34 South Main St., Attleboro, MA - Directions - (508) 222-7000
Home News Sports Features classifieds milestones services photos tvlistings cars jobs realestate subscribe
News

Unions: Don't blame us for 15 city layoffs




ATTLEBORO - City unions took issue with a city hall claim that their refusal to accept health insurance concessions is to blame for upcoming layoffs

Police union officials said they did not reject the proposal out of hand, but made a counter proposal that didn't get a response. Their attempt to work out a deal was ignored, they said.

"They didn't respond to us; they didn't get back to us," union attorney Leigh Panettiere said Tuesday. "Why didn't the city come back to us and try to reach a compromise?"

The city asked unions to accept higher co-pays to save money on health insurance premiums in the face of a budget crushing $2 million deficit next year.

Administration officials said Monday the city could have saved $1 million in premiums if all seven unions had agreed to the deal. Only the clerk's union agreed to the plan, which had to be accepted by all.

As a result, 15 workers will be laid off, city personnel consultant Jan Silverman told the city council.

The police counter proposal included a request for a pay raise with part of the money saved, Panettiere said.

"We essentially agreed to (the city proposal) with some slight modifications, and we asked for a pay raise with a small portion of the savings," she said.

Police Association President Detective Russell Castro said it's unfair to blame the unions.

While health insurance is expensive, there are a number of problems causing the spreading red ink, he said.

"It's not the only reason for the city's deficit," Castro said. "There are many causes."

Fire department union President Capt. Tom Joubert said it seems like workers have been giving more than they've been getting in recent years, despite what he said is a "good rapport" with the administration.

Joubert said a previous agreement on a health insurance concession was intended to fund a pay increase, but it never came to fruition, prompting the union to balk at the new plan.

The union has to draw the line somewhere, he said. "We can't keep doing this year after year," Joubert said. "You can't blame the unions for the layoffs."

Laborer's union steward Jim Proulx agreed with Castro that there are a number of reasons for the deficit.

One is salary increases created by a new pay plan passed last year that gave some big raises to a number of administrators and is adding stress to an already stressed budget, he said.

"The reclassification was a huge chunk of money that benefited administrators more than it benefited workers," Proulx said.

While insurance premiums under the city plan would be lower, they would still go up and there was no guarantee not to layoff, Proulx said.

 


*Member ID:
*Password:
  Forgot Your Password?
 
View Comments » No comments posted. « Hide Comments

ricknkim wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:53 AM:

" Tough times call for tough cuts & choices unfortunately. Too bad city leadership as well as the unions negotiate like children. Union members should be more assertive and demand better union leadership rather than acting like blind sheep - Union leaders have nobody to blame but themselves and have given the term "union" a bad reputation over the past several decades. "

kevin h. wrote on Jun 9, 2008 4:17 PM:

" Huh? "

BHARK70 wrote on Jun 8, 2008 3:05 AM:

" UMMM FREE AMBULANCE RIDES FOR FIREFIGHTERS??? THATS A BENNIE??? WE DON'T USE AMBULANCES FOR SILLY THINGS LIKE HEADACHE, SWOLLEN LIP. THE ALL TO FREQUENT COUGH. NO THESE ARE NOT OLDER PEOPLE THEY ARE YOUNG 17-24 YEAR OLDS. MAKE PEOPLE PAY THE CO-PAY AND SET AMBULANCE FEE UNLESS DEEMED NEEDED. NOT COUGH, SWOLLEN LIPS, CUT FINGERS. NUMBER OF CARS OWNED IN DRIVEWAY SHOULD COUNT. HEADACHES? THE 17 YEAR OLD WHOSE MOM NEEDED TO CATCH UP ON SLEEP SO COULD NOT DRIVE 1/4 MILE TO ER AT 3AM FOR TO MANY SNIFFLES. THIS ALONE WILL CUT DOWN ON HEALTHCARE AND SAVE MONEY. ALSO PEOPLE WHO COME TO ER 5 DAYS IN A ROW FOR SAME THING. WHEN THEY REQUEST 1MG OF ANY NARCOTIC. MAKE THEM PAY. "

kevin h. wrote on Jun 5, 2008 1:05 PM:

" We are talking about a sliver of 38% of the budget. Education gobbles up 62% of our hard earned tax dollars. Taking it to the police and firefighters is like putting a band-aid on a cut when you leg is missing and you are bleeding to death. "

very_concerned wrote on Jun 4, 2008 2:17 PM:

" If you read papers from towns all around Massachusetts right now it's all the same thing. The cities and towns are all out of money due to the decline of state aid over the last few years. There are stories similar to this where the paper runs an inflammatory article and a few people decide that because the benefits offered to city and town employees are better than what they get that it is wrong.

When you go to the local store and the prices are higher (just as they are at every store) do you ask to see the manager to discuss the benefit package his employees are getting?

Shouldn't we all be working together to figure out a better healthcare solution instead of trying to say that some may have it better than others?

Yes the civil servants may have taken a test and maybe some of them just wanted the benefits. But the bottom line is the benefits are not unreasonable and any employee municipal or private should never stand for getting less benefits from year to year. If you so than that is your problem not everyone elses. "

jose21 wrote on Jun 4, 2008 12:28 PM:

" firefighters mom, I have a ton of respect for your son and all firefighters, all police officers, and all military personel. But lets not forget, they chose those jobs, they were not drafted into them and they are compensated for them. How many of those people woke up and said they want to help people, so they went and took the test -vs- how many were just looking for a good paying job that could be easliy obtained by taking a test and getting put on a list? Again, I have nothing but respect for firefighters, but at the same time I don't put them on a pedistal. "

Harry Hindsight wrote on Jun 4, 2008 10:42 AM:

" Firefighter's mom, that is why it is called a benifit package. It is not a requirement of his job. Your son gets paid to save others and their property, a benifit of that type of job is that he also receives a lower co-pay. I am not, beyond a shadow of thinking, trying to belittle what your son does for a living, it is quite a noble profession. If the city was going to reduce his hourly wage to balance the books, then it's a bigger issue. Much as your son and his direct family receive free ambulance rides as a benifit, health insurance co-pays are negotiable. "

firefighter's mom wrote on Jun 4, 2008 4:20 AM:

" Sorry to remind you all of reality but my son will save your family and property when called on to do so, even at risk to his own life; how can anyone argue about co-pays or unions when that is the case?? "

citywatch wrote on Jun 2, 2008 11:45 PM:

" " How about a City Vehicle use policy to save money! Lets get real and stop all the vehicles going out of the city...What a perk that is!!!Especially for people who don't even respond for anything ... " "

publius wrote on May 30, 2008 9:53 PM:

" For the prupose of this discussion, "the wrong person" is not referring to a false arrest. The "wrong person" may be a politically connected person, or someone else of that ilk. "

publius wrote on May 30, 2008 9:50 PM:

" Feehan has motivated teachers and good scores because if a kid doesn't toe the line her or she is out. No special ed, no Chapter 76, no nothing.

The public schools are obligated by our constitution, the law that are based on the constitution, and the many court decisions which mandate hoe things should be done. Feehan is not bound many many of the decisions since they are a private entity.

The reason you want union Police Officers is when they come to you house, they can solve the ptoblem without having to worry about politics. Do you want the Police to be worrying about what's going to happen to them if they arrest the wrong person. The job is hard enough than to have to worry about that too.

There are unions in the public sector because of how often the direction of the wind changes. "

harry hindsight wrote on May 30, 2008 5:36 PM:

" Sorry, should have been " to Feehan. Their students ..." "

Harry Hindsight wrote on May 30, 2008 2:50 PM:

" very_concerned Says: "I don't know about you but I want my children to have the best possible teachers"

Then I would say send them the Feehan. There students have higher test scores and their drop out rate is almost nonexistant. I was a sub there and the standards are much higher than public schools. And they do not have a teacher's union. Go figure. Now what system is better. No union, higher test scores, graduates that give back to the school, growing number of sports and clubs. "

kevin h. wrote on May 30, 2008 1:15 PM:

" very_concerned Says: "I don't know about you but I want my children to have the best possible teachers"

The problem is that the teachers unions do not base compensation on merit, so we are NOT getting the best teachers. The unions will let a teacher teach that has FAILED the teachers test numerous times and STILL they can't produce decent math anbd science teachers.

Also you say: "I'm sure there are many other ways the City can cut and save money."

Such As.... What are your great ideas?
Education is 62% of the budget. Where in the 38% are you going to cut? "

very_concerned wrote on May 29, 2008 8:48 PM:

" sorry I can't edit my last post.....that should read "if there were" not If there was "

very_concerned wrote on May 29, 2008 8:45 PM:

" Harry- that is not possible. the city has to deal with the current unions they have.

Craig- I am in a union shop but I am not in public service. Unions can have good points and bad. Unions are unfortunately a necessity when dealing with large corporations and municipalities. If there was no Unions the Police, Fire and School departments would all be getting paid substandard wages and benefits packages. So think about the workers you would end up with in those positions. They would be the workers that could not get jobs in other higher paying departments.

I don't know about you but I want my children to have the best possible teachers. If I ever have to use the services of the Police and Fire departments I hope that for the sake of my life that they are the best possible people.

The bottom line is that fair pay and benefits should be afforded to the public servants of your city. I would never want to do the job of a teacher and I would never want to be shot at or have to run into a burning building or deal with sick people. Therefore in my opinion I have no problem with the city unions.

I'm sure there are many other ways the City can cut and save money.

It's not the fault of unions that private sector employees often don't receive fair pay or benefits. "

kevin h. wrote on May 28, 2008 8:52 AM:

" It's not the individual teachers per se, it is the teachers unions championing high cost mediocrity. "

kevin h. wrote on May 28, 2008 8:47 AM:

" It's been one day, a new budget came out, so the city will spend 62% of the budget on the school system. "

thosref wrote on May 27, 2008 9:02 PM:

" Sure, kick the teacher unions..but first walk a mile in shoes that stoll AHS each day..where despite the woeful structure, a shoe string staff arrives each day and does a heck of a job. Remember, this district is consistently level funded, has a large Special Education population, and is asked to meet NCLB AYP projections..and does. So either buck up, get a graduate degree, pass the teacher test, and join the ranks, or help your kid do his homework..otherwise quit blaming educators for divers civic problems. "

kevin h. wrote on May 27, 2008 5:46 PM:

" You are right on. The city spends about 50% of the budget on education, so hit the biggest guy first, the sub-par, excuse filled teachers unions. They have a profoundly formative effect on the next generation of tax-paying, voting, jury members. We should be telling THEM what will happen. After all, we are the employer. They say they know best for the children; better than the parents. But how smart are they if they cannot produce math and science teachers? Do not abandon our kids, demand teacher accountability. "

Craig m wrote on May 26, 2008 6:00 PM:

" harry,
You are correct. An independent group? Another union? or possibly privately held company? Lets start one. I have always thought that would be possible. "

harry hindsight wrote on May 26, 2008 8:40 AM:

" Craig m, sorry, maybe "deal" was the wrong word. Why can't the city establish a new contract with another police, firefighter or DPW union when the current contract runs out with each? Is the city bound to negotiate with only one union or can they offer the jobs to another? "

craig m wrote on May 26, 2008 7:02 AM:

" Unions couldn't work a deal. Why is it always "working a deal"?
I respect firefighters and police for what they do but it is your job. Get off your pedestal. It is your choice to be a firefighter or police officer. If you don't like it get another job. Mmmm that would be interesting. Oh thats right you have part time jobs that your job allows because you work your shift/ schedule and still have your part-time landscaper, painter jobs etc. Be happy with what you have. We are all in positions because we choose to be. If we want better then we work harder or get out and do something better. Not any easy thing but we do have choices. "

harry hindsight wrote on May 25, 2008 10:13 AM:

" Can someone please tell me why the city is bound to deal with the current unions? Let's look at the services provided as job or task in the private sector. If those that provide the service feel that they are not fairly compensated, then they are free to not provide that service. If the owner feels that the workers are not doing a good job, they are free to fire and hire those that can do it to their liking. I work in a non union shop and have never been a union member. Why can't the city post these jobs to other union firefighters, highway personell and policemen? Much like the city shops for insurance carriers, can they shop for unions? I just do not knwo how this all works. "

rick wrote on May 24, 2008 6:56 AM:

" Veryconcerned, I'm not sure where you work in the private sector but private sector employees aren't guaranteed raises every year. Also, this issue is more about the benefits package than wages, and City workers benefits packages are far richer than anything you'll ever see in the private sector.

I'm all for Police, Firemen & Teachers, don't get me wrong, but to somehow infer that people in the private sector are getting something they're not getting is incorrect. "

very_concerned wrote on May 22, 2008 8:56 PM:

" I think the Unions should get a raise just like private citizens do at their jobs. It's not the Unions fault that the city can't manage funds correctly. The Police and Firefighters not only risk their lives every day for the citizens but work hard to save others lives. The least the city can do is negotiate fairly with the unions. If there were no unions the City Employees would probably never get a raise and have crappy healthcare. "

PTLM27253 wrote on May 22, 2008 2:16 PM:

" Instead of laying off people that actually work for a living and have meaningful and useful contributions to the welfare of the city, why doesn't the city administration consider trimming some fat out of their shop- i.e. a "mayor's assistant" that was never needed before, a "budget administrator" that we never had before but now sops up a healthy salary, and especially the ARA. The ARA has already gaffed federal grants which have since been frozen due to financial malfeasance on their part and on the city's part (that was a story that went away rather quickly). Also, that 100K+ that the city forked over to the ARA to keep it up and running would have gone a long way to keep some real workers employed. "

attlebrockton wrote on May 22, 2008 7:20 AM:

" fair enough Jose we agree to keep debating both sides of the issue.No boxing yet:) "

jose21 wrote on May 21, 2008 8:30 PM:

" OK, I was joking but probably went to far with my comment, I certainly do not want to fight anyone, so I'm sorry for that.

However, like I said, I'm stating my opinion, I'm not trying to spend anyone elses money, just saying I don't mind spending mine to improve the city I live in.

You take care also. "

attlebrockton wrote on May 21, 2008 7:56 PM:

" I haven't been in a fight for years ,however I am old enough to remember when most of the ppl on the east side were hard working Irish & French Canadian immigrants.Those were followed by the Puerto Ricans in the 60's who came like the others for factory jobs ,then the cambodians who came in the 70s-80s again for freedom & jobs . The freedom is still here but the jobs are gone to Mexico then China.This willingness to spend others money is what irks me about yourself & others like you. The economy is slow,people are losing jobs. The time to box at the armory is long ago .Now is the time to stop wasting money on beautfication projects.We can contnue another day i'm sure there will be more Poor ARA or poor city no more money stories.I'll see you then ,or maybe on Pine st. take care Jose. "

jose21 wrote on May 21, 2008 5:19 PM:

" I wasn't playing a race card, I don't have one to play. I was just asking for your reasons.

Yes, I do own a house in the town. I must have missed the memo on Attleboro not being resident friendly, seems Ok to me. I pay the same taxes you do, probably more, but thanks for the feedback.

I'll take you up on that meeting. Maybe we could head down to the lower level of the Armory? "

attlebrockton wrote on May 21, 2008 5:05 PM:

" Yes its all a white man conspiracy to keep the off-white ppl down.If you want to have a legit discussion without the race card feel free.As for the grad rates etc ..yes they stink if your measuring stick is North Attleboro ,Mansfield,Foxboro etc. As for low income housing ,the whole downtown riverfront area will be a min. of 20 percent "affordable" housing by law . Do yuo own property in town ,own a business in town? If you did you'd know the city is neither biz friendly or resident freindly . If you wish to discuss further i'll meet you at the third new lamp post on the left. Oh and as for me taking it personal ,you bet Jose it's my money they are spending .Wise up it might even be yours . "

jose21 wrote on May 21, 2008 4:09 PM:

" I'm a sharp tack?

It's funny, your ability to put together a well written sentence seems to diminish in each response; somewhat ironic that you're bashing the schools. What exactly do you base your opinion of the school system on? Where do you get the Brockton and Pawtucket comparison? I really would like to know, maybe youre right, maybe youre wrong, but Id love to understand your reasoning. Is this based on test scores, curriculum, graduation percentages? Or just the fact that there is a large minority presence in the Attleboro school system?

So because there is low income housing downtown, the city shouldn't fix the area up?
I gave my opinion that I think the area looks nicer. I welcome the changes, and have no problem spending a few extra dollars to pay higher taxes, if the results make the city look nicer. Thats my opinion, you dont need to agree. You seem to take that personal, like nobody can have an opinion that differs from yours.

As far as wanting to know more about you, trust me, I don't. What I was saying, which I thought was pretty clear, is instead of crying in your posts, why don't you go to a city council meeting and voice one of your brilliant ideas. You have such a heated dislike for the Mayor and the ARA, so tell them how you would do things better, I'm sure they'd love your feedback.
"

dogparkfan wrote on May 21, 2008 3:32 PM:

" As a city employee, I am saddened by the administrations claims of "no money" and the resulting layoffs of good workers. These budget woes are a result of poor planning and poor spending. Where was the "so called lack of money" when our good mayor gave top administrators a giant pay raise? Why are several city employees going to surrounding towns and cities because the pay is much higher? Mayor - you get what you pay for. Poor salaries equals poor employees. Maybe your concern is better grass and better street lights downtown rather then better employees beneath you. Unfortunately, the city will suffer once again when you fail to support the people who truly care about the welfare of the city. To those who lost their jobs this week...I wish you the best. "

attlebrockton wrote on May 21, 2008 2:50 PM:

" you are a sharp tack Jose. The problem is the downtown is surrounded by low income ,lousy neighborhoods .The school system blows ,if the city wants to compare itself to other towns with regards to the downtown business then they should also compare on the school systems ,a city is only as good as its schools. So on that note Attleboro is sub-par slightly above the Brocktons & Pawtuckets but far below the towns by which it fancies itself comparable in the pretty street lamp dept. As to the involvement of myself and the others who voice their opinions ,how do you know we aren't involved .I assume we are all involved on some level as either tax payer ,city employee, business person ,student etc .If you would like to more about us just ask.Until then keep yuor mouth open & the powers at be will keep shoveling the sidewalk & street lamp talk down yuor most receptive gullet. "

jose21 wrote on May 21, 2008 2:14 PM:

" attlebrockton - Sorry, I'm not mocking, just giving my opinion. You guys complain about everything the city does. It's the same thing every day, over and over. If you guys are so concerned, why dont you stand up and do something, go to some meetings, bring your brilliant ideas to the table. I'm sure you have plenty of experience in these situations, as the mayor of the imaginary city of Attlebrockton.
I choose not to complain, I don't mind that the downtown area is being fixed up, I don't mind if there is a train service going to Fall River, I don't have a problem with the Attleboro school system. I personally can deal with my taxes being raised a bit. So when I feel like jumping in and giving my opinion, I do so.

I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about as far as the cardboard is concerned. I havent noticed it. Why do you ask me anyway? Is it written in some cryptic code that only people named Jose can understand it?
"

attlebrockton wrote on May 21, 2008 12:55 PM:

" Can the ARA .ARA Salaries for 09 389K.
That scracth buys alot of pretty lamp post for Jose! "

attlebrockton wrote on May 21, 2008 12:53 PM:

" jose , jose, jose. mocking is catching .Incidentally what does the cardboard in the window mean on Holman st? "

jose21 wrote on May 21, 2008 12:34 PM:

" I think the sidewalks and lamp posts are pretty! "

PTLM27253 wrote on May 21, 2008 12:06 PM:

" The city is kidding itself if it believes that raising the co-pays on health insurance for employees would have been the miracle cure they were looking for. The fact of the matter is they have been financially irresponsible, spending money on unneeded new sidewalks and lamp posts in the already barren city center, as well as giving themselves (middle-managers and executives) a healthy pay increase. "

Harry Hindsight wrote on May 21, 2008 8:27 AM:

" Sure the unions can counter offer, but can the city go to their insurance carriers and counter offer. Hey, if the city can shop around for better rates between insurance companies, why can't they shop around to different unions for better rates? Why be locked into dealing with one FOP or IAFF, why not put the jobs out to bid and see what other unions come in with lower or higher wages and beneift packages? Wouldn't that be nice. "

attlebrockton wrote on May 21, 2008 8:18 AM:

" how much do they pay for their health care now ?I don't care what their co-pays are ...what do they pay a month? Does anyone know? "

socal1 wrote on May 21, 2008 8:06 AM:

" When economic times are tough you either increase income or reduce cost. If you can do both great. Today's climate favors reducing cost. So, it seems illogical and impractical for the City to give members of a union a pay raise in order to get them to agree to have its members pay a higher co-pay for insurance. How does this reduce cost? "

kevin h. wrote on May 21, 2008 8:02 AM:

" Administration officials said Monday the city could have saved $1 million in premiums if all seven unions had agreed to the deal.
SEVEN UNIONS!!! Yea, right, the unions aren't to blame. "


*Member ID:
*Password:
  Forgot Your Password?
 
 or