Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Weirdest story of the day
Next Post: No need to read more than this
Posted in:
* From a press release…
Governor Bruce Rauner and the following labor unions have agreed to terms on new four-year collective bargaining agreements: Service Employees International Union (“SEIU”), Local 1 Chicago, the International Union of United Food and Commercial Workers, the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Three Councils of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America (The Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters, Mid-Central Illinois Regional Council of Carpenters, and the St. Louis-Kansas City Carpenter’s Regional Council), the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers – Iron Shipbuilders, Blacksmiths, Forgers, and Helpers, the Laborers International Union of North America, the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, & Transportation Workers, and Illinois State Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers.
In October, the Administration announced agreements with the International Union of Operating Engineers, the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry, and the International Association of Machinist and Aerospace Workers. These agreements have now been ratified. Over the summer, the Administration reached collective bargaining agreements with 5 different bargaining units represented by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, all of which have also been ratified.
Altogether, the Governor has now successfully negotiated new collective bargaining agreements with 17 different bargaining units representing more than 5,000 state employees. These developments stand in stark contrast to the ongoing negotiations with AFSCME Council 31. Despite being offered substantially the same material terms as the Teamsters and the Trades, AFSCME has to date rejected the Governor’s chief proposals.
The agreements announced today include:
· The State will expand the existing group health insurance program by offering employees a variety of new options. In the expanded program, employees will receive on average $967 per month to either maintain their current premiums, maintain their current coverage, mix and match in the way that is most beneficial to them, or shop for an entirely new custom health insurance package potentially on a new health insurance marketplace. Employees can also use the State’s contribution to purchase insurance through a union plan.
· A new performance incentive program to reward employees with bonuses for cost-saving measures and meeting or exceeding performance standards.
· A new, collaborative managed competition program that allows management and the unions to work together to provide low-cost alternatives to outsourcing.
· A reduction in the payout for accumulated unused vacation from 75 to 45 days for employees hired after January 1, 2016.
· Continuation of a 40-hour work week with overtime earned after 40 hours.
· A program to enable the State of Illinois to address minority underutilization in state government.
· Increased training and certification opportunities for employees.
· Continuation of the prevailing rate system administered by the Illinois Department of Labor.
AFSCME is now on the opposite side of these negotiations from their own colleagues in organized labor. AFSCME continues to reject many of the same, reasonable proposals being ratified by wide margins by their fellow state employees:
· AFSCME continues to reject the health insurance framework accepted by the trade unions. AFSCME’s proposal is to continue the same unaffordable health insurance system that the credit rating agencies have noted in the recent downgrades.
· AFSCME continues to reject a new performance incentive program accepted by trades and Teamsters. AFSCME’s proposal is to continue to pay employees unaffordable automatic wage increases.
· AFSCME continues to reject a new, collaborative managed competition program accepted by trades and Teamsters.
· AFSCME continues to resist moving the overtime trigger to the common workplace benchmark of 40 hours.
· AFSCME continues to reject a program to enable the State of Illinois to address minority underutilization in state government.
· AFSCME continues to reject a four-year wage freeze. Teamsters, in contrast, not only agreed to freeze their wages but did so on top of the 75% in-hire rate.
*** UPDATE 1 *** From AFSCME Council 31…
Contrary to statements from the Governor’s Office today, the Rauner Administration has failed to reach agreement on union contracts covering the vast majority of state employees. In addition to AFSCME, unions that have not reached agreements include the INA, LIUNA, IFT, FOP, PB&PA and SEIU Healthcare, which together represent more than 40,000 state employees and tens of thousands of state-funded independent providers.
In contrast, the trades unions whose agreements were announced today represent only several hundred state workers.
The issues at stake in the trades negotiations are likewise very different. Because these unions have independent health plans, their members have the option not to take state health insurance. Similarly, their pay is typically set by the prevailing wage. Our union negotiates the health plan covering state and university employees and retirees, and bargains wage schedules for more than 500 job titles.
In negotiations with AFSCME, the Rauner Administration is demanding a four-year wage freeze and huge hikes in employee health costs, forcing workers to pay double their current premium to keep their coverage and driving down their take-home pay.
The Rauner Administration is also seeking to eliminate our contract’s safeguards against reckless privatization of public services, and demanding a so-called “merit pay” scheme that opens the door wide to cronyism by letting politically appointed bosses determine who gets a raise.
Like all working people, caregivers, child protection workers, correctional officers and other AFSCME-represented public service workers in state government deserve wages that sustain a family, affordable health care, retirement security and a voice on the job.
Our union is committed to reaching a fair agreement that achieves those goals. If the governor shares our commitment, he will correct his staff’s misleading claims and alter his confrontational tactics that make it harder, not easier, to find common ground.
*** UPDATE 2 *** Press release…
Following is the statement of SEIU Healthcare Illinois President Keith Kelleher in response to the breaking news that the Bruce Rauner administration had reached a contract deal with a unit of SEIU Local 1:
“While we are happy for our sisters and brothers at SEIU Local 1, the fact remains that the state’s largest bargaining units, the 52,000 low-income Illinois home healthcare and child care workers of SEIU Healthcare Illinois, continue to work without a contract while Bruce Rauner presses extreme demands that would totally destabilize this workforce.
“Our contracts expired June 30th. At the bargaining table, Gov. Rauner has sought to strip the lowest-paid workforce in the state of health insurance and training, along with other demands meant to diminish if not outright eliminate the workplace voice of these vital workers. He also is demanding a wage freeze for workers earning poverty-level wages. Already, he has stopped payments to the healthcare funds for our workers, raising immediate threats of misery and economic hardship on a large scale.
“For some reason, Rauner appears to be willing to single out SEIU Healthcare for demands harsher than the other units of government with whom he has reached a deal and ALL OF WHICH were able to keep their bargained-for health insurance—and their union voice.
“Rauner recently attacked our workforce through administrative rules meant to diminish the size of the home healthcare and child care workforces. And he bankrolls anti-union groups that are shamefully attacking our workers in the courts and in the media. His ongoing attacks at the bargaining table are part of his greater hostility against collective bargaining in general and his billionaire agenda to permanently weaken the union movement.”
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:04 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Weirdest story of the day
Next Post: No need to read more than this
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
AFSCME needs to build a time machine, you can’t keep doubling down, eventually you lose everything.
Comment by Almost the Weekend Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:16 pm
Maybe the Governor should seek arbitration if he is unhappy with how things are going in talks with AFSCME.
Comment by 360 Degree TurnAround Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:16 pm
I agree with AFSCME. And I am not a member.
Comment by illinoised Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:17 pm
And just how many employees does AFSCME represent? Isn’t something like 35,000?
The governor got the crumbs first. The loaf is going to be more difficult.
Comment by Huh? Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:17 pm
With all due respect to the Governor, trade union environments provide easy verification for cost-saving measures and performance. The office environment? Think of Blagojevich era cost savings items such as “efficiency initiatives” “Shared Services” and “pouring rights” …
Comment by Smitty Irving Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:20 pm
Is the problem with Rauner and everyone else?
Or AFSCME?
Rauner’s successful negotiations with these other labor groups suggests the latter.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:20 pm
The governor’s office should detail exactly why the public should trust his word that he has fairly negotiated with an organization he repeatedly has called “Afscammy.”
Comment by Precinct Captain Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:22 pm
The groups that Rauner reached agreement with were relatively small numbers that could be privatized out. They were threatened and had to take the cuts or lose their jobs.
Comment by DuPage Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:23 pm
Let’s get this over with. Time for Rauner to issue his best and final offer. With all the other contracts settled, AFSCME is insane if they think the public would side with them in the event of a strike.
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:23 pm
Did the Governor refer to any other unions during the campaign like he did with “AFSCAMMY”?
Comment by 360 Degree TurnAround Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:23 pm
He’s learning! Divide and conquer much more effective than total war.
Comment by Century Club Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:25 pm
Do these trade unions have the same health insurance program as the Teamsters? The major sticking point with AFSME is health insurance.
Comment by Pacman Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:26 pm
What exactly does it mean to receive “$967 per month to maintain current premiums, maintain their current coverage …” Could this end up back in court?
Comment by skeptical Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:28 pm
And here I thought that SEIU hated Rauner’s guts?!
AFSCME needs to live in the present. They lost both the GOP primary and general elections last year. Rauner is the guv, whether they like it or not. I hate to take that tact, but their options of defeating Rauner and getting SB 1229 through both failed. Sorry, folks, but those are the realities.
Comment by Team Sleep Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:28 pm
Can the governor’s office detail how a “managed competition” program would work for AFSCME employees at agencies such as DFCS or the Dept. of Corrections?
Comment by Precinct Captain Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:29 pm
==· A new, collaborative managed competition program that allows management and the unions to work together to provide low-cost alternatives to outsourcing.==
Let’s rephrase this in east-to-understand language: If management threatens to outsource, the union will be allowed to negotiate a wage cut.
Why would AFSCME agree to this language and begin the race to the bottom?
I wonder if Rauner uses this tactic with his “superstars”?
Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:38 pm
The healthcare framework brings up some questions.
A. What would the premiums be for an average family. 967$ of a 1300 dollar premium is much more reasonable than 967 of a 2k premium.
B. What exactly does average refer too is it a sliding scale based on wage?
Not a lot of detail here.
Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:40 pm
Do we know the details of Rauner’s healthcare proposal to AFSCME?
Comment by skeptical Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:44 pm
===Despite being offered substantially the same material terms as the Teamsters and the Trades, AFSCME has to date rejected the Governor’s chief proposals.===
Health Care?
Hmm.
To the Post,
Elections have consequences, all AFSCME can do is try to come up with a deal that doesn’t gut their presence or make their collective irrelevant.
I have no sympathy for AFSCME, while I do sympathize with member’s stories.
What are the Unions prepared to do come 2016?
Right now? Sorry. You have members voting against the Union, that’s on the Union. You have a Union not understanding the threats, that’s on the Union too.
Now… about that…
===Despite being offered substantially the same material terms as the Teamsters and the Trades, AFSCME has to date rejected the Governor’s chief proposals.===
Hmm. Still trying to understand that. Then again, these are consequences, so there’s that.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:46 pm
“- 360 Degree TurnAround - Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:16 pm:
Maybe the Governor should seek arbitration if he is unhappy with how things are going in talks with AFSCME.”
Snark. But true.
Not only does the governor disingenuously omit mention of how many more state workers are enrolled in AFSCME, he also omits mention of the different types of jobs performed by AFSCME, as opposed to the trade unions.
Comment by Independent retiree/lawyer/journalist Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:46 pm
No one - not even legislative and executive staffers - will EVER get anything as good as the Teamsters healthcare plan.
Comment by Team Sleep Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:49 pm
- skeptical - Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:44 pm:
Do we know the details of Rauner’s healthcare proposal to AFSCME?
From what we have been told, employee’s portion of premium would double, co-pays SUBSTANTIALLY increase, and after co-pays met remaining balance would be paid 60/40.
Comment by anon Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:53 pm
To follow on what -Mason Born- said, I’d like to know how the state contribution is figured, what percentage of the total premium cost that is, and how that figure compares to both past support and current health insurance offerings.
As others have noted, the real prize is changing the health insurance. That cost has been going up much faster than all other costs.
And for AFSCME, it’s not just the 35,000 employees, it’s all the retirees. While the 20 year SERS get their insurance premium free, they have to pay for their dependents … and they’ve already had a diminishment of sorts by being forced into one of the Medicare Advantage programs. For other “state” retirees, setting a support floor and not pushing the insurance companies for the best deals will result in their costs going up since they pay the full cost minus, in some cases, partial support from previous contributions (TIPS in the case of TRS).
My gut is telling me that the state employee / retiree is going to end up with the short end of the stick on health insurance.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:54 pm
==Let’s rephrase this in east-to-understand language: If management threatens to outsource, the union will be allowed to negotiate a wage cut.==
So are you saying the state shouldn’t have the right to provide the same service at a lower cost? And that in light of the competition, that AFSCME cannot reconsider their current stance and renegotiate a lower rate if they deem that rate to still be beneficial for themselves?
If the state is prevented from pursuing the best bang for the buck, like everyone else does in society, we are in a world of hurt.
Comment by nixit71 Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:56 pm
Most trade unions and the Teamsters run their own health care program….AFSCME does not….the Teamsters HCP is in the same financial shape as their pension plan…dire!
Comment by observer Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:57 pm
Look at what we have now for “health insurance.” Premiums are deducted, but no claims are paid. How does Illinois get away with this fraud. And by the way, what is the status of union court case on this?
Comment by SaxMan Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:58 pm
“We want to pay you less, we want you to work longer, we want you to pay more for healthcare, we want you to agree to a diminished pension.”
At no point in time has the administration ever suggested why State employees should agree to not receiving step increases and not receiving a cost of living adjustment while also having healthcare costs increase and also demanding an increase in the number of hours worked.
Has the Governor actually made an argument as to why state employees should accept these provisions?
What about the labor market? How on earth does this guy think he’s going to retain people who are capable at being good at their jobs?
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:58 pm
==Why would AFSCME agree to this language and begin the race to the bottom==
I thought that phrase was outlawed. But if not, allow me to retort…
Are you referring to the public sector “race” that has no competition, forced payment of entry fee even if you do not wish to race, and no freedom to choose what race you wish to run? Because that is not a race. That is my high school walk-a-thon.
Comment by nixit71 Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 2:59 pm
===Rauner’s successful negotiations with these other labor groups suggests the latter.===
This is a logical fallacy. The bargained agreements arrived at are under much different circumstances than those covered by AFSCME.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:00 pm
They left out giving them the flexibility to lay off up to 5000 employees at s time and replace them with contract workers. The healthcare change hasn’t even been proposed in detail, so no one knows what the cost difference would be. Basically the Rauner team hasn’t even proposed any financial details to the bargaining table, so what is afscme turning down exactly? How can they do last best if they haven’t even proposed a single contract?
Comment by Tuesday's Pizza Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:05 pm
Unsolicited Advice: perhaps Rich could build off the upcoming public state budget negotiations by creating a public Rauner/AFSCME negotiation and do a web cast on this site. Nix that–it sounds dull. Let’s come up with some format where Rich is more of a Judge Judy. Or a pro wrestling format? /snark
Comment by Earnest Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:06 pm
=demanding an increase in the number of hours worked.=
Don’t believe anyone will be working more hours. This is the administration trying to save some money on overtime.
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:08 pm
The Governor wants the public to believe he has reached an agreement with everyone but AFSCME, but it isn’t so. The State’s Pay Plan suggests there are quite a few holdouts. He has a decent start but nothing more. He needs to get back to the hard work of negotiating, though negotiating a budget should be the priority.
Comment by Neveranonymous Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:09 pm
PR game played by both sides.
Yawn.
Comment by walker Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:16 pm
== demanding a so-called “merit pay” scheme that opens the door wide to cronyism by letting politically appointed bosses determine who gets a raise. ==
I don’t like AFSCME’s “one size fits all” approach to raises BUT … having seen how raises worked prior to Civil Service and how it worked under Merit Compensation, AFSCME has a very valid point.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:20 pm
afscme also is negotiating health care for thousand of retirees who have constitutional protection to health care premiums for annuitants. If health care costs go up too much we will be right back in front of the ISC because instead of raising premiums (courts said no) they are doing it “back door” by gutting the benefits.
Comment by Facts are Stubborn Things Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:20 pm
=== a so-called “merit pay” scheme that opens the door wide to cronyism by letting politically appointed bosses determine who gets a raise.===
This is actually a very genuine concern that I think all of the body politic should share and it probably shouldn’t be subject to bargaining without very detailed specifics requiring metrics that matter being utilized to determine when someone deserves a merit pay increase.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:21 pm
== we will be right back in front of the ISC ==
Yes. The IL SC did a lot of questioning about that exact tactic during the oral arguments in Kanerva.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:23 pm
I’m no fan of Bruce Rauner, but AFSCME needs to give up their opposition to merit pay. All State employees are not created equally.
Comment by Rahm'sMiddleFinger Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:30 pm
Robert the 1st - a few good friends of ours work at Logan Correctional. None of them have gotten much in the way of overtime at all for quite some time, so your take is spot-on.
As a context, a close friend of mine who works there was routinely pulling in 60-70 hours a week at the end of 2014. He told me two weeks ago that he is routinely working 45-50 hours now.
Comment by Team Sleep Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:31 pm
Well, I think there’s been some progress by AFSCME as far as their messaging goes. This response isn’t as hyperbole filled as past responses. This response seemed rather measured for them.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:33 pm
Rauner’s continued quest to gut health coverage is going to make retaining Poe’s seat difficult at the next election. A lot of retirees and non-union workers in Sangamon County even if they are republican.
Comment by Liberty Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:36 pm
== Rauner’s continued quest to gut health coverage is going to make retaining Poe’s seat difficult at the next election. A lot of retirees and non-union workers in Sangamon County even if they are republican. ==
Which is a perfect example of why all politics are local.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:41 pm
Merit pay would be perfect, if it was based on merit.
Comment by CharlieKratos Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:41 pm
Sorry SEIU Healthcare sisters and brothers. I’m glad you’re with us!
Comment by Honeybear Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:55 pm
Excuse me if I don’t jump for joy at Rauner’s alleged generous offer. His administration is known for it’s obfuscations. Basically, the contract negotiations come down to Rauner wants a win and an AFSCME loss. Who wants a representative that will come back from negotiations with you losing existing rights and benefits without getting anything in return.
Comment by Norseman Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 3:57 pm
Information please …Who determines what retired teachers pay for health insurance? I am told this changes every year.
Comment by Big footi Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:05 pm
The first thing written by RNUG I disagree with:
“As others have noted, the real prize is changing the health insurance.”
The real prize is eliminating restrictions on subcontracting, hiring, bumping and layoffs. Eliminating the union using those means will allow the administration to impose anything it wants, at least for employees, and eliminate not only unions but public service in its entirety, any time they’d like. That’s the real prize.
Comment by AC Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:15 pm
“. . like everyone else does in society” so, the new UAW contract with Ford allows the company to just lay off people at will and hire people off the street?
Comment by Skeptic Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:16 pm
AC- it’s all on the table. All or nothing. This is the big game.
Comment by Honeybear Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:18 pm
Taxpayers keep losing at the hands of unions…
Comment by Raunerbot Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:20 pm
== Information please …Who determines what retired teachers pay for health insurance? I am told this changes every year. ==
As I understand it, the State negotiates with the health insurance providers to, supposedly, get the best deals for various types of plans … although I have sometimes questioned the prices they’ve ended up paying.
As a TRS retiree, you have the right to buy one of those plans at the price the State is paying for it. If you participated in TRIP, then your cost is partially offset by a payment from that fund.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:20 pm
You know what I really really hate about this is having to talk about this crap with my union sisters and brothers before Christmas. My God it’s the last conversation I want to be having.
Comment by Honeybear Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:21 pm
== The first thing written by RNUG I disagree with: ==
Feel free to disagree. We all have our opinions. Come up with a good enough argument and I may change my mind …
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:22 pm
AC +1
Comment by Tuesday's Pizza Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:22 pm
Three cheers for union solidarity! “We must all hang together or surely we shall hang separately.” Nope, never heard that one before. Just gonna stick our heads back in the sand and hope it’ll all turn out OK.
This is how you lose, just looking out for your own narrow interests.
Comment by Willie Stark Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:31 pm
” Raunerbot - Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:20 pm:
Taxpayers keep losing at the hands of unions…”
Really? I guess it would be cheaper in the short run to contract the jobs out to non union, but the long run would be less cost effective. The same rates would be charged would be charged for the labor, there would just be les going to the employee and more going to Corporation Cronie.
Comment by Big Z Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 4:33 pm
I’m not saying health insurance costs aren’t a huge issue, especially for lower wage workers. However, once the union jobs are outsourced, and that’s the goal of eliminating restrictions on outsourcing and layoffs, it isn’t going to matter what’s negotiated in the contract. Retirees may be protected if health insurance is diminished, but I doubt active employees would be similarly protected, at least until they retired. Contracting out work eventually would eliminate not only union jobs, but civil service / merit comp jobs as well. After all, if a private organization handles large portions of agency operations, possibly even off site, there’s no need to have managers to do more than ensure the contract eliverables have been met. Those vendors are obligated by their investors to do as little as possible while meeting their obligations to the state, but it isn’t about quality, it’s about an ideological belief in privatization. When privatization is complete, an agency could easily eliminate 90% of their staff, with the remainder being contractors, or services provided entirely by vendors and simply rebranded to appear as though they have been provided by the agency. So, yes, it’s all important, but health insurance benefits and premiums could be made irrelevant by simply outsourcing the states functions and operations.
Comment by AC Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 5:40 pm
I agree that elections have consequences but that doesn’t give the governor the right or the ability to destroy the union of about 35,000 people with no other support. And I beg to differ that the public will be against afscme not so much for their likability but for the universal dislike of the governor throughout this state.
Comment by DHSJim Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 5:44 pm
===And I beg to differ that the public will be against afscme not so much for their likability but for the universal dislike of the governor throughout this state.===
You’d lose.
Rauner would demonize AFSCME in a way Rahm couldn’t with CTU.
The only way you’d win is no protests, no picket lines, just silence and press conferences daily, and even then, it’s a gamble.
Protests and taking the Capitol over, you’d lose.
Elections have consequences. Too many AFSCME members wanted to teach Quinn a lesson. Two of 5 union household voters voted Rauner.
Sorry.
Try to get the best deal, AFSCME, but you got beat, twice, even knowing Rauner had a target on you.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 6:04 pm
I think most AFSCME members are competent, hard-working state employees. I personally like most of AFSCME’s staff. But I think they need to be looking for a way out of this because I don’t think they are going to prevail. As the administration settles more and more contracts the Governor looks more and more like a reasonable negotiator. The difference in the various unions, different kinds of health insurance among them, etc, are inside baseball. Once AFSCME becomes the bad guy in public opinion I think they could get slaughtered. Time to find and execute an exit strategy before they and SEIU Healthcare become the last holdouts.
Comment by steve schnorf Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 9:35 pm
@steve schnorf - nails it.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Nov 18, 15 @ 10:40 pm
I don’t understand how a contract can be reached without a budget. How do they know what their funding will be? Is the agreement non economic issues only?
Comment by DuPage Grandma Thursday, Nov 19, 15 @ 8:26 am
==I’m no fan of Bruce Rauner, but AFSCME needs to give up their opposition to merit pay.==
Why? Rauner hasn’t even implemented merit pay for his merit comp employees. What makes anyone think he is going to devise a fair system for bargaining unit employees?
Comment by Anon. Thursday, Nov 19, 15 @ 9:02 am