Tuesday, December 10, 2013

Labor Union Negotiations

----  By an Anonymous Guest Gadfly



The topic of labor union negotiations has reared its head.  This is often times considered a “taboo” subject in East Greenbush.  The elected officials appease the Unions and the Unions agree to back certain parties, as is evidenced by the political contributions made by some of our town unions.  Visit the BOE site and peruse the political contributions to each Party and/or candidate for the past 5—10 years and you will see a pattern.  East Greenbush has found itself in a financial pickle, of which there is no doubt.  The information shown at the end of this thread pinpoints the evidence of that.  

Do we, as residents, want to see the Political Parties negotiating the contracts?  Chances are they will “negotiate” favors and gifts with our tax dollars and we, the taxpayers, will pay the price for the gifts that we had no intention of giving.  Maybe it is time to play a neutral position with the Unions and NOT a political position.  The fact is unions do not want their pensions touched, none of us want our financial futures toyed with and gambled.  It seems, due to a recent court decision regarding Detroit, our Town’s poor financial condition can be used to the Town’s advantage…maybe there is a silver, (or at least a pewter) lining to the East Greenbush decrepit financial condition.  East Greenbush is NOT declaring bankruptcy however, if the finances continue on the downward side of the slope than who knows how things can turn out and that benefits NONE of us, including the unions.  Very few thought Detroit would go bankrupt.  

You are asked to review the information regurgitated below.  Then, after review ask yourself, do YOU want political cronies involved in the Town’s union contract negotiations?  Do YOU want the Political Parties beholden to the Unions?  Do YOU want prudent contract negotiations between individuals that do NOT have a political stake in how our tax dollars are spent/squandered?  To the Union leaders and members, do YOU want your pensions put on the line?  Do Union members want to worry about their pensions’ futures due to political games and favors?  Do union members want their pensions safe from financial ignorance?  Do union members in East Greenbush want the security of knowing Detroit is not East Greenbush’s ugly financial cousin?  Think about all of that and then ponder this……who is involved in contract negotiations on behalf of the Town and on behalf of the Unions?  Are they people we can all trust to put the interests of tax payers ahead of their own political gain and put the safety of union pensions ahead of their personal goals and aspirations?  Scroll through this information and it will cause you to take pause at what is happening with the Town’s finances and Union negotiations.  It will cause you to ask questions.  


Read that link and you will understand why the current East Greenbush labor negotiations and contracts are so important to residents as well as the union members.  Due to a court’s ruling regarding Detroit’s situation, the union pensions are NOT protected from the city’s declaration of bankruptcy.  What was once considered a “sacred cow” is now open for negotiations with municipalities?  The article begins as follows:

A federal bankruptcy court’s decision in Detroit last week putting that city’s constitutionally protected public pension on the table for cuts cracks the door open for pension reductions in New York.
The concern among unions is that the assurance that New York’s public workers have operated under since 1938 — that pensions “shall not be diminished or impaired” — could now be threatened by local governments fighting off insolvency.
“It’s a turning point. ... What has been sacred — pensions — are not sacred anymore,” said Syracuse Mayor Stephanie Miner, who has been a leader in seeking action to save New York’s distressed municipalities from insolvency. That has so far been avoided through higher taxes and layoffs and reducing services.
The Detroit decision could give struggling municipalities leverage in negotiating other concessions to avoid bankruptcy court.”
Please keep in mind, in August 2013 the following was printed:
WSJ editorial writer Stephen Moore, on the conservative Newsmax  website, is wondering if East Greenbush and Newburgh of all places may be the new Empire State poster children for unsustainable municipal governments.
He notes that the Albany suburb of East Greenbush has a record of “questionable employment contracts and illegal payments to town officials, and Newburgh has a $2 million budget gap in its schools and 26 percent of the population below the poverty line.” 
The article continued, “The East Greenbush consideration may not be that far off, I recall doing a story a while back about how their police pension costs in 2009 caused their credit rating to fall to junk bond status and my colleague Alysia Santo has noted the town’s other problems

2. East Greenbush, N.Y.

A New York state audit concluded that years of fiscal mismanagement — including questionable employment contracts and illegal payments to town officials — left East Greenbush more than $2 million in debt.

In conclusion I will again ask both residents and union members, “WHO DO YOU WANT INVOLVED IN NEGOTIATING UNION CONTRACTS?” 

52 comments:

  1. I know I have complete confidence in Supervisor and CFO Keith Langley to negotiate the union contracts for the benefit of all the residents of East Greenbush. This is the opportunity Keith has been waiting patiently for. I am certain the newly elected Langley majority will work under Keith's direction to tirelessly lead East Greenbush the Smart Way Forward.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous Guest GadflyDecember 10, 2013 at 4:01 PM

    In the long run, with a municipality in a financial pickle, the "political" piece of union negotiations does not inure to the benefit of the residents OR union members, as the court decision pertaining to Detroit proves.~~~Anonymous Guest Gadfly.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous Guest GadflyDecember 10, 2013 at 4:03 PM

    To I Like Langley--there is an assumption of sarcasm in your comment BUT, if that assumption is incorrect, do you have complete confidence in C.D. and his involvement in the union negotiations? Either as a taxpayer OR union member, the answer should be NO.

    ReplyDelete
  4. To 4:03 PM,
    I don't believe I know a C.D., but my complete confidence in Supervisor Langley extends to anyone he selects to assist him. Don't forget, the people of EG have spoken loud and clear. They also like Langley and have given him his Smart Way Forward majority for the next two years.

    ReplyDelete
  5. To paraphrase the late John Lennon: "All we are saaaayiiing is give Keith a chance!!
    If you don't like him and/or his partner Chris, run against them next time. Remember we all knew that when we voted for Keith, we also got Chris. Sort of like Bill and Hilary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry Anonymous...there was no notation on the ballot and there is no provision in Town Law which provides for a party boss getting as seat at the table when the issues of the people's interest are at stake. This may have been a "convention" (like the way things were always done) in EG, but not any more. The other party learned the hard way. Looks like it may be time for the same curriculum on the other side.

      Delete
    2. 5:12pm- All Keith needs to do is appoint Chris to a high level position at town hall and he would be officially ok'd with sitting in on ALL high level meetings. Maybe Keith is just trying to get Chris up to speed before January 2nd.What's the big deal? This is just part of the normal transition process. So what if Keith likes having Chris around? I'm surprised you didn't think of that.

      Delete
    3. My point was to address what has been the bane of Town existence for the last few years.....the running of the Town by political operatives rather than the most qualified. We got into trouble because unqualified people were paid stipends to do the political bidding and not the job. Why do you think Wojeski is still at work so that Toski can begin?

      Delete
    4. Yes, I get it. Many great leaders have an unpaid male pal around and they allow the pal to comment on everything. Think the Lone Ranger and Tonto, McCabe and Benko, and Fred and Barney. OH don't forget Nixon and Bebe Rebozo.

      Delete
  6. Gadfly,
    Why do think Keith postponed submitting the results of the AUDs until after January 2nd? So Chris, Keith and the rest of his Smart Way Forward Majority can review them before they go out. Get real Gadfly. This is Chris' and Keith's Town now. The rest of us just live in it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The day is rapidly approaching where the taxpayers of East Greenbush will not be able to afford the extremely generous health benefit plans and pension benfits enjoyed by the town's unionized employees.

    That, friends and neighbors, is a simple economic reality.

    The state created different tiers within the pension plan to recognize this looming reality.

    I have personally negotiated more than 100 collective bargaining agreements in the private sector.

    Will Langley, as the taxpayer's chief spokesperson do what's right for those taxpayers? Highly doubtful. I cannot think of a single major decision in East Greenbush that has EVER been made for the regular taxpayer.

    Negotiations in East Greenbush are done in total secrecy. The results are voted with not one single detail contained in the resolution. Prior negotiations have included sneaky deals cut by the prior supervisor to give union members additional benefits AFTER the town board voted for the settlement.

    The town's finances remain highly stressed. We'll see what Langley does about that but the odds, in my opinion, are absolutely zero that he will take a long term view of the cost of health benefits and pension in these, or any other negotiations. He is just not smart enough and lacks the skills to figure out hiw to negotiate effectively.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The town for years should have done comparable salaries for all classes of employees its done every where but not here for the exact reason stated that if one unit got more than the other they wouldn't vote for me so we gave everyone the going rate.

      Delete
  8. On the whole I think town employees do a very good job but in a time of financial insecurity both for the town and for already over-stressed taxpayers this is a time to hold the line in negotiations with town employees. A lot of people working in the private sector have not gotten raises in years while having the share they pay for benefits increased several times over. These are still hard times and town employees need to make some of the same sacrifices other people have been making for years. I wish it weren't so but $2 million in debt and absurdly high taxes demand a tough stance with the unions.

    The Guest Gadfly is right that it matters who negotiates with union members and even more so whether their priority is tax relief and good government or currying favor with people they believe can help in their next election. One of my biggest complaints about our town government is that it seems to exist more for the benefit of town employees than for taxpayers and residents. If the new majority believes in good government and not simply in taking their turn at the public trough, these negotiations could go a long way toward reversing priorities and putting taxpayers first. I don't want to see union members punished for previous political loyalties but holding the line seems a prudent course to take.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jack,
      Town employees are a good bunch of people, I know quite a few. Your view though the right one will not be well liked by those employees, and me taking the same side as your view will cause those employees to look upon me with scorn too. Most people had to make some type of sacrifices over the last few years, so I believe that those employees need to make some too. Sorry people just my opinion.

      Delete
    2. Jim_C - I appreciate your comment. I agree that town employees are good people. I hope that holding the line in the current negotiations can prevent layoffs and other problems in the long run. As a retired member of PEF I believe in unions but I'd rather see a broad sacrifice by the town workforce rather than a scorched earth layoff policy. My views may make town workers mad but they'll feel even worse if the whole system falls apart. I hope you and your family have a great holiday season.

      Delete
  9. Anonymous Guest GadflyDecember 10, 2013 at 8:06 PM

    Anon, Dec 10 @ 6:32---thus the reason we need impartial, experienced contract negotiators. Keith and C.D. will capitulate to the unions for the obvious reasons-political support in two years.
    Anon Dec 10 @ 5:03--we have already given 2 years of chances.. He was in the minority but nothing stopped him from dissenting from the Dem Majority and he often times chose not to, which he followed up with, "They are hitting me from all sides." That is politics and Keith was afraid to do what he was elected to do. He has no backbone and he does not stand up for the tax payer unless he has majority support. Is that the "man" we want negotiating on behalf of the tax payer? The Gadfly nailed it---Chris was NOT on the ballot and Chris was NOT elected. We do not need a jobbernowl sitting at the negotiation table. This Town has seen enough fubbery; the Town needs honest negotiations that behoove the taxpayers and union members while nursing the Town's finances. Keith and Chris have proven to be a couple of popinjays that continue to feed their self-inflated egos.
    Both the taxpayers and union members should be watching and paying attention to these negotiations with great interest. The unions know the Town's financial conditional and if we follow Detroit's path, those union pensions become financial targets and their future becomes unknown.
    Side note--Malone has a brother in DPW; ethically he should abstain from the final contract vote.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Side note.....not so much. P. Malone was actually who was representing the majority before elections. Maybe he's out of it now but you never know. It is absolutely inappropriate.

      Delete
    2. Phil Malone should not even be negotiating any contract which would affect a family member. Recusal means no participation, period.

      Delete
  10. the pension system is mandatory for municipalities ... can't do a thing about it folks. Med insurance is another ball of wax. Higher employee contributions, including retirees, are critical to the town.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous Guest GadflyDecember 10, 2013 at 8:38 PM

    Anon Dec 10@ 8:22--true as that may be.....the point is, that pension is NOT guaranteed any longer. That pension, in a large part, is now contingent upon the financial condition of the municipality. If a muni declares bankruptcy that pension is in jeopardy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe the pension system is run by the state and independent of any municipality's financial condition

      thus a muni could go bankrupt but the employee pension credits earned until that point would be sound

      Delete
  12. All employees hired after the date of ratification should be placed in tier 6 of the state's pension plan. It is as siml,e as that. That is the proper long term approach. Current employee's pensions are not affected.

    Health benefits need a much higher element of cost sharing. That is the trend - like it or not. Jack Conway summed it up perfectly.

    Supervisor Langley: are you listening? For a change?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous Gadfly GuestDecember 11, 2013 at 7:41 AM

    The point of the thread is to highlight the Town's financial condition and what the town can ill afford. If the Town funds outrageous benefits and continues to include a GUARANTEE of OT in the contracts, based on a return of political favors, the Town is NOT considering the financial condition EG is in and we are in NO position to give away the store. The union members, understanding that fact, may want to seriously consider what they want to ask for and negotiate because if the Town continues to slip into financial quicksand than the pensions will be in jeopardy. If the Town DOES follow Detroit's path than the pensions are in peril.
    We need competent people negotiating for the Town, not a couple of political operatives and hacks. The union members, knowing the Town's fretful financial position, should want the same thing. If the Town begins to default and ends up declaring bankruptcy, the union's pensions are in danger. THAT is the point of the thread.

    ReplyDelete
  14. There are union clerical emplohees who work a six hour day,with lunch and collect a full time salary

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That will end under Supervisor Langley's majority. He will require a full day's work for everyone.

      Delete
  15. Both union and non-union employees sbhould stop taking their birthdays off.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The town has nothing to do with the retirement benefits other than the percentage paid by them. The tiers are set at the time any employee is hired and is enrolled in the system. The longer any employee has been employed they obviously had a better retirement. Yes tier 5 and 6 has given relief to the entire payment percent paid by the town or county or state where ever you work but that is for new hires and has nothing to do with longer employed workers.

      Delete
  16. Dear Jimmy Jones......This thread was submitted without solicitation and without edit by me in any respect. The fact is that municipal labor contracts and the benefit "tails" which go with them are seriously threatening the viability of governments all over the place. So I agree with the thesis. EG and similar Towns have been going down a self-destructive path for a long time. Your personal "shots" cannot produce a denial of that fact.

    EG's in trouble because of added stuff like the sick leave incentive and built-in OT to pad salaries. All of this was promised in exchange for "election." Election pays off in other areas for the inner circle.

    Unfortunately, one of your buddies actually got up in a Town Board meeting and stated on tape that it was "his turn now." Just can't make this stuff up.

    Keep it up. The show will be unbeatable.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous Guest GadflyDecember 11, 2013 at 9:32 PM

    I am going to try this one more time.
    The point of this post is to highlight the need for a muni to be financially stable. The Union pensions are NOT safe and/or guaranteed if EG follows Detroit's path. The Union pensions for Detroit's Unions are now in jeopardy. It behooves BOTH the Town and the Unions if strong, intelligent negotiators are at the table negotiating for the Town and the Unions. Negotiators need to understand the Town's financial instability and importance of prudent negotiations that inure to benefit the TOWN'S finances without beating down the Unions. Unions contracts listing GUARANTEED OT should be scratched from "Santa's List". That directly and negatively impacts the Town's budget.
    When a couple of political operatives and hacks are sitting at the table negotiating with our tax dollars nobody in Town should be comfortable. If anyone is seriously comfortable with C. Def and Langley negotiating the Town's Union contracts than you really need to get up to speed regarding the financial condition of this Town and the resources listed in this thread are a great place for you to start.
    Serious negotiations should be happening that include the residents' needs and what the residents can afford. That type of negotiating is a long term benefit for the Unions as well.......ask a Union member in Detroit if he/she now wishes negotiations had contracts had been conducted differently and if they wish the negotiators had taken Detroit's financial woes much more seriously when negotiations occurred.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 9:32 PM:
      Keith Langley has been the Town Supervisor and CFO for the last two years. He has a better grasp of the Town's finances than anyone in and outside of Town government. He has reviewed the AUDs and he has prepared the last two Town Budgets. Who else would you suggest handle these important negotiations? Keith has the knowledge, experience and voter mandate to effectively negotiate these contracts. The voters elected the Langley majority in the November elections by an overwhelming margin. They seem to be very comfortable with the way Keith is handling this. If you don't agree with them, why don't you speak up at Town Board meetings and/ or stop by Town Hall and share your concerns with Keith?
      As far as Defruscio goes, Keith is entitled to consult with anyone he pleases. He is also entitled to appoint Defruscio to any governmental position he pleases.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous Guest Gadfly is so far off the mark it's laughable

      read this article http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/albany-politics/federal-judges-ruling-on-detroit-pension-vulnerability-downplayed-in-ny-20131210

      "Because so many state and local government units are part of one pension system, it means that a potential bankruptcy by one municipality would not have the broad impact on a pension system as seen in Detroit."

      Delete
    3. You chose only one sentence of the entire article to quote to convey your message. I think if you review the article again, you will not be so quick to be dismissive of the issue or the problem. Certainly part of the problem is fat contracts which stretch the resources of a municipality so that they cannot meet the obligations of current contributions, and this is a direct impact on current workers. And pension padding with things like un-needed OT is both a drain on current cash resources as well as future obligations.

      Delete
  18. Gadfly:
    It's important to note that the "his turn now" individual was and remains one of Supervisor Langley's closest confidants.
    I agree with you...with this cast of characters the show will be unbeatable.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Atlas. If you want something published, use your own blog (which has been dormant since Troy told you to cool it).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Gadfly:
      What? or who? is Atlas? And where is the blog?

      Delete
    2. When he comes out of the shadows, I'll let you know. So far, no ID.

      Delete
  20. Atlas wants to be published. He addresses me by name, but won't share his - but he wants me to post his opinion. What does that say?? He even attaches the following quote from Herbert Hoover which apparently labels me a dictator:

    "It is a paradox that every dictator has climbed to power on the ladder of free speech. Immediately on attaining power each dictator has suppressed all free speech except his own."

    Newspapers decide which letters to the editor get published. (BTW - Atlas confuses "your" with "you're.")

    I'd say come out of the bushes and let's have a public debate.

    ReplyDelete
  21. By the way, Atlas, it wasn't the Gadfly who put a stop to questions at the Town Board meetings. If there is going to be transparency and openness and debate on local public policy, tell your surrogates to engage rather than hide.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The problem of union contracts that taxpayers cannot afford now will only get worse over time. The solution is simple. Town employees, like employees everywhere, have to pick up more of the cost of health benefits. New employees have to be placed in tier 5 or 6 of the state pension system. And wage increases have to frozen for two years and the 3rd year wage increase needs to be around 1.5%.

    It is as simple as that. And that solution requires nothing more than for Langley, and the town board, to represent taxpayers in the negotiations instead of their family members on the town's payroll and their own narrow political interests.

    But, like virtually every other issue in East Greenbush, the needs of the taxpayers are never a factor. Never. Why? Because, for the most part, taxpayers don't pay attention or don't care.

    It all as completely simple as that.

    ReplyDelete
  23. the last board meeting's minutes conveniently omit Mangold's offer to vote for Langley's tentative budget twice and has the audits finished early 2014

    can you say revisionary history?

    ReplyDelete
  24. uh oh more conspiracies. @ 8:05 the minutes you refer to are not even final yet and if you were at the pre-board meeting (and you probably were to know what the minutes lack) you heard Sue Mangold request that her offer be reflected in the minutes. Before you start stating what the minutes lack let’s wait for the final minutes (the ones that matter) to be published. @ 3:15 am First I hope it is because of a normal schedule and not a sleep problem that has you up at that hour. I think it is important to note that the new majority represents change and I think it is premature to think that past practices are a template for what is to come. As for your idea of pay freezes and 1.5 percent that is a good starting part but like all negotiations there has to be some give and take. While the Tax Payers may not be paying attention to their government my belief is that the new majority is paying close attention to what is good for the tax payers. Let’s not break out the torches and pitch forks before the new majority is even seated.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @12:12 the minutes I refer to were posted 12/13/13, the day AFTER the pre-board meeting

      let's see if Langley mans up and amends the posted minutes

      Delete
    2. @12:12 when have you ever seen the posted minutes amended and reposted?

      please be specific

      Delete
    3. Dear Atlas:
      Would you know if the new Smart Way Forward Majority is planning on amending the Preliminary Budget to go back to the no tax increase Tentative Budget proposed and carefully crafted by Supervisor Langley?
      Keith made the right call to keep our taxes from increasing. I'm sure the new majority will support Keith on this!!

      Delete
  25. Atlas,

    We will give you the benefit of the doubt. What you say is true, but all politicians know that to go against the employees of any town, city, state is all but a death sentence for their political career. It seems to me the only union that hasn't figured that out yet are the state union's because they will still support Cuomo come election time, even though he gave them the shaft a few years ago. So you might be right the newly elected town board might be ready to negotiate hard, but in the long run it could cost them their positions if they do.

    ReplyDelete
  26. @ 7:31 First I believe the Town Clerk is the keeper of the minutes so I doubt it is up to langley to "man up". Second I am not entirely convinced that it should be in the minutes. Sure she said that but she would still have had to follow through. and third after checking the web site I am surprised that the Minutes were not stamped "draft". but I think you put too much weight on the fact that the minutes should reflect Mangolds offer. If you want to talk revisionist history we could talk about Malones comment that it was the Democrats that brought Fed Ex to East Greenbush now THAT"S a rewrite. Wow I'm surprised his nose didn't poke a hole in the opposite wall when he told that whopper

    ReplyDelete
  27. I agree with Atlas 8:08 PM, What does it matter what Mangold offered if Supervisor Keith Langley and his majority Board are going to make sure we don't have a tax increase anyway?
    All we have to do is wait for after the first of the year and Keith, Deb and MaryAnn will get us the no tax increase budget they promised. If Sue and Phil want to vote for it, that would make it unanimous and a big win for EG taxpayers. If they don't, we will know where they stand.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Hooray for Keith Langley for making sure we don't have a Tax Increase for 2014! He is a man we can count on to keep his promise of NO TAX INCREASE to the taxpayers of East Greenbush, now that he has his NO TAX INCREASE TOWN BOARD MAJORITY.
    Now they just have to instruct the Receiver of Taxes to hold off sending out the Preliminary Budget's 2014 Tax Increase Bills for a couple of days so the Langley majority can pass the NO TAX INCREASE BUDGET Keith wants.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @11:04 and @1:45 it'll be too late by then take a look at your tax bill

      Delete
    2. @ 1:45 good idea and the hidden benefit in holding the bills for a few days is that we won't need to pay Toni's buddies to "work" on the tax bills over the holiday weekend.

      Delete
  29. The important questions is- Will Chairman DeFruscio allow Supervisor Langley and the new Smart Forward Majority Town Board to vote for a Town Budget that doesn't raise taxes. After all, Mr. DeFruscio has promised a number of patronage jobs to his cronies and extended family members. He may need those tax increases to pay for them..
    We'll see if Supervisor Langley and Councilpersons elect DiMartino and M.A. Matters have the political courage to buck their political "leader" on this very important issue.
    Stay tuned...

    ReplyDelete
  30. The Supervisor has a chance now to make the administration HIS as opposed to the Party's. It relates to the patronage that the Chairman wants. Will the new majority actually forge a reform agenda, or go with with the Party flow and replicate the Dem debacle. It's your choice Keith. Can you separate yourself from the R machine? You and Mary Ann and Deb were ELECTED, not the other crowd. You've got two years to prove that your administration is not just the Dems with an R label.

    ReplyDelete