is being scheduled.

Additionally, four grievances have been filed regarding the City Manager’s failure to abide by the contractual terms of the Agreement by unilaterally amending the health insurance benefits. The grievances have been elevated to arbitration and mediation is being scheduled.

An Unfair Labor Practice is being formulated against the City for its failure, in general, to adhere to the collective bargaining agreement.

December 30, 2009

Ed Mitchell
City Administrator
401 Clematis Street
West Palm Beach, FL 33401

VIA FAX: (561) 822-1424
Dear Mr. Mitchell:

Your letter of December 30, 2009 to Mr. Mike Granzow, PMSA Coordinator has been forwarded to my office for appropriate response. Your letter states the City is declaring a unilateral impasse regarding the parties’ current negotiations for a successor agreement. Also, your letter states that the City is waiving the appointment of a special magistrate and that the City assumes that the Union is willing to do the same. Contrary to the latter portion of your assertion, the Union has no intention of waiving its right to a special magistrate hearing or for that matter mediation.

Chapter 447.403(1) provides that the public employer or the bargaining agent, or both parties acting jointly, may appoint, or secure the appointment of a mediator to assist in the resolution of the impasse. Chapter 447.403(2) (a) provides for the securing of a special magistrate if mediation fails. Therefore, consistent with Chapter 447.403 it is requested that your office coordinate with me in order to secure the appointment of a mediator and to schedule appropriate dates and times for mediation. If mediation does not resolve the impasse the selection of a special magistrate would follow as would an appropriate hearing.

You should be reminded that it was your administration that reached a tentative agreement with the PMSA and reneged on the agreement when it requested the City Commission reject the tentative agreements terms. In my opinion the City Commission directed your administration to research and propose an alternative pension proposal – to date it has provided no proposal. It seems quite hilarious for you to declare impasse when you have made no effort to make a legitimate proposal.

Make no mistake about it, the PMSA will not be “blackmailed” by you and your administrations continuing threats of impasse if it does not acquiesce to your demands. It is your representatives that were less than truthful at the bargaining table not the PMSA’s.

All future discussions and correspondence regarding this issue are to be conducted through my office or that of Ms. Brenda Nedzweckas, PMSA Vice President. Please feel free to call with any questions.

Sincerely,
Jack Seddon
Executive Director

Health care reform has now been signed into law - What will it actually mean for you? Don’t feel like reading the more than 2000-page bill yourself?

We’ll help you sort it all out.

In short, the new law puts us on a path to provide health care coverage for all Americans, empowers consumers over insurance companies and ensures we are moving to reduce health care costs in the long run. Now that the bill has passed the reconciliation process and will now be law, sweeping new policies will be ushered in. Many outlets are trying to tease out what this will mean for the average consumer. We’ve put together some information that will help you to understand it all. We will continue to sift through the many resources that have been providing information about this historic reform so you don’t have to. Check back often for updates.

THE TOP 10 IMMEDIATE BENEFITS YOU’LL GET

The new health care reform law will immediately:

·	Prohibit pre-existing condition exclusions for children in all new plans;

·	Provide immediate access to insurance for uninsured Americans who are uninsured because of a pre-existing condition through a temporary high-risk pool;

·	Prohibit dropping people from coverage when they get sick in all individual plans;

·	Lower seniors prescription drug prices by beginning to close the donut hole;

·	Offer tax credits to small businesses to purchase coverage;

·	Eliminate lifetime limits and restrictive annual limits on benefits in all plans;

·	Require plans to cover an enrollee’s dependent children until age 26;

·	Require new plans to cover preventive services and immunizations without cost-sharing;

·	Ensure consumers have access to an effective internal and external appeals process to appeal new insurance plan decisions;

·	Require premium rebates to enrollees from insurers with high administrative expenditures and require public disclosure of the percent of premiums applied to overhead costs.

OTHER RESOURCES:

The New York Times has a great interactive summary.

CLICK HERE

Politics Daily gives a “Year-by-Year Rundown of What Happens & When”

CLICK HERE

“Republicans Set for Last Ditch Senate Assault on Reform.”

CLICK HERE

Investopedia.com lists “10 Ways The New Healthcare Bill May Affect You.”

CLICK HERE

CNNMoney.com reports “What health care reform means for your business.”

CLICK HERE

First Contract for City Employees!

In a ratification vote on this day, May 13, 2010, the bargaining unit employees overwhelmingly voted in favor of this first contract for managers and supervisors employed by the city. This first contract is 3 years in duration and protects all current wages, hours and terms and conditions of employment. The contract is subject to instant re-openers for fiscal year 2010-2011 economics.

Vice President Brenda Nedzweckas gives a special thanks to bargaining team members Edwina Saunders, Willis Williams and Gus Robinson for their perseverance, strength and unity during the course of these negotiations.

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL

Dear Jack:

Following up on the recent conversations between you, me and Jack Seddon, I want to make clear the position of the PMSA regarding actions and positions taken by the City regarding the Communications Supervisors and related matters.

The PMSA believes that the City has taken a series of actions that have targeted union members and supporters since the election. It started with Guerry Everett, an original union supporter, who was told during the initial efforts to gain union recognition that he was being watched and that he would eventually be demoted or terminated. Unfortunately, all of that came to pass. Another supervisor and member of the PMSA bargaining team, Gus Robinson, has been unfairly harassed by his Director for simply exercising his supervisory authority in an appropriate manner. Another bargaining team member and PMSA Coordinator, Willis Williams, was just informed that his position, Dock Master, has been eliminated effective October 1, 2009, without any prior notification to him or the PMSA that such action was even being contemplated. The Communications Supervisors have likewise had their positions eliminated with insufficient notice while the City and the PMSA were negotiating layoff provisions in general and a specific proposal to address these positions. The PMSA does not believe these actions are merely a series of coincidences.

With respect to the Communications Supervisors, two of which are on the bargaining team and one of which is a Coordinator, the PMSA has offered a reasonable proposal that would accommodate the City’s expressed need to reduce the number of Communications Office employees, but maintain the supervisory positions. This proposal would not only allow the City to increase the amount of time the supervisory positions spend actually performing Communications Operator duties, but would also make it unnecessary for the Police Department to pull several Road Deputies out of the field to supervise the Operators, a move that would not only be costly, but would also reduce the police protection available for the City’s citizens. The PMSA believes this decision has more to do with removing the supervisory positions for the PMSA unit, as the City originally sought, than addressing financial concerns.

The PMSA simply cannot stand by and permit the City to eliminate the supervisory unit, position by position. Accordingly, the PMSA intends to pursue all of its legal remedies to protect the interests of the employees in the bargaining unit if the City does not return to the status quo pending the conclusion of the ongoing negotiations. The PMSA was not given adequate notice and an opportunity to engage in meaningful negotiations over the impact of the elimination of bargaining unit positions. To the contrary, PMSA was awaiting your response to its proposal to maintain the Communications Supervisor positions when it learned from the affected employees that they had been notified of the abolishment of their positions. This does not constitute good faith negotiations, particularly where the City’s action did not result in any net savings, but actually increased costs by diverting the higher paid Road Deputies to supervision of non-law enforcement personnel.

Accordingly, the PMSA demands that the City restore the status quo and resume negotiations immediately.

High Salaries Cause Outrage in Bell, CA - City Managers Discuss Damage Control

BELL, CA - The Los Angeles Times reported on July 14 that in one of the poorest cities in Los Angeles County, city officials were receiving some of the highest salaries in the country. This Times report on the “ridiculous” and “obscene” salaries of top administrators and elected officials in the small, working-class city of Bell has ignited community anger, which has led to resignations at City Hall and condemnation from politicians and civic groups.

Most council members are earning nearly $100,000 for part-time work, far more than the $400-a-month stipend recommended for a city the size of Bell. The stories of soaring salaries come amid cutbacks during a recession, making many taxpayers ever more interested in what services they get for their tax dollars. Such controversy, of course, undermines the arguments made by city managers against state budget proposals that would take money away from municipalities. For months, city officials have been crying poverty and that they can’t afford any more cuts. But when the city of Bell cut more than $800,000 from public safety and community services the same year that it gave City Manager Robert Rizzo an $82,000 raise, it’s hard to swallow.

But with the story of huge salaries for officials in Bell, it suggests either that this “duress may not apply to all cities, or that some cities are not allowing their economic plight to curtail Fortune 500-level salaries.” Of course officials in other cities have found themselves having to explain to concerned residents that they are “not Bell.” Regardless, an investigation is underway.

To read the entire LA Times story, and link to related stories, CLICK HERE

For the very latest updates, CLICK HERE & CLICK HERE