Friday, March 12, 2010

Unions and Pensions: Another Year Older and Deeper and Debt. By Geniusofdespair

New City of Miami Manager Carlos Migoya said on "Issues" last week that life expectancy has made City of Miami pensions unsustainable (people with pensions have to start dying younger to fix that). He said, right now 56% of the budget is spent on benefits and it should be at about 40%. He also spoke about the cost of living adjustments in union contracts that are costing the City an extra $100 million dollars a year. He said that is because the City pensions have to have a return of 7 3/4% to have the money to make future payments to retirees but he said that with the bad markets these past few years, the City is not getting that return. However, the city still has to guarantee it, thus the extra $100 million needed. (That is how I understood what he said)

Former City of Miami Manager, and Current County Commissioner, Carlos Gimenez was also talking about union contracts - the County's - today in the Miami Herald. What he said was more complex so I don't rightly know if I can sum it up, but here is a quote:

"However, COLAs, merit increases and longevity bonuses do not have a reopener clause. Additionally, the PBA contracts call for their flex benefits to be automatically restored in one year. While the unions agreed to contribute back to the county 5 percent of their base salary toward health insurance in lieu of a salary reduction, these savings are greatly diminished once the guaranteed COLA, merit increases and longevity bonuses are reinstated. For the PBA contracts, the financial impact to the county is even greater. While I am a strong supporter of our police officers, I cannot support contracts that will, on the one hand, have the employees contribute 5 percent of their base salary back to the county toward health insurance, but then give the members of the PBA a 5-percent (one step) raise this year and another 5-percent (one step) raise next year, along with a 3-percent COLA in July 2011. In essence, the members of the PBA are receiving an overall net salary increase of 8 percent through September 2012."

Now if you think the likes of Commissioners Dorrin Rolle, Pepe Diaz, Audrey Edmonson, Javier Souto or Bruno Barreiro can understand any of that...you are sadly mistaken. They will just do what County Manager Burgess tells them to do, or worse, some Lobbyist. Gimenez has made his own mind up: "I could not vote to approve these contracts when that would leave only two options when the time comes to set the millage -- raise taxes or lay off more employees (both of which I oppose)."

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

He does look like Daddy Warbucks.

David said...

If I may take a stab at what Commissioner Gimenez (who is one of the few on rostrum that gets a spark when two brain cells rub together) is saying; I do have some labor relations experience.

Several of the county's unions gave up cost of living adjustments to salary (usually pegged to a government published rate of inflation), merit increases (usually negotiated as a percentage of base salary between the union and the county), and longevity bonuses (based on years of service) in their most recent contract negotiations for this year only. After this year, for the term of the contracts, there is no reopener clause on these items, which means for the term of the contract, the county cannot request to "reopen" these subjects for interim negotiations; the increases are "locked in" for the remaining term of the agreement. Once COLA's, merit increases, and longevity bonuses are given during the remaining terms of the contract years, the 5% contribution of the employees to their health insurance (which results in a significant savings to the county is obviated(as an example, 1.5% COLA, 2.5% merit, and 2% longevity equals 6% minus the 5% healthcare give back puts the employees up 1%...no savings for the county.

In the case of the PBA, they surrendered 5% to contribute to their healthcare plan, but obtain a 5% base pay increase in the same year, which is a wash. With a 5% base pay increase negotiated for next year and a 3% COLA increase as part of the contract for 2011, the PBA members realize an 8% (5 plus three) increase through 2012.

I think that covers it. I hope I have elucidated the issue further.

Anonymous said...

Gimenez is taking a very courageous stand here, especially in challenging the unions. He deserves enormous credit and respect for doing so. The cost of employees grows at about 8% per year at the county - totally unsustainable without huge tax increases or service cuts.

Geniusofdespair said...

I am liking this reader David...

Anonymous said...

David is on point! Good analysis on what was actually said. Gimenez tried to convey this point time and again during the discussion on all the union contracts, and, of course, it feel on "dumb" ears. At the end of the day, the Union leadership needs to realize that if the ad valorem revenue does not pick up, they will be asking certain members of their own Unions to pack up! I think Gimenez's major concern was that Administration just seemed to ignore the raw numbers on this, which, I must say, is just par for the course these days. When are we all going to wake up!!??

Anonymous said...

Doesn't COLA also cover housing expenses? Since the cost of housing has plummeted shouldn't they be giving some back? I'm just sayin'...

Anonymous said...

Last anon, the COLA is supposed to reflect the cost of living. It doesn't. It simply is a negotiated rate with the unions for automatic base salary escalators.

If the COLA tracked actual data, it would have been flat or gone down for just the reason you mentioned. And it would have jumped more than it did during the building craze and the run-up in gas prices.

Gemenez has a good point about the contract term. After all this grief, we're going to be back to new contracts next year? What a waste.

Oh, and the PBA was the union that punched the biggest hole in the budget and held out the longest, refusing to negotiate and forcing the longer "impasse" procedure. So as a reward, they get a better contract? Don't the other unions have a "me too" clause that automatically gives them the best deal?

Anonymous said...

Migoya thinks pension costs should be 40% of the budget? Is he nuts? Did you mean 40% of pay? - that is still nuts. How many private businessess set aside 40% of their employees' pay for pensions? 40% in not sustainable, regardless of how you compute it.

CATO said...

Last Anon
-Yes
-NO he's city manager, which means nuts would be an improvement.
-NO Actually if you wait aound pretending to work for 25 years its approx 80% of pay.
-none, unless they get bailed out a la GM which puts the onus back on the taxpayer.

City of Miami Government will implode no matter what Migoya does. The county will follow shortly; salaries, benefits and pensions have been of the chain in the public sector for too long.
Time to pay the piper......

Anonymous said...

here is another interview from issues, where JMH and pensions were discussed.

http://ka.uvuvideo.org/_Issues-Jackson-Health-System/video/946519/86294.html

Anonymous said...

Another Helen Ferre Interview, this time with Commissioner Gimenez, regarding the mess at Jackson, and the Union Contracts.

http://ka.uvuvideo.org/_Issues-Jackson-Health-System/video/946519/86294.html

Anonymous said...

The firemens union members get overpaid and their pensions are rich. Bankruptcy looms.