PAX Centurion - September / October 2013

www.bppa.org PAX CENTURION • September/October 2013 • Page 5 Vice President’s Message: Ronald McGillivray, BPPA Vice President Close to achieving parity, Safe Street Teams & IOD A side from telling you what you already know…the award works for all but at varied timelines and would not have passed a ratification vote given the early calls received. The arbitrator has saved the City millions by pushing back increases and in- centives that for many aren’t attainable at this time in their career. The arbitrator’s decision to embrace a 6 year deal as opposed to a 3 enabled him to back end the award. The arbitrator realized that if his award was for 3 years it would probably look like a standard 3 fours across the board for 12%. Though more acceptable to our membership in that it is inclusive to the entire group and balanced in retroactive monies… from the arbitrator’s standpoint that would have produced a larger cost to the city and attainable base wage increases for the upcoming fire arbi- tration perpetuating the status quo of both groups chasing the other’s successive increases but not solving the underlying disparity issue. The arbitrator closely measured the effect of our award on the continuing Fire negotiations by issuing 1, 1, 3, 3, and 3 for base wages over the back 5 years…limiting our retro and giving the city an improved position to argue against the Fire receiving anything but our base wages. No doubt Fire will attempt to capture dollar for dollar increases in addition to the base. That and the TCAP will frame their fight. Fire received an average of $29,000 per for retro last cycle…ours will be in the area of one quarter of that if funded. Comparing total cost for similar time lines had the Fire at $104 million and the Police at $80.4 million. Some wonder why the constant “compare and contrast” with the Fire. Both groups are each other’s so-called most important “tie breaker”. Each carries the most weight in determining the others credible parity for an arbitrator. The BPPA filed 203 Union exhibits along with additional joint exhibits many of which dealt with disparity between our groups. The “cardinal sin” for any city administration is to deviate from the norm. That is to let the disproportion of pay get to where the police and fire are presently. Here are a couple of past issues that would qualify as sending a “ripple effect” into the uniformity of the parity relationship. These did not come from an arbitrator but from the administration. The TCAP , was a side letter of agreement incor- porated into the Fire CBA in 1987 that gives every 5 th year firefighter an additional 1% every time their contract opens which has generally been at least once annually and after police groups have settled. Regarding the City administration’s attempt to sway the City Council that the BPPA bargained for their educational incentive, knew the inherent drawbacks and does not deserve longevity parity with the Fire…please understand what followed. When the Police received the Quinn benefit during the bargaining cycle from 1996 through fiscal 2001 …our wage increases were 4, 4, 3, 3, 0, and 0…the 2 zeroes representing the “quid pro quo” for receiving the educational incentive . Shortly after the police had settled, a 5 TH year firefighter during the same cycle received 5, 5, 4, 4, and 10 in the last 2 years in which the police took zeroes. The TCAP included 6% for a 5 th year firefighter...so the Fire received close to Bachelor’s degree money in addition to base wages during that cycle…the “unlimited sick time” swap also had a nice ring to it. So if the BPPA knew the inherent drawback was going to be the administration’s “disproportionate payout” that laid in wait… make no mistake prior to bargaining the Quinn incentive the BPPA would have opted for the Fire package. After addressing members regarding our award one member inquired as to which side of the table the administration sat during that Fire negotiation. Understand this is not a jealous rant but rather a response to recent statements such as “We can’t give away the store” from the corner of- fice seeking to lessen our award. Given the city’s questionable attempts at reasoned “give and take” one might think that the corner office would show good sense in realizing the factual bargaining history before launching their propaganda campaign blaming a flawed arbitra- tion system for their self-induced state of affairs. The city attempting to make the mutually agreed to process the scapegoat is way off the mark. If anything this arbitrator creates a recalibrated template to help put the city’s house back in order. The arbitrator unquestionably got it… the case went in well and why shouldn’t it, the difference in base wages for similarly situated 5 th year employees is unprecedented both in the state and country. Comparing other benefits from “Injured on Duty”, a city issue that was withdrawn by the city for fear that the police would receive the firefighter package…to an additional 60 hours of sick time annually… to over 1,200 more hours of buy back at retirement…to the TCAP. Ironically, these were all Fire benefits secured at the bargaining table from the administration, not an arbitrator. The administration wanting a do-over is not surprising but the facts do not support the city’s desired outcome despite the media’s ill-informed portrayal…just follow the money trail for the past 20-plus years. Bargaining against ourselves makes little sense since the mutu- ally agreed upon dispute mechanism has rendered a verdict. The fact that funding was not passionately or otherwise argued at the table speaks volumes as to the large amount of funds that were identified as unencumbered and not earmarked as administration members claimed. We understand that the City Council got this dropped at their collective doorstep for a second time but it is not tasked with renegotiating this outcome only with funding. The Council has 60 days from October 9 th . On or about September 4 th , an article by the Herald’s RichardWeir spoke of a “doomsday scenario” that could cost the city upwards of $125 million in police back pay in effect crippling the city. On September 28 th , RichardWeir penned a follow up article that makes note of the city’s new costing of the award…it is more in the range of $80.4 million according to the city advocate’s dissent letter. It is hard not to conclude that the administration’s sponsored, original article was acknowledged in the form of an approximate $40 million dollar back-ended “mulligan”. Did the arbitrator purposefully give the city advocate a snapshot of what a comparable contract to the Fire would look like with up-front benchmarks going back to the 1 st year of the bargaining cycle? Something prompted the administration to put the September 4 th doomsday article in motion because after the one-time, $125 million pin-ball type number was mentioned…it was never to be heard again. The JLMC (Joint Labor Management Committee) helps provide a level playing field for police and fire. This essential alternative gener- ally ensures neither side is happy with the outcome for reasons that are readily identifiable but the option of having the media decide our fate is non-negotiable. The JLMC must be safeguarded at all costs and accurate representations of How, When andWhy the city and See Vice President on page 34