City's "Offer" Released By The CMCEA
EMPLOYEES "SUCKER-PUNCHED" BY CITY OFFER
The Costa Mesa City Employees Association (CMCEA) released the contents of the contract presented by The City at a meeting Tuesday. To call it a sucker punch would be putting it mildly. You can read about it HERE.
AGREEMENT GUTTED LIKE A FLOUNDER
In a nutshell, The City basically gutted the existing agreement with the employees. The low points of the proposal are as follows:
As you read that list, keep in mind that the employees have not had a pay increase for several years and have participated in furlough days to help The City through the rough patch. Not only does this proposal NOT recognize the contributions and cooperation of the employees over the past 5-6 years of economic hardship, but it spits in their faces.
NOW ADVERSARIES, NOT PARTNERS
Clearly, The City has chosen to abandon the long-standing collaborative approach experienced in past years. The City leadership has chosen to take an adversarial approach, which will very likely result in a failed negotiation and the imposition of "impasse" in the process.
WE'LL SEE
The next meeting is scheduled for September 10th, at which time the CMCEA will respond to the proposal. I'm not encouraged...
The Costa Mesa City Employees Association (CMCEA) released the contents of the contract presented by The City at a meeting Tuesday. To call it a sucker punch would be putting it mildly. You can read about it HERE.AGREEMENT GUTTED LIKE A FLOUNDER
- Two year contract.
- An immediate 5 percent pay cut for existing employees, and a 10 percent reduction in pay scale for newly-hired employees.
- An additional 5 percent pay cut for top-step employees who do not receive an “outstanding” performance evaluation.
- Increase retirement contributions immediately by more than 5 percent the first year, and more for the second year.
- Employees pay all future health care cost increases.
- Eliminate salary benchmarking with other public sector agencies. The City’s proposal purports to adopt a private sector approach, but admits that no comprehensive surveys of comparable private sector compensation exist.
- Eliminate requirement that employees be given any advanced notice if they are going to be laid off, as well as any hire-back rights.
NOW ADVERSARIES, NOT PARTNERS
Clearly, The City has chosen to abandon the long-standing collaborative approach experienced in past years. The City leadership has chosen to take an adversarial approach, which will very likely result in a failed negotiation and the imposition of "impasse" in the process.
WE'LL SEE
The next meeting is scheduled for September 10th, at which time the CMCEA will respond to the proposal. I'm not encouraged...Labels: CMCEA, Labor Negotiations
posted by The Pot Stirrer at 8/07/2013 03:14:00 PM
112 Comments:
The councildudes never intended to "work with" our city employees, did they?-EVER!
Can their disregard for our fine city employees become more evident? I think not.
They sure talk the talk but when it's time to show the action, it's a 180 from the rhetoric and front they put on for the press.
No wonder Riggy got so upset when word was out that OCEA had put up their own website to show transparency in these negotiations. He never wanted the details known to the public. The councildudes' "transparency" is VERY selective.
Riggy, we are NOT a business, stop comparing everything to the private sector! Most of us don't want our city run like a business. You barely squeaked by with a majority last election and your charter bombed, bigtime.
Costa Mesa has been, is and will be a CITY long after all of us are gone.
So stop with this insane, Baugh directed nonsense once and for all!!
WE are Costa Mesa, NOT Baugh's "revolution"!
It's time he understands that.
Are we really shocked by all this? Hello! Newsflash! The 3-man scumbag council have wanted to fire ALL employees and award ALL city jobs to the private sector. How can anyone be shocked? Here's a reality check for those who have put their heads in the sand:
They want you gone so they can make a name for themselves in politics. You are lucky they haven't pushed through their charter scam. If the charter ever passes, you are GONE.
The smart ones have already left. If you plan on staying, you better get involved and fight the charter with the residents again. Camp Piggy has an unlimited amount of staff and resources at his disposal.
And Fitzy didn't like the language in my 75-year-old mom's e-mail to staff over a code violation, which was innocuous at worst? What balls these guys have. Hypocrites Rule!
Regardless, it seems like they are losing support by the day. Can't wait for an opportunity to vote against them again.
Nice language you allow on this blog?
When you say the employees have not had a raise, I am not so sure.
With all these benchmarks and steps, are you sure no one got a raise?
How do you define raise? I think it is that in one period you made a specific amount. And in the next if it was higher then that is a raise in my book.
I don't know all the details but isn't that what is trying to be cleaned up?
Maybe the union could publish some facts. They say they want to be transparent. I encourage city council to ask for proof that no one got an increase in pay.
Prove it
I say to all city employees: WALK Out and go work at other cities! Or in the private sector. show the boyz you don't need this job and there are tons of jobs out there that pay more. walk the walk everyone.
I’m a life-long Democrat from a working-class union family. Nevertheless, during most of my seven-year residence in Costa Mesa, I had nothing but respect and admiration for the city’s Republican council and mayor and the people who ran the city. Republicans, yes, but decent, intelligent people who worked for the commonweal. The mayor and city council were nearly bipartisan; no party politics that I could see, so I didn’t worry about it. Some of that changed when Alan Mansour -- the race baiter mentored by Costa Mesa’s most rabid, pretentious, unhinged bigot -- showed up. And then the perennial, pissed-off boob and candidate, Chris Steele and his collection of Westside “Improvers.” Just a few blips, I thought. They’re insane. They won’t last long, because the electorate will boot them out. One out of two ain’t bad, but then in 2010 Righeimer and his band of flacks hit Costa Mesa like a ton of raw sewage. Just about everything that that made Costa Mesa one of the most well-run cities in the state was attacked and politicized shamelessly. And the most shamless treatment went to the city employees, labeled thugs or the credulous tools of some mythical “Big Labor.” Righeimer and Co. brazenly pitted citizen against citizen, and lied through their dental work nearly every time they opened their mouths, shrieking that the employees -- with their petulant demands for decent pay and benefits -- were bankrupting the city. I’ve lived in fours states, and I’ve never seen the like in any city I resided in. Gary Monahan should be escorted from the council chambers and quietly put out to pasture, and Righeimer and Mensinger should be tarred, feathered, and run out of town on a rail (I’m speaking figuratively here to make a point. Duh). Sadly, that won’t happen because I suspect that most voters, incredibly, have no idea what’s being done to their city. I moved out two years ago. I wish my former residents the best of luck. With this wrecking crew in charge, you’ll need it.
Righiemer has been wrong time after time on how to do things. He's be rebuffed over and over, whether it's his pink slips for everybody, to his charter that would let him re-pinkslip everybody. He has suffered loss after loss trying to push through his cockeyed agenda, while damaging the workings of the city and wasting money trying to do it.
As we go into next year, the police contract is up and there isn't any question on what he'll do with them. This is a pretty good indication to say the least.
When this kind of in your face approach happens there... that's when the wheels really fall off.
In addition to the retirements, the officers who have been wanting to stay on, in the hopes that this can't really happen, will give up and call it a day. Don't think some of them aren't ready.
That's when the words minimally staffed gets changed to... not enough left to do the job.
I don't know if the general employees really have any mobility or not. I suppose some do and could take their skills elsewhere and others might not be in that position. Many of them may have to just stay and take it.
I have my doubts that the cops will. I do know that they can simply leave and work for another agency. Depts statewide are working hard to find experienced and reliable officers. Costa Mesa laterals will be welcome.
And then the problem of finding quality officers here, when the current ones are leaving, will rear it ugly head.
Can it be done at a pace to keep up and keep this dept functional without lowering standards... nope.
Good luck
BOMOPs,
Didn't your cronies the councildudes produce records of all city employee positions, salaries including their names? I remember you handing out copies of them at a forum at the CM Community Center.
So- check those records yourself.
You have access to them, right?
btw,We don't have "unions" in Costa Mesa.
The employees have associations.
You already know this.
There is a difference.
But don't take it from me,
Google it for yourself.
I am no fan of the council majority, but a perusal of the contract seemed very reasonable to me - although it's definitely more generous than the benefits of most private sector jobs. Given what the union employees are used to however I can understand they are upset by this. But it's time to face reality. Over the years, the salaries and benefits demanded by unions have escalated to the point where they are no longer viable. Small changes won't solve the problem and an overhaul such as this is overdue. It's just unfortunate that the needed adjustments weren't started earlier so a more gradual transition could have been achieved. For that I fault both sides - but this is what happens when you "kick the can" down the road -eventually you hit a brick wall.
I can already see where this is heading. Back to a court of law. Whether it is right or wrong, I can't believe the council is just going to be able to pull this off. Shouldn't the city be in actual, dire, financial straits before they could make this type of contract fly? Even at the height of the recession, when the last round of negotiations took place, the city didn't try this. So, why should this work now? It won't. The city will ultimately end up losing again in court. And, the worse part of this is the council majority won't care because they are playing with house (taxpayer) money. This appears to be Riggy's latest scheme. Doomed to failure like all of the rest. November 2014 cannot come quick enough!
Mike O'Reilly, you write beautifully and expressed thoughts so similar to my husband's and mine.
Even though you are a Democrat and we are Republicans it should all be about what's good for the City and what's needed to make it functional. This is the most dysfunctional threesome we have ever seen at the helm, and the most dysfunctional 3 years we've seen since we lived here.
The problem is as you say; so few voters know what is happening.
Allan Mansoor was a moderate compared to these hacks. At least he occasionally listened to the residents and now and then, had an open mind.
At this point we are just two more Disgusted Republicans.
I'll take those terms. If an employee equivalent to my job & level wants to quit their job because of these terms, let me know. I'm ready to step in.
People, people, relax. I know robin must be in absolute tears right now but we need to be strong and realize this is an OPENING offer in NEGOTIATIONS.
You know, much like cops wanting to be paid to put on uniforms, who would actually grant that (we did? oh)? Just a silly asking point to then meet in the middle. Like unions asking to be paid for time from car in parking lot to desk (jailers got that? hmm).
Anyway, it is the hired negotiator just doing a fantastic job of laying the groundwork so we taxpayers don't continue to get screwed. Oh, you don't care? Just raise taxes to pay more. LOL remember in November who wants to raise taxes.
alf: "barely squeaked by in the last election"?
YEP!!
SCOREBOARD BABY!!
haha
@Nancy....have you just started paying attention? Our city employees have worked with the City at every step of the way. They have always partnered in with the city in finding solutions to make this city work better and leaner. They reduced their numbers when faced with a financial crisis. They froze wages. They were the first in the state to set up a two tiered hiring package for new hires. They have never been the highest paid. Our city has always been in the middle.
The lawsuit regarding the layoffs was not caused by the associations, it was brought on by the council refusing to meet and study the issue before giving notice to e entire workforce as required by the contract.
Now property values are soaring, sales taxes are up, tot is higher, infrastructure spending is up, they are running through money like they won the lottery.
I'm not saying they need to give raises to every employee, but the employees don't deserve this treatment. They have suffered under the worst regime in our city's history. We've seen an entire generation of seasoned upper managerial employees leave. The remaining employees are working under enormous strain and having to do the jobs of two or three. They are struggling to provide the same service levels but its just impossible, with he increased work load and diminished work force.
This City Council 3man majority has destroyed our platinum Service City and turned it into a minimum wage Fast Food Drive Thru. The sickening part is that they are proud of that.
Gericault - I've been paying attention for quite some time. Your statements about the city employees are a great example of how insulated they have become from the "real" world. If the city employees aren't happy with what the city proposes in terms of employment wages and benefits, they are completely free to find another job - that's how the world works. Why on earth does anyone think that they are entitled to a job AND that that job must have certain pay and benefits and that if they don't like it they have the right to hold the taxpayers hostage? It's absurd. The city employees need to grow up. "Suffered under the worst regime"?? Oh please. If they don't like the job and the conditions they can quit. You seem to be under the impression that it is the City's job to serve the needs of the employees. That is NOT the job of the city. The city's job is to provide the highest level of services to it's citizens for the lowest cost - and after reading the red lined version of the contract, the city has it's work cut out for them. To be honest, I had no idea that city employees enjoyed such lavish benefits - reading that contract was an eye opening experience and it's clear that this overhaul is long past due.
BOMOPs,
Right! You guys were sweating it out at 5PM for several days after election day. No landslide there.
That "SCOREBOARD" wasn't too kind to your beloved charter was it? With that resounding 'No' from the voters we sent a message, we don't want Scott Baugh and his baby, that *&^& charter running our city. Too bad none of the councildudes are listening to us.
btw, With your latest entry I now have your maturity down to a 2nd grade level.
Nancy,
Price is what you pay, value is what you get.
Many studies show that for a given skill set, level of education, experience etc. public sector workers make less over their lifetimes than their peers in the private sector, even when you factor in defined benefit retirement plans and public benefits.
The important question from my perspective is, how much intellectual capital is this city willing to lose? How many years will it take a replacement worker to perform their job at an equivalent level? Is the financial savings worth it?
I am not sure what all the fuss is about. t appears non of the commenters have been through negotiations. It is the beginning of a negotiated settlement. Many time one side or the other puts out ridiculous negotiation points. Usually the union or association is associated with doing this, but oft times it is who makes the first offer. The Council decied in closed session what their bottom line is, but that is all changeable as negotiations progress. Airing the negotiation points makes it a lot harder to back off from them. I am totally astounded that the Association aired the Cities first offer. It seems beyond dumb to me, it can not bode well for the process of negotiations. If the association had made the first offer, it likely would have been the other extreme, but would have been more expected.
The City does have a lot of power in the negotiation process, sso I think the Association did not do their members any favors by posting the negotiation points from the Cities first offer. Usually first offers are laughable, this one is beyond laughable, but trying to embarrass the City Council by publishing it is very much out of step with the negotiation process.
Nancy,
You are a breath of fresh air. Many of the "haters" are either retired or independent - very few have "real" private sector jobs. They don't have a clue and are emotionally invested. There seems to be some sort of need to "take care" of well-compensated public employees who just happen to be professionally represented by a hard-hitting union that loves to play loose with facts, fund smear campaigns, and enjoys playing dirty.
Your statement is one of the best synopsis of the whole sad affair that I have ever seen:
"You seem to be under the impression that it is the City's job to serve the needs of the employees. That is NOT the job of the city. The city's job is to provide the highest level of services to it's citizens for the lowest cost - and after reading the red lined version of the contract, the city has it's work cut out for them. To be honest, I had no idea that city employees enjoyed such lavish benefits - reading that contract was an eye opening experience and it's clear that this overhaul is long past due."
So Riggy's negotiator offered to cut the Employees pay even more? Just so the he can buy up "problematic motels" to sell them off for a loss? Just so even more fast food chains can be built all along that Hot Mess Redevelopment Zone: "The Harbor Blvd of Lard"?
Our current Planning Commission & City Council Majority seem to promote a brand new City service:"You want fries with that?" "Butt" that is all they seem to have "developed". Hence, they now must encourage bloated CM voters to join their Mayberry Walks while chugging down two Diet Cokes.
And they still plan to buy Talbert Nature "Preserve" from the County? Just so they can just contract out it's costly maintenance later? So they can then quickly turn OUR now peaceful Fairview Park into the soon-to-be-lighted "destination sports complex" for Mensy's Pet Meatheads.
Why does it seem that our City's Developmental Services Division is slowly warping into "St-evil's person-Arnel Development Division"? Also, why is he still "under-employed" if this Bubble 2.0 Real Estate Market is so hot?
Bob, having negotiated many employee contracts with the city. I can tell you that even in the worst of times there has never been a laughable offer from the city until now. The employees have always done the right thing for the City often times putting the City before their own family. Nancy, if you have been that involved you know there has been an exodus of seasoned employees from the City both to other agencies and the private sector. The brain drain has been enormous. If this were a real business instead of a municipality it would be well on the way out by now. The fact that the council has a guaranteed revenue source is the only thing that keeps it going. I myself left the City because it became almost impossible to do my job. I was followed, harassed, asked to be a supervisor and then be told I wouldn't be paid to do the job and I still did it for 18 months. I was not given resources or support from a scared management and I watched helplessly while key personnel left and not replaced. If you want to live in a Wallmart City instead of a Costco City by all means support these guys. If you think being middle class is a bad thing and you should either be rich or poor, support these guys. I started a new business here in town and hopefully it will be successful though working as hard as I am now was made easier because I am used to working much harder from when I was with the City. Bob, I'm surprised you don't support transparency, thought you liked it. If they didn't want embarrassment, your words, they should have made such a laughable offer. Again your words. There are many really good people trying to stick it out that are very dedicated and knowledgeable but in a strange way I don't think the men on the council think that hard work and knowledge are an asset, on the contrary, I think they think it is an impairment to their progress as politicians. The decisions made and the actions taken are certainly not business decisions as they run counter to all good business practices. James, there are 40-50 open positions at the city but none that you have applied for, am I correct? Go for it. Let me know how that works out OK?
@Billy
You are right on. I hope you know that those of us in the trenches appreciated all that you did. We appreciated your skills and expertise. Your working conditions were brutal and you're right, the 3man council could care less. They only care about themselves and their political careers.
Congrats on your new business! I will ask around and see what business you own unless you want to publish it here. Would love to support your business in any way I can.
It would appear that Riggy's 5th floor army is slowly falling apart with the recent news about Dan Joyce and Christine Cordon. I can't wait to see what scandal gets unveiled. If it's something big and misappropriation of public funds is involved, I'm sure Geoff will ask for a professional investigative reporter for help. Not to knock you Geoff, we all love what you do. We're thinking there's a big story here and you can use some help from the pros with unlimited resources.
Thanks for all that you do Geoff!
Gary, that may have been true in the 1950's but when you factor in the value of healthcare and retirement, public employees are compensated far better than those in the public sector - there are quite a few studies that demonstrate this. "Intellectual capital"? Sorry, Gary but running a city isn't exactly rocket science- finding qualified people is not a problem since most positions in the city don't require advanced degrees or specialized experience. Your point however, does bring up a good point - public employees "think" that they aren't replaceable. The truth of the matter is that they are and therefore don't warrant the level of compensation they have commanded in the past. As to "value" based on a review of the current contract, the taxpayers have been significantly overpaying for services for quite some time.
I think I just fell in love with Billy Folsom - again.
Time to BAIL OUT! Let CM have the pick of the hundreds and hundreds to applications of marginal apps .....In MANY cases, you get what you pay for!
Did the PD get hundreds of quality apps that Riggy though that he would get? I don't think so....
Good Luck CM....The demise is picking up steam!!
I fell in love with Nancy.
You go girl!
To Nancy, et al. Running a city isn't rocket science? So, you're saying mediocrity is perfectly acceptable for the people responsible for maintaining the parks your kids use, protecting your property, and making sure the addition your neighbor builds doesn't come crashing down into your yard?
I don't work for CM, but here's the reality of life in the public sector. I spent years in college, working two jobs, to get a BA and a Masters. I toiled through sub-minimum wage internships doing all sorts of grunt work. Then I worked my way to a management position. Because of the limits on compensation, we don't get bonuses no matter how well we perform. Over the past 20 years, we have bee viewed with contempt, or at best, indifference, despite the fact, when I was hired, I took an oath to serve the people of my jurisdiction. Like the employees in CM, I haven't had a raise in several years, and now pay an increased share of health care and retirement, so I am actually making less than I did 7 years ago. All the while, we still have 300 miles of streets that need to be repaired, several hundred acres of parks that need mowing, and permits that need processing. Our workload has not diminished in the least. In fact, as my city has aged, things have gotten more complicated even as funding has dried up. And we still get just as many irate calls from people who don't care if we've lost 20% of our workforce or funding.
My spouse works for a private sector firm. On paper, she makes a little less than me. However, if her company does well, she gets a bonus; if her unit does well, she gets a bonus, and if she personally does well, she gets a bonus.
Your vaunted "private sector" merely pushes wealth to the top. The disgraced CEO of AMR, the parent company of American Airlines, just got a $19 million bonus for getting fired.
So, with all due respect, before you start talking about "lavish" pay and benefits, you should try working in one of those "non-rocket science" jobs, and then be told you're taking a 10% cut for the pleasure of doing the same job.
I think I fell in love with this blog again. Nice to see real names with real people advocating real positions - on both sides.
kudos to Nancy. Or as alf would say, to Fitz.
The boyz and girlz of the council should be looking out for the taxpayers, this city is not a jobs center. Let's hope we get a fair outcome that both sides find acceptable but nothing wrong in putting out a position in negotiations as a starter. will be interesting to see the employees association response of actual numbers they want. Instead all we have is boilerplate complaint statement. Looking forward to association's demands and taxpayer response.
Nancy knows. - her "newness" is just another attempt at writing fiction. No fan of the City Council, uhuh. Gotta say, he/she is more literate than some of the koolade regurgitators. It's a decent change from the MPD who keeps having semi-coherent fitz on here, but no change from the tired talking points.
I certainly respect many of the opinions that were shared here by those that want the most bang for their buck. I appreciate the fact that the city is trying to gain increased contributions from the employees towards their pensions. But couple this with the automatic pay decrease, plus having to achieve an outstanding on performance reviews, plus slashing vacation and sick banks, and the taking away of other specialty type pay, along with many of the other proposed cuts, and you end up with something that will be dead-on-arrival. The city wants this contract to be for only two years. Why not just target increasing employee contributions towards their retirement this time around. In two years go after the sick and vacation banks. On the following contract target something else. Unfortunately, this council will not follow a pragmatic and measured approach. To borrow a baseball metaphor , this council is always swinging for the fences. Worse yet, it is always a World Series, game 7, bottom of the ninth, two out, game winning grand slam that they are always trying to hit. Slow it down! Achieve small, doable, meaningful reforms. Stop over-reaching! Somehow find a way to not be sued. Being sued all of the time is not the cost of doing business. Take a cue from the episode of Seinfeld where George Constanza does the opposite of his first instinct and makes significant gains in his life. Could you please, pretty please, with cherries and whip cream on top, stay out of court, just this once, on this particular action?
Get it right is so wrong on so many levels. Julie followed professional advice from a superior who supports the council majority but gave bad advice. That’s why the missed deadline. That’s why she got a tidy settlement. And that’s why the investigation was quashed before it really started. This time though? We’ll see.
If Mr. Wrong remembers rightly, Allan Roeder advised against benefit increases when they weren’t fiscally prudent and warned the Council what the consequences would be if they approved extravagant budgets. If a manipulative Council tried to change his title to CEO he would have had the cojones to say “No thank you!” He knew he had a City to run and a Council to serve, not a board of directors he had to grovel before just to keep his job.
Mr. Wrong Jim Fitzpatrick knows he is slandering others as surely as he knows it will come back on him and those who gave him his talking points. This time, maybe legally. Julie Folcik is not elected or appointed to public office nor a celebrity and therefore all the laws that allow a private citizen to take action against slander apply.
Nancy, the blog article was in regards to the General City Employee or CMCEA. I would ask that you do a little research and click the link below. It's the City of Costa Mesa's own prepared fiscal analysis or CMCEA employees.
In this link you will see that the CMCEA employee has an average base salary of about $65,000 per year. Not the $100k some seem to be trying to attach to CMCEA employees. It's a false ploy and a bit deceitful.
209 CMCEA employees authorized in the budget for a total base salary of $13,422,320.
As someone employed at OCC I hope you can do the division. 13,422,320/209 = 64,221.63.
Keep in mind most positions require college or several years of equivalent experience. So to compare these jobs, level of education and or experience required with private sector jobs such as cook, dishwasher and many other lower paid skilled jobs not requiring the same prerequisites is not really a true analysis now is it? All those jobs while very respectable but to compare the private sector average salary which includes very low skilled and education requirements heavily included to one heavily weighted engineers, specialists and the level of experience and education required by our city is very disingenuous.
http://www.costamesaca.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=9788
billy says there hasn't been a laughable offer till now.
result: more than a quarter BILLION in unfunded pensions.
Happening all over the country too.
Cities going bankrupt. Chicago next. Mostly cities led by libs.
I saw from Nancy's profile that she apparently likes Ayn Rand. It's funny that Rand, the person who despised government on almost every level, happily took Social Security and Medicare at the end of her life.
Does stuff like this sound familiar?
http://www.alternet.org/story/149721/ayn_rand_railed_against_government_benefits,_but_grabbed_social_security_and_medicare_when_she_needed_them
Selective transparency - that is exactly what it is. Transparency should apply to every decision made. There doesn't appear to be a set standard for hiring in this City, all agencies. How about some transparency in government hiring???
Hmm, Billy, let me know of these 30-40 open positions. I see 6 on the website. I would apply if somehing close to my profession or abilities came up. I can definitely let you know later on, not sure of your actual interest in me. Perhaps you think I'm an idiot, or perhaps you are interested in quality people filling those positions.
I got somewhat long winded on my last comment and there was something else I wanted to add. Riggy needs to cease trying to compare the city's workforce to the private sector. Riggy already had the opportunity to conduct his grand experiment related to outsourcing. Out of 18 targeted departments, only 3 bids were received by private sector companies which showed any kind of savings. So, what do these findings mean? Apparently, to Riggy it still somehow means that the municipal labor is overly over-compensated. Facts are our friends, folks. The rest is simply politics!
Noclib,
Thank you for your response!
As for mediocrity, I am saying no such thing. What I am saying is that it is possible to improve the level of service the city provides it's residents for a substantially lower cost.
I am really sorry that you have pay into a pension program, fund part of your healthcare and that you haven't had a raise in several years. Having been accustomed to a these perks, I can well understand the frustration you must be feeling. Me, I am lucky. You see, I don't HAVE a pension program - no one is guaranteeing me a retirement for life and based upon my age and the state of SS, there will be no help from that corner. Health insurance? Well, I just finished filing my tax return and we spent over $25,000 this year on healthcare and have just been notified that my premiums are, you guessed it, going up! Oh, and my employer won't be paying a dime of that increase. Raise? LOL - I haven't had one in over 6 years despite glowing performance reviews - the company just isn't making enough money to fund those pay raises. But again, your post is an excellent example of what I have been saying regarding the public employees. You all feel that you are terribly treated by your employers - when the fact of the matter is your total pay,benefits (health, retirement, sick leave, vacation, job protections, etc., etc.) far exceeds that which is available to the private sector.
As to the state of the streets in your city and Costa Mesa, the causes are the same. Public entities are simply paying too much for labor - wages, benefits, hiring/firing rules have hamstrung cities so the funds aren't available to perform the very services that cities were designed to provide. Such benefits simply aren't sustainable in the long run as history has proven over and over again.
Ah, the irony!! Hate to break it to you but I actually do some work for a "public entity" so I know exactly what I am talking about - and years ago I worked for a company that was unionized and of course I had to "join" the union. I hated it. Too many restrictions on when I could work (or couldn't) when I "had" to take a break, petty squabbles with management over stupid things. But it was a tremendous learning experience on the destruction nature of unions.
My new name is Nancy -
Thanks for the response - cute handle by the way - I am flattered:-)!
Ah, if only you knew.. re: the council majority... but that is a tale for another time and another thread.
Well, if my "talking points are tired" then please put forth an argument to refute them!!!!
It is truly sad to see the level of juvenile BS that pervades this blog. People like Billy, CMCEA Truth and Nancy keep it from sinking.
To Timely comment, tough words from behind an anonymous veil. You are disclosing confidential information, if true, and know that is against policy and probably cause for termination - if you are employed by the city.
None of what you say is available publicly, so it may be completely false - but that is the MO of a select few malcontents, spreading lies and violating policies while demanding that everyone else follow the rules.
You are an embarrassment, and you are not helping the vast majority of professionals who honorably serve Costa Mesa residents with distinction and pride.
CMCEA truth,
Thanks so much for the response and the link. I think, however, that if you are going to look at employee compensation, "average" salary figures aren't of much value. As you yourself said, comparing a maintenance worker's salary to that of say an engineer (which requires a college degree) isn't useful - rather like comparing apples and oranges. Also, looking simply at salary figures is as well. To make a comparison, you really need to look at the value of the total compensation package. Looking at comparable positions, many city position base salaries do exceed those in the private sector - some do not. However,when taken as a whole (wages,health, vacation time, sick leave, pension benefits, job protections,etc.)it's clear that on the whole, public employees "earn" more than those who hold a comparable position in the private sector. While I am sure you can find studies that both confirm and deny this, it is also common sense. The vast majority of private companies offer no pension benefit whatsoever, limited to non existent sick leave, much higher health insurance premiums (if they offer insurance at all), etc. etc. On virtually every benefit measure, public employees receive a much more expensive benefit package that far exceeds shortfall in base salary when compared to the private sector.
Hello Nathaniel!
Yes, I am a proponent of Any Rand's works. Actually, Ms. Rand's acceptance of Social Security and Medicare is entirely consistent with her philosophy. In fact, it is an example of it.
Since she was forced, by law, into paying into the system she had an obligation to collect!!! Note the term "paid" Rand's philosophy is based upon the value of an individual's efforts - and more importantly the "freedom" of the individual to choose how and when to exchange that value. Based on your comment, I don't think you fully understand Rand's philosophy
face it, if we lose any employee because of this the replacement cannot be as good. we already have the bestest. private sector workers are spoiled and can't cut it here.
Nancy:
"Yes, I am a proponent of Any Rand's works. Actually, Ms. Rand's acceptance of Social Security and Medicare is entirely consistent with her philosophy. In fact, it is an example of it.
Since she was forced, by law, into paying into the system she had an obligation to collect!!!"
I see. So she accepted no more than she paid in? Awesome.
Commenter "Careful":
"None of what you say is available publicly, so it may be completely false - but that is the MO of a select few malcontents, spreading lies and violating policies"
Is that you Jimbo? Since when are you down on someone spreading lies or violating policies??
Hi Nathaniel,
I have no idea how much she paid in nor how much she received - or whether what she received was the equivalent of what she could have earned had she invested those funds on her own - and depending upon what her investment choices would have been - who knows? I am quite sure she would have preferred not to participate at all (as would I) - but that isn't a choice - AND that is the point!!! SS and Medicare are simply wealth redistribution systems and are reaching their predictable ends - insolvency... which will of course require even more funds be confiscated by those who produce until the system completely collapses - which was the story of Atlas Shrugged. Funny how her "fictional" story has so many parallels to current events, isn't it?
Nancy, uh...Steve: You are not providing the best services to this city for ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY. This city is deteriorating at an alarming rate. Take a good, hard look at Harbor Blvd. 19th Street, Baker...on and on. Its a mess under this regime. Shame on this council for letting this city turn into such a nightmare. How many rehab houses have been set up in the last 3 years? Most of them!!!!!
Oh yeah...and Nancy L. turned out to be a real person that I was able to contact. Joke is on you!
Nancy:
"..require even more funds be confiscated by those who produce until the system completely collapses - which was the story of Atlas Shrugged. Funny how her "fictional" story has so many parallels to current events, isn't it?"
Um, no. The fictional story of "Atlas Shrugged" is just that- fictional.
Here in the real USA, the super-rich, through a variety of schemes, have accomplished the largest wealth transfer in human history.
Nancy Boy Steve: Hmmm... not sure what you mean - not sure why you thought I was "Nancy L". but whatever. I also don't know why you thought I am "Steve".
However, I have to agree (to an extent) that the city has not improved under the current council majority's leadership - but the issue raised by Geoff's post is about the negotiations between the city and the employees union so I think we should confine ourselves to that topic.
Hello Nathaniel,
Well, I am not surprised you don't grasp Ms. Rand's work but that is really neither here nor there. Shall we get back to discussing the negotiation between the city and the employee's union?
It is no secret that the current trajectory of employee compensation is not sustainable. So, the question becomes what should be done to address the problem. Thoughts???
See the Daily Pilot. Ask yourself why the story now?
Is it in the best interest of employees to work with a public safety union? Isn't public safety the real money concern?
And should the employees get rid of Nick Bernadino? How is he helping? Is he hurting employees with his gum chewing animosity raising tactics?
I think the employees should go public with concerns on public safety pay and fire union boss Bernadino
Nancy,
City has not improved under current council?
Balanced budget. With COIN we can now peek into negotiations. We are now aware of excessive compensation. We are putting together a Charter to further address issues. The streets are getting paved for the first time in who knows how long?
Thoughts would be to introduce a Charter that will give us local control and save taxpayer's money.
Nancy, this thread isn't about Ayn Rand either...
Thoughts, give us an example of how a charter will save us taxpayer money. We're still not clear on that issue. Especially since there isn't a charter to refer to.
Nancy:
"Well, I am not surprised you don't grasp Ms. Rand's work but that is really neither here nor there. Shall we get back to discussing the negotiation between the city and the employee's union?"
My seeing Ayn Rand as an angry sociopath doesn't mean I "don't grasp her work." Your assumption is offensive. FTR, I not only know much about Objectivism, but personally corresponded with Nathaniel Branden for a number of years.
It wasn't me discussing the employee association vs. the city with you.
By all means, continue. Complete the mission. Give my best to Scott.
Billy, you were one of the best employees our city had, hands down!
Nancy, you do have a pension program. It is called Social Security. City workers gets PERS in-lieu of Social Security. City employees do not have a choice of what type of pension program they get. It is too bad that your career choice has made you such a bitter person. You could of worked for a public agency that participates in PERS and you would be eligible for that benefit. You made a different choice. Get over yourself and go cook something.
Hello Thoughts,
1. Balanced budget - robbing Peter to pay Paul so I can't really give them credit for that one. Right direction, agreed. But we aren't there yet.
2. Transparency - great move and one that is long overdue.
3. Charter - jury is still out on that one. Charter could benefit the taxpayers - or allow the council majority increased levels of power - which definitely wouldn't be a good thing. The "devil" they say is in the details and until we know the details, hard to say if this is a positive or a negative.
4. Increased development - a big negative IMO since it isn't balanced. The council majority seems more interested in polishing their "developer" bona fides than in what is best for the city as a whole.
5. Hubris - this perhaps more than anything is what has "soured" me on the council majority.
So, overall, I wouldn't say the council majority is a benefit - I definitely believe that we can do better... much better.
Hello Nancyboy
I agree - simply was trying to be polite and steer the conversation back to the topic.
Isn’t the point of the COIN ordinance to provide transparency when there is an offer on the table? They told us offers would be posted and that the public will be fully informed so us little people can play judge and jury. The city is lagging. Why bash OCEA for doing their job for them?
Nathaniel,
I am sorry you found my comments offensive - in all honesty they weren't intended to be. Given your comments, it was clear to me that you really don't understand Objectivism. If you did, you wouldn't have questioned her acceptance of SS and Medicare.
I understand that you weren't discussing the city's negotiations with the union - however, that is the topic of Geoff's post and thus we should limit our discussion to that topic.
Nancy, the Daily Pilot article on the CMCEA proposal stated the average base salary of city employees is over $100K. Sadly in the article about CMCEA they decided to include Public Safety salaries as part of the base average.
Very disingenuous of the Daily Pilot to do that making everyone think CMCEA employees make over $100K base salary. Others often regurgitate the misleading information.
But if you want to talk about total comp then fine. Did you check the link. The total comp for CMCEA employees is less than $95K. Not even the $100K average base salary the Dishonest Daily Pilot reports and many try to falsely imply about CMCEA to create this anger and hatred toward city servants. That's less than $95K Nancy for many many skilled positions.
My comment to you still stands whether using total comp or base salary. You tend to compare and mention often the private sector as your comparison which is extremely disingenuous. The over-all private sector numbers include an overwhelming amount of low skilled and low education requirement jobs. The city has many highly skilled and higher education requirement jobs.
Your obvious and stated bias toward unions is clouding your thoughts and causing you to make disingenuous comments.
An example are your ignorant comments that you don't get a pension for life. Your SS is a Defined Pension for life. Someone is paying and has paid into the SS system for you if you work in the private sector. You can actually go to the SS website and calculate your lifetime pension there. Granted the rates are lower and the year to retire later but nonetheless someone has paid around 14% of your wages into SS for you in the past when you got paid. Usually 7% the employer and 7% the employee. Recently it's been changed to 13%.
Most city employees are not covered under a SS plan and CalPers is their Retirement Plan. They switched by the way in 1978 and guess what the rate was over 35 years ago. 2 @ 60. Today that is the same rate for new hires in CM for CMCEA employees thanks to your city employees who apparently unbeknown to you passed this reform back in 2010. But you keep sticking with your negative comments about CMCEA employees and how they don't care about the community and tax payers.
Also your comments about city employees thinking they are owed jobs or whatever shows you have no idea about those you talk about. I suspect once again this is your union hatred speaking.
City employees have made many sacrifices when asked. And would have today if they trusted the current city leaders. But if its unfair the rate between private and public then let's discuss rationally and leave your union hatred out of it. It could be a good discussion if public employees deserve better pay, do we want to be able to attract some of the best, keep them and do they actually have different tasks and responsibilities compared to the same private sector of similar classification. Those we can discuss. Let's also compare comparable jobs. But blanket statements like just comparing private to public is ludicrous. You can find someone to be cop for $20k a year but do you really want people who are willing to be a cop for $20k a year being the person you are going to rely on to protect your kids or yourself?
to be cont.
cont. to Nancy...Your maintenance comparison let's start there. Do you know what a city maintenance worker prerequisites are? Do you know what the qualifications, education and experience required is? Do you know how many buildings this person is in charge of how many people depend on this person? If you are comparing a maintenance worker who oversees 1 building with about 40 people it's a bogus comparison when a city maintenance worker has to take care of numerous buildings including 6 fire stations and 2 police facilities that are vital to the safety of citizens. Plus over 400 people rely on these workers.
There is a great deal more but hopefully even if you don't get it others may learn the difference and understand and hopefully not resort to your hollow comments because of your union hatred bias. Then maybe we can discuss the issues and find reasonable solutions all of us working together and not trying to create hate and anger.
taking care of 40 buildings or 1 doesn't matter you union freakthink. buildings are buildings and it is not like you put in 40 times the work, more like 1/40th the time per building correct? ah, union math, gotta love it.
Since this comment thread is still vibrant, why not add another comment. For those that continue to compare public sector jobs to their private sector ccounterparts; just give it up. It doesn't matter if public sector employees earn more than the private sector ones. The city doesn't get to contract directly with private sector employees. The city must contract through the profit seeking entities that employ private sector employees. The city does not get to pay a direct rate for private sector employees. Why did the recent outsourcing scheme gloriously fail? No doubt, this must have been a major contributor.
what's the math... thank you for demonstrating your inability to think and comprehend. I thankfully am positive you are not representative of the private sectors mental ability!
The numbers or math are not the issue but the unique specifications and different requirements inherent in having to over see different buildings that have different functions and elements to them.
One typical office building to maintain requires a lessor degree of skills and knowledge than a fire station, or our new police station. The needs of the seniors at the senior center, the historical society building. The Estancia Adobe. The maintence needs of these facilities can often be unique and certainly not what you see in a typical office building. Then add to that the 400 people that rely on our maintenance workers to help them continue to work effeciently for the public.
Our police, our fire department, our staff and the citizens rely on our maintenance workers to help keep certain things running and moving. Their knowledge and experience with these buildings alone is a huge benefit to the other workers and to the citizens who rely on ALL our city services.
It's kind of like how people tried to label a Master Mechanic as simply on the level of a jiffy lube employee. It's bogus and intellectually dishonest.
If you can't understand this and intellectually have problems then I feel very sad for you and those around you.
CMCEA Truth,
Yes, SS is a defined benefit program. But as you are no doubt aware, according to the CBO, SS is projected to fall short of funds in 2023/2024. Given that the CBO is STILL using static modeling, my own projections indicate that it will be sooner than that. So, while SS "is" a "defined benefit" program in name, it really is "in name only" - those enrolled in SS have no legal recourse in the event the program runs out of money.The government makes the rules and states, quite clearly, that any "benfits" I may receive are subject to ... well, whatever Congress decides.... and with a $17T deficit, could you really argue that those of us with some means will receive anything close to what has been paid into the system? I don't think so. Those in public pension programs do - and if the Vallejo case is any example, public employee pension pay outs will be take precedence over anyone else.
As to my examples in the private sector, you actually proved my point. The use of an average base salary would only be relevant if you were comparing two similar groups - but because of differences in the make up of those groups (i.e. skilled versus unskilled for example) is not as accurate for comparison purposes. Thus, if you want to answer the question "is the compensation level higher for public or private employees" it is better to look at individual positions - such as maintenance workers, accounting clerks, etc. where the job responsibilities are similar.
I challenge you to quote where I have said that "City employees don't care about the city and taxpayers". The truth of the matter is I have said no such thing.If you wish to honestly debate this you need to stop mischaracterizing my posts as attacks on individuals. Instead you need to argue your points.
If just "comparing private to public" positions is ludicrous, then how do you propose evaluating whether public employees deserve higher compensation?
$20,000 for a police officer? What in heavens name are you talking about? My point is that for many positions (like those of maintenance workers, accountants, etc., etc.) comparable positions can be found in the private sector. In reviewing the total compensation for these positions in the city, it is clear that the total compensation for these positions exceeds that of the private sector. Since you believe that the city positions are deserving of this higher compensation,could explain the rational for this?
Finally, if public workers are not being paid appropriately (as say, compared to the private sector) then what is your objection to altering the system so that it mirrors that of the private sector and dispense with unionization all together?
CMCEA truth,
Alright, lets go with the maintenance worker position. Unless the city's job descriptions vary greatly from the private sector - a "worker" is typically not a supervisory position so this position would not be responsible for a building or for managing other employees. Based on a review of the city website, the basic requirements are a high school degree or equivalent, a drivers license, the ability to safely operate basic tools, some landscaping experience, etc., etc. In short, the qualifications are virtually identical to a number of maintenance positions currently being advertised for assisted living, property management firms, etc. , etc.
An assisted living home also relies heavily on the proper maintenance of the facility for the safety of the residents so I am not clear exactly on why a city maintenance worker warrants an additional $20,000 or so a year in additional compensation so perhaps you could explain that.
I am all for avoiding "hate and anger"... and as I recall, I haven't characterized your posts as "ignorant" , "biased" and "filled with anger and hatred" ... so perhaps you ought to follow your own advice? Just a suggestion :-)!!!
Nancy, unfortunately it's obvious there is no way to have an honest discussion with you. You make inflammatory comments regarding city employees and then deny saying such things. Here is from just one of your many posts regarding city employees. "Your statements about the city employees are a great example of how insulated they have become from the "real" world. If the city employees aren't happy with what the city proposes in terms of employment wages and benefits, they are completely free to find another job - that's how the world works. Why on earth does anyone think that they are entitled to a job AND that that job must have certain pay and benefits and that if they don't like it they have the right to hold the taxpayers hostage? It's absurd. The city employees need to grow up. "
Among the many disparaging comments toward city employees you also said... The right to hold taxpayers hostage! Then you dishonestly ask where have you said the employees don't care about the city and the taxpayers.
Your hatred for unions has made you biased and blinded toward the city workers.
Regarding the maintenance issue it's been pointed out how a typical maintenance worker in the private sector differs from our city maintenance workers in the specialty of the facilities they have to maintain and that they are relied upon by those providing vital services to the city and its residents.
I agree as do i am sure our many employees as well as the leaders at OCEA reforms are needed. In fact OCEA has implemented many of those within several agencies they represent.
So your tired subtle argument that city workers don't care and i plying they are against reforms is bogus as has been so much of your comments.
The problem is both sides need to come together. But intellectually dishonest comments like yours don't do anyone any good.
Also in regard to the SS issue. You stated nobody was paying for your lifetime retirement benefit and that was clearly not the truth. Now you are trying to wiggle around that false statement by saying well its estimated that SS will be insolvent in the future so that justifies your claim. What happens in the future as with calPers too is unknown and that doesn't qualify you to make false comments that nobody is paying for your lifetime retirement when someone is. By your definition neither is a city or state employees because those are threatened too and its unknown what happens to them.
Yours is a bogus argument and conflicting claims exposé your true agenda. You basically said it you don't like unions.
Hello Common Sense!
Really? I wasn't aware of that. Please explain, in detail the differences in the skill levels required to maintain a fire station versus an office building or business park.
Nancy, you seem to be a great numbers person. Do me a favor since you're getting all this attention because you seem to have more time than a lot of us.
Can you please get me the total to date on how much the city has spent on legal fees fighting with our employees? I'm just curious if it was cheaper to just work with them or try and oust them all.
I'm curious as to why such a nice city like Costa Mesa with awesome tax revenue from South Costa Mesa has the need to outsource city jobs. I hate calling Citibank and Amex now because they don't have real employees who care. To me, as a taxpayer, I want quality service and if my tax dollars and the shoppers tax dollars can pay for it, I'm fine with paying public employees a living wage that can afford them home ownership and keep our small businesses in business during lunch time.
While you're at it, I keep hearing about an entire 5th floor full of employees and contractors employed to help Righeimer's cause. You can skip Dan Joyce and Christine Cordon, I know that's about $250,000 just for those two.
Can you then calculate the amount spent on pet projects like lighting up a parking lot at a park. I heard that was like $500,000.
Can you also please do some research as to the number of police officers we lost since Righeimer took office? I'm also curious about what other services the city lost since Righeimer took office.
Didn't the city use to have helicopters? An EMS coordinator? All I know is hearing something about CARE ambulance being a campaign contributor and something about our former EMS coordinator being canned after he made a fool out of Righeimer in a council meeting. I'm sure that's just a rumor because Costa Mesa is a professional organization who would never be vindictive or hire an entire 5th floor full of contractors to help Righeimer right?
They wouldn't do something like pay Dan Joyce $3,000 a week to put a spin on stories and attack city employees who earn pensions right? Just to then hire him as an actual pension drawing employee right?
How about his sidekick Christine Cordon. They don't just all of a sudden promote a secretary and slap a new title on her calling her some Asst Recreation Manager and pay her $100,000 to plan events do they? That's a whole lot of tax dollars we could be using for another police officer...
$250,000 on just 2 positions...hmmm...
I know you can help me see the truth because I hear a lot of rumors, but I'm sure it's not true. They City wouldn't waste money on 5 outsourced law firms and employ an entire floor full of people to help Righeimers political agenda would they? I know the 2 positions I mentions comes to a quarter of a million dollars on just 2 positions, how much money is really being wasted up there? While you're at it, can you please find out exactly how much money was spent on some 60th anniversary party that was filled with out of towners driving by trying to attend to a Free Foo Fighters Concert?
Lastly, since you have so much time on your hands, can you please do us all a favor and let us know where our tax dollars went, exactly how much and who it went to for the 60th anniversary bill. ALL related costs, even if it came from petty cash. Then, help us cross check to see if any of the vendors are owned by city employees who also own a business on the side.
I look forward to seeing your well researched response, as I am just a naïve resident.
@Nancy
I'm with you. A patrol officer from a security firm has a gun, baton, pepper spray, tazer and handcuffs. They also drive cars with flashing lights. They also arrest people.
Who needs a stinkin police department when we can have G4S security as our private Security Police Department?
No pensions!
Righeimer and Mensinger should seriously consider this. All it takes to be a armed peace officer with arrest powers is a simple PC832 class at the local community college for about 50 hours.
You can get someone at the city clerks office to swear them in, pin a badge on them, and BAM! You have yourself a sworn peace officer.
This is not a joke. Research it. Get a bid from G4S and you just got rid of an entire police force!
You can totally do the same thing with the fire department. CARE ambulance is totally equipped to be 1st responders. Plus, what does it take to aim a hose at a fire? Outsource that too. Easy stuff.
I'm so totally with you guys. Having professionals do city jobs makes no sense at all.
When I have people breaking in to my house, I don't care who has guns. I'm totally ok with a armed security guard driving 200 mph and barging in my place with guns blazing.
And when my wife and kid gets in a horrific crash on Harbor and Adams from all the red light runners, I'm totally ok with a snot nosed kid treating her.
With all the money we save, we can throw a real concert with entire stage of Foo Fighters, not just 1 and advertise the all.
Nancy you are a crack up. You write well enough so I surmise you can read with good comprehension. Your on-topic points have been logically refuted by well informed and well reasoned writers, but you don't like the answers. You challenge me for answers and now you have been answered by many. So at the end of the thread, is it the case that perhaps you have an opinion that you cherish and your questions are just rhetorical?
I agree with your evaluation of the councilmen though. Furthermore they are not the type of people I trust at the helm of such critical negotiations. Adjustments must be made here and statewide, they are unlikey to materialize in a toxic atmosphere. Good faith negotiation is not a concept this bunch gets. Costa Mesa needs results, not political posturing.
Wanna-be trolls take note, Nancy became the center of attention, got every point out there, repeated them without wavering, and made this blog about what she wanted it to be. She also has an amazing amount of time to devote to Salt n Pepperblogging.
Would I be surprised if she’s getting paid? Not very.
Actually CMCEA truth, I think we are having an honest discussion. There is nothing 'inflammatory" about stating that city employees are insulated from the reality of the real world - comments such as "sacrafice" etc, etc. are proof of that. The "hardships" you've referenced aren't unique to public employees - the same issues exist in the private sector - in fact, in the private sector, employees have virtually non of the job protection measures of public employees. If you don't like the working conditions, your boss, the CEO or anything else about your job, you have a choice - you either adapt to the situation or find another job.
So, are you denying that city employees can strike if the city does not provide a contract that is acceptable? If so, that is great news! But assuming that they can, how else can you characterize a strike? The intent is to withhold (hold hostage) "services" if the unions requirements aren't met. I am sorry that you find this inflammatory, but it is the truth. The main difference is that in the private sector, if you aren't happy with your wages or benefits you have two choices - quit or accept said wages and benefits. If you withhold your "services" you will be fired - in short there is no "right" to strike and no right to dictate wages and benefits. The reasons for that are obvious - companies couldn't successfully operate under that scenario - and neither can public institutions.
With regard to the maintenance worker aspect, NO ONE has described, in detail the differences between maintaining a fire station and say, an assisted living facility. Simply stating that it is so isn't sufficient. If it's true, then please post the details. Until then, that argument simply doesn't hold water.
As to SS it is not a defined benefit program. In other words, the government has no obligation to pay me anything - it is subject to the whims of Congress. In short, I have no legal standing to demand payment from the government. Now there is absolutely no question that CalPERS is in trouble. The difference between that and SS is that as a politically powerful lobby, CalPERS beneficiaries have the clout to demand that the taxpayers (see Valejo) fund their retirement and you have the legal standing to do so. Those on SS do not - so technically SS is not a "defined benefit" program. Finally, you had the opportunity to opt out of SS - I on the other hand, have no such option. Even if I decline the benefits, I still have to pay the taxes.
You are correct that I absolutely don't like unionization - it is an anachronistic institution for which there is simply no need and is the main reason cities, counties and states are experiencing financial crises. The bottom line is that public employee unions have demanded (and received) wages and benefits far in excess of what equivalent jobs are worth in the private sector and that is simply not sustainable. The solution is to disband the union model and treat city employees just as employees are treated in the private sector.
I'd be very interested in your arguments as to why that couldn't/ shouldn't happen.
Hello Carrie!
LOL!!! You are funny!!! I think you'd learn more though by doing your own research!!!
But I did want to point out one thing - you seem to think that because I support the proposed reforms to the city employee contract I support all the actions of the council. I don't.
G4s...
LOL!!!! Well, in your opinion, how should wages and benefits be determined for police officers, firefighters, etc., etc. be determined?
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!!!
Salt and Pepper -
Aside from my initial post, I am simply responding to comments directed to me - which I thought was the polite thing to do. As for my time - noooo not getting paid for this (LOL!!) but it's a fun diversion and break from a large project I'm working on (that I do get paid for!).
I'm sure you'll agree that this is a very important issue - it's outcome will determine, to a great extent, the direction this city takes. I've made my position clear - I don't think there is any reason whatsoever to have unions and I think the best solution to the city's financial woes is to treat employment in the same manner it's treated in the private sector - this would result in lower operating costs and probably a lot less drama! The main objection to eliminating unions seems to be the incredibly specialized nature of city operations require this - yet to date no one has posted anything to substantiate this claim (or how the union provides this as opposed to how private companies accomplish the same task). Statements to that effect, absolutely. But a detailed explanation (such as what specialized maintenance skills are required for a fire station versus an assisted living facility)have not been made. So, my challenge to you, and everyone else who supports the union position is to explain in detail why following a model based on the private sector won't work and why unions are necessary.
Truly looking forward to your answers and discussing this issue!!!
Nancy, first you say SS is a defined benefit now you're contradicting your own comment saying it isn't a defined benefit. I don't know how to have a rational discussion with some one who changes their comments like you do.
You asked me to provide you with proof where you said employees don't care about the taxpayers. I showed you your own words claiming employees think they can hold the taxpayers hostage.
I personally don't know if your memory is the problem or your intellect. Although I think everyone gets it's. You hate unions, you think CMCEA is a union and therefor you make up a lot bogus claims you have to back peddle on.
And yes CMCEA can't strike. But where do that come from anyways?
I hope anyone reading your comments keeps in mind your changing stories and comments to suit your agenda.
We have been hearing about SS going broke for years. It's kinda like the end of the world scenario. It doesn't happen in 1984 so then they just change the date to 2000, that doesn't happen so lets just set a new date.
But a defined benefit in contrast to what Nacy says isn't guaranteed. It's a promise. Nancy is just a union hater and therefor she justifies making false claims based on her biases. SS by all definitions is a defined benefit. You can go to the SS webpage and calculate what you will get as in any defined benefit.
Which way should we treat employees like private sector? The Costco prevailing wage with benefits and retirement way?....or the Walmart make everything part time so they get nothing and have to use food stamps and emergency rooms way?
Nancy:
".. explain in detail why following a model based on the private sector won't work and why unions are necessary."
Hi Nancy,
Got your detail right here:
The purpose of the private sector is to make a profit. The purpose of government is to deliver services and make sure the laws are followed.
Your hero Ayn Rand liked to make believe government was the "bad guy," but here in the non-fiction world, it's usually corporate greed that causes the most problems.
This is entertaining watching a resident banter with employees and union plants.
The union anticipated all the employees would run here and prepared to support them with other fake bloggers.
We are waiting for the real entertainment that follows.
Everyone realizes that the employee union must now counter? And that proposal will be made public? Oh yes it will.
We hope the city is lying in wait for the moronic union bosses to give their counter that will no doubt ask for a PAY INCREASE.
We hope the city then produces a report that shows that many employees have had their pay increased and show worst case scenarios of how this "step" stuff works in action.
Once the public sees the counter and some supporting reports that will hopefully shed light on what is really going on we don't think the public will empathize. We think the public will be once again outraged.
When will the counter proposal be sent? This will be more fun than football season!
CM,
Obviously, my point wasn't clear -so let me clarify. "Technically" SS is not a defined benefit program as it doesn't meet the definition of one but it's the closest the private sector has to what public employees enjoy with some very notable differences as I have explained. So, if you are trying to compare private/public it is as close as you are going to get - but it's still an "apples and oranges" comparison in the end.
With regard to CMCEA's ability to strike, your comment isn't entirely accurate. As you will note the MOU clearly acknowledges that walk outs, work stoppages and a general strike are activities that CMCEA can engage in - but for the duration of the MOU CMCEA has agreed not to engage in such activites. According to the city website, that agreement expired in March. So to suggest that CMCEA "cannot strike" is not entirely correct. Furthermore, if it was, why on earth would the council majority negotiate? Do you honestly believe that Righeimer, Messinger and Monohan would do it out of the "goodness of their hearts"? LOL! Leece and Genis - yes.... That group??? Even my imagination cannot stretch that far.
I haven't made any "bogus" claims. What I have done is pointed out the problems associated with the union model which obviously doesn't fit with your narrative that the union employees have been infinitely reasonable and acommodating. Thus, any contradiction of that narrative must be based on "hatred" of unions and "anger" with them. From your viewpoint I am sure that you honestly believe this and I am sure your fellow members of CMCEA do as well. However, what this narrative suggests is that "public employees" should be treated differently - that they somehow deserve special considerations that aren't available to those in the private sector - and yet, so far no no evidence has been presented as to why these employees deserve such special treatment. Historically, the reasons were that public employees did not enjoy the same wage earning potential as those of private sector employees. But over time, that "gap" has disappeared.In virtually every job category, public employee total compensation exceeds that of an equivalent position in the private sector. You noted that your wife receives bonuses when her company does well - which is terrific BTW!. But are her total benefits on par with yours? I am sure that answer is "no".
So the question is on what basis should public employees be treated differently than those in the private sector?
250K for 2 positions on 5th floor?
Bargain.
only get 2/3rds of a cook, er , fireman for that.
I repeat...which employees from the private sector? Those with benefits, and retirement plans or those without? The other question begging to be asked.... How do you expect to deliver the best services and recruit the best municipal employees when you are the one city offering the worst employment package?
Just look at our current status with Police recruitment.
How you treat employees does matter.
BTW...I'm just a resident, and not a union plant
Hello Geri!
Ah, but you see, that's the problem with the union model... it's basically a monopoly so there is no real competition and it is competition (i.e. the free market) which enables institutions to provide the best product for the lowest cost.
Gericault,
According to the Baugh followers we are all "union plants" if we aren't members of a union. That still ranks us as "union thugs" per the wisdom of that crowd.
According to their narrow world filled with lies and control through fear mongering, there are Baugh followers and there are the union plants/"Commies"/union thugs/"lefties". There's no room for moderation in the Baugh/CMTA world.
Scott wouldn't have it any other way.
Joe McCarthy is smiling up at him.
It does seem interesting that someone who has a cooking blog is so very interested in employee negotiations. Nancy seems to know a lot about previous negotiations and other nefarious facts. Did she just wake up one morning and say I am going to read the Bubbling Cauldron and comment? Where has she been the last few years? I wonder why she has now surfaced? Hmmmm.
Hello Sam,
So, are you suggesting that one cannot have more than one interest in life?
I am very interested in the current negotiations since it will have an enormous impact on the city and I recently stumbled across this blog.
"Nefarious" acts?? Not sure what you are referring to by this....
Sam,
It's because Riggy thinks the people of Costa Mesa are stupid. Too late. There's no turning back for Fred Flintstone. He's outed and understood.
We are competing with 438 other california cities for qualified municipal employees. That's a free market. There is no monopolies there. The employees go where they can get the best working conditions. If we set ourselves up to get the cheapest labor pool we suffer for it.
The only way your strategy will work is if you have every other city attack its workers and lower the wages across the state. That same strategy would also work for lowering gas prices. we just have to get every motorist to stop buying gas until they lower the prices.Which is not going to happen.
Politically, you can brag that you are the biggest baddest Ayn Randian around. At the end of the day you will be paying more and getting less to show for it.
Currently, that is exactly what we have happening in this City.
Gericault,
Government unions enjoy a legal monopoly on wages and benefits - there is no free market competition at work.
I am not so sure about that Geri - there are quite a few professionals that I am sure would be happy to work for a variety of governmental institutions - if they weren't unionized. But overall yes, in order for any government to work more efficiently, the unions must go... and that day is coming.
With regard to gas prices - not exactly. The largest barrier to lower energy costs is not the energy companies but the government. The government has artificially raised the cost of entry to the market and thus reduced competition. I completely agree that I am paying more and receiving less - however the solution is not to empower the very forces that are responsible for this - the public employee unions. If Americans truly want their government to work better, we have to get rid of public employee unions.
Got it. You are rabidly anti - labor. It doesn't matter what anybody can show you about performance levels, cost efficiencies or service response mtetrics because as long as that worker has organized union representation, he must be eliminated.
Your private sector arguments vs our city labor force has unfortunately for you and our dear mayor, has not quite worked out any savings.
I'll leave you with this quote from Frank Lloyd Wright.." If capitalism is fair then unionism must be. If men have the right to capitalize their ideas and resources of their country, then that implies the right of men to capitalize their labor".
Nancy, I can't believe some of the stuff you state. Your ignorance is bountiful.
There is no monopoly. Do you even know what a monopoly is or what it means?
Regarding the wages and pensions monopoly. The city council and city management set the salaries and benefits. When the general city employees received their pension enhancement it was approved 5-0 by a Republican Majority city council. When the Fire Department received their previous enhancement 2 of the 3 votes were from Republicans. I don't think Costa Mesa has ever been ruled by a majority liberal union friendly council. At least not in the last decade where enhancements were granted.
This idiotic notion that the associations have control over the Conservative Republican Councils so much so that they have forced previous council to vote for their enhancements is ludicrous.
Council controls this not the Associations.
The Fire Department recently negotiated a deal. This council accepted that deal. There were reforms and they will be paying more of their pensions. Council has said it's sustainable. If this deal wasn't sustainable why then did this City Council approve it? Are you saying Riggy and Mensy are now bought buy the unions?
You really are a piece of work. You basically hate unions and therefor you make idiotic ignorant claims because of your bias.
General City Employees have put in place reforms too. A long time ago. Back to a sustainable level. There is more they can do and probably will in the end.
It's also happening all over the place. But you just keep spewing your ignorant biased hate of working people.
It only took 3-4 days to out "Nancy" as one who hates the average wage earner.
The Newport bosses need to get themselves some better puppet-builders.
Their boy Jimbo is a failure on so many levels.
Hello Work Together!
So, are you saying that the city can hire someone and pay them whatever the two parties agree to and provide whatever benefits the two agree to? Can the city hire employees and can those employees decline union membership?
If so, that is absolutely wonderful news! However, based upon everything I've read that isn't the case. If every employee must belong to the respective union for their department then public employ unions ARE a monopoly - they possess exclusive control of labor terms.
Since you are bit unclear on the economics I would recommend Thomas Sowell's "Basic Economics". It is an excellent overview of economics in layman's terms and I am sure you'd find it great reading.
s to "hate", well, as Reagan said, "there you go again!" While it's true I hated having to belong to a union, my opinions on unions are that they serve no role in our economy and are in fact are unproductive and destructive. Since you support the concept of unions, perhaps you could explain the necessity of them and what benefits they provide to the taxpayers.
As to your remark that the reforms agreed to by the general city employees are "sustainable" that isn't accurate. It's quite clear that CalPERS will not be able to fully fund future retiree benefits - even with increased contributions from employees, it will not be enough to fund promised benefits.
"Hate" for working people? Now that is just silly. I am a working person myself so I have nothing against employment :-)!
Hello Truthout!
"Out" me? Not sure what you are referring to.
Perhaps though, you could explain why you find it necessary to make disparaging comments. Do you really think it's productive for either side of a debate to do that? Obviously this is an important issue and I fail to see how being rude and antagonistic contributes to the discussion.
Hello Geri!
Well, to date "no one" has "shown" anything regarding "performance levels, cost efficiencies or service response metrics. I've been told that public employees are far more educated and far superior to those of us in the private sector, but to date have not been provided with any evidence to support this claim.
On the contrary - that is not at all what I have said. I am sure that the city has a number of qualified individuals that do a good job. What I object to is the presence of a labor union. To date no one has provided any evidence of why unions are necessary. To go back to my earlier question. A few posters have stated that city positions require specialized education and experience - but that is true of numerous private sector jobs as well, so again, why is a union necessary? Why can't the city hire it's workforce the way every other private entity does???
As to the recent "outsourcing" experience I am not surprised - hiring a firm to do a job that can be done in house in many instances is more expensive - and such bids did not take into consideration one of the main drivers of expenses in the city - benefits.
LOL!! Frank Lloyd Wright might have been a talented architect, but his understanding of economics is flawed at best. As Milton Friedman stated - “When unions get higher wages for their members by restricting entry into an occupation, those higher wages are at the expense of other workers who find their opportunities reduced. When government pays its employees higher wages, those higher wages are at the expense of the taxpayer. But when workers get higher wages and better working conditions through the free market, when they get raises by firm competing with one another for the best workers, by workers competing with one another for the best jobs, those higher wages are at nobody's expense. They can only come from higher productivity, greater capital investment, more widely diffused skills. The whole pie is bigger - there's more for the worker, but there's also more for the employer, the investor, the consumer, and even the tax collector.
That's the way the free market system distributes the fruits of economic progress among all people. That's the secret of the enormous improvements in the conditions of the working person over the past two centuries.”
― Milton Friedman, Free to Choose: A Personal Statement
Nancy you need to do your own homework. first you make a comment about the control of salaries and pension then I show you where you are wrong there now you switch to the labor monopoly is because everybody has to join the union that is not true city employees don't have to join the union or association really. your hatred once again of Union shows how low you will go to keep switching the argument. yes City Council had to approve the pension enhancements that everybody is screaming about. they also appoint the city manager now CEO who has to approve salaries and that person is controlled by council and not your boogeyman unions so once again you are completely out of touch with reality but I suspect as you do all the time you justl come back and change the argument again
Does anyone else notice the distinct "style" of nancy boys writing?
Regurgitated broken rhetoric!
Hello Work Together,
Since I didn't receive an answer to my question, let's try it this way.
Can the city independently negotiate employment terms - salary, benefits, vacation pay, sick leave, pension benefits, etc., etc. with individual employees or not??
Simple question. Yes or no?
Dennis,
Why do you feel the need to make disparaging comments? Do you honestly think it's helpful or productive???
Is that really all you are capable of adding to the discussion?
If this an example of how members of the union deal with those with whom they disagree, is it any wonder the relationship is strained???
How do you know that Dennis is a union member?
Why do you people continue to feed the trolls?
No wonder they laugh at you!
Ronald, true, this troll/trolless does like to laught at (not with) people, while saying others shouldn't disparage.
Costa Mesa employees are not required to belong to an association. Several don’t. They still get the benefits negotiated by whichever association works with their employee group. Those who choose to join do not have to pay dues for political activities. Several choose to contribute to a charity of their choice instead. Can they negotiate for an individual package and terms? No more than most job applicants in any sector, except those at the highest echelons with a collection of skills and a track record that put them in the enviable place where employers are competing for them, not them competing with other applicants for a job.
City of Costa Mesa employees do not belong to unions. Membership in an Employee Association is voluntary. Associations do not have the same power as unions, for instance they cannot perform job actions such as strikes.
How did I learn this? I called and asked shortly after an employee committed suicide. Getting the facts straight is much better than guessing and making false assumptions.
Nancy, do businesses have the customers elect new management every two years? That's in essence what we do with the city council every time we have an election. Imagine every two years different council majorities being able to come in and sweep out employees they no longer want to use and replace them with friends and political backers. That's why there are contracts and certain requirements for employment qualifications. Many of the city employees work a myriad of responsibilities far above and beyond the actual positions they are hired for. Billy Folsom was a city mechanic. He worked on every city vehicle , including The European police motorcycles. Was a talented machinist that could fix almost anything, and did. He also has certification to inspect all the underground tanks in the city and could perform inspections required by state and county. Basically he was doing about three different jobs. Which when he left we now take the motorcycles to be worked on at the dealership.we need to get another tank inspector. There is only a couple mechanics left and then that dept. is soon to die out. So we lose all the knowledge of the people who worked on all our equipment. Have to outsource everything , Many cases to more than one outside service. How easy would r be for an outside mechanic to be able to rip off the city if there is no one there who knows anything about cars? Abuses will and can happen without loyal longtime employees dedicated to maintaining high levels of service and accountability. Now we asked for service levels and studies of what departments needed to be outsourced but we were never presented with that information.During the ill advised and illegal "layoff" period.the council was supposed to meet and confer, study the Depts. to be outsourced then make their decisions. Even though the City spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on outside consultants they found few instances where the City saved money.now I understand you don't like unions. Working at OCC can make anyone bitter. There are 96k a year highly paid faculty members taking up all the salary s. So OCC now just hires temps and keeps all the new faculty members just under the threshold of being full time. I agree it's a bad situation, but it is a completely different situation than what we had running our city. Our city was well run, we had favorable relationships with the organizations that came and worked with the city every step of the way during the financial meltdown. They care about the city and take pride in their jobs. They were attacked because they we in an employee association, and Righeimer, like yourself, think every union is exactly the same and must be destroyed. If we didn't have unions every couple of years we would have new politicians come in and reward unqualified political cronies with highly paid city jobs. In fact, that is happening now....welcome to Tammany Hall.
Wow, little miss nancy sure gets a lot of attention on here! Hey Nancy, do you know the Huy Pham tragedy in Costa Mesa? The day the city issued 213 pinkslips, Huy Pham, a hard working employee who did not understand the ruthless political game Righeimer is playing, walked up to the roof of city hall, took his boots off and jumped off the roof. To make a statement, he jumped toward where Righeimer parks.
Shortly after, management ordered the removal of sympathy flowers fellow employees were leaving.
One can say that the blood of Huy Pham has and always will be on the hands of Righeimer, Mesinger, Monahan and Hatch. It disgusts me to see those who attended his funeral would later stab their fellow employees in the back and be rewarded with a 90K a year unnecessary positions on the 5th floor. As karma would have it, she's on admin leave and its just a matter of time before they rid of her completely. A little jail time and a life long criminal record will be nice to see if they find something worth prosecuting.
Now we have a Nancy sticking up for the 3man scumbag council.
As a gesture of solidarity, I know a lot of employees will not be attending the city sponsored lunch next week. Really Riggy? You really think after everything you've done and what you're doing to us that we're going to put on a fake smile and pretend like we're friends?
Employees can't strike, but we sure can make a statement by not attending this BS lunch! Please make arrangements for a soup kitchen to pickup all the uneaten meals. I assure you that there will be plenty.
I encourage you all the read the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act. This is government code Section 3500-3511. Here is the link to the law. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=gov&group=03001-04000&file=3500-3511.
It basically spells out the collective bargaining process along with "good faith" negotiations.
Negotiations have to follow the provisions of the act. It is kind of a long read, but very interesting. I am very curious to see how the different factions interpret the act.
Post a Comment
<< Home