Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: CSU expects “massive disruption of operations” by March 1
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 - Radogno responds *** City won’t help CPS
Posted in:
* WUIS…
Rauner says after a year and 67 bargaining sessions, he’s seen no progress with AFSCME.
“Our team just asked ‘em: So do you think we’re at impasse. I’m not sure, I think the union said they don’t believe we are,” Rauner said. “So our team is just trying to assess, where do we go from here? We’re spinning our wheels right now and making no progress.”
AFSMCE spokesman Anders Lindall has a different take on how things went down. He says AFSCME leaders were stunned by the impasse offer, because the union made a big new offer of its own, to accept Rauner’s wage terms for one year, and to pay more (though not as much as Rauner wants) for their health insurance.
“It is too reminiscent of the lack of a process that’s left us without a budget. It’s Rauner’s way or no way,” Lindall said.
* I asked the governor’s office for a response…
Rich, here are the “big” changes they claim to have made on Friday. They are not seeking a pay freeze at all. They changed their first year pay increase from a 1.5% general increase to a $1000 automatic stipend for all employees that would be pensionable – so that makes it a salary increase since once it is awarded it can never be reduced. Second, they changed their second year increase from 2.5% to 2.25%. They are still seeking automatic step increases all four years of the contract and they are still seeking additional increases of 3% in Year 3 and 3% in Year 4. So in the course of a full year of negotiations here are their changes:
1) Automatic four year step increases – NO CHANGE
2) Year 1: 2% increase – Automatic $1000 pensionable “stipend”
3) Year 2: 3% — 2.25%.
4) Year 3: 3% — NO CHANGE
5) Year 4: 3% — NO CHANGE
6) They have indicated they will NEVER agree to performance bonuses under any circumstance.As for health insurance, they renewed their proposal they have made from the beginning to seek a more expensive health plan adding new health and dental benefits to their already expensive platinum plus plan. For 12 months, they have proposed no increases in premiums. Friday for the first time, they proposed to increase premiums on this new, MORE EXPENSIVE plan by between $5 to $11 a month (depending on your salary band it was proposed: $5, $6, $6, $7, $8, and $11 for each current band) in Year 2 only and then no further increases in Years 3 and 4.
There is nothing “big” about these plans and the fact that it has taken us 12 months to get here is why it is entirely reasonable to ask whether future negotiating sessions would be worthwhile. Keep in mind 17 other unions agreed to across the board pay freezes for 4 full years, new less expensive health plans, and performance pay in a matter of weeks of negotiations.
Thanks,
ck
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:23 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: CSU expects “massive disruption of operations” by March 1
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 - Radogno responds *** City won’t help CPS
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
It would be interesting if the unions offered a proposal that merely replicated SS increases each year.
I do not know but perhaps that might put even Rauner on the defensive.
Comment by Federalist Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:27 am
this is where Team Rauner has failed the most.. instead of this drastic turn around agenda, he should have focused in year 1 totally on AFSME and the State of Illinois contracts.. he would have found bi partisan support in the GA..
Comment by Not Rich Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:28 am
smh.
17 other labor deals successfully concluded, and this is all the progress made so far with the remaining holdout.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:28 am
=there’s nothing “big” about these plans=
Yea, right.
Comment by Hedley Lamarr Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:30 am
So Rauner says he did not declare impasse. But then ck says “it is entirely reasonable to ask whether future negotiating sessions would be worthwhile”. So which is it? The tough thing about lying is you have to your stories straight.
Comment by Jeff Park Mom Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:31 am
I’m guessing Lindall was at the table, and neither Rauner nor the flack were.
Of course, read between the lines and you see AFSCME was moving while the governor was saying my way, or the highway.
Comment by Independent retired lawyer, journalist Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:32 am
While they may not LIKE the counter-offered presented by AFCSME, it IS a counter proposal that at least buys into some of the CONCEPTS the governor is pushing. That - by definition - is not an impasse.
Comment by xxtofer Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:34 am
As to the new health and dental increases that Rauner wants (I have not seen any details), how does this affect retirees?
Supposedly their health benefits can not be reduced but it would appear that any increases (co-pays- deductibles, dental ) that went beyond the AAI adjustment would be just that.
The there is the issue of whether the unions can actually represent retirees as we are not members.
Yes, I know that was done in the past. A lot of things not legal or kosher have been done in the past. So what, this is a new era on this issue particularly since the State SC decision.
As far as I can tell the issue for retirees ( a sizable number of people) seems to be ignored. Even SUAA which supposedly represent state university retirees seems to purposely be deaf on this matter.
Anybody who knows anything about this please respond.
P.S. I have read that the State SC mentioned the issue of costs for retirees that I have addressed.
However, i am not certain of that. If anybody knows about this and can verify what specific comments were made, please share.
Comment by Federalist Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:36 am
“Negotiating by press” doesn’t help much in this case.
Comment by walker Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:37 am
It’s truly impossible to tell who is bargaining in good faith at this point anymore. On one hand you have Rauner, his administration has successfully negotiated several other union contracts, but attacks unions every chance he gets. Then you have AFSCME, who spent millions to defeat Rauner, and haven’t budged throughout the negotiating process, forgetting that elections have consequences. This is like a good TV show that lasted three seasons too long. Wake me up when it’s the series finale.
Comment by Almost the Weekend Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:40 am
Why does no one ever call them out on their agreements with other unions and how some of what is in those agreements isn’t comparable because they are trade unions? For example, you cannot compare the healthcare benefits of trade unions with non-trade unions because they don’t operate the same way.
What the Governor is offering on healthcare is absolutely unreasonable and the union should reject it out of hand. I also think AFSCME’s offer isn’t reasonable either. Sit down and negotiate something both sides can live with. Asking for an increase isn’t unreasonable. Asking to double the cost is absolutely unreasonable. Figure it out. Make a reasonable offer and see if the Governor intends on being reasonable on the healthcare front.
That being said, AFSCME needs to knock off the pay raise thing. It’s reasonable to ask for no pay increases right now. It’s completely unreasonable in my opinion to even suggest raises. Agree to that point and move on. If you don’t like merit pay or the Governor’s reward bonuses then negotiate something else. Negotiate a non-pensionable bonus but ask for it for everyone. Compromise a little. Something is better than nothing.
I don’t really see either side in these negotiations being all that reasonable. It’s hard to come to an agreement when you have two unreasonable parties trying to talk to each other.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:40 am
Hey this is NEGOTIATION not dictation. It’s still a negotiation. Stay at the table and we hammer things out. There is no impasse. There is only impatience and frustration on Rauners side. Nobody said negotiations are easy. And FKA the deals offered to the other unions are not what is being offered or proposed to AFSMCE. Those are as different as apples and elephants. Rauner only cut those deals to dupe his base into believing that AFSCME is being unreasonable.
Comment by Honeybear Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:41 am
So, why shouldn’t the union employees get a step raise each year? And why shouldn’t that step raise be adjusted for cost of living, etc?
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:44 am
The Governor’s team frequently touts the number of Unions that they have reached agreement with but they never talk about the actual number of employees that are covered by those CBA’s versus the number of employees who are represented by AFSCME. My guess is that the Governors office has only reached agreement with a small percentage of their employees.
Comment by Stones Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:44 am
Rauner = Impotent
The more he negotiates and whines through the press, the more he becomes impotent. One of the least effective — if not *the* least effective — governors in recent memory.
Comment by Macbeth Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:46 am
17 others that are guaranteed a prevailing wage (which are also garanteed for positions lost to privitisation) and don’t add up to 10% of the work force. Apples and oranges comparison.
Comment by GOP Extremist Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:48 am
==The there is the issue of whether the unions can actually represent retirees as we are not members.==
This is only a partial answer, but …
Re: AFSCME negotiating health ins for retirees, I did find this reference in an Illinois State Employment Association Retirees news letter, about 3/4s of the way down the page at: http://www.isearetirees.org/
“During former Governor Edgar’s administration he gave all negotiating rights for health insurance to AFSCME because this union had more State employee members than the other unions. In addition, to keep from further complications (meaning reducing time spent with other State entities/departments) AFSCME health insurance negotiations would include everyone who worked for the State, including management, all other non-union employees, and in addition all State and university retirees.”
Comment by Joe M Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:49 am
==So, why shouldn’t the union employees get a step raise each year? ==
Ugh. You honestly do not understand the fiscal situation right now? Raises are not unreasonable generally. Right now I don’t think that raises are a fight that’s worth spending any negotiating capital on. Use it as a bargaining chip. Give raises away for minimal changes to health insurance. If you ask most employees every one of them will tell you what scares the heck out of them most is the huge increase in healthcare costs he is asking for.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:49 am
Hey CK - I think that email with all of the fiscal information on the Turnaround Agenda the Governor promised Rich may have gotten hung up in your email Outbox.
Can you re-send it so we can all take a look?
Comment by Sam Weinberg Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:50 am
AFSCME: “Blah, blah, blah”
Get in there and offer something meaningful or your members are going to take it in the shorts. Quit whining already. You’ve had it good for a long time. With the Dems in the governor’s office, you kept biting the hand that fed you.
Tell your members to be careful what they ask for next election.
Better yet, AFSCME Members should fire their leadership for lack of political leadership.
Kind of interesting that you guys helped elect Rauner and he’s still trying to do it to you.
Comment by Miss Demeanor Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:50 am
AFSCME would be wise to seriously negotiate. What is represented as their offer was not a serious offer considering the State’s fiscal condition and the magnitude of cuts needed to see any compromise on future spending.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:50 am
The problem I see with the Governor’s response is that it doesn’t list out what THEY’RE proposing. Why not?
Comment by Moby Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:51 am
===It’s reasonable to ask for no pay increases right now. It’s completely unreasonable in my opinion to even suggest raises. ===
Demoralized, you state that it is unreasonable to ask for a pay raise. Could you please explain your opinion?
The state’s budgetary issues are largely created by the elected officials that decided to spend money and make financial commitments without levying the appropriate taxes to pay for it. Is there a reason why you think that a public employee ought to accept the idea of no pay increases (which due to cost of living is actually a decrease in wages) in this instance?
The state employee is an employee of the public. The public has decided to create a financial crisis by failing to raise enough revenue to pay for all of the things that they want. How is it unreasonable for a public employee to expect a pay raise?
Do you think it’s a reasonable expectation that a public employee should just go “Oh, okay. You spent 40 years failing to collect enough tax revenue to pay for things, so I guess I should make less and be okay with it.”
The labor market is also a thing. I the State’s wages do not stay competitive, good luck hiring and retaining the decent people.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:51 am
Rauner and his team must be frustrated that they in essence walked away on a Friday afternoon and that AFSCME got the word out before they did. Now they have to cover their tracks. And, as Jeff Park Mom said, “the tough thing about lying is you have to your stories straight.” Really, does Rauner still admire Walker and Wisconsin so much that he would push us down their path to no return?
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:52 am
@Joe M Wednesday.
Thank you for your comment. I was aware of that but it still begs the question of whether he legally had the right to do this. Obviously, almost anything can be done until it is questioned and/or fought.
Comment by Federalist Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:53 am
-Federalist-,
It was mentioned but never resolved in the oral arguments in Kanerva. The recording is available online.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:55 am
If you believe that all unions are alike, and you are ant-union - then Rauner’s foolish blatherings about how AFSCME is just being political, sounds like the truth.
Obviously, it isn’t the truth.
There is as much difference between the unions as there are among vehicles. You don’t compare a MINI with a NASA space shuttle, even though they are both on wheels and carry people to destinations. So don’t fall for the argument that the Governor is attempting to make here.
Don’t let Rauner make you look like a rube.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:56 am
The trust meter isn’t too high with respect to AFSCME, but it’s even lower for Rauner. Keep negotiating folks and zip your lips - including the banal and inaccurate comparison to the trade union contracts.
Comment by Norseman Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:58 am
“17 other unions agreed to….new less expensive health plans”
How is that possible if AFSCME has to determine the State health plan for everyone? Also, the Teamsters have THEIR OWN health plan as an alternative if they don’t like what the State offers. Finally, “less expensive” to whom — the employee or the State?
Comment by Secret Square Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:00 pm
Sure no COLA is reasonable but step increases affect those just out of college. The State is already is receiving the benefit of replacing expensive retirees with lower paid professionals. If you want to discourage a young workforce even more stick to no steps. Don’t you think the tier II pension employees have done enough to help the State’s financial condition!
Comment by Triple fat Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:06 pm
==So Rauner says he did not declare impasse. But then ck says “it is entirely reasonable to ask==
Respectfully, one is a declaration and one is a question.
They are not the same.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:07 pm
?
Comment by Triple fat Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:07 pm
A “raise” is really a cost of living adjustment. Amazing how people think public employees should all remain at entry level pay no matter how many years of experience and increasing responsibilities. And that a public employee’s pay should never be adjusted for cost of living just because politicians would rather spend money elsewhere. When you complain that public employees should have benefits commensurate with the private sector, please stop being hypocritical by arguing that the pay should not also be subject to private sector norms.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:10 pm
Secret Square: (key word here is “may” Retirees and merit comp should be aware Rauner could gut their insurance according to statute. (5 ILCS 375/7.1) (from Ch. 127, par. 527.1)
Sec. 7.1. Any benefit received by an employee under this Act pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement may be extended by the Director to employees whose wages, hours and other conditions of employment with the State are not subject to a collective bargaining agreement. In addition, if any benefit is offered by the Department of Central Management Services to employees who are not members of a recognized bargaining unit, then that benefit shall also be offered to all bargaining unit members through their certified exclusive representative.
(Source: P.A. 85-848.)
Comment by Liberty Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:13 pm
I’m trying to figure out how disliking an offer means impasse. Afscme moved. Is Rauner refusing to move at all? If Rauner thinks the move was so little, they should move the same on their end. How much have they moved from their starting position over the last year?
Comment by Anonymity Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:17 pm
Not only would no raises over 4 yrs. be akin to a cut in pay due to cost of living increases so would an increase in healthcare with no raises. I’m no expert when it comes to AFSCME bargaining strategy but it seems to me they’re pretty adamant about not lowering the take-home pay of members. I tend to agree as this is too slippery a slope. I think (hope) AFSCME would be ok with net pay/benefits remaining static.
Comment by Cubs in '16 Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:17 pm
-Liberty-,
Kanerva decision says Rauner better be real careful if he goes after retirees. The IL SC expressed lots of concerns about that possibility.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:26 pm
the “stipend” was rauners offer…. not sure why they are making it look like some odd union request. They pretty much aped the caterpillar process of offering a signing bonus. BUT cat never made a proposal this harsh to the employees, and cat baragins pretty tough.
Ford offered a wage freeze, BUT with a bonus tied to perfromance. the perfromance bonus goes to every employee, not just a percentage based on a limited pool like the govs.
Rauner may want to consider offering the salary freeze, with a system where everyone who performs can earn a bonus based in their performace/eval rating…. 4 gets you x percent, 5 gets you Y etc. the bonus would not be a covered pension amount by the state, BUT the empmoyees could elect to include it in pension calculation at their choice, if they pay 15% of the gross amount of the bonus into the pension system.
on a side note, ill labor stuff is purley a statutory creation, govt is otherwise can not be unionized. which is a fancy way of saying the gov could craft a fair agreement, and ask the GA to implement it by statute. a variant on the no strike law. ie union employees can not strike for next 4 years, and they get the following pay and benefits.
Madigan imho would be willing to pass a pay and benefits package with some ince in health care costs, and i think with my pay proposal or a variant… he is not afraid to do what afscme doesnt want, so long as it seems fair. the gov just need to drop the whole anti nuclear option and the speaker would probably support him o. some tough love… my 2cents
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:32 pm
The raises cited wouldn’t cover the big increases in healthcare premiums and deductables proposed. Wages and benefits need to be viewed in total to truly understand what would be reasonable for the employee. Settle on freezing healthcare premiums as was done for the 17 other unions and then negotiate on pay.
Comment by Johnnie F. Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:35 pm
So in other words, AFSCME made a counter proposal. Isn’t this where the Governor now makes a counter in response?
Comment by Menard guy Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:37 pm
The best paid state workers in the Midwest, in the most deficit running state in the country, do not need raises anytime soon while demanding tax increases on their neighbors. That’s a nonstarter that AFSCME needs to drop.
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:48 pm
I also call baloney on Rauner callin State Health Insurance plans ‘Platinum Plus’. If he’s lying about our healthcare plans, how can I believe anything he says about negotistions?
Comment by Triple fat Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:55 pm
AFSCME has every right to ask for pay increases if Rauner wants to ramp up the cost of living by having people pay more for insurance and everything else in this state. How much is payroll as a percentage of the budget again? People need to pay increases just to keep up with the cost of living, otherwise the entire contract will result in net losses for members. Who wants to agree to that?
Comment by Concerned Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:58 pm
I’m trying to understand why the “superstars” are entitled to their huge salaries, but the rest of state employees are supposed to take it on the chin because of the state’s fiscal crisis. What good for the goose should be good for the gander. Rauner brought this on himself by insisting we could pay superstars what they are being paid.
Comment by Thinking Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:01 pm
I can’t get a budget- Madigan’s fault
I can’t get Chicago to go RTW- Rahm’s fault
I can’t get labor peace - state worker’s fault
Credit downgrade- 100 years of democrats fault
Nothing- Bruce Rauner’s fault.
Comment by Trolling Troll Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:02 pm
@Liberty - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 12:13 pm:
Such legislation that you cited is like the legislation passed for the elimination of retirees health insurance. In other words it does not mean diddle. Unless the STATE SC reverses Kanerva vs, Weems you are barking up the wrong tree.
I repeat, how is it legal to have someone represent you if you have not given them permission to do so. That is the legal question and any law passed by the GA that states or directs otherwise is more than questionable and will head to the courts again. And if that is done it will be a lot nastier out there.
Of course the most reasonable approach is to increase co-pays and deductibles for retirees by the amount of their AAI.
Is anybody in government out there smart enough, and honest enough to do that. I doubt it, but we will see,
Comment by Federalist Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:05 pm
@RNUG - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:55 am:
-Federalist-,
“It was mentioned but never resolved in the oral arguments in Kanerva. The recording is available online.”
Thanks much. Found it and listened to it. No real insight as far as I could determine. Hope not another court case!
Comment by Federalist Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:12 pm
67 negotiating sessions? They are either close after 67 sessions or they are wasting everyone’s time. Which is it?
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:14 pm
Robert 1st-
Where can IFind that information regarding state worker pay comparisons??? I tried the Google and came up empty.
Comment by Triple fat Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:18 pm
Triple fat- why, Cap Fax of course.
https://capitolfax.com/2015/02/02/rauner-increases-attack-on-state-workers/
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:24 pm
- @Anon - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:51 am:
==The labor market is also a thing. I the State’s wages do not stay competitive, good luck hiring and retaining the decent people.==
Yes it is a thing, does anybody believe that the total package offered by the state (wages, health care, pension, and job security) is under market?
People gumbling about insurance the proposed insurance package have not been in the real world for a while.
Most jobs are at-will. You are there until someone else can do the same work better, faster, and cheaper.
Comment by Any Mouse Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:26 pm
Question about health insurance. While no one has spoken in detail on the record, there has been all sorts of horror stories of employees paying some incredible percentage of the cost after the deductible (40% ?), and the response is the Obamacare “Cadillac Tax.”
The recent federal budget deal pushes it back from 2018 to 2020. If the collective bargaining agreement is in effect from July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2019, should not the 2 year delay in the “Cadillac Tax” make that “problem” go away?
Comment by Anyone Remember Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:26 pm
I think the governor is stalling until state of the state or the budget address.
His side is the one refusing to meet…
The rest is his usual spin…
Comment by There is power in a union... Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:27 pm
==Ghost: “Rauner may want to consider offering … a system where everyone who performs can earn a bonus based in their performace/eval rating…. ==
This was addressed in comments here last week. Various “pay for performance” and “cash for cost-cutting suggestions” schemes have been implemented in the past.
Unfortunately, EVERY SINGLE TIME, these turn into “pay for patronage” where evaluations are anything but objective, metrics are manipulated, and cost-cutting/efficiency suggestions only get rewarded if they’re made by the Favored Few.
Comment by Curmudgeon Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:29 pm
Illinois state employees do earn more than some states surrounding us. The election of Republican governors with the same agenda as Rauner have seen to that.
Comment by in all fairness Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:31 pm
Until Rauner drops his demand that state and state university employees be put into insurance plans, where the insurance only pays 60% of a medical bill - and on top of that, premiums for the employees are doubled - progress towards a contract will be hard to achieve.
Comment by Joe M Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:35 pm
Performance Bonuses are wrong because they are political.
I have a supervisor who hates me and I had my best year ever last year as far as performance but it was not recognized or appreciated with exceeded expectations. All I got was meets expectations but you can bet that he would have ripped me apart if he could have.
I am on vacation but the job is so demanding that I am doing paperwork on my vacation. We work hard.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:39 pm
Thank you Robert. I would Prefer a head to head match up because if Missouri is one of the states they would grossly skew the 5 state avgerage. Also it appears the Comptroller’s figures include overtime… Not really a fair comparison.
Comment by Triple fat Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:42 pm
Employees in the other sector receive raises because they accrue greater skills, improve their performance, demonstrate loyalty and teamwork, etc. But, not all receive across the board increases simply for attendance. In an ongoing down economy, with virtually no inflation, private sector wage increases have been few and far between. So, to ask for automatic 3% increases in given years seems like an artifact from another period in time. It is not realistic at this time.
Comment by Keyser Soze Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:50 pm
== Anonymouse: “… I am on vacation but the job is so demanding that I am doing paperwork on my vacation. We work hard.” ==
Oh, yeah. I recall one Saturday afternoon when I was in the office — along with a number of other employees in my immediate area — after being on the road Monday-Friday. I returned a call to a business owner in my territory who proceeded to kvetch for five minutes about “lazy, do-nothing state employees” … Sheesh!
Comment by Curmudgeon Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:00 pm
== the governor is stalling ==
It would appear he is waiting for:
a) AFSCME to cave
b) March 15 - primary election
c) Late June (maybe) - SCOTUS ruling on fair share
d) October - Cubs to win the World Series
e) November 8 - general election
f) MJM to surrender
g) getting to 60 & 30 by peeling off D’s
Okay, (d) might actually happen.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:05 pm
Robert the 1st — Are you really quoting Rauner’s slides (that show no citations to support or explain his figures) as a convincing data source for this discussion? Would you accept a different set of stats compiled by AFSCME by an unspecified method from an unnamed data set?
Weak.
Comment by X-prof Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:16 pm
It seems to me that the point of the $1,000 as a stipend rather than a salary increase is that it would not be included in the base salary from which the 2nd year 2.25% increase is calculated from. That isn’t consistent with ck’s statement that it can never be reduced. They may need a legal framework for defining it that way. But the intent seems clear to me.
It’s an interesting concession, particularly since caving on year 1 and conceding a smaller increase in year 2 means the year 3 & 4 increases are on smaller bases. A good actuary could show the governor how this works. The value of a increase rate concession in Y. 1 and 2 is significantly higher than a concession in year 3 & 4. If they ultimately gave up Year 1 and 2 increases, that would be more than meeting halfway. (Though how you reconcile that with 17 other unions that all gave 4-year freezes … not good for morale or for future goodwill with those unions.)
But I do see AFSCME as moving significantly with this offer.
Comment by some doofus Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:19 pm
X-prof
I was trying to use a Cap Fax reference. When IL janitors make more than many MBAs, I think it’s safe to say our state workforce is better compensated than most.
http://accountability.illinois.gov/Employees/Position/Employees.aspx?Year=2015&Title=21951&Agency=416
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:30 pm
Robert:
Your generalizing. Some are higher. Some are lower. You can’t just say our entire state workforce is better compensated than most because that is not true as a blanket statement.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:37 pm
*You’re. I can hear my English teacher . . .
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:38 pm
People on the teat to long are always resistant to change … even if it results in everyone losing everything… it is better to have some then nothing. There should be a pay freeze for a minimum 2 years but I would even accept 4. YES I am in AFSCME, Yes I am a FULL member, Yes I voted for and Support Gov Rauner.
Comment by Allen D Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:40 pm
Yes I was generalizing. If you like, provide me a position/title in IL state government that you believe pays below the “norm.”
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:52 pm
RNUG-You’ve always provided valuable insight and analysis. Your option “d”, while the most realistic, ran shivers down my spine as a Cardinal fan.
Comment by ToughGuy Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:00 pm
Rob 1st - Then there’s this: http://databases.sj-r.com/salaries/state-of-il/title/?page=1&sortord=asc&sortcol=salary&title=JANITOR. It tells a very different story. Why the discrepancy? I don’t know; maybe one is base salary and the other includes a lot of overtime compensation. I again see BVR’s name at the top of web page you reference for Janitor salaries. Isn’t it reasonable to consider the possibility that Rauner’s team would post data (with scant explanation) that best supports their political agenda?
Comment by X-prof Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:15 pm
Your link isn’t working for me. Why shouldn’t overtime be considered? It certainly is for the lifetime pensions state employees receive. Anyway, overtime aside, I believe IL state janitors top off around $69k/year. Not bad for a job that doesn’t even require a GED. They’d make $20k in the private sector with no pension.
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:20 pm
Truly insane proposals from the union. Their state, the one they have helped to bankrupt, is hopelessly in debt and without a budget and they expect increases! Rauner is doing what any reasonable taxpayer would expect and will continue to get the support of all those who are tired of state government being run by the unions.
Comment by NeverPoliticallyCorrect Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:32 pm
What doesAAI stand for reg
arding towards Retirees healthcare co-pays?
Comment by Democrat Man Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:39 pm
@Robert the first - You make some good points about State employee salaries. One thing to consider, however, is the Cost of Living in Chicago. The State is also not replacing most retirees, and if they do, CMS takes a year to fill a position. I started working for the State in 2005 and my Agency now has half the headcount that it did back then.
With all that said, I agree that a 4 year wage freeze should be agreed to by AFSCME. However, my situation is not the same as most of my coworkers, as I’m single and don’t have kids. Layoffs and privatization would have a major impact on my life if my job was contracted out. There needs to be language about bumping rights and layoff protection. Has Rauner budged from that position? If not, the other issues don’t matter to me.
The real savings is with the the defined benefit costs, if changes can be made there. If you eliminated the salaries of every state employee, you’d still have a massive deficit. 25% of the budget goes to retirees.
Comment by deadguy Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:43 pm
- ToughGuy -
Despite being logical most of the time, I’ve also been a life-long Cubs fan. What can I say?
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:45 pm
==If you like, provide me a position/title in IL state government that you believe pays below the “norm.”==
It’s hard to provide titles because they would be general titles like SPSA. But, if you want to look in the professional ranks (lawyers, finance, engineers) you’ll find they are paid less than what many of them could make in the private sector. That’s their choice, of course. My point is that you can’t simply say state workers make more than the norm. That generalization simply is not true.
You are attempting to take janitorial pay and extrapolate out the conclusion that workers are generally paid more than their private sector counterparts. As I said. Some are. Some aren’t.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:48 pm
- Democrat Man -
AAI = Automatic Annual Increase
It’s kind of a COLA but, instead of being tied directly to current inflation, it is fixed at the 3% level every year.
Why 3%? Instead of having a CPI based COLA, the State wanted a fixed amount that could be projected and budgeted. 3% was the amount settled on. The state people that made the determination actually knew what they were doing. If you review the CPI from the early 1900’s to today, either overall or almost every 10 year period, the average CPI has ranged from 2.9% to 3.2%, so 3% is not out of line. The current, artificially induced, period of 0% or near 0% inflation is an anomaly.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:52 pm
==will continue to get the support of all those who are tired of state government being run by the unions==
Some of us are tired of people wanting to destroy the finances of others just so they can make themselves feel better that they have “stuck it to” those evil unions.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:53 pm
what SS increase??? Robert the first has it right and as for janitors making 67k this place is a joke.
Comment by scott aster Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:59 pm
=Some are. Some aren’t.=
I provided one example of “some are.” I could list dozens more, particularly in IDOT and IDOC.
Could you provide and example of “some aren’t.” I looked up some attorney positions and they certainly appear at or above market (not even factoring in benefits). What’s SPSA stand for?
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:00 pm
Robert:
SPSA is Senior Public Service Administrator.
You’ve got a narrative and you’ve found examples that support your narrative. You’ve decided what “norm” is for salaries (whatever “norm” is) and have concluded that state employees are paid above that “norm.”
Believe it or not. I don’t particularly care. All I can tell you is that your generalization is wrong. But then again those of you with that already believe that state employees are paid above the “norm” aren’t likely to be convinced of anything else.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:10 pm
Dead guy: Bruce still wants unfettered privatization and to eliminate many bump steps.
And to all those bashing state janitors, check ITAP. There are exactly 23. Not exactly the budget buster you make it out to be…
Comment by There is power in a union... Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:11 pm
…those of you with that *assumption* already believe
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:11 pm
How many of those complaining that state employees are paid above the norm have filled out a job application? Yeah, that’s right. When push comes to shove, you know that your total wage/benefit/working conditions package is better in the private sector.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:15 pm
My opinion is based on the facts I know.
It appears SPSA is a 6-figure position that requires the equivalent of a 4 year degree.
http://accountability.illinois.gov/Employees/Position/Employees.aspx?Year=2015&Title=40070&Agency=444
Is this your example of “some aren’t” ?
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:17 pm
SPSA covers a wide range of jobs and are not six figure salaries necessarily. Take a look at the info from the link you posted.
You’re failing to see the point. I’m telling you that pay is not universal throughout state government, not even for specific jobs. Thus, the some are, some aren’t answer.
I don’t care if you believe me or not. I know better.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:21 pm
Robert: SPSAs are typically policy makers and supervisors of large units. (And btw, few if any are Union, so you can strike that part out your argument.) You might compare that to an ass’t VP in a corporation. Are any of them making
Comment by Skeptic Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:23 pm
Apparently, if you accept a job in the public sector, you are called a public servant. And being happy to serve everyone is, indeed, your function. You shouldn’t think about providing for yourself, your family or their futures. You should be happy to take niblets that the taxpayers choose to toss your way. And be happy to serve.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:24 pm
You may know better. I just asked for an example. I posted mine, janitors. I could have used “painter” or “toll collector.” Or a dozen others.
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:27 pm
-Robert the 1st- & -Demoralized-,
It’s a bit dated but during the period I worked for the State (Ogilvie through Ryan) and was part of upper / middle management, I observed that, generally speaking, the lesser skilled jobs were somewhat overpaid and the higher skilled jobs were somewhat to significantly underpaid. Since then, it appears the union positions have become somewhat more overpaid while the management positions (except for the politically connected) became even more underpaid.
Examples can be found to support both positions; the salary structure is what it is. I will also note that in competitive markets, like metro Chicago, all the salaries were quite a bit lower than the private sector when duties and experience were equal.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:31 pm
And you used yours (janitors) to then assume that everyone is paid above the norm, which isn’t true.
I cannot give you a title because, as I said, much of what I’m thinking about are SPSAs and you cannot look those up by working title. For example, I know CFO’s of agencies that make less than 6 figures. Any of those people could go to the private sector and make far more than they make now. They are paid below the “norm.”
Why are we even having a conversation about the “norm” anyway. Is there some rule that no one is allowed to make either above or below the “norm?” Are we back to these nonsense arguments?
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:33 pm
“I just asked for an example.” That’s called “Cherry picking.” Hardly convincing. And when you find a job (such as janitor) that matches your criteria (ignoring ones that don’t), that’s called “Confirmation bias.” When you show confirmation bias by cherry picking your data, your argument because worthless.
Comment by Skeptic Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:33 pm
=Why are we even having a conversation about the “norm” anyway.=
It started with me stating that I don’t believe AFSCME should be asking for raises right now.
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:38 pm
Robert:
I argued the same thing. Just not for the reasons you are using.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:38 pm
Skeptic-
I invited anyone to “cherry pick” any position in state government that is underpaid, no one has.
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:39 pm
I think my reasons are valid too, though. I also think you’re honest and objective. I honestly don’t mean to personally insult anyone. I too have family members that are employed by the state.
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:41 pm
-Demoralized- does have a point about being hard to compare the SPSA titles to the private sector. Prior to the creation of the generic SPSA title, there were something like 50 or 60 different payroll titles that actually described the management / technical / professional job being done. Today, you have to try to figure out the sub-speciality classification that is attached to the SPSA title because that isn’t in the publicly released payroll data (or at least not included in the searchable records I’ve used). Note: the same also applies to the middle management PSA title.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:47 pm
Robert the 1rst, I’m happy for a janitor that makes a great salary. That person is going to be a very stable element in their family and community. Every dollar that janitor makes will get plowed right back into the local economy. You will never find me complaining about another persons salary up to about a 150k per single or about 250 per family. Again that money gets moved very quickly back into Illinois. Above that amount I’ve got a problem. It doesn’t go back local. It usually leaves or doesn’t benefit Illinois. So maybe quit trying to indicate that someone is bad or wrong or unworthy of getting paid. Wages are the best local economic stimulus.
Comment by Honeybear Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:55 pm
RNUG-
I think your point on lower-skill vs more-skill and pay is fair on a sliding scale, in general.
I understand it’s not always easy to compare government jobs to private jobs and certain titles can cover a variety of actual work.
I guess my point is you can easily identify some positions that any honest person would say are paid very well (if not ridiculously overpaid) and are in no need for a raise now or anytime soon.
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 4:57 pm
CPA’s are underpaid and with no Step increases it makes it unfair and even worse.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 5:11 pm
Also, it would be a disaster to hard working high producing employees who are not politically connected if jobs went to merit pay.
I agree with the prior post on evaluations. They are biased. I too received all meets expectations but work very hard and should have received a better evaluation. It was the worst evaluation that I could have been given to be meets expectations because I do a great job and also have a supervisor that does not like me and would have given worse if he could have gotten away with it.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 5:17 pm
Do you think entry level DCFS Caseworkers or DoC prison guards are overpaid? C’mon, man.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 5:18 pm
Honeybear-
I’m happy for them too. But we’re talking about government policy and public dollars here.
Many on this site constantly tell us we need to raise taxes. Will you be the one to explain to a private janitor making $25k and saving for retirement that his take-home pay is going to be reduce to give another raise to janitors making $70k with the promise of a public pension?
PS- sorry about losing the Rams if you were a fan.
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 5:57 pm
=CPA’s are underpaid=
There we go! Something I can agree with. I forgot, my cousin-in-law worked as a state CPA and yes, he would have made considerably more in the private sector.
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 5:59 pm
With all the back-and-forth about this example or that one, I am reminded of what a wise person once said…’It is a mistake to let the tyrrany of the anecdote drive policy.’
Comment by Independent retiree/lawyer/journalist Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 6:03 pm
When you literally have thousands of examples I’m not sure you could call it an anecdote. Also, since we’re comparing to millions of other people, that said examples directly affects, I do believe we could use it to drive policy.
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 6:23 pm
> Allen D - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:40 pm:
People on the teat to long are always resistant to change … even if it results in everyone losing everything… it is better to have some then nothing. There should be a pay freeze for a minimum 2 years but I would even accept 4. YES I am in AFSCME, Yes I am a FULL member, Yes I voted for and Support Gov Rauner.
Comment by Mando Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 6:25 pm
First time making a comment, not sure what happen to the rest of my post. ^_^
I also work for AFSCME and it surprised me that another state employee would even considered this. So I did some looking into. It so happen that there are only 3 Allen D that work for the state. I am going to assume you are one of them. I will disregard one of the three because it looks like he just started. As for the other two, one of them works for HFS as a Human Service Caseworker salary is as follows
Agency: HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES
Position: HUMAN SERVICES CASEWORKER
YTD Gross: 2015 $73,441.50
2014 $77,186.40
The Caseworker pay scale at step 8 (the max step) is $5913 a month x 12 = $70,956. + Longevity (assuming) = more.
The other works an ES Tax Auditor for IDES
Agency: DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY
Positon: E S TAX AUDITOR II
YTD: 2015 $80,672.51
2014 $84,189.50
Their step 8 pay is max at $6990 x 12 = $83,880, again at Max step.
It’s easy to say when one already completed their steps to say to freeze steps. Not fair to the rest who are not max.
YOU SIR ARE SELFISH!
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 6:34 pm
Honeybear-
I reread you comment and I find the second half absolutely fascinating. Does you disdain for earners above $150k include people who took risks and started them own business, possibly employing others? (I’d wager our very own Rich M would fall in your “no-no” zone)
Is your $150k for individual $250k per couple indexed for inflation? How did you come up with these numbers?
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 7:10 pm
Yikes. Typos gone wild. “your” & “their” An edit button would be great…. Just saying.
Comment by Robert the 1st Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 7:15 pm
-Triple Fat-,
You can also use the Open The Books web site. Lots of local, state and federal spending information there, including salaries and pensions. They will get after you to donate …
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 7:56 pm
Trolling troll@1:02.
Contact Willie about turning that into a t.shirt!
Perfect
Comment by Property of IDOC Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 8:50 pm
Since AFSCME just made a counter offer I guess that deflates the argument that they are at an impasse. Obviously they didn’t make a huge concession but it would not be a sound negotiating tactic to offer a lot without a counter offer from the Administration.
I think it’s pretty clear that at least right now the Administration isn’t interested in meeting AFSCME in the middle.
I had to laugh when CK used the term Platinum plus to describe the health insurance benefit. What the Administration is proposing would give Illinois state workers the worst health insurance plan in the country.
Comment by The Dude Abides Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 9:04 pm
Can you trust anything Rauner says? Before you double down on the reportedly settled Teamster’s contracts, wouldn’t it be prudent to research exactly what was agreed to, and then why?
You might want to figure in a recent son of a Teamster big wig got a huge contract, and the father got an appointment to the LRB.
Comment by BVR Thursday, Jan 14, 16 @ 5:25 am
Robert 1st: Here’s the corrected link for Janitors in the Department of SoS (as opposed to your data for CMS janitors) http://databases.sj-r.com/salaries/state-of-il/title/?page=1&sortord=asc&sortcol=salary&title=JANITOR
The SoS Janitor compensation doesn’t vary very much; they top out in the low $50k range. I suspect that the big variation in CMS salaries are due to overtime pay, and yes of course that makes a difference. If someone works 50 hours instead of 40, their compensation goes up, but not their base pay scale.
Comment by X-prof Thursday, Jan 14, 16 @ 8:36 am
=50 hours instead of 40=
Don’t you mean if they work 40 hours instead of 37.5? Yet another ridiculous demand from AFSCME that can’t continue.
Comment by Robert the 1st Thursday, Jan 14, 16 @ 12:06 pm