see also “County Home privatization” page
Darn right their request is too little (for one thing, expecting “full” IGT funding to continue when it should not and can not and government welfare as such needs to come to an end) and too late (quote “According to a release by the CSEA on Tuesday, the union is taking the first step toward controlling costs”, excuse us but months and months later we are just to pretend that nothing has occurred over all this time and beyond to which for one, this shouldnt be a first step, and secondly they’ve known not for months but rather years of the need to step up with serious concessions, but nope they didnt). Too bad, it’s now too little too late and the County needs to move forward with the sale of the home whether CSEA likes it or not!
Worker gripes ignore demand
April 28, 2013 The OBSERVER Save | Comments (1) | Post a comment |
Ask any employee who works at a private-sector business about staffing levels and their response is almost always going to be, “We are understaffed.”
So, it would not be a surprise if you asked a local government or school district worker about staffing levels in their departments. You would receive that same answer from these employees: “We are understaffed.”
But now there is a new buzzword for being understaffed in government and schools. It is “essential.”
During budget meetings in Fredonia, which raised taxes while cutting the scraps earlier this month, Jack Boland, Department of Public Works supervisor, brought along an employee to talk about the operations. Since Boland in January did not know how many employees were in his department, it was “essential” he have some back-up with his department’s future finances on the line.
In this case, he brought with him a motor equipment operator. Both Boland and the operator discussed how there were no projects done in the village by the department. “That was my plan for this year, just maintenance,” the supervisor said.
Both also mentioned how the department can be down workers due to vacation or sick time taken by employees at any given time.
Therein lies the problem. The private sector does not fill positions because there will be sick or vacation time taken by staff. They fill positions based on demand for product.
In Fredonia – and all of Chautauqua County – demand for our product has gone down. Our population has decreased. Our number of businesses have as well.
When demand decreases, you reduce the number of employees you maintain on your payroll to keep positive cash flow. Too many of our municipalities – and schools – can’t seem to grasp this concept, especially at budget time.
Most disappointing in the process is the management and oversight by the boards. Workers and paid supervisors should not be driving the hiring process because they gripe. They are employees who will always want what is best for them.
Boards are expected to be the financial gatekeepers for their communities, not hiring agencies.
Besides, listening to employees and supervisors complain about being understaffed is the equivalent of a couple walking into the jewelry store before the engagement if official. It ultimately becomes a pricey experience.
Can spending spree stop?
February 24, 2013 The OBSERVER Save | Comments (1) | Post a comment
Though far from perfect, the recent contract agreed to by the Dunkirk Police Benevolent Association and the city could be viewed as a template for future negotiations for all area municipalities and school districts.
In an OBSERVER’s View on Jan. 22, we noted our distaste for the “longevity pay” portion of the deal. That is a $1,050 payment that begins this year and ends in 2015 with the contract. What is the welcome portion of the deal is the first three years: zero percent pay hikes, which is similar to the deal for city firefighters reached in 2012.
Though still not an outright concession, it is an admission by the officers. They know the city is facing a rough and uncertain future in terms of its industry and business climate. They also know it is better to look like a partner in negotiations, than an adversary.
The same could not be said last year for the county CSEA, which came to the table seeking a 5 percent annual pay increase from Chautauqua County. Though negotiations are continuing, there are signs the union is offering some concessions – about $400,000 worth – for those workers at the County Home.
That is unfortunate. If county union leaders are offering concessions for one sector of its employees, why not another?
In the meantime, some municipalities such as the town of Dunkirk, at left, just seem to be OK with showering money at its employees. At its first meeting of the year, the town handed out 3 percent pay raises to its staff like a generous tooth fairy who visits a denture factory.
Those raises are not just costs for 2013, they are costs the town will be burdened with in the future, specifically when it comes time to pay the pension bill to New York state.
Edwards, CSEA plan negotiations, differ on IGT funding
January 31, 2013 By LIZ SKOCZYLAS – OBSERVER Mayville Bureau Save | Comments (3) | Post a comment
MAYVILLE – Although the CSEA would like the promise of Intergovernmental Transfer funds before it begins negotiations on the County Home, County Executive Greg Edwards has other plans in mind.
CSEA issued a press release last week, stating that it is committed to negotiate separately for nursing home workers following the County Legislature’s vote not to sell the County Home.
In the release, which was published in Saturday’s OBSERVER, it was proposed that nursing home workers remain members of CSEA Chautauqua County Unit 6300, but a separate section of the contract include articles specific only to County Home employees. It also said that the union’s request to negotiate remains contingent on the full funding of the County Home, including IGT funds and the implementation of other CGR report measures.
Edwards said he is currently working through the mandatory process of negotiations for all 934 CSEA employees.
He said he is fine with the County Home employees negotiating separately; however, he cannot guarantee that the home will continue to be funded by IGT money.
“That is something I cannot commit the people of Chautauqua County to. That’s like sentencing the taxpayers of Chautauqua County to spending more than $3 million of taxpayer dollars,” Edwards said. “That is asking me to guarantee a $3.3 million taxpayer subsidy to keep 250 government jobs. I just cannot commit to that. I will be glad to negotiate. I will be glad to find ways to work on reducing the cost to the taxpayers so that we are not using tax dollars to fund jobs that could be done in the private sector at no taxpayer exposure. But, I cannot condition negotiations on spending over $3 million of taxpayer dollars.”
Edwards will continue discussions with CSEA until negotiations are complete.
COUNTY HOME: Opportunity melts away?
December 2, 2012 The OBSERVER Save | Comments (2) | Post a comment |
Like the teenager who appears at the door offering to shovel snow when it begins to melt, CSEA leadership has missed a window of opportunity.
More than a week ago – after stubbornly not replying for 10 months – the union sent a letter to the county executive and legislators requesting negotiations for County Home employees to “be separated from negotiations for the remainder of Chautauqua County Employee Unit 6300.” While the obvious question is what took the union so long, the other question is why did the union say previously this type of “separated” negotiation could not be done?
Regrettably, the trust factor with union leadership is a major issue.
Many employees have privately said all along they were willing to discuss concessions regarding pay and benefits at the Home. In the meantime, this union was marching to a different beat.
Leadership, without consulting with its dues-paying members, made the arrogant offer of a 5 percent pay increase annually for the county workers. At about that same time, it was announced the county was considering future options on the County Home in August 2011.
When the county newspapers published this information on the wage demands, union membership was irate, telling us the information we were printing was incorrect.
In early 2012, workers reluctantly found out the truth. Five percent was the ask.
“It’s just unfair that if we truly want to bring the public into this then we need to let them know where we’re at with February information, not information from August,” said Rose Conti, former CSEA Chautauqua County president, almost as though leadership was a victim.
What residents and CSEA employees in the county deserve, especially those at the Home, is a consistent message.
If the CSEA wants to work with the county, why did it take so long to respond to the county, even after the report from the Center for Governmental Research? If the CSEA wants to do what is in the best interest of county residents, why did its first bargaining chip begin with 5 percent annual raises for its county workers?
In 2008, during the previous negotiations, many CSEA members placed signs in their yards that stated they deserved a fair contract.
Maybe, four years later, those same members should post a different sign this year in their yards asking for more communication and fairness from its leadership – one that is transparent, timely and accountable to its members.
CSEA request could be too little, too late
November 28, 2012 By LIZ SKOCZYLAS – OBSERVER Mayville Bureau Save | Comments (18)
MAYVILLE – Nearly 11 months after a request for what the CSEA was willing to do regarding the sale of the County Home, the union has responded.
Last week, County Executive Greg Edwards received a letter from the CSEA. In the letter, the union requested “that negotiations for terms and conditions of employment for employees at the Chau-tauqua County Nursing Home be separated from negotiations for the remainder of the Chautauqua County Employee Unit 6300.”
However, the letter may be too little, too late.
“My thoughts are pretty clear. I asked the president of the local CSEA in January by letter to advise me what the CSEA was willing to do,” Edwards said. “They did not acknowledge receipt of the letter, nor did they ever respond to that letter until I received this letter in my office on Nov. 21. So, from January until November, this is the first thing I have received.”
Edwards said he had formally communicated with the CSEA in January of this year. At the time, he said he told them he was working with Marcus and Millichap to begin marketing analysis of the County Home.
He requested that the CSEA provide anything it was going to propose on the County Home by April, to be presented along with the findings of Marcus and Millichap.
According to a release by the CSEA on Tuesday, the union is taking the first step toward controlling costs and increasing revenue as suggested in a recent report and study of operations at the Chautauqua County Home.
“We are committed to nursing home residents and taxpayers who demand quality long-term care and access to the care that only the Chautauqua County Home provides,” said David Fagerstrom, Chautauqua County unit president. “This offer demonstrates that commitment. We are hopeful these negotiations can begin immediately and that measures recommended by the Legislature’s Ad Hoc Committee on the County Home and the Center for Govern-mental Research can be implemented.”
The letter, which is dated Nov. 20, states that the request is predicated upon full funding of the County Home, including IGT match, and implementation of other cost saving and revenue enhancing recommendations made in the Center for Governmental Research report.
Under the union proposal, nursing home workers would remain members of the CSEA Chautauqua County Unit 6300, but a separate section of the contract would include articles specific only to county home employees.
In his budget proposal, Edwards called for $1.3 million in IGT funding which would have been matched by another $1.3 million of state and federal taxes. The legislature, however, reduced that amount by $250,000.
“It is important for the home to be fully funded as negotiations take place, and for other recommendations in the study to be considered for implementation as well,” Fagerstrom said. “The Chautauqua County Home is an asset owned by county residents, and an important safety net that provides care for all regardless of ability to pay. We believe it can remain taxpayer-owned and thrive if the CGR report is fully and seriously considered.”
According to Edwards, the County Home is projected to lose more than $700,000, or approximately $9,000 per day. This information is why the county engaged Marcus and Millichap, and why it acknowledged an offer by Altitude Health Services Inc. for $16.5 million to purchase the County Home, Edwards said.
“That’s why we are finalizing the contract as we speak between Altitude and the county of Chautauqua to be presented to the Chautauqua County Legislature for their review for their December session,” Edwards said. “So, obviously it is difficult on the eve of reviewing the contract of the sale, to receive this letter as the first letter in response to my January letter, when we’re negotiating the contract for the sale of the property. So, it’s very unfortunate timing that the CSEA chose here.”
Stephen Abdella, county attorney, said since the budget is fully adopted, Legislators would not be able to change the tax levy at this point.
“If they decided to increase it back to where it was in the tentative budget or higher, I think they could do that by going to the fund balance,” he said. “They could do that at any time. That would be outside the budget process at this point.”
Edwards said he does not expect the letter from CSEA to be discussed during tonight’s legislature meeting. However, he will be discussing the letter further with CSEA representatives.
“Since it’s unclear what is actually being proposed in this letter, I’ll work between now and the December meeting to try and figure out what that is,” Edwards said.
Attempts to reach union officials for further comment Tuesday were unsuccessful.
CSEA Looks To Negotiate Separately For County Home Workers
Post-Journal November 28, 2012 Save | Comments (2) | Post a comment |
MAYVILLE – Nearly 11 months after a request for what the CSEA was willing to do regarding the sale of the County Home, the union has responded….
Binding Arbitration Clause Needs Dropped
October 14, 2012 The Post-Journal Save | Comments (3) | Post a comment |
When Eliot Spitzer was governor he talked about the “perfect storm of unaffordability” that was inexorably chugging its way toward the state and local governments. Employee salaries and benefits were a major part of that storm – comprising 71 percent of municipal government operating expenses at that time in 2007.
The situation has only grown worse.
As we reported last week, while Jamestown Mayor Sam Teresi’s executive budget for 2013 recommends reducing the amount budgeted for employee salaries, benefits are on schedule to increase by about 6 percent. With that increase, salaries and benefits will consume 76 percent of the entire $33.4 million the city will spend next year.
There is not a thing City Council or the mayor can do it about because of a state law that sets out ground rules for unions to organize public employees in counties, cities, towns, villages and school districts. The Taylor Law tips the scale of fairness so off kilter that the unions virtually run the tables.
But the Republican-controlled state Senate has plenty of chances to make a difference and will again next year. Ironically the Senate need only do nothing when a section of the state Taylor Law expires in June.
It is the section of the law that requires compulsory arbitration by a third-party panel for police and fire fighters. Simply put, for Jamestown and its tax-paying property owners, compulsory arbitration has been insidious.
Under the Taylor Law, if the police or firefighter unions reach an impasse in contract negotiations with the city, an outside arbitration panel imposes a binding settlement – regardless of how much property taxes must increase to pay for it.
”As one might expect, an unelected panel of non-residents of a community are not going to be sensitive to the financial capacity of local taxpayers when it issues compulsory arbitration awards,” notes the New York Conference of Mayors citing a 2007 report issued by the Empire Center for New York State Policy entitled ”Taylor Made – The Costs and Consequences of New York’s Public Sector Labor Laws.”
You can see the consequences of binding arbitration, the report says, in the fact that in most places, the average salaries of police and firefighters, between 1997 and 2007, rose faster than those of non-uniformed state and local employees.
This “salary surge” is due in part to the fact that binding arbitration not only acts as an incentive for the unions to push negotiations to impasse and let the usually pro-union arbitrator decide, but it also persuades employers to agree to terms they may have otherwise rejected merely due to the threat of binding arbitration, the report notes.
The kick-in-the-head part of all of this is that the binding arbitration provision expires in June every other year.
Yes. In June 2013, as it has every two years for the past four decades, the state Legislature has to vote to renew the binding arbitration section of the Civil Service Law.
We accept that it is unrealistic to expect the Democrat-controlled union friendly state Assembly to let the binding arbitration provision expire.
But what about the Republicans in the state Senate?
If they hang onto the majority in November’s election, it will be time for the leadership of the state Senate next year, as well as our own Sen. Catharine Young, to take up the banner for common sense and fairness.
It seems to us that by simply doing nothing when it is time to vote to renew the Taylor Law provision, our state senators will do more to help beleaguered cities across the state weather that perfect storm of unaffordabilty than any other thing they will do next year.
troglodyte
Without question public employee union relations to government and the Democratic Party are the most extensive and most pernicious example of corruption in our society – totally self serving and complete contempt for ethics and the public good.
imfedup
A possible solution here is that the Arbitration Board be forced to apply current Census figures for a particular city,town, county, etc when ‘cosidering’ salary/benefit increases for that area. They would have to look at the AFFORDABILITY of the proposed increase and how it would impact that particular area; and that would be the ONLY consideration looked at.
What’s missing in wage freeze?
September 30, 2012 The OBSERVER Save | Comments (13) | Post a comment |
It appears as if the CSEA wants to make a portion of its negotiations with Chautauqua County public.
During the Legislature meeting on Wednesday, union President David Fagerstrom told the governing body the county has rejected its proposal to freeze wages as well as step increases as part of a two-year deal.
“It appears to me … that the union has made an attempt to correct part of the situation,” county Legislator Keith Ahlstrom of Dunkirk said last week on WDOE-AM. “This agreement would have covered … close to 1,000 members of the CSEA, not just the County Home workers, so the savings on it would have been substantial.”
According to Fagerstrom, those savings would have been about $1.8 million.
Let us begin by applauding the CSEA for understanding the plight of the county and its economy. We are not growing – and industry here in many sectors is suffering.
Let us also applaud the union for reducing its demands, which began last year at this time with 5 percent annual wage increases. They have come down to no annual increase, which is admirable. But we still do not know the full details of the proposal.
Fagerstrom was outspoken in regard to what the CSEA is giving up, but what exactly is the union wanting in return? Would the county taxpayers pick up a larger tab in health-care benefits for the workers? Would the pension benefits be affected?
There are two sides in every negotiation. CSEA, which was not completely honest with its membership last year when it asked for 5 percent annual wage hike, has presented a portion of its side in Mayville.
If the county rejected those potential millions in savings, then there has to be a clause in the proposal that does not sit well with the other side. Is the CSEA ready to disclose that?
Concessions are necessity
September 16, 2012 The OBSERVER Save | Comments (23) | Post a comment |
What’s next for the city of Dunkirk, its school district and Chautauqua County?
NRG Energy Inc., which is currently on a payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) agreement, is in the process of mothballing two of its largest units, meaning it is running at about one-third of its capacity. What that equates to for three taxing entities is the potential for less revenue in the PILOT.
With that being the case, the three taxing entities are already facing a shortfall in 2013. A sum of money – about $8.2 million combined – that was expected to be there at this time last year, may not be.
In addition, there is a tax cap of 2 percent that was enacted last year by New York state. Raising property taxes, however, does not seem as though it can be answer.
So who is willing to step up?
Residents and businesses in this community have for years. They already pay some of the highest taxes in the nation.
That is why it is time for all parties affected – city, school and county leadership – to meet with management and union employees to discuss some sort of concessions or givebacks. Automatic pay raises for another year of work cannot happen while tax revenue that is continuously – and drastically this year – decreasing.
Dunkirk firefighters are already a part of the solution. They agreed to a contract that held the line on wages for two years. They deserve the community’s thanks.
But if concessions do not happen elsewhere, personnel cuts will be made. That does nothing to help the local economy, though it will pad the wages of those top-tier earners – the $80,000 to $100,000 per year employees – for all three taxing entities.
Reducing the work force so those at the top can make more money was not the premise that unions were founded on, but that has become the way it is in the public sector.
Take a look at the Chautauqua County Home. Some of the biggest savings in expenses would be in union concessions, as stated in the Center for Government Research report. But David Fagerstrom, CSEA Unit 6300 president, would rather send out a press release last week complaining about politics behind the possible sale of the Home than talk about what the union can do to help with future cost savings.
Community residents have paid “their fair share” for many years. They cannot afford any more tax or fee increases in the coming year.
All who work for the city, its schools and county must be ready to come to the table and plan for less in the future. The current path is not sustainable.
Seeing the light in Wisconsin
June 8, 2012
By JOHN D’AGOSTINO – OBSERVER Publisher , The OBSERVER Save | Comments (10) | Post a comment
When it comes to public-sector union contracts, it appears the tide may be turning. How else can you explain what happened in Wisconsin this week?
In a historic recall election, Gov. Scott Walker was soundly approved by voters to continue doing the job of righting the finances of the Badger State. Changing that financial picture of any entity starts with private investment, which is desperately needed in highly taxed Chautauqua County.
How did our region’s taxes become so high? The same way they did in Wisconsin.
When things were going good economically in the mid 1980s and 1990s, the public sector – in government and education – was overly generous in the way it treated its employees. Public entities increased salaries and continued excellent benefit packages, including health care and pensions, for its workers.
Now, that pot of public money has dried up. A global slowdown again is being feared in Europe, Asia and in North America. How does that affect you and me in Chautauqua County?
In business and at home, we watch our finances closely – and attempt to cut where we can. In government and education, especially around here, we continue to spend more and increase any fees possible.
Why? Because of the contracts. Public-sector contracts.
When public unions are asked to sacrifice, all too often the leaders of the unions say no. That leads to the elimination of positions with the least experience and smaller salaries while the pay scale at the top continues to grow.
Just how much do the 1.3 million public employees in New York state earn? According to seethroughny.com in 2011, those employees earned collectively $61,690,499,144. The average pay of those employees is around $47,000 while the median wage is $43,250.
But that is not the total cost. Add in the compensation for health care benefits and pensions, and the cost nears $86,380,000,000 – an average of $65,800 per employee per year and going up.
To go one step further, the median income in Chautauqua County hovers around $35,000. The median cost of a public employee to taxpayers is $65,800.
In Wisconsin, Walker is working – with voter approval – to reduce the burden of public-sector compensation. Here’s what Monday’s Wall Street Journal editorial said about the recall vote:
“(Walker’s) political offense was daring to challenge the monopoly sway that public unions have come to hold over modern state government through collective bargaining. Public unions aren’t like private unions that negotiate labor terms with a single company or workplace. Public unions have outsize influence because they can often buy the politicians who are supposed to represent taxpayers. The unions effectively sit at both sides of the bargaining table.
“Thus over time they have been able to extort excessive wages, benefits and pensions as well as sweetheart contracts like the monopoly provision of health insurance. Their focused special interest trumps the general interest of taxpayers, who are busy making a living and lack the time to focus on politics other than during elections or amid a fiscal crisis.”
In 2011, property taxes fell 0.4 percent in Wisconsin, the first time since 1998 the taxes did not increase in the Midwest state.
How are we handling this issue in New York? We implement a property tax cap, which just keeps increasing an already high tax burden that is guaranteed by too many school districts, towns and villages in upstate.
Our leaders celebrate that tax cap, especially when their budgets stay within the range. But the cap just keeps New York moving in the wrong direction.
Wisconsin, however, a state that leans left, seems to be getting it right for future investment.
It is a milestone this weekend for OBSERVER contributor John Fedyszyn. His weekly feature In Honor and Memory reaches its 100th article. This week, Fedyszyn pays tribute to another hero – his father.
John D’Agostino is OBSERVER publisher. Send comments to jdagostino@observertoday.com or call 366-3000, ext. 401.
Up to the challenge?
In our neighborhood May 30, 2012 – John D’Agostino Read comments | Post a comment
Excellent column on Memorial Day by Douglas Turner in The Buffalo News.
Turner wrote of Gov. Andrew Cuomo and his small, but sometimes major, steps of challenging the public-sector unions in the state over the recent years. The reason? Public unions are choking the state, Turner says.
“According to New York’s Labor Department reports of April, three times as many work in government as in manufacturing,” Turner wrote. “The 1,450,000 public employees actually outnumber those working in construction, finance and manufacturing combined. Government employees provide extremely valuable services, but do not provide net revenues or wealth. Only private investment does. Believing otherwise is pure socialism.”
“Private investment,” however, happens when taxes and fees do not have a stranglehold on a region like they do in Western New York. Easing any burden is a step in the right direction.
Solutions To Tax Burden Offered
July 1, 2012
The Post-Journal Save | Comments (5) | Post a comment |
To the Readers’ Forum:
The Southern Tier Tea Party Patriots has proposed three resolutions to help relieve the property owners in Chautauqua County from continually rising property taxes.
1) The sale of the Chautauqua County Home to private ownership is long overdue for many reasons. One main reason is that the public would not be supporting the continually rising payroll and benefits for another public sector union.
2) The labor and benefit contracts currently being negotiated in Mayville should be frozen for three years. The pension and health costs alone are no longer affordable to the property owners to subsidize year after year.
3) The Chautauqua County Airport should be turned over to a private manager as the taskforce recommended.
David ”Skip” Axelson, Frewsburg
Sheriff’s Deputies Contract On Hold
Coughlin Questions Pay Increase, Seeks Breakdown
March 30, 2012 By Eric Tichy (etichy@post-journal.com) , The Post-Journal Save | Comments (12)
MAYVILLE – Part-time sheriff’s deputies hoping their new labor contract – and $2.92 per hour pay hike – would be approved by county lawmakers were disappointed Wednesday.
A resolution to approve a tentative contract agreement between Chautauqua County and CSEA Unit 6322 was tabled during the County Legislature’s full-body meeting.
The decision came after Legislator Bill Coughlin, D-Fredonia, questioned a 22 percent pay increase for the part-time deputies.
“We’re still talking about a 22 percent increase (in pay), correct?” asked Coughlin. “We’re entering into a contract right now where they are asking for us to OK a 22 percent increase.”
Under the tentative agreement, part-time deputies would see their hourly rate jump $2.92 over 2009 salaries. The agreement calls for a $1.46 increase over 2009 levels, and an additional $1.46 over 2010 levels. There would be no increases in 2012.
First-step deputies would see their rates increase from $13.41 an hour to $16.33 an hour. In total, the sheriff’s department would see its expenditures rise by about $75,000 if the pay increase were to take effect.
According to Joseph Porpiglia, county human services director, the contract does not call for any retroactive pay.
“There is no retroactive pay; they agreed to that,” Porpiglia said. “They’re just catching up a little bit if you will.”
The resolution passed Audit and Control and Administrative Services committee meetings earlier this week, where Porpiglia also fielded questions regarding the language of the contract.
Not all legislators were against the resolution Wednesday, either.
“Bear in mind these are replacements for different police departments and our own sheriff’s department,” said Fred Croscut, R-Sherman.
However, Coughlin stressed the increase is significant.
“By my calculations, that’s 22 percent,” Coughlin said, noting he would have liked to have seen the tentative agreement in the Public Safety Committee meeting before it was brought before the legislature for a vote.
“I’m just not comfortable with a 22 percent increase,” he added. “I cannot seem to come to grips on everything that’s in here, and I ask that we table this for a month so more questions could be asked.”
Coughlin said he wants to see how the pay increases will be broken down before a vote takes place.
The legislature body agreed.
The resolution was tabled, with Croscut; Minority Leader Lori Cornell, D-Jamestown; Tom Erlandson, D-Frewsburg; David Himelein, R-Findley Lake; Tim Hoyer, D-Jamestown; Chuck Nazzaro, D-Jamestown; Mark Tarbrake, R-Ellicott; Paul Wendell, R-Lakewood; Robert Whitney, D-Jamestown; and Chairman Jay Gould, R-Ashville, voting no.
Unit 6322 represents 36 part-time sheriffs deputies, 25 of which are active, who oversee prison transports and court proceedings as well as contracted patrols with surrounding municipalities.
The part-time deputies have been without a contract since 2009.
Pendulum swings with unions
March 20, 2012 The OBSERVERSave | Comments (3) | Post a comment |
Suppose you were a CEO with a non-profit organization, in charge of a large work force, and never had to show a profit.
If you ran in the red, you could always get a government grant for more funds, even if they had to raise taxes. One of your duties was to negotiate contracts with these employees. Suppose, however, these employees had the power to fire you if they felt you were too tight fisted in your negotiations? Let’s also suppose that if you were as generous to them as you dared to be, it would have a positive effect on your own status, and add to the possibility of you keeping your job. Your employees would stand behind you.
This is unlike CEOs in private industry. They answer to their stockholders who expect them to operate with a profit; the more the better. They will be more generous to you, and be more likely to keep you, if you are prudent with the operation and show a good profit.
That’s the main difference between unions organized for workers in government service and those in private industry. That’s also why there are so many more lush benefits in public unions than in unions in private industry. That is why in recent years, unions have flourished mostly in areas where the employees are working for the government. Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges.
This is not a tirade against unions. They have played a major role in bringing a higher degree of equity to workers in industry. Alas, with the human animal in most cases, a little power will usually lead to a push for more. That’s why unions became necessary in the first place, to overcome the early industrialists, who were unconcerned for the plight or welfare of their labor. The union’s battle for recognition was more difficult than it should have been in a country that supposedly rests on the premise that all men are creatures of God. Unfortunately, our open society granting expression and opportunity to all is often misused by some. It will be a continuous and perceptive struggle to maintain our freedoms, without having them taken away in the guise of serving our own good.
Power, once tasted, can be a narcotic that requires ever stronger doses to satisfy. It seems to me that a large percentage of all the trouble in the world is born of the lust for power. We are always testing the water to see how far we can go. Perhaps unions in the public sector have become a bit drunk with power in their dealings with elected officials. Officials know full well that to stay in office they may have to cater to the unions, who can actually represent a large portion of the voting public. As we have seen in Wisconsin, an elected official can get in real trouble by thwarting the union’s desires. They are already planning to get him removed from office. Any union has more clout than their numbers would indicate, simply because when it comes to a showdown, all unions are one union. One must be willing to surrender their life’s work to go against a public union. This is not so likely in private industry.
Nobody ever wants to accept limits on their lives or desires. Life is a tenuous situation at best. We are each given our own life to look after, and we take our own chances. I guess the good Lord knew what he was doing when he limited our life span. It made it necessary for us to turn our power over to someone else. Otherwise I suppose Julius Caesar, or Attila the Hun would still be master of the world today.
When any person or group, is able to claim anything close to unlimited power, they inevitably misuse it, as they must if they wish to maintain it. That’s why we needed unions. They were born as a solution to a problem. Now alas, as the pendulum swings, at least in the public situation, unions are in real danger of becoming the problem. We hope they don’t destroy themselves. Unlimited power never dies a natural death. We hope they understand that.
Richard Westlund is a Collins resident. Send comments to editorial@observertoday.com
PhilJulian
Mar-21-12 9:35 AM | Agree | Disagree |
The numbers speak for themselves. Only 6.9% of the private sector is unionized while 45% of the public sector is organized. The private sector has a choice. They can go out of business, move to a right to work state or move operations overseas. Clearly, unions have had great value in protecting workers rights over the years. Unfortunately, excessive union demands have been a major contributor in the de-industrialization process as many middle class Americans lost their means of financial security.
The 5% ask
February 13, 2012 – John D’Agostino Read comments | Post a comment
County workers, apparently, have a bone to pick with our newspaper.
Last week in two editorials, the OBSERVER made note of the Chautauqua County CSEA seeking a 5 percent annual increase in a new contract. This news came out after the CSEA declared an impasse in talks and asked a meditator to become involved.
In the meantime, the CSEA — in its press release announcing the impasse — said their most recent deal would have saved taxpayers $1.7 million over the next two years. What we do not know is if that savings comes from a lesser ask by the union than the 5 percent annually they began with.
By the way, that “5 percent” figure did not come from the CSEA. It came from County Executive Greg Edwards after the impasse was announced. “They wanted five years of 5 percent each year increases in their contract,” he said on Feb. 4. “And they wanted more days off. They wanted an extra $1 an hour for what they call shift differentials, so if you work anything other than 9 to 5 you get an extra $1 an hour.”
It should also be noted the “5 percent” has not been disputed by the union leaders, though it would seem as the 5 percent annually is nowhere close to what state workers have received in their sacrifice to get new contracts.
So what is the truth in these labor negotiations? Workers want more, county is offering less. Other than that, we have no idea.
It’s kind of like the whole Time Warner-MSG flap facing Buffalo Sabre fans. Who do you believe in those negotiations? One wants more, the other is offering less.
State employees know the drill after recent contract deals. Expect less during economic uncertainty.
PhilJulian
Feb-14-12 9:55 AM
One thing is certain – this area can no longer afford union employees. It is union greed that is at the foundation of the decline of this area. The only short term answer is to eliminate as many union jobs as possible and replace them with services that are contracted out to the private sector. Radio commentor Paul Harvey once said “history is full of stories of people who self destructed because of greed”. I suspect that todays unions will have to take their place in history.
Executive Edwards Monday Morning Memo # 214-Monday, February 6, 2012
On the CSEA Union negotiations having reached an “Impasse”
This past week, Union officials representing the CSEA declared that the negotiations for a new contract between the Union and Chautauqua County had reached an “Impasse” as that is defined in the world of Public Employees Relations Board (PERB). With the declaration, the Union released the rationale for their position which stated, “for what we believe are purely political reasons the county is giving up the opportunity to save $1.7 million over the next two years…”
I am discouraged that we were not able to reach a four-year deal and instead move to the next step which is the assignment of a mediator from PERB to become involved in the process. I will continue to work toward a four-year contract with the union who represents approximately 930 people who work for Chautauqua County operations.
The challenges with reaching an agreement were significant when we entered into our negotiations in August of 2011. The CSEA was in the last year of a four-year deal negotiated in 2007 that had increases in pay for all union members of approximately 2.9% each year (plus step increases or longevity pay bonuses). We reached this deal in 2007 before the international recession and as a result of the Union’s agreement to changes in Health Insurance it saved County taxpayers millions of dollars. However, the recession changed the financial picture of the County along with the increase of over 100% in pension costs, increase in Medicaid, increase in other expenses driven by Albany, and the loss of over $70 million in sales tax revenue from the forced reduction in our sales tax rate from 8.25% to 7.5%.
As a result of these pressures, I am negotiating from a position that the taxpayers of our County need relief from any expense that increases our property taxes. I began the negotiations with a proposal that included a four-year contract with no salary increases for 2012 and 2013, a one time $500 cash payment in 2014, and a 1% pay raise in 2015. I also proposed that the step pay increases end, which have been in CSEA contracts for county employees for over a decade. These step increases entitle CSEA employees to an increase of over 2% in addition to annual pay raises. I also wanted to freeze longevity pay, which adds a minimum of $400 extra every year after their 9th year, and add a requirement that the CSEA join the managers in the County’s high deductible health insurance plan.
The CSEA opened their negotiations with a demand for a five-year contract with a 5% increase in pay every year for five years, increasing the hours of all employees who were working 35-37 hours a week to 40 hours, no changes in health insurance, adding Black Friday as another holiday with pay, adding another vacation day with pay, and other provisions.
This proposal by the Union created an almost insurmountable distance between our positions and caused significant challenges since I have frozen all of the non-union county worker’s salaries for three years with no increases and required a larger payment by non-union employees toward insurance costs. In addition, I cannot even entertain increasing days off with pay since in their first year CSEA employees are already entitled to a minimum of up to 40 days off with pay, and senior employees have up to 50 days off with pay.
At the end of our negotiations the union had proposed a two-year contract with no pay increases and other changes, but not the four-year term that is essential for us to deal with the continuing financial pressures the County is facing and I don’t want to be in the position this time next year to begin negotiations again.
While I know the Union has a right to mediation, I was frustrated on the “political reasons” comment by local CSEA Union President Rose Conti. This year Governor Cuomo threatened to lay off 3,500 State CSEA workers, and Rose’s boss State CSEA President Danny Donahue was able to settle on a four- year contract for State CSEA workers that included three years with zero raises, at least seven days off without pay, and significant increases in employees’ contribution to their health insurance. In addition three other State Unions have agreed to similar terms.
Those are the types of terms I have been working to achieve with our local CSEA. I will continue to work toward a settlement that will provide the local CSEA employees with a fair wage, fair benefits, and an opportunity to contribute to the welfare of all whom live here, at a cost that the taxpayers of Chautauqua County can afford.
County, CSEA Head To Mediation
February 4, 2012 By Nicholas L. Dean (ndean@post-journal.com) , The Post-Journal Save | Comments (12) | Post a comment |
MAYVILLE – County Executive Greg Edwards on Friday announced his disappointment that contract negotiations with the CSEA have ended.
By declaring an impasse and moving to mediation, CSEA Unit 6300 President Rose Conti showed interest in no longer negotiating, Edwards said, which allows him to discuss the issue.
The county and the union entered into negotiations in August, Edwards explained.
In the recent contract negotiations, Edwards said, the CSEA was coming off a four-year contract which had pay increases every year and averaged out to be a 2.9 percent increase over the course of the four years.
“In our first meeting in August, we each submitted simultaneous proposals, and you’ll see the one that I submitted and the one that they submitted was stunning in the sense of the way it was presented,” Edwards said Thursday. “They wanted five years of 5 percent each year increases in their contract. And they wanted more days off. They wanted an extra $1 an hour for what they call shift differentials, so if you work anything other than 9 to 5 you get an extra $1 an hour.”
Currently, the base pay for a CSEA employee starts at more than $12 an hour, Edwards said – with $13 an hour guaranteed by the end of their first year. In addition, there’s a minimum of 40 days off each year between sick days, vacation time and personal days – with a senior employee having 53 days available to them.
Furthermore, of the 934 employees in the CSEA union, not a single one is working at that base salary pay, Edwards said.
“So they came in with a proposal after having come off a 2.9 percent per year increase and they want, basically, a 30 percent increase in pay over the next 5 years,” Edwards said Thursday.
A document provided by Edwards can be found attached with this article online at www.post-journal.com.
In it, Edwards details issues of the county and CSEA’s contract negotiations and also offers up his assessment. Conti could not be reached at the CSEA number in Mayville late Thursday afternoon.
CSEA officials said Wednesday that the union had proposed a deal which would have saved taxpayers close to $2 million over the life of the contract. That proposed contract is a different deal than the one which Edwards said the CSEA initially brought to the table.
Conti confirmed Friday that even during the short few months of negotiating, there had been multiple contracts discussed.
“For what we believe are purely political reasons, the county is giving up the opportunity to save $1.7 million over the next two years, plus additional savings that would come from changes to workers’ health insurance coverage,” Conti said in Wednesday’s release. “We want residents to know that this union found ways to reduce costs and offer savings, but the county executive turned away a chance to save a significant amount of money.”
Edwards questioned the allegations of politics on Thursday and cited state CSEA President Danny Donahue, who just settled the NYS CSEA contract for four years with three years of 0 percent increase, seven days off without pay and significant increases in state CSEA employees contributions to their health insurance.
“That deal was struck after Gov. Cuomo threatened to lay off 3,500 CSEA workers,” Edwards said. “Even more interesting is the fact that at least three other state unions have agreed to contracts in the last two months with three zeros, furlough days and increase contributions for health insurance. No one has alleged ‘politics’ in the state CSEA, but in this case, the local CSEA president is making just such a baseless allegation.”
Edwards said he believes he negotiated at least fairly, and likely offered more latitude than was offered by the state’s CSEA leader.
“While I am disappointed that the local CSEA has decided to declare an impasse, I am pleased that PERB will assign a mediator to come in and work to try to facilitate a deal,” Edwards said. “My goal continues to be to provide a place where the 934 full-time CSEA employees can work, earn a fair wage, receive fair benefits, contribute to the welfare of all who live here, and at a cost that the taxpayers of Chautauqua County can afford.”
Edwards said he was insistent that the contract be a four-year deal to provide fiscal stability for the taxpayers of the county.
“Virtually all of my nonunion employees have had their pay frozen for three years with no increases,” he said.
Additionally, those employees have been participating in the High Deductible Health Insurance Plan.
Conti on Friday said that the union had been looking for a two-year agreement which would have saved the county money for the time being and would have revisited the issues shortly.
“As long as we were still talking, then you don’t go to impasse,” Conti said Friday. “But when you see yourself going nowhere, then you’ve got to sit back and say, ‘If we can’t go anywhere, we go to mediation.'”
The previous four-year contract expired Dec. 31, 2011. The labor union is one of five unions negotiating contracts with the county. Four of the contracts expired at the end of 2011, though one, the contract for the Civil Service Employees Association Unit 6322, expired in December 2009. That particular CSEA unit represents part-time sheriff’s deputies.
The other four contracts are for the Sheriff’s Supervisors Association, which represents lieutenants; the Deputy Sheriff’s Association, which represents primarily road patrol personnel; the Sheriff’s Employee’s Association, which represents primarily jail personnel; and the CSEA led by Conti, which represents many different general positions in the county, from laborers to supervisors.
CSEA, County Hit Wall
Contract Negotiations Will Go Before Mediator
February 2, 2012
By Nicholas L. Dean (ndean@post-journal.com) , The Post-Journal
Save | Comments (11) | Post a comment |
MAYVILLE – The county’s contract negotiations with its CSEA union will move to mediation.
CSEA officials said Wednesday that the union has come to an impasse in its talks with Chautauqua County. As a result, a neutral mediator will be appointed to meet with both parties to try to hammer out a compromise agreement.
In announcing the impasse Wednesday, Rose Conti, CSEA Chautauqua County unit president, said the deal proposed by the union would have saved taxpayers close to $2 million over the life of the contract.
“For what we believe are purely political reasons, the county is giving up the opportunity to save $1.7 million over the next two years, plus additional savings that would come from changes to workers’ health insurance coverage,” Conti said. “We want residents to know that this union found ways to reduce costs and offer savings, but the county executive turned away a chance to save a significant amount of money.”
The previous four-year contract expired Dec. 31, 2011. Negotiations between the union and the county had been underway since August 2011, according to the release issued by the CSEA.
County Executive Greg Edwards was reached for comment while driving back to the area from Albany on Wednesday. Edwards had been in Albany for a meeting of the New York Association of Counties. As such, Edwards had not received the CSEA’s news release and said he will be in a better position to respond to it after having returned to the county and meeting with his negotiating team and the county’s human resources director.
The CSEA Chautauqua County Unit represents 1,000 county workers. The labor union is one of five unions negotiating contracts with the county. Four of the contracts expired at the end of 2011, though one, the contract for the Civil Service Employees Association Unit 6322, expired in December 2009. That particular CSEA unit represents part-time sheriff’s deputies.
The other four contracts are for the Sheriff’s Supervisors Association, which represents lieutenants; the Deputy Sheriff’s Association, which represents primarily road patrol personnel; the Sheriff’s Employee’s Association, which represents primarily jail personnel; and the CSEA led by Conti, which represents many different general positions in the county, from laborers to supervisors.
“Our members are the front-line workers that provide the needed services to the taxpayers and residents of Chautauqua County,” Conti said Wednesday’s news release. “We recognize these are difficult times and we believe our
proposal – with the near $2 million in savings – takes today’s economy into account. County workers deserve a fair contract and to be treated with respect.”
There is little county officials can say though about ongoing negotiations. Saying too much, Edwards explained in August, could leave him open for an improper-practice charge by labor leaders.
“The objective is to go into negotiations with an open mind to comprehensive and global solutions, and the wage issue is only one part of the package,” he said in August.
According to The Post-Journal’s records, the last contract ratified for the CSEA Unit 6300 featured a retroactive 47-cent pay raise for 2008; 3 percent pay raises in 2009 and 2010; and a 60 cent pay raise in 2011. In the years since that contract’s ratification, however, the CSEA has changed its insurance twice to save money at the request of the county. CSEA officials also cited the recent early retirement incentive when the county asked to re-open contract negotiations early.
Comments (12)
polish
Feb-02-12 12:29 PM | Agree | Disagree |
keep the unions, cut half of the law enforcement in the county and the state, that would save hundreds of millions in tax dollars. too many cops sucking down donuts
0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
fedup2
Feb-02-12 11:43 AM | Agree | Disagree |
I think “pleasewakeup” is a member of the CSEA.
1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
minuteman
Feb-02-12 9:41 AM | Agree | Disagree |
I think “pleaewakeup” is asleep and having a bad dream…….
2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
PleaseWakeUp
Feb-02-12 9:23 AM | Agree | Disagree |
As a youth, I hated unions, because all of the UAW meetings took my father away from a family life, but today, I realize and YOU should realize that unions do have a purpose. Think about the following and what unions stand for: a) Equal pay for equal work, b) Benefits, so that the “employer” does not take advantage of its hard workers. c) Job Protection. Yes, some workers may have protections that they don’t deserve, but it may be necessary to protect others. Regarding Government employees…. It’s the benefits that bring the best and capable workers to help your tax dollars. A public employee’s salary is available for each of us to view. Look at the salary and benefits compared to others and then question if they are overpaid. The way most of you talk…..You want all to be paid minimum wage, which in reality is PAID Slavery!
5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
pedrov
Feb-02-12 9:19 AM | Agree | Disagree |
in an age where most private sector employers are giving 0-2% raises these people are holding out for more.rose shut your mouth and settle taxpayers are sick of you and your union.
1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
duckster
Feb-02-12 8:38 AM | Agree | Disagree |
Hey! Don,t get me started on those rich teachers and snow plow drivers! Now, back to the mall for some shopping.. hmm
1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
pacomike
Feb-02-12 8:16 AM | Agree | Disagree |
Time for public service unions to “suck it up” just like the rest of America. The money well has gone dry.
7 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
askwhy
Feb-02-12 8:09 AM | Agree | Disagree |
CSEA is allowed to yap away, but it is improper of county officals to tell their side? Just goes to show you how public unions silence our leaders and then blackmail them into decisions that favor the union …..all with no public opinion or input.
8 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
minuteman
Feb-02-12 7:19 AM | Agree | Disagree |
Unions are one big, big part of the problem with the current state of the USA. Their existence tends to breed the “entitlement mentality”.
11 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
ru4real
Feb-02-12 7:03 AM | Agree | Disagree |
There should be no union for those who work for tax dollars!!This is the reason for taxes so high and destroying America.These public sector jobs pay double/triple and up with benefits more then private sector****mon sense.
County contract talks underway
January 3, 2012
By NICHOLAS L. DEAN – OBSERVER Mayville Bureau , The OBSERVER Save | Comments (9) | Post a comment
MAYVILLE – The five contracts which the county is currently negotiating with labor unions are continuing into the new year.
Four of the contracts expired at the conclusion of the year, though one, the contract for the Civil Service Employees Association Unit 6322, expired in December 2009. That particular CSEA unit represents part-time sheriff’s deputies.
“All of the provisions of the contracts will remain in effect including what they call steps,” said County Executive Greg Edwards recently. “Steps are the incremental increases in pay that most employees get for the first nine years of their work. Those will continue as well.”
Edwards called the system of holding over the terms of an expiring contract until a new one is agreed upon or imposed “truly unique to New York.”
The other four contracts are for the Sheriff’s Supervisors Association, which represents lieutenants; the Deputy Sheriff’s Association, which represents primarily road patrol personnel; the Sheriff’s Employee’s Association, which represents primarily jail personnel; and the CSEA Unit 6300, which represents many different general positions in the county, from laborers to supervisors.
With so many negotiations in progress, the OBSERVER questioned Edwards some months back about what can be expected of the new contracts.
In August, the OBSERVER asked Edwards whether he had issued a zero-wage increase directive in the negotiations, as, with the county’s fiscal situation there looks to be zero money available for raises. The county faced a deficit again in 2011 and looks to face another multi-million deficit in 2012.
There is little a county executive can say though about ongoing negotiations.
Saying too much, he explained in August, could leave him open for an improper-practice charge by labor leaders.
“The objective is to go into negotiations with an open mind to comprehensive and global solutions, and the wage issue is only one part of the package,” he said in August.
According to the OBSERVER’s records, the last contract ratified for the CSEA Unit 6300 featured a retroactive 47-cent pay raise for 2008; 3 percent pay raises in 2009 and 2010; and a 60 cent pay raise in 2011. In the years since that contract’s ratification, however, the CSEA has changed its insurance twice to save money at the request of the county. CSEA officials also cited the recent early retirement incentive when the county asked to re-open contract negotiations early.
“I continue to look for ways to work with my co-workers and we will do that as the existing contract will continue,” Edwards told the OBSERVER recently.
Escapee
Jan-04-12 9:49 PM | Agree | Disagree |
Seems to me, the appropriate average wage for county employees (including lifetime benefits) should be no more than the average wage (including lifetime benefits) of the citizens of that county.
0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
DKexpat
Jan-04-12 8:54 AM | Agree | Disagree |
Captain, I agree – if there’s belt-tightening to be done, it should be shared by all county employees, union and non-union alike.
This has nothing to do with union busting, rather with prudent management of a limited pool of dollars.
0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Captain
Jan-03-12 7:41 PM | Agree | Disagree |
(cont)…this goes for ALL county services, not just law enforcement (including all non-union employees such as Dept heads, appointees, admins, etc.)
0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Captain
Jan-03-12 7:29 PM | Agree | Disagree |
I’m a private union worker, and I’ve got to say, I’ve taken more than my share of significant cuts in pay & benefits. When an employer is broke, how can union workers expect/demand gains? If Edwards has any notion of giving pay raises, he better take it out of the existing budget. In fact, the current costs to operate ALL law enforcement must be reduced thru CBA talks, and if the unions are unwilling to negotiate meaningful concessions, layoffs should immediately follow any impasse.
commentor
Jan-03-12 1:12 PM | Agree | Disagree |
The only step that non union private sector workers get is stepped on. We don’t get raises for being there for the year. We also do not negotiate our benefits. Unions have and are destroying American business.
0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
DKexpat
Jan-03-12 12:34 PM | Agree | Disagree |
The Fortune 100 company I work for doesn’t have step raises or COLA increases or pensions or retirement healthcare.
In fact, with an 11% increase in operating income last year and 22% increase in free cash flow – in the billions of dollars – everyone received a max raise of 1.2% (most were under 1%) along with a 25% decrease (2% of wages) in 401(k) contributions…for a net wage DECREASE.
That’s not atypical in the private sector where many companies reduced matching 401(k) contributions or stopped them altogether, and the past several years the private sector has been rife with layoffs, consolidation, managed services, etc.
Contrast that with guaranteed or civil service jobs, step/COLA increases, pensions, retirement healthcare, etc. in most of the public sector and much of the union base, and you understand what the rest of us taxpayers are grousing about.
PhilJulian
Jan-03-12 9:31 AM | Agree | Disagree |
Oh heck – give them everything they want. Union greed has destroyed our city, county and state and there is no hope for recovery anytime soon. Exactly what is the logic for an annual pay raise? Is it a reward for greater productivity? Is it a reward for greater responsibility? No, it’s actually a reward for being there a year longer and for belonging to a union and the money comes directly from the pockets of individual taxpayers and businneses that are struggling to stay in business. Maybe that explains why our population is dropping and good jobs are so hard to find. So, go ahead and give them everything they want. There is no hope for progress in Chautauqua County anytime soon and one more nail in our coffin just won’t make any difference.
[cry us a river, but please ignore the plight of the taxpayers, which yes you maybe, but only because the rest pay you to be!]
CSEA Pres. On Personnel Cuts
Mayville Bureau Blog November 1, 2011 – The Post-Journal Read comments | Post a comment
Posted by Nicholas L. Dean
Cuts to the county’s work force are eliminations of actual people.
That was Rose Conti’s message to the County Legislature during the public comment portion of last month’s budget meeting.
Conti is the CSEA Unit 6300 president. Prior to the meeting, county employees and supporters of the County Home held a rally in the parking lot of the Gerace Office Building.
What follows is the full text of Conti’s comments to the legislature:
ROSE CONTI CSEA Unit 6300 President
I do understand that the process that you go through is difficult. I know that it’s tough to take a look at the money you have and try to figure out where to put it and what to do with it, but I want to know if you understand that these decisions are difficult on human beings.
They’re not numbers in a book, they’re not numbers on a piece of paper. These are human beings whose jobs your going to take away tonight, whose families are not going to have that income. Every layoff is not just a line on a piece of paper, it’s a human being who has a family, who has children, who have invested in this county and now we’re telling them: ‘Gee, that’s too bad.’
It is about money, but it’s also about what we say we stand for. On one hand we say we want to take all kinds of money and invest in jobs and invest in all of this. And on the other hand we say: ‘By the way, we want to throw a few away in the process.’
We want to take people who have dedicated themselves to serving the public in this county and we just want to tell them they’re just not worth it anymore. And in the meantime, we want everyone else to figure out how to do the job they leave behind. As a union leader I’m often really surprised because something is an important job and it’s paid this much, but then we get rid of it and anybody can do it.
These are real jobs, they’re really going to go away tonight if you do this. They’re not jobs that we will stand up and tell you we’re saving you $30, $40, $50, $60 thousand dollars by eliminating a job here and then just creating a new one over there with a different title.
These are real jobs and real people, and they serve the public that you’re supposed to serve. They serve them on the roads, they serve them in the clinics, they serve them here in this building, they serve them in Jamestown, they serve them in Dunkirk. They serve the public. They do the work that you decide has to be done. And yet you decide it’s okay to have less of them to try to do it?
You know, it’s really easy to sit and say: ‘Oh, don’t worry, we’ve got enough staff.’
Spend a few days with these people and see what they now have to do, see what regulations do, see what layoffs have done, see what vacant positions have done. A vacant position may not be a human, but there are a lot of humans behind that having to do the work that used to be done by it.
Spend some time and when my members call, don’t tell them you don’t need to talk to them. Don’t tell them there’s nothing you can do. Don’t tell them that’s nothing that you want talk to them about now. They elected you. They have a right to ask you questions. They have a right to get answers from you. That’s what you’re supposed to do for them because they are still taxpayers.
ROSE CONTI On The County Home
This afternoon I took a phone call from a lady who wanted to know if she could have a sign for her yard. And she told me about her family’s medical history and told me that she knew that she would be destined to be in a nursing home long before she should have to.
She said to me: I am terrified that I will not be able to go to the County Home. I have spent my life watching every member of my family have to go to a home because of a hereditary problem. I have seen them all and it terrifies me to know that the County Home may be sold.
I want you to think about her as you progress through that process and think about how you’re terrifying people. I’m not terrifying her. I’m not the one making that decision.
CSEA Unit 6300 President Rose Conti addresses the County Legislature during its October budget meeting.
P-J photo by Nicholas L. Dean
Rose Conti addresses CSEA members and County Home
CSEA Unit 6300 President Rose Conti addresses the http://www.post-journal.com/photos/blogs/md/1002_1.jpg
Salary Cut Passes Committee
Lawmakers Will Consider Mueller Plan To Cut Salaries
October 18, 2011
By Nicholas L. Dean (ndean@post-journal.com) , The Post-Journal Save | Comments (9) | Post a comment
MAYVILLE – Two proposals to cut legislature salaries were discussed in committee Monday, with one being forwarded on to the full body for vote later this month.
The two proposals were from Keith Ahlstrom, D-Dunkirk, and Minority Leader Rudy Mueller, D-Lakewood.
Ahlstrom’s proposal failed to pass the Administrative Services Committee in a 4 to 1 vote while Mueller’s passed 3 to 2.
Mueller’s plan saves more than the idea put forth by Ahlstrom, which was to cut all of the additional stipends which some legislators receive.
Mueller’s proposal reduces all legislators’ salaries as well as the additional stipends, totaling $75,011 in savings.
The first vote was on Ahlstrom’s plan, which saw support from only Lori Cornell, D-Jamestown. The second vote also saw support from Cornell, as well as from John Runkle, R-Stockton, and Paula DeJoy, D-Jamestown. The two opposition votes came from Majority Leader Larry Barmore, R-Gerry, and Bob Scudder, R-Fredonia.
Commenting on his proposal before the vote, Mueller spoke of how the county would have seen $75,000 in savings if downsizing to 19 members would have happened in time for this fall’s elections. He also spoke of the legislature setting an example for other county departments by voting to reduce its pay.
Barmore, who chairs the Administrative Services Committee, pointed out that the legislature has cut its department in recent years.
“This body has not taken a raise in 12 years and we’ve given up our health insurance,” Barmore said. “We’ve given up our mileage, we’ve given up our internet service and we’ve given up getting all (legislature documents) sent to us. We have to buy our own ink and print our own stuff at home.
“We’ve lowered our legislature budget more than 24 percent within the last four years,” Barmore continued. “I believe that this legislature has done more than its fair share of setting an example for other departments and other employees.”
Barmore said he also takes issue with the fact that Mueller’s proposal cuts out entirely the stipends for ranking members of committees, who Barmore said should be compensated for their extra work.
During the exchange between Barmore and Mueller, Barmore said that the savings from the salary cuts would save someone who owns a $100,000 about 13 cents a year.
Mueller responded by saying such a cut puts the legislature all that much closer to meeting the state’s 2 percent tax cap.
“I think the legislature needs to step up and set an example,” Mueller said.
PROPOSAL DETAILS
Ahlstrom’s proposal was to cut several stipends entirely, for both the legislature’s majority and minority leaders as well as their assistants, committee chairs and the ranking members of each committee.
His proposal leaves intact the annual $9,000 salary which all legislators receive as well as the additional $8,000 stipend which the chairman of the legislature receives.
Currently, committee chairpersons receive a $1,000 stipend – as do the majority and minority leaders. The assistant party leaders receive $500 stipends while the ranking members of each committee receive $250 stipends.
Lawmakers do not receive multiple stipends for doubling up on additional work. Barmore, for instance, receives a $1,000 stipend for being the legislature’s majority caucus leader.
He does not, however, take another $1,000 stipend for being the chairman of the Administrative Services Committee.
Mueller’s proposal reduces the annual salary of legislators to $7,000 in 2012, with the $9,000 amount returning in 2014. Additionally, the stipend for the chairman of the legislature would be cut to $6,000. Stipends for all other positions would similarly see reductions.
In specific, the stipend for party leaders would drop to $750, the stipend for assistants would drop to $375 and each committee chairperson would receive only $750.
His proposal also cuts entirely the stipends for the ranking members of each committee.
Mueller’s local law will be considered by the full legislature at the body’s Oct. 26 meeting.
County Legislature to consider local laws regarding pay, stipend cuts to lawmakers…
A pair of local laws that would cut the pay for Chautauqua County Legislators are going before lawmakers this month. One has been pre-filed for the full legislature… and, the second for the Administrative Services Committee. Legislature Chairman Fred Croscut says the main one… proposed by Dunkirk Democrat Keith Ahlstrom… would reduce ALL legislators salaries from next January through January of 2014 from $9,000 to $7,000 a year. Croscut says leadership stipends would also be cut. He says the chairman’s stipend would be dropped from $8,000 to $6,000… and, Majority and Minority leadership pay would be cut… along with committee chair stipends. Croscut says the second measure would reduce all stipends by about $8,000. The Chairman says he’s leery of the cuts… because lawmakers have taken several cuts the past couple of years… including health insurance. Those cuts have totaled more than $200,000. Croscut says Ahlstrom’s proposal has been put on legislator’s desks… while other proposal… which has no named sponsor… goes before the legislature’s Administrative Services Committee next Monday.
Do you favor cutting salaries and stipends of Chautauqua County legislators?
- 1. YES
82%
- 2. NO
18%
Salary cuts for county legislators proposed
October 13, 2011
By NICHOLAS L. DEAN OBSERVER Mayville Bureau , The OBSERVER Save | Comments (5) | Post a comment |
MAYVILLE – Democratic leaders in the County Legislature are proposing cuts to lawmakers’ salaries.
The two proposals, from legislator Keith Ahlstrom, D-Dunkirk, and Minority Leader Rudy Mueller, D-Lakewood, will go to the Administrative Services Committee on Monday.
Ahlstrom’s proposal is to cut several stipends entirely, for both the legislature’s majority and minority leaders as well as their assistants, committee chairs and the ranking members of each committee. His proposal leaves intact the annual $9,000 salary which all legislators receive as well as the additional $8,000 stipend which the chairman of the legislature receives.
Currently, committee chairpersons receive a $1,000 stipend – as do the majority and minority leaders. The assistant party leaders receive $500 stipends while the ranking members of each committee receive $250 stipends.
Lawmakers do not receive multiple stipends for doubling up on additional work, which Majority Leader Larry Barmore, R-Gerry, pointed out during the legislature’s recent budget review process.
Barmore, for instance, receives a $1,000 stipend for being the legislature’s majority caucus leader. He does not, however, take another $1,000 stipend for being the chairman of the Administrative Services Committee.
Mueller’s proposal is a little more complicated. The local law which he’s proposing is to cut the annual salary of legislators to $7,000 in 2012, with the $9,000 amount returning in 2014. Additionally, the stipend for the chairman of the legislature would be cut to $6,000. Stipends for all other positions would similarly see cuts.
In specific, the stipend for party leaders would drop to $750, the stipend for assistants would drop to $375 and each committee chairperson would receive only $750.
His proposal also cuts entirely the stipends for the ranking members of each committee.
By cutting $2,000 from each of the 25 legislators, Mueller’s proposal saves more money than Ahlstrom’s while still leaving intact some incentive for lawmakers to take on additional roles.
KINDBERG PROPOSAL
At the legislature’s regular September business meeting, Democrats tried and failed to force a reduction to the maximum stipends which some legislators can receive.
Maria Kindberg, D-Jamestown, proposed the amendment, which would have cut the stipends of caucus leaders in half and taken all the rest to zero.
Kindberg’s amendment was defeated 12 ‘yes’ to 13 ‘no’ votes, with the vote breaking down largely along party lines. A public hearing on the maximum amount of the stipends and salaries will be held at the two full legislature meetings later this month.
The Administrative Services Committee meets at 5:30 p.m. Monday on the third floor of the Gerace Office Building in Mayville.
Tell New York State ‘Enough Is Enough’
October 2, 2011
The Post-Journal
Save | Comments (18) | Post a comment |
Unionized county workers were in the wrong place when they mounted an informational picket Wednesday evening in Mayville to protest job cuts and the sale of the county nursing home as Chautauqua County Executive Gregory Edwards delivered his 2012 budget proposal to the legislature.
The Civil Service Employees Association members need to take their pickets to the site of the biggest engines that drive the cost of local government ever upward: Albany.
So, too, should the forces that will be gathered to support county Sheriff Joseph Gerace as he, quite understandably, lobbies to have the 5.4 percent cut to his department restored.
As the proposed county budget now stands, the property tax bills that will be sent out in January will be 22 percent higher than the bills property owners in Chautauqua County received just last year – January 2010.
Yes, that’s worthy of a collective gasp.
This year, Edwards released his entire budget document to the public promptly. There are cuts throughout. The snowmobile patrol is gone. The Youth Bureau is cut nearly in half. Planning and Development is down 24 percent. Board of Elections and the Veterans Service are down. Pavement marking, snow removal, road and bridge maintenance, core public health, parks, information technology services – all down, down, down.
We note, too, the money-losing county airports and county home are still carried on the books. The local share of Medicaid is up $3.4 million, or 11.8 percent. The county executive’s budget is up 0.7 percent; the legislature’s is up 0.4 percent.
It will be interesting to see what the County Legislature, which holds the power to impose the property tax levy, does with this budget proposal over the next few weeks.
As we have noted several times, when the governor and state legislators enacted a law this spring limiting local property tax increases to 2 percent a year, they cynically and deliberately neglected to cede to county governments the ability and authority to control spending on expensive state programs and local personnel costs to meet that cap.
That principally is why add our voice to those calling on the county to stop making Medicaid payments to the state. The county Chamber of Commerce at least wants to start talking about it.
When he presented his budget to the legislature, Edwards agreed, saying he wants to stop payments to get the state to put an end to unfunded mandates – although he tips his hand in also demanding the county be allowed to increase the sales tax, which is the opposite direction taxes should be going.
In stating his case for withholding Medicaid payments, Edwards said, “As long as they can shovel the problem off to taxpayers in Chautauqua County … they will keep doing it, just like they’ve done to every other county across New York state. It won’t be until we say, ‘Enough. No more. It’s your responsibility. If you want the program, you pay for it.”’
We believe it is time to go a step beyond withholding the money.
The legislature should refuse to impose a property tax levy big enough to raise the money to even make those payments.
County Currently Negotiating Contracts
August 5, 2011
By Nicholas L. Dean (ndean@post-journal.com) , The Post-Journal
Save | Comments (1) | Post a comment |
MAYVILLE – Chautauqua County is currently negotiating five contracts with labor unions.
Four of the contracts expire at the conclusion of the year, though one, Civil Service Employees Association Unit 6322, which represents part-time sheriff’s deputies, expired in December 2009.
The other four are the Sheriff’s Supervisors Association, which represents lieutenants; the Deputy Sheriff’s Association, which represents primarily road patrol personnel; the Sheriff’s Employee’s Association, which represents primarily jail personnel; and the CSEA Unit 6300, which represents many different general positions in the county, from laborers to supervisors.
With so many negotiations in progress, The Post-Journal questioned County Executive Greg Edwards recently about what can be expected of the new contracts.
Specifically, The Post-Journal asked Edwards whether he has issued a zero-wage increase directive in the negotiations, as, with the county’s financial problems, there is literally no money for raises. The county is facing another $18 million deficit in 2012.
Edwards explained that he would first have to check with the county’s law and human resources departments to find out what he could and could not say about ongoing negotiations.
According to The Post-Journal’s records, the last contract ratified for the CSEA Unit 6300 featured a retroactive 47-cent pay raise for 2008; 3 percent pay raises in 2009 and 2010; and a 60-cent pay raise in 2011. In the years since that contract’s ratification, however, the CSEA has changed its insurance twice to save money at the request of the county. CSEA officials also cited the recent early retirement incentive when the county asked to re-open contract negotiations early.
After consulting with County Attorney Steve Abdella, Edwards responded to The Post-Journal by explaining that there is little he can say about ongoing negotiations.
“It is difficult for me to say much about the contract negotiations without leaving myself open for an improper-practice charge by my organized labor leaders, alleging that we are not negotiating in good faith, which is a legal term based on the process undertaken in negotiating union contracts in New York state,” Edwards said. “The objective is to go into negotiations with an open mind to comprehensive and global solutions, and the wage issue is only one part of the package.
“Departments within county operations have been instructed to bring in overall budgets with a target of zero increases for the 2012 budget,” Edwards continued. “This certainly has every department leader and all finance staff focused on new efficiencies, additional reductions, and necessary eliminations going forward.”
Edwards concluded by saying that as negotiations develop, more information may be made available.