SEBAC has met with representatives from the Governor's Office twice in the past week and there isn't much to report in the way of progress. The situation is dynamic, while at the same time frustratingly static. The Governor's Office is not focusing on any one issue. Rather, there are three distinct factors which appear to be driving the state's overall agenda:
- Budgetarily- they are attempting to patch the budget in the short term via wage freezes
- Structuraly - they are attempting to curtail future budget deficits by long-term restructuring of pension and healthcare funding via increased employee contributions
- Legislatively - some legislators are calling for modification to the system via legislation to increase public confidence
This three pronged approach does not provide a clear path for resolution of the issue by SEBAC leadership. We are being asked to give on all fronts.
We know of the Governor's immediate desire to fill a $1.4B budget gap with the help of labor. We feel confident that we can deliver most of what is being asked to balance the budget deficit with relatively little pain to employees (through wage freezes etc). But the Governor's Office does not appear content to stop at wage freezes. The Governor's representatives are also asking for long-term structural changes, namely higher employee contributions to pensions and healthcare.
The Governor wants long term structural changes in order to lower annual state expenses while at the same time ensuring funding pools for pension and healthcare are maintained. We understand this and recognize the long term benefit of partially self funding our retirement benefits. It secures our own future. While we are non-committal, we are willing to discuss this with the Governor. Ideally, future wage increases would be partially offset against future increased contributions. But the Governor's Office is demanding all at once - now! Wage freezes AND increased contributions all in the same year!
This is asking way too much of members. It will be expensive indeed in a time of wage freezes to ask members to increase their contributions. Clearly, if members are to be asked to make sacrifices, they need to be reasonable asks or we won't entertain any notion of them. It is one thing to ask for wage freezes, and yet another to ask for higher employee contributions. But it amounts to insult and injury when the other party is asking employees to take wage freezes for two years while at the same time asking them to make significant out of pocket contributions during these same two years. This is not something we would take under consideration at the table and definitely not something we would bring to the membership.
A&R has stuck to its principles. We will not bring an agreement to the membership that has employees forking over thousands of dollars without contemporaneous wage increases. Further, we are absolutely stuck on two principles: retro active top-step payments must be made and we will not bring forth a SEBAC agreement unless our contract is resolved.
The 3 main issues are all being scattered across the table without any cohesive approach to resolving any of the major issues. The lack of an organized approach has not been conducive to accomplishing any of the goals. If the State becomes a bit more organized in it's concerns and prioritizes it needs vs its wants, then it is possible that there can be an agreement. With the current hodge-podge menu of items that all need to be addressed immediately, the two sides will not come to any agreement.
A&R has stuck to its principles and will not bother to bring an agreement to the membership that has employees forking over thousands of dollars without wage increases. We will continue to ensure that there is not a laundry list of items that require a super-computer to decipher the impact. Further, we are absolutely stuck on two principles: top-step payments must be made and we will not bring forth a SEBAC agreement unless our contract is resolved.
JD's ORIGINAL below (most of it except 1st paragraph)
or seems to be trying to serve too many agendas rather than focusing in on what is needed. There appears to be 3 global agendas he is trying to serve simultaneously without focusing in on solving any individual issue. Issue 1: he is attempting to fill a budget hole Issue 2: he is seeking to make long-term structural changes that can (hopefully) prevent the never-ending cycle of budget deficits and Issue 3: address some legislative calls for modifications that create public confidence in the system.
The problem is, this shot-gun approach leaves SEBAC a bit confused on what items are needed vs. what items are merely wanted.
We know there is the immediate desire to fill a $1.4B budget gap with the help of labor. We feel confident that we can deliver most of what he needs to balance the budget with no pain to employees (through wage freezes etc), but the Governor won't accept accomplishing this achievement alone. He also feels that while he has our attention, he wants long-term structural changes (items such as higher pension contributions, higher healthcare cost sharing, retiree COLA changes). The Governor wants these changes in order to lower annual State expenses and prop-up the funding pools for these items. We understand this and may be willing to address these, but the Governor demands that these changes begin immediately...this would be expensive in a time of wage freezes and very few employees would or could afford to support this. . Clearly, these are items that would need to be addressed in years when wages and increments are in play, but the Governor feels he must have these items now. Then there are items that are less impactful, but have a higher public profile (overtime spiking , longevity, defined contribution plans). These items gain headlines but aren't widespread problems. They can be addressed but they shouldn't be a driving point nor a dividing point when there are larger issues to tackle.
The 3 main issues are all being scattered across the table without any cohesive approach to resolving any of the major issues. The lack of an organized approach has not been conducive to accomplishing any of the goals. If the State becomes a bit more organized in it's concerns and prioritizes it needs vs its wants, then it is possible that there can be an agreement. With the current hodge-podge menu of items that all need to be addressed immediately, the two sides will not come to any agreement.
A&R has stuck to its principles and will not bother to bring an agreement to the membership that has employees forking over thousands of dollars without wage increases. We will continue to ensure that there is not a laundry list of items that require a super-computer to decipher the impact. Further, we are absolutely stuck on two principles: top-step payments must be made and we will not bring forth a SEBAC agreement unless our contract is resolved.