August 2012 Column - Proposed contract is fair

Members of the County’s largest union will soon be voting on their proposed new contract – and I encourage them to approve the terms of the agreements as presented by the administration. The County Executive did a good job in negotiating a fair deal for the taxpayers and county workers. 

 

Reviewing the proposed agreement, I noted that it included concessions from both sides. It is necessary that these adjustments take place as the county’s finances and overall way of doing business continuously changes. What worked 30, 20 or even just 10 years ago, doesn’t work today.

 

For example, the cost of employee and retiree health insurance has proven too costly, not sustainable by the current tax base. In recognizing this, the administration has requested that employees contribute to their health care. We would be hard pressed to find anyone in the private sector who receives 100 percent free health insurance; in fact, it is becoming increasingly more difficult to find any public employees who don’t contribute something. Nobody wants to start paying for something they are receiving for free but without change, I believe the county will have to adjust elsewhere to create a balanced budget year after year.

 

Employees aren’t being asked to give up anything that isn’t considered the norm for most workers today. For example, the average number of paid holidays received by private-sector employees is six. County workers receive twice as many. This contract asks CSEA employees to compromise and give back two holidays; Columbus Day and Election Day. The contract would also eliminate two vacation days and summer hours. These concessions do not reflect any loss of wages or any added expense to the employee. The adjustment will improve efficiency and result in better services.

 

While many of the stipulations are positive for taxpayers, I do have some concerns with the terms of the vacation sell back offer. This would allow employees to sell back 40 hours of vacation time each year. This would boost their annual salary by approximately 2 percent, a significant amount especially when coupled with an 11 percent wage increase, over five years, also included in the contract. The average CSEA employee receives four weeks of vacation a year, in addition to sick, personal and holiday pay, which leads to reason that many employees will be in a position to benefit from this offer. Unfortunately, not knowing the total number of employees that will sell back vacation time, we can’t know the true cost to the taxpayers.

 

I see the potential benefit in this term of the contract, but would stress that proper management is key. I think it also raises the issue of man-hours and if employees are not physically taking off for vacation and thus, working one extra week a year, then that should reduce the total number of necessary bodies. Looking at this objectively, with 3,500 employees in the CSEA, the county is benefitting from them being at work five extra days a year, more work is getting done, and I think a direct result would be the need for less employees and overtime.

 

Contract negotiations never leave both sides of the table completely satisfied, but in the end, when the final T is cross and I dotted, we would have a fair agreement.