When Mayor Robinson-Briggs enlisted police union leaders in her campaign for mayor, she put herself in a pickle.
All politics is transactional.
The day would come when she would have to pay them back for their help. That day has come -- actually it came this past December -- with the expiration of the police union contracts.
Word is that the Mayor had the temerity to ask the unions to give up the supplementary medical benefits package that favors more senior members over those with less seniority.
Daring to bring up this item was the third-rail which short-circuited any hope of Mayor Al McWilliams for support by police union leadership for a third term.
So far, the Mayor's offer to the unions has been deemed unacceptable, and although several meetings have been held, PT's guess is that the pas de deux will be executed in the usual fashion, with the matter ultimately going to binding arbitration.
Traditionally, this is a desirable outcome for the union leadership as they have usually gotten the administration to up the ante enough by the time it goes to arbitration that the arbitrator's award will be quite satisfactory to the unions.
Elected officials -- no matter how much and how loudly they protest the arbitration settlement -- are relieved of responsibility for the settlement since they can claim it was "out of their hands."
Oddsmakers are guesstimating that the settlement will come in around 13-14% for a three-year contract. With the supplementary medical benefits plan untouched. If union members are asked to chip in any more toward their benefits costs, she can kiss their support goodbye.
Taxpayers need to keep in mind not only the potential impact this settlement will ultimately have, but the fact that the police union contracts set the pattern for the fire unions, the DPW workers and ultimately the rest of the city unions.
Add to all this the full offloading of pension and benefits expenses to municipalities, which will be completed over the next two fiscal years -- and the likelihood that the deterioration of the State's fiscal position will lead to hefty increases in school taxes -- and the stage is set for a taxpayer revolt just as the Mayor prepares to run for her second term. (See the Ledger's Tuesday article, "Property taxes face 'ticking time bomb'")
So the question for the Mayor is what kind of pickle she will make of all this -- sweet or sour.
-- Dan Damon
View today's CLIPS here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.
ARCHIVED POSTS OF PLAINFIELD TODAY FROM 11/03/2005 THROUGH 12/31/2006 ARE AT
http://plainfieldtoday.blogspot.com/
http://plainfieldtoday.blogspot.com/
Posts
2 comments:
All the municipal employees, not just police, have had FREE medical insurance for many years, not only for themselves, but for an UNLIMITED number of dependents. This has to stop. I could see giving the employee him/herself free coverage (though it makes me gag when I see my own premium) but they should pay the full cost of coverage for spouses, children, etc. Mayor McWilliams had free coverage for himself, his wife and five children for years despite working for a big company with its own medical plan. Why not, when he could save the contribution?? If the Mayor doesn't stand up to the unions now, she loses all my respect and support.
Please excuse my late response.
I am of the opinion that the larger boby of the Brotherhodd of Police Union should ask or remove Andre Crawford and Kenny Reid from any negotiations with the Mayor/Administration. This is because of their close relations/ties to the Mayor?Adminstration and Assemblyman Green. One can see a clear conflict of intrest.
Post a Comment