PDF Archive

Easily share your PDF documents with your contacts, on the Web and Social Networks.

Share a file Manage my documents Convert Recover PDF Search Help Contact



Contract talk .pdf



Original filename: Contract_talk.pdf

This PDF 1.5 document has been generated by convertonlinefree.com, and has been sent on pdf-archive.com on 07/09/2015 at 00:34, from IP address 24.168.x.x. The current document download page has been viewed 661 times.
File size: 200 KB (5 pages).
Privacy: public file




Download original PDF file









Document preview


65-?
The UFA sent out emails AND mail to each member in a 65-2 entitled 2010-2017
Contract Information. Many members feel this is a 1 sided informational waste of 11 pages of
paper; lets look at why. They failed to SPELL out any and all the NEGATIVES that this contract
has on our members.
Throughout this informational sheet I will use a base salary of $100,000 for argument's purpose.
(simpler math)

1. Permanent Rsot? One of the main selling points is a Permanent RSOT.
Permanent - lasting or intended to last or remain unchanged indefinitely.
96 hours RSOT equates to just under $6000 per year that you have to work to get. 4 day tours
and 4 night tours. 8 EXTRA days you HAVE to show up to work to get paid the overtime.
A modest 3%, 3% RAISE for 2010-2011 will net you 106,090 JUST FOR 2010-2011. $100,000
x3% = $103,000 for 2010 and $103,000 x 3% = $106,090
Even if we got 0's for 2012-2013 we would be AHEAD of the 1%,1%,1%,1% that is offered in
this current contract proposal. How? Well 1% of the Base $100000 that we are using is $101,000
for 2010, $102,010 for 2011, $103030 for 2012, $104,060 for 2013 and $105,101 for 2014. Lets
throw in the 1.5% for 2015 in also and you get to $106,676. VOTE NO

2. The UFA 65-2 shows 2 different retro numbers. $13000 and an average of about
$15,000. The $15000 retro includes average overtime in said period. This retro represents 2010
to the Current time. Lets look again at our modest 3%,3%,0%,0% RAISE on the $100,000 base
pay NOT including overtime. $21270! WHAT? HOW?? Simple math $3000 for 2010 +
$6090(3% compounded) for 2011 + $6090 for 2012(0% raise) + $6090 for 2013= $21270 Did I
mention that’s not including Overtime? I cant stress how important it is for % up front. We can
give back for this in the 2010-2011 contract and then renegotiate the stuff we gave up and get
them back for 0% for 2012-2013 contract. VOTE NO

3. C+20 and RSOT staffing PERMANENT with this agreement. OH?
Permanent - lasting or intended to last or remain unchanged indefinitely.
MEDICAL LEAVE 7.5% will "trigger' a LOSS of the C+20.
Medical leave is currently around 7.1%. Let’s say there is currently 8,000 active firefighters.
7.1% of those firefighters is on medical leave. 8000x7.1% = 568 To lose the C+20 it would take
7.5% members on medical leave. 8000x7.5% = 600 7.1 to 7.5% is a difference of 32! 32
members go sick and WE LOSE the C+20 5th man engines.. 32 THIRTY TWO... VOTE NO

4. Did the UFA GAIN Disability Pension Benefit Legislation for tier 3/6 members along
with presumptive bills? Ask an Executive board member next time they come by about The
Public Employees Fair Employment Act, ie The Taylor Law.
Article 14 of The Public Employees Fair Employment Act also known as The Taylor Law
STATES under Civil Service Law, 201(4) provides that the term "terms and conditions of
employment" shall not include any benefits provided by or to be provided by a public retirement
system, or payments to a fund or insurer to provide an income for retirees, or payment to retirees

or their beneficiaries, and declares that no such retirement benefits shall be negotiated pursuant
to article 14 of that law. The basic purpose of these restrictions is to help government employers
hold down increases in the cost of pension benefits.
I'm no lawyer, but doesn't that mean 3/4 CAN NOT be discussed in contract talk between the fire
dept and its employer?? So how can any member of this executive board state they negotiated
3/4 with the city(our employer)?? threading on thin ice Mr. Cassidy. VOTE NO

5. A Lawsuit was filed on July 13th, 2015 against NY City Council Speaker regarding
her office’s obstruction of debate and open government, and for fostering a lack of transparency
in New York City Council requesting. This Lawsuit has TEETH according to Mr. Cassidy. So
why drop it now? Are we to let shady and possibly unlawful acts off the hook, which
ULTIMATELY BLOCK our tier 3/6 members from obtaining 3/4 and all presumptives that tier
2 members have?
What does this lawsuit try to fix or shed light on?
Well in a nutshell this lawsuit was set up to call to light and show transparency how an
unidentified council member BLOCKED and gave fictitious pension proposal to the city council
board members. HOW??
Previously in 2014 city council member Crowley submitted a proposal before the City
council board that would create parity among the different pension tiers for firefighters and
police officers. (Sounds like 3/4 no???) This proposal was resubmitted Jan 2015 after it expired
in 2014. Supposedly roughly 40/51 city council members supported Mrs Crowley’s proposal but
the unidentified council member said they submitted a proposal BEFORE council woman
Crowley’s proposal thus BLOCKING it.
Mr. Cassidy said, “The UFA considers the availability of public information under the
FOIL integral to New York State’s commitment to providing open, democratic leadership and
legislative processes for all New Yorkers, and deems the New York City Council are Council
Speaker are no exception. We expect the court will have the last word on this.”
--------So in fireman terms: We are calling out the council member who is trying to block our
members from obtaining 3/4 and restoration of all presumptions (heart,stroke,cancer, lung and
communicable disease) VOTE NO
5A. 3/4 is a STATE not CITY issue. Only the State can pass Disability Legislation. This
is READY TO PASS in ALBANY. The CITY who offered us this contract is using the HOME
RULE to hold this back. Political suicide?? VOTE NO Let this fight continue in the courts.
VOTE NO

6. Tier 3/6 members WILL pay 3% more into their pension. what is the VALUE of this
to the rest of the membership, including the tier 3/6 members? Certainly not
1%,1%,1%,1%,1.5%,2.5%,3% over 7 years is it????? VOTE NO
Tier 3/6 members HAVE to contribute the EXTRA 3% into their pension for their WHOLE time
employed. Tier 2 members have option to not contribute after their 20th year. VOTE NO
Tier 3/6 members can only create an EXCESS via pension contributions AFTER their 22 year of
service. VOTE NO

7. Terminal leave cash payout is NOT pensionable. Is $20,000 40% taxed to $12000
worth 1's?? That money can be spent in a day and will NEVER be seen again in your pension.
VOTE NO
8. CFRD on STRAIGHT TIME??? 1%'s for CFRD on straight time?? VALUE doesnt
add up. VOTE NO

9. Re-opener?? NOPE! Section 7 of the MOI states we can seek arbitration in 2017. We
can get FUTURE value/credit in a FUTURE contract if any other union in the unified collation
does better than us. So if the cops do better we can’t REOPEN this current 2010-2011, 20122013,2014-2015 or 2016-2017 contracts. It does say we can go to ARBITRATION for future
contracts. Why not go to arbitration now? VOTE NO

10. If we vote this down we go to Arbitration. So? are we not prepared to fight a
RAISE? PERB has awarded HISTORIC contracts to the PBA since 2002. Perb awarded the PBA
over 29.5% RAISES in 6 years. Why take 11% over 7 years now? VOTE NO

11. Executive board members have been asking members who argue back What will we
give up to get 3%,3%? 1st of all its NOT our job to crunch those numbers. 2nd if we were to do
the numbers we would need the numbers no?? WE DO NOT have any values for anything
proposed in this contract. When asked for the VALUES of this contract Mr. Cassidy replied "
No other unions in the Uniformed Collation gave values, so the UFA won't."
But for arguments sake here are some things we can offer on the table if the MONEY adds up.
A. We can stretch out new members for 2010-2011 contract to 7 years for 3%,3% and
THEN for the 2012-2013 contract bring them back to a 5.5 year stretch for 0,0% achieving the
3%,3%,0%,0% stated in points 1. 2. above. (no probie classes during these years wink wink)
VOTE NO
B. 0% sound bad? Ok Take away RSOT BUT lose the 7 year stretch and bring it back to
5.5 years for 1%,1% for 2012-2013 VOTE NO
C. no RSOT sound bad? Look at it this way 3,3,1,1% using a base of $100,000 = wound
bring the base up to $108,222 so we give up $6000 for $8222. $8222 raise just for 4 years and
DO NOT HAVE to work 8 tours for the $6000. (Retro for this scenario is over $24000 for base
pay) VOTE NO this scenario is a likely one if our executive board does their job. VOTE NO
D. What happens when overtime drys up and we don’t have the RSOT? well we lose
$6000 in 8 tours we HAVE to work to get paid for. We gain over $8000 to our base pay. VOTE
NO

12. The UFA tries to shoot down the talk and literature going around about other paid
department's recent contracts saying they pay more into health care, more into their pension, and
have stretched out their members reaching top pay. After looking at the Boston contract for
2011-2017 Any extra they pay into their pension or healthcare was NOT done in their recent
contract that they got a RAISE with. VOTE NO

The Sergeant at Arms on the Executive board is passing out a sheet with 7 other paid fire
departments in the IAFF in the USA. Mr Fitzgerald states Boston received 14% over 6 years. He
is semi correct. They received a 14% RAISE over 6 years plus 2% for 2017.
According to Boston’s labor agreements found at:
http://www.cityofboston.gov/labor/agreements.asp
Boston agreement July 2011 1%, July 2012 2%, July 2013 3%, July 2014 3%, July 2015 3%,
July 2016 2%
Furthermore Mr Fitzgerald states they work 42 hour weeks, pay into their HMO 17.5%, Retire
Full pension with 32 years and age 55 and pay 9% into their pension.
According to Boston’s labor agreements found at:
http://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/IAFF%20MOA%202014-2017_tcm347632.pdf
They gained a sick leave overtime tour.. up from 3 to 4 tours (2 night 2 day)
NO WHERE in their 2011-2017 contract does it talk of an increased work week, more payment
into healthcare or pension. So why have that on a CONTRACT Sheet handed out by the Sargent
at arms?
Boston FD Concessions: They lost 37.5 hours for emt certification but gained a 2% to their base
salary effective 2017
I can break down each of the other 6 Fire depts that Mr. Fitzgerald listed on that sheet but
the point is made.

13. 5th man, closure of companies, etc. ARE public safety issues. Mr Cassidy knows
this. These issues should not be brought up in CONTACT talk.. Are we to Pay for our own
safety, the safety of the public and their property? VOTE NO
Mr Cassidy talked about receiving "credit" for the C+20 5 man engines.. Where is our "credit"
for the other 40 they took from us? VOTE NO

14. Last but certainly not least, TIMING. I can quote Braveheart and say HOLD HOLD
HOLD, NOW! Mr Cassidy beat me to it. Wait Wait Wait Wait for PBA. NA!
Fact: THE DAY AFTER proposing this contract to the executive board, the city asked
the neutral arbitrator Howard Edelman to Re-open the perb arbitration to "introduce additional
evidence following the UFA contract ratification vote."
Ask yourself why? And if you can’t find an answer here it is: The city wants to use
OUR 1%,1% for the 2010-2011; that IF RATIFIED by our union, will be used against the cops
PERB ruling. Still confused? The PBA is getting more than 1%1% for 2010-2011! Why else
would the city ask to use our 1%,1%? Answer: To Lower the PBA PERB award AND this
breaks PARITY.
Parity with the PBA IS OUR #1 asset. We have not had to go to arbitration because
the PBA has done it for us in the 2002-2010 contracts. VOTE NO

15. We can’t F#@$ the new guys. Well paying 3% extra into their tier 3 pension IS
SELLING out the new guys. What VALUE did we gain for this? We dont have to give back

anything for a RAISE! If the city asks us to give something back we have other options that
DON’T take money out of peoples pockets. Ultimately a CONTRACT is about MONEY. We
want to get the most and give back the least. Do you think our executive board members got us
the most with the least givebacks? VOTE NO

16. The Taylor Law (The Public Employees Fair Employment Act) is more than a law
taught to all the probies as a law that prohibits us from striking. It actually PROTECTS us from
our UNION and our EMPLOYER the city of NY.
If a member of the EXECUTIVE board asks what do we argue for in PERB if we vote
this contract down tell him to read section 9 of the Taylor Law. It explains what he can bargain
for. Or you can read this to them.
(v) the public arbitration panel shall make a just and reasonable determination of the matters in
dispute. In arriving at such determination, the panel shall specify the basis for its findings, taking
into consideration, in addition to any other relevant factors, the following:
a. comparison of the wages, hours and conditions of employment of the employees
involved in the arbitration proceeding with the wages, hours, and conditions of employment of
other employees performing similar services or requiring similar skills under similar working
conditions and with other employees generally in public and private employment in comparable
communities;
b. the interests and welfare of the public and the financial ability of the public employer
to pay;
c. comparison of peculiarities in regard to other trades or professions, including
specifically, (1) hazards of employment; (2) physical qualifications; (3) educational
qualifications; (4) mental qualifications; (5) job training and skills;
d. the terms of collective agreements negotiated between the parties in the past providing
for compensation and fringe benefits, including, but not limited to, the provisions for salary,
insurance and retirement benefits, medical and hospitalization benefits, paid time off and job
security.

17. Hope this actual factual info is helpful in your decision. Be sure to have your
Company delegates POLL your members. A simple house tax sheet converted into a yes/no will
suffice. And hold your company delegate accountable. How? show up to the meeting on the
23rd. Bring a copy of the polling sheet with you and walk up to the mic with said delegate. If any
Delegate cannot Poll their members then they should step down and be removed from their
position. Bottom line is we want a RAISE. Be safe brothers and sisters.
Mark B L113


Related documents


fire lies
contract talk
contract summary final
65 vote
h k proposal for cape 2016 06 28
hill district education council executive director


Related keywords