PATRICK-MURRAY ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCES UNION AGREEMENTS TO SAVE TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, PROTECT KEY SERVICES
National Association of Government Employees Units, 1, 3 and 6, and Massachusetts Organization of State Engineer and Scientists, Unit 9, agree to contract changes to help solve budget gap
BOSTON – Tuesday, March 9, 2010 – Governor Deval Patrick announced today that the Patrick-Murray Administration has reached agreement with nearly 14,000 union workers on two new contracts that will save the Commonwealth more than $40 million and help mitigate employee layoffs.
About 11,000 members of Units 1, 3, and 6 represented by the National Association of Government Employees (NAGE) ratified by an 85% margin contract revisions that will save taxpayers an estimated $36.4 million over the next three years, including roughly $4.5 million this fiscal year.
Similarly, about 3,000 members of Unit 9, represented by the Massachusetts Organization of State Engineers and Scientists (MOSES), ratified by a 75% margin contract revisions that will save taxpayers an estimated $6 million over the next three years, including roughly $760,000 this fiscal year.
“I thank the members of NAGE Units, 1, 3, and 6, and the members of MOSES, Unit 9 for their contribution to the Commonwealth and their willingness to work with us to find ways to save money in the face of very difficult budget challenges,” Governor Patrick said.
These contracts, along with others the Governor announced earlier this year (here and here), mark the first time since collective bargaining was established in the Commonwealth that a Governor has successfully negotiated such compromises.
The Governor called for renewed union negotiations in October as the Administration identified a $600 million revenue shortfall in the current fiscal year. To date, the Governor has reached agreement with four state employee unions.
If approved by the Legislature, the new NAGE contract will save tens of millions of dollars through a combination of delayed wage increases and eliminating some payments to the Health and Welfare fund. The voluntary concessions will save $6.8 million in FY10. NAGE employees work in a myriad of professional, administrative and skilled crafts jobs throughout state government.
Similarly, the new MOSES contract will save millions of dollars through a combination of delayed wage increase and employee furloughs. Furloughs will save $2.7 million in FY10. Members of MOSES work in a number of engineering and scientific positions throughout state government.
The savings from these revisions will allow the Administration to protect key programs and services, and prevent some layoffs.
“State workers have contributed significantly to help address our challenges over the last two years, and we thank them for that,” said Administration and Finance Secretary Jay Gonzalez. “As we head into another difficult budget year it is important that we all make the necessary sacrifices that will help us climb out of the recession and position the commonwealth for long term economic growth.”
The Governor has reached agreement with the bargaining units of SEIU Local 509, SEIU Local 888, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Council 93, the National Association of Government Employees and the Massachusetts Organization of State Engineers and Scientists. These five unions cover over 32,000 union employees -more than 75 percent of unionized state executive branch workers.
###
The voluntary concessions are not voluntary layoffs. They include furlough days (3 days for NAGE Unit 6 if you make more than $50,000; 3.6 furlough days for MOSES Unit 9) and salary givebacks. The collective bargaining agreement that NAGE signed last year provided for some raises. Something like 7% over three years, after a couple of years of seeing no raises. Instead of the raises being effective on the first day of the new fiscal year, they’ll be effective on the last day of each fiscal year for the next three. For example, on June 30, I’m going to get $2.90 as my negotiated raise. I know, I’m really porking it, and I should be ashamed.
<
p>Many agencies did have “incentives” to jettison staff. Payments of around $10,000 were made to people who agreed to retire by a certain date before the end of 2009 and where I work a few people took advantage of that. People have also been offered a chance to reduce their schedules to save money. On top of these union concessions, executive branch managers have been dealing with mandatory furloughs since last spring, but that’s a different press release.
<
p>NAGE has spun this as a big victory. It is hardly that, but frankly, we’re all just happy to have jobs. There were 2 things people wanted from the administration that we didn’t get: assurance that furloughs in an agency would save jobs in that agency; and a commitment to do something about the layers of management and so called “120-day employees”. (These are people who retired but come back to work no more than 120 days a year). I think the administration agreed to “look into that.”
<
p>Like our colleagues in the private sector, our health insurance costs have gone up. Our share of the premium was increased; co-pays have tripled; and we now have a bigger deductible to contend with. I know there are posters on BMG who think state employees are rolling in the dough, with all these amazing perks, but the reality is that we have experienced layoffs, salary cuts, and increased costs, just like everyone else. And we are still expected to provide the same level and quality of service, and guess what – we do.
Thanks for posting this, David.
<
p>State employees have no doubt sacrificed to cut costs through furloughs, wage cuts, and higher health insurance payments.
<
p>They are doing this to help mitigate layoffs, while continuing to provide a high-level of service during the worse economic downturn since the Great Depression.
<
p>It’s a shame health insurance executives making $6,000 per-day will never do the same.
My argument has always been that while unions are an important and neccessary roadblock to prevent management from balancing budgets on the backs of employees, it is also important for unions to recognize when concessions are valid, needed, and responsible.
<
p>If we’re going to have collective bargaining, there also has to be, at times, collective sacrifice.
<
p>Noone likes pay cuts. No one likes increased health care costs. But by sacrificing collectively, I feel these unions make themselves stronger by saying “All of our members are important, not just the ones with seniority.”
What you can get when you ask nicely for a shared sacrifice and are honest with the other side of the table about the dire straights, instead of spending years bashing the very concept of unions and then bashing them over the head in negotiations to get concessions?
I somehow doubt Governor Jane Swift, who was involved in negotiating contracts for union workers at our state’s public universities, but then fought very hard against the very deal she helped forge, would have had much luck in achieving any kind of union concessions with any union in the state. If memory serves me correctly, it was well into the Romney years before any contract was ever signed in that case.
I want to see if the SEIU is stupid enough to support the Governor, since he’s putting their members out of work.
is the Gov doing the right thing, in your view?
The governor cut the hours of clients of Personal Care Attendants (PCA’s) that use less than 15 hours per week. My reasons:
1. Most importantly the fulltime care of the client then falls entirely upon family members. The small respite family members could have with that small weekly allotment of time is invaluable in keeping one’s sanity.
2. A possible alternative to the client staying home could be a nursing home. When I spent my summer in a nursing home in ’08, Medicare paid $356 a day for me. It beat being homeless.
3. The PCA industry in Massachusetts is a closed shop. Every PCA must join the union, the SEIU. Of course this involves paying union dues.
4. Nowadays PCA’s are paid via a payroll service. This involves the government taking their share of the paycheck.
In summation:
More people out of work. Some PCA’s worked multiple clients. They may be eligible to collect unemployment. A drain on the state
Not working, no payroll taxes.
Not working, no need to pay union dues. A loss of members, and more importantly dues money.
In our recent senate special election, there were several examples of Massachusetts SEIU members supporting Scott Brown. The national union was still blindly supporting the democrat. Even to the point of out-of-state phone banking.
Massachusetts is unique in it’s one party domination. The ancient tales of democrats being for the working man are way passe. Now the democrats are the rich ones wishing to hold onto the status quo, they have the power. If I had it, I wouldn’t be giving it away either.
All sincerity intended. No rudeness intended at all.