Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Durkin, Radogno react to Madigan budget announcement
Next Post: Keeping Illinois Nuclear Plants Open: Think About What’s At Stake
Posted in:
* From AFSCME Council 31…
Stand together for a fair contract!
The Rauner Administration is pushing for sweeping changes to the AFSCME Master Contract. With dozens of proposed changes to contract language, pay and benefits on the table, they are aiming to drastically diminish the rights of employees, weaken the role of the union, and drive down the standard of living of our families.
Rauner has said that if we don’t agree to his terms, he’ll force a strike and shut down state government until we do. Those kind of threats don’t serve the bargaining process or the citizens of our state well. The services we provide are essential to Illinois citizens. And there’s no way that ‘replacement workers’ could perform the complex and challenging jobs that we do. That’s why our union is doing everything possible to reach a fair settlement at the bargaining table.
And that’s why it’s essential that we stand up and stand together now to say “NO WAY” to Rauner’s demands. We know that times are tough and we’re prepared to do our part, but we won’t go backwards or back down when it comes to our rights, our jobs, or our economic security.
On June 9-11, AFSCME local unions will hold rallies at worksites all across the state. Our message is clear: “State workers deserve a fair contract. Illinois citizens deserve quality services.” Contact your local union for the date, time and location of the rally nearest you.
And be sure to reach out to your local community. With the AFSCME “Friends and Family” cards or with yard signs or window signs, ask local businesses, elected officials, other labor unions, to stand with state workers. Remind them of the vital services that we provide and on which citizens depend.
Your AFSCME Bargaining Committee is back at the table with the Administration this week—and again next week. The Committee is working intensively to reach an agreement, but Management is showing little signs of moving off its hard-line demands.
The current union contract will expire on June 30. If no agreement is reached by then, normally the parties would agree to a contract extension that keeps the terms of the current contract in place. But there’s no way to know at this point whether the Rauner Administration will agree to such an extension.
Whatever may come, we can withstand the storm if we continue to build on the commitment and unity that are the hallmarks of our union.
In unity,
Roberta Lynch
Executive Director
* From that above-mentioned list…
KEY RAUNER ADMINISTRATION CONTRACT DEMANDS
• No wage increases.
• Freeze all step increases.
• Eliminate longevity pay (including for all those currently receiving it).
• Eliminate almost all semi‐automatic promotions.
• Eliminate maximum security pay.
• Reduce call‐back pay and stand‐by pay.
• Restructure the group health plan to drastically shift costs to employees—with employees paying 40% of the premium cost PLUS 40% of the cost of medical care, paid through much higher co‐pays, deductibles, and co‐insurance. Employees’ costs would increase by thousands of dollars.
• Increase dental premiums by more than 100%.
• Increase retiree health insurance costs.
• Increase “out‐of‐pocket” maximums, likely to the highest allowable under federal law.
• Require all employees hired before July 1, 2011 to “voluntarily” agree to reduce their pension benefits to the Tier 2 level.
• Eliminate the Upward Mobility Program in its entirety, as well as all other forms of tuition reimbursement, continuing education, and licensure reimbursement.
• Calculate overtime pay based on over 40 hours worked in a full week (and excludes benefit time).
• Reduce amount of holidays and vacation time.
• “Management Rights” clause would not be limited by the terms of the Union contract.
• Allow Management to suspend the contract if it determines an “emergency” exists.
• Redefine grievances to refer only to violations of the “express provisions” of the contract.
• Refuse to allow union dues, PEOPLE contributions, or Fair Share fees to be deducted from employees’ paychecks.
• Delete all language that restricts subcontracting or personal service contracts—allowing Management to privatize any state services‐‐replacing bargaining unit employees with vendor employees‐‐at any time without any notice, justification or review.
• Void the Memorandum of Understanding that places limits on mandatory overtime, allowing Management to mandate overtime without any restrictions.
• Eliminate most seniority rights during the layoff process including eliminating all bumping rights.
• Require employees to use their own time for grievance meetings.
• Require Union stewards to use their own time to represent employees.
• Completely eliminate requirement to bargain about changes in working conditions.
I had heard rumblings about that push to force union members to “voluntarily” give up their Tier 1 pension benefits, but found it hard to believe.
…Adding… This was sent to me by a reader…
I was told by a union rep that the governor is attempting to tie the Tier 2 option with the new contract. If you vote for yes for the new contract, the state employee is voting yes for the Tier 2 option. If the employee wants to vote against the Tier 2 option, they automatically vote against the contract.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:34 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Durkin, Radogno react to Madigan budget announcement
Next Post: Keeping Illinois Nuclear Plants Open: Think About What’s At Stake
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Do not strike, be locked out.
Be locked out, no rallies, no picketing… just stay home, let the phones ring off the hook, agencies flounder, and a daily podium “talk” by the union;
“We want to work, the people of Illinois are suffering, but the Governor wants us gone.”
Anything that gives Rauner his “demonstrations” is a loss for the Unions.
Know that.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:39 am
Don’t do what Rauner wants. Don’t let him use a strike as a weapon against you. If he wants to shut down Illinois, make him lock you out.
When that happens, the unions will have the P.R. battle on their side.
Comment by Aldyth Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:41 am
I’m probably more often anti-AFSCME than the average commenter here, but what a ridiculous list from Rauner.
Why would anyone agree to this? He so clearly wants a fight.
Comment by Robert the Bruce Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:42 am
Agree — if AFSCME strikes, they’re crazy.
The best defense for this craziness is simply to continue to negotiate and let Rauner pull the plug.
The business savvy guy will learn he’s nowhere near as savvy as he thought when the state’s wheels come off — all because he can’t get what he wants. A lockout sure would be good for business!
Comment by Frenchie Mendoza Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:44 am
This is obviously a starting position but this one is laugh out loud for those of us in private sector.
• Eliminate almost all semi‐automatic promotions.
Comment by Very Fed Up Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:44 am
OW, How could the union force a lock out?
Comment by Honeybear Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:44 am
I third the lock out strategy! I have ZERO in giving Ruaner the show he so desperately wants.
I am cool with some concessions in this contract, but this list is ridiculous. There’s almost literally nothing left. I’m not one to get caught up in the alarmist drama AFSCME leadership tends to create during contract negotiation time but truly, this is an an insult.
Comment by Politix Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:46 am
Bye-Bye AFSCME. You got greedy and now it’s karma time.
Comment by Bored Chairman Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:46 am
Ok just curious but how do you Force someone to “voluntarily” reduce their pension? Gov.?
Even so if employees have an individual contract with the state in regards to their pensions how can anyone AFSCME or other sign it away. Seems AFSCME’s response is sime we don’t have the authority to do it.
Comment by Mason born Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:47 am
I never thought I’d say this, but maybe it’s time to create a “Miss Me Yet?” poster of Pat Quinn…
Comment by Secret Square Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:52 am
That list is insulting, I work in the private sector and I’m not in a union but if I were to be given this list I’d tell them to get lost in a not so safe for work language. I feel sorry for the workers having to put up with this.
Comment by Publius Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:53 am
- Honeybear -, AFSCME just needs to continue to show up to contract negotiations, keep the communication going, and theost literal, do not vote to strike, and especially don’t vote on the strike, then choose to strike.
Just don’t do it.
Sonny will force the lockout. Sonny’s proposed concessions show a need for confrontation.
If the union won’t confront Sonny, Sonny, as always, goes to the mattresses.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:55 am
“…”most literal…”
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:55 am
I suspect if AFSCME strikes, Rauner will issue some sort of EO ordering workers back in 24 hours or firing them.
I bet this is Rauner’s plan to completely bust the union. Once back, Rauner will have his own contract for the workers to sign.
Comment by Frenchie Mendoza Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:56 am
-secretSquare-
No, just no, not now not ever.
Comment by Zanzibar Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:56 am
@Mason Born,
I had the same question as to how you can voluntarily get everyone to move to Tier 2. The right is the employee’s, it isn’t the unions to bargain away.
Comment by Guzzlepot Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:57 am
“Bye-Bye AFSCME. You got greedy and now it’s karma time.”
Do you know what contract negotiations are? AFSCME didn’t take anything out of greed. They negotiated fair and square with agreement on both sides. Quit trolling.
Comment by Politix Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:57 am
Didn’t AFSCME recently claim bargaining should be at the table and not in the press? This is the State’s starting point - what is the AFSCME demand.
Comment by anon e mouse Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:59 am
Definitely, do not strike. Let Rauner own up to the totally rediculous changes that he wants, and let’s see how the state runs while he locks out the state workers. That should create the furor necessary to make him back off on the demands he has presented. The governor will be a laughing stock all over the country, and his leadership will be questioned all across the country.
Comment by Big Joe Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:00 am
No, a strike is a bad idea. Instead the union should request a work slow down to get its point across. If he does a lock out, then employees are entitled to unemployment and any new hires are temporary.
Comment by A Jack Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:02 am
Opening salvo is always ridiculous on both sides.
Comment by Peoria Guy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:02 am
Bruce Rauner’s “bargaining” will cost to state millions in the long run.
Comment by Precinct Captain Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:03 am
PG, wasn’t this covered with you last week? The negotiations have been going on for months.
Comment by Precinct Captain Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:04 am
Rauner to union: here’s a gun, now shoot yourself. By the way, you’ll pay your own medical.
Rauner is who we thought he was.
Comment by Norseman Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:05 am
AFSCME now realizes that it’s the governor’s intention to destroy their union. He is not going to bargain in good faith. This is all out war and he wants annihilation.
This is no starting position, it’s a finishing one..
Comment by Mouthy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:05 am
It is my understanding that as of right now the state is not willing to negotiate individual ideas. They are submitting proposals as package proposals and telling the union to take it or leave it. No negotiation on any aspect of the plan. It’s the whole plan or nothing. As long as that is the tactic these negotiations aren’t going to go anywhere and we are in for a very long ride.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:05 am
===Opening salvo===
Dude, that’s not an opening salvo. Negotiations have been going on for months.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:05 am
A forced lock-out or a strike will affect retirees too. I assume there would be No One to process the retirement checks or transfer the monthly funds to the banks.
Comment by Mama Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:07 am
Rauner is already starting to shut down the state, he hasn’t signed the contract for glass beads which leaves 18 road stripping crews idle.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:07 am
So, part of these negotiations will include a war for public support. That’s certainly different from negotiations under the Democrats, who discreetly gave public employees hefty raises and other good stuff during their one-party reign, starting with Blago. The best contract in the country, I believe some union spokesperson said.
Of course the time are different. The recession is supposedly over, meaning it’s harder for middle class workers to believe things will get better for them. Indeed, they could get worse.
Every day I see a new article about income inequity and middle class economic stagnation.
So will the general public support AFSCME or will citizens look at state workers and wonder why they are complaining. Who knows. Some restraint seems indicated, though. Rauner should tame down the union-bashing, even if provoked, and be a reasonable guy in difficult financial times, working on behalf of overburdened taxpayers.
And a labor strike would be very risky-for labor, not just for the guv.
Comment by Cassandra Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:07 am
Rauner promised to run the state like a business.
Comment by Hedley Lamarr Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:07 am
While there are quite a few ridiculous requests in this list, there are some items the union could give a bit on, no raises being the main one. After all, did anyone really expect to get a raise under this guy?
The real problem is the various Trojan Horses hidden in plain sight in the list. Here are what I view as the 3 biggest ones:
1 - Allow Management to suspend the contract if it determines an “emergency” exists.
What good is a contract if you can declare it null and void at any time? Coming from Rauner’s world where a contract is just something to ignore or negate, this should not be a surprise.
2 - Refuse to allow union dues, PEOPLE contributions, or Fair Share fees to be deducted from employees’ paychecks.
Again, no surprise since it is part of Rauner’s
starve the unions’ plan.
3 - Eliminate most seniority rights during the layoff process including eliminating all bumping
rights.
This would be legal permission to fire all the ‘Tier 1′ employees who refused to ‘voluntarily’ switch to ‘Tier 2′.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:07 am
This might as well be titled “How to get rid of qualified employees and make sure you can’t hire new ones.”
Comment by Anon Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:08 am
I think that AFSCME is right to put this out publicly — how many working people, public or private sector, would want to be confronted with this slap in the face and stab in the back by their employer when they walked into work?
Comment by kimocat Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:08 am
Dude, negotiations do not get serious until near the contract end. Lots of bluster until then from both sides.
Comment by Peoria Guy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:09 am
AFSCME prompting a strike is playing right into Rauner’s hands. Still lost at sea without a paddle.
Comment by Almost the Weekend Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:10 am
Take in all of yesterday’s and today’s posts in combination and consider what the summer may hold: madigan budget, no turnaround agenda, nasty attack ads, OVERTIME, digging in, missed paydayS, AFSCME contract terminated, lockout, replacement hires. i dont see rauner blinking until the state is in shambles. Maybe not even then, unless the general public wakes up and screams “enough”.
Comment by Langhorne Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:11 am
This might be a good time for Rauner to propose prohibiting strikes by public workers in Illinois, including teachers and school workers.
Put the onus on Madigan and Cullerton to choose to protect the wants of the unions over the needs of the people.
It would make good optics. Ask the people, “Do we give raises and increased benefits to government workers, or do we return funding to the disabled and sick? Do we protect the children’s education and schools or do we bankrupt schools to give increased salaries and benefits to the teacher unions?”
That last point will become increasingly important as the CTU starts rattling their sabres about another unconscionable strike this year.
It would seem like public employee strike prohibitions would be BOTH good policy and politics at this point.
Comment by Arizona Bob Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:11 am
I agree with Rich that politically this could go badly for the Dems. But this list is an overreach and provides opportunity for unions.
Comment by Chicago Cynic Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:11 am
Politix makes an interesting comment, which I think is true-”They negotiated fair and square with agreement on both sides.”
There are surely some things that AFSCME can/should give on, that is what negotiating is about usually, but some of that list is simply laughable. That usually does not help negotiations.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:11 am
I hope that the governor’s personal neediness for national publicity doesn’t negatively impact his judgement when it comes to doing the job that he was elected to do.
Just kidding.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:12 am
Feel bad for the union employees, but I know a lot of them, active and retired, had Rauner signs in their yards at election time. The union leaders tried to warn them their choices for Governor were bad and worse. A lot of them voted for worse. To those that voted for “worse” I guess you reap what you sow. Maybe they will listen next time.
Comment by Tough Guy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:13 am
• Require all employees hired before July 1, 2011 to “voluntarily” agree to reduce their pension benefits to the Tier 2 level.
-As mentioned don’t see how this is legal
• Calculate overtime pay based on over 40 hours worked in a full week (and excludes benefit time).
-This seems like a no-brainer, does the state really pay OT when someone works less than 40 hours and uses PTO for the other time.
Comment by Name/Nickname/Anon Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:14 am
• Restructure the group health plan to drastically shift costs to employees—with employees paying 40% of the premium cost PLUS 40% of the cost of medical care, paid through much higher co‐pays, deductibles, and co‐insurance. Employees’ costs would increase by thousands of dollars.
• Increase dental premiums by more than 100%.
The lack of context makes it hard to ascertain the actual cost. What was it before? Is it still better than comparable private sector plans?
Comment by nixit71 Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:14 am
=This might be a good time for Rauner to propose prohibiting strikes by public workers in Illinois, including teachers and school workers.=
Keep on working hard for the 1% class, it seems to have a great benefit to absolutely no one outside of the 1%. It has not helped the economy anywhere.
=Do we protect the children’s education and schools or do we bankrupt schools to give increased salaries and benefits to the teacher unions?”=
Salaries and benefits are not “given”, they are earned. Payment for work.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:14 am
I view about half of these as obvious. While I’m not sure about the outright no pay increase eliminating the step, longevity & semi-automatic provisions seems fair. Also, where else would over time start under 40 hours a week but the State of Illinois?
State employees pay and benefits are really good right now, it’s hard to see how they don’t get a benefit reduction.
Comment by Ahoy! Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:15 am
- Freeze all step increases.
- Eliminate almost all semi‐automatic promotions.
So removing automatic raises and promotions with no reference to performance is a bad thing?
Comment by nixit71 Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:15 am
The way AFSCME dissed Pat Quinn and Madigan the past few years, it’s hard to believe they have the sympathy of Democrats.
Maybe they should seek counsel from the GOP members who represent their members in places like Lincoln, Pontiac and Vandalia.
You. Are. On. Your. Own.
Comment by Snopes Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:15 am
I am not an expert on labor law, so please don’t be too harsh on me, but I am just wondering how all this will play out. Obviously AFSCME will not agree to anything near these demands, and given his goal to bust the union Rauner will not likely agree to substantial modifications. So what happens when the current contract expires? Can the State unilaterally impose its terms (no matter how insane) on the workers, forever? If so, then the union will have no choice but to strike, and Rauner can use this as an excuse to fire them and replace them with new people, like Reagan did with the air traffic controllers in 1981. On the other hand, if the old contract’s terms remain in force, then this would favor the union, and Rauner will likely accomplish nothing. Or, when there is a continuing impasse, does it eventually go to a neutral arbitrator?
Comment by Andy S. Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:16 am
@
- Name/Nickname/Anon - Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:14 am:
=• Calculate overtime pay based on over 40 hours worked in a full week (and excludes benefit time).
-This seems like a no-brainer, does the state really pay OT when someone works less than 40 hours and uses PTO for the other time. =
Yes, if you use vacation, sick, personal etc. then those hours are counted towards overtime. If you work 8 hours Monday through Thursday and take vacation on Friday and then are called in to work 8 hours on Saturday it is 8 hours of overtime. Otherwise, the vacation day that has already been earned would be greatly diminished. You would be penalized for using accredited time off.
Comment by facts are stubborn things Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:17 am
“• Require all employees hired before July 1, 2011 to “voluntarily” agree to reduce their pension benefits to the Tier 2 level.”
Wait….what?! I am pretty sure there was this court case in the Supreme Court that kinda said he can’t do that…what a week ago?!
And what is up with punishing/blaming the state worker?
Comment by Shanks Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:18 am
I do not think it is feasible to “fire” all employees and replace them with replacement workers. This is not an easy thing to do from any angle. Eventually it would require a decertification vote from the union members
Comment by Peoria Guy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:20 am
I would like RNUG and others to please comment on what looks like a distinction between employee health care cost increases and those proposed for retirees. Suspect that is both a divide and conquer strategy and also a recognition of the ISC Kanerva ruling?
Comment by facts are stubborn things Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:20 am
Rauner promised the retirees that “he would let retirees keep what they have” at the RSEA meeting before he was elected. Forcing a lock-out does not protect the retirees.
Comment by Mama Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:20 am
Umm Peoria Guy, usually yes, but this has not been a real negotiation. The Rauner team were dickering hard over the non-financial stuff and giving a bit till this list came out last week before they were even close to wrapping up the non-financials. Thus they were just playing for time before they lowered the boom. This is so outrageous it’s laughable. You might as well not have a contract. This takes away nearly everything from the union side. Unconditional surrender or else. It’s not bluster from both sides. The union has shown remarkable restraint!
Comment by Honeybear Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:20 am
This isn’t bluster. The boss has taken virtually every benefit the worker has and trashed it. The message is clear. We’re coming to get you. I’m sticking with my original thinking which is the Governor intends to have the contract expire, let the union know it will no longer honor the terms of the contract, and then implement he own wages and conditions of work. Then sit back and dare AFSCME to go on strike so he can fire them and outsource the work. For him it’s union Armageddon time…
Comment by Mouthy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:22 am
===Bored Chairman===
You should hold your breath until AFSCME is gone. The Gov is wasting time instead of fixing the budget.
Comment by Taxman Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:25 am
“requiring” someone to do something “voluntarily” is a profound corruption of the language.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:26 am
==Dude, negotiations do not get serious until near the contract end.==
It ends in a month. Negotiations should be “serious” by now.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:26 am
This is part and parcel of scapegoating state workers for the state’s financial problems. Even though the pay for the average state worker is modest, unlike for Rauner hires, and even though Illinois has fewer state workers than all but one other state.
Comment by nona Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:26 am
One easy thing AFSCME could agree to is a 40 hour work week as opposed to the 37.5 hour work week. It is also a travesty that members get automatic step increases and soon thereafter begin making more money than their non-union supervisors.
Kinda dumb stuff that most people scratch their heads at.
Comment by Snopes Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:27 am
In the trades over time often starts after 8 on any given day and after 40 in the week.
The idea is that they cant just run you into a 3 day or 4 day work week
Comment by Todd Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:29 am
Desperate times require desperate measures.
Comment by Peoria Guy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:30 am
I agree with the advice to AFSCME to wait for the coming lockout. Save the demonstrations and rallies until there is a lockout. Then do their best to get media coverage of the workers showing up every day and being turned away … perfect visual for the PR war of the State employees being reasonable and Rauner being unreasonable and keep showing up every day.
Which leads to an interesting observation / question. There aren’t that many non-union State employees left (probably between 5% and 10%), clearly not enough to keep the State running for very long, so showing up every day and ‘forcing’ those employees to take time out to turn away the employees will reduce the non-union employees’ effectiveness.
Which brings up another question: how is Rauner going to LEGALLY hire replacements? This isn’t a private business where you can just suspend all the procurement and personnel rules and immediately hire people off the street or issue a contract without bidding. Even ’sole source’ / ‘emergency’ contracts have limits on how they are handled in terms of amounts and duration. The union could be in court every day asking for injunctions against illegal actions by the State.
I’m more convinced than ever that Rauner will cost the State more in legal fees his first year than Blago did his entire tenure. And AFSMCE better hope national comes in with money to help fund all the legal fees the union will incur.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:30 am
Snopes, I agree that it’s a travesty that the administration doesn’t pay it’s supervisors well. It’s probably why so many wanted to join a union in the first place.
Comment by Name Withheld Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:31 am
My recall is that at the City and County, overtime starts as soon as 35 hours in a week.
My main point here is for Merit Comp employees: now you know what’s headed your way.
Comment by Original Rambler Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:31 am
Regardless of what Rauner has said in the past, the new reality that awaits Illinois voters are the ads Rauner will buy with his $34 million in political funds.
Remember today, for history will be rewritten beginning this summer.
Comment by Snopes Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:31 am
I’m not a Union member but that list is an absolute joke.
I do agree with OW - just accept the lockout quietly and let the backlash fall on the Governor’s shoulders. Take your free time to complete a few errands or perhaps a nice summer family vacation.
You’ll be back once Governor Rauner learns that citizens miss the services that government provides.
Comment by Stones Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:32 am
What happens when the prison guards are locked out? Do all of the prisoners get to go home?
Comment by Mama Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:32 am
== Rauner promised to run the state like a business. ==
How to answer that?
He’s running it like one of HIS businesses, breaking it with no way to repair it …
or
He’s going to find what is legal in business isn’t legal in government …
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:33 am
@JSMILL
=Salaries and benefits are not “given”, they are earned. Payment for work.=
Wrong. Salaries and benefits in collective bargaining in no way reflect the fair market value for work, or what is “earned” from that value provided. They are the result of labor power and politics. Of course, as a school admin you should know that.
=Keep on working hard for the 1% class, it seems to have a great benefit to absolutely no one outside of the 1%. It has not helped the economy anywhere=
So you’re saying that prohibiting public strikes somehow helps the “1%” more than the middle class homeowner who’s forced to pay far more than market value for construction work under prevailing wage, and grossly overpaid educational administrators and senior faculty in public schools? You are clearly detached from reality, JS. It’s the common middle (and lower) class taxpayer who’s the most damaged through this extortive system that keeps taxes too high and school fees excessive. Of course, if you weren’t part of the privileged “public ed” class, you’d know that.
Comment by Arizona Bob Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:34 am
Todd at 10:29 gets it. If Rauner got his way, he could work people back-to-back double shifts (16 hours on, 8 off, 16 hours on), without incurring OT. Couple that with the horrendous lack of staff in state agencies and the bullet-point above where Rauner would wipe out any curbs on management’s ability to assign forced overtime … shudder.
Comment by Reality Check Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:34 am
==Is it still better than comparable private sector plans?==
Depends on your base pay I’m guessing. With what I make as a state employee, I would qualify for subsidies in the private sector. My child would actually qualify for AllKids and I wouldn’t be paying an extra $113 a month for her. But since I work for the state, I can’t get any assistance. Those of us under the 300% of poverty line will get the brunt of it.
Comment by HangingOn Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:37 am
Even though it isn’t an opening salvo, first proposals need not be ridiculous. That is a bad way to start.
Having said that…do not strike…that’s what BVR wants.
Comment by Exit 59 Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:37 am
Bob:
In case you weren’t aware there are two sides to every negotiation. Laying the blame on only one side shows your bias.
And, Bob, just say “see my previous statements” when you comment. You are like a broken record. We all know you think the economic woes of the world are the result of overpaid teachers, prevailing wage, and the ability of public employees and teachers to strike.
And nice insult Bob. Feel better now?
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:38 am
– desperate times require desperate measures–
PG, you’re so right.
The governor is desperate for personal attention from the national media in the worst way, and it looks like he may seek to get it in the worst way.
The problem is, there are about 20 GOP officeholders and other prominent figures running for president.
There’s not enough oxygen in the room to feed Rauner’s neediness under those conditions.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:38 am
Seems like everyone is missing the big picture. The robber-barons plan is to destroy the middle class. Obviously you can’t do that in one step. They have pretty much succeeded in the private sector, now on to the government sector. Everyone gets hurt by this, not just the state employees. The plan is to drag everyone down. Only then will there be a revolt and charge the government to step in a create a more equitable system. Oh wait, that was the late 19th century. We wouldn’t let that happen to us again, would we?
Comment by RetiredStateEmployee Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:39 am
This made sense as a going in position by management, with some extreme and ridiculous demands set up for trade. To stand fast on all of it, after months of negotiation, is a frightening sign.
There is no negotiation. My way or the highway on all things.
Comment by walker Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:39 am
Did either side give the required notice to terminate the contract? Article XXXV of the AFSCME contract requires 60 day notice prior to the expiration of the contract to terminate the contract, otherwise the contract automatically extends for another year. As long as the contract is in effect AFSCME can’t strike and the State can’t lockout.
Comment by wapak Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:44 am
A good many of you don’t get it. I’ve negotiated union contracts with the state. The above list isn’t negotiating…
Comment by Mouthy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:47 am
==Salaries and benefits in collective bargaining in no way reflect the fair market value for work, or what is “earned” from that value provided. They are the result of labor power and politics. ==
Substitute “executive bargaining” for “collective bargaining” and “labor power” for “executive power” and that reflects executive compensation today. But I guess that’s more fair since a board of directors agrees to it.
Comment by Name Withheld Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:47 am
== I would like RNUG and others to please comment on what looks like a distinction between employee health care cost increases and those proposed for retirees. Suspect that is both a divide and conquer strategy and also a recognition of the ISC Kanerva ruling? ==
It’s possibly trying to divide that issue 3 ways: employee, retiree under 65, retiree over 65.
The attack on retirees over 65 has already started; they were all forced off of Medicare with a state plan as supplemental to a Medicare Advantage program with no other supplemental insurance. They are now paying co-pays and deductibles they were not paying before. If this is forced much further, there will probably be another Kanerva type case since the IL SC questioned this specific issue.
The under 65 retirees are now in the cross-hairs. The same comments as above apply if the co-pays and deductibles are pushed too far.
It was expected that the employee health benefits would be further attacked; that’s been happening in the private sector for quite some time so it’s not a surprise. Traditionally, the retirees have always received the ’same’ health insurance. That changed last year with the forced Medicare Advantage program carve-out. This year you may see the under 65 retirees carved out separate from the workers. I haven’t seen any of the proposals. so all I can do is read the CMS web site and guess.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:52 am
== My main point here is for Merit Comp employees: now you know what’s headed your way. ==
Headed their way? More like the unions are now getting some of the same treatment MC people, especially in the SPSA positions and PSA before they got in the union, have had to endure for a good part of the past decade or more.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:54 am
Keep in mind, too, that if the employees don’t or can’t report, there’s always the weird issue of passwords these days. I know it sounds crazy, but much of the state’s functioning is blanketed behind passwords — passwords to log in to servers, passwords to update data, passwords to override, etc.
Usually, most workers are told — in any business — not to share passwords. Even managers (in the union!) have passwords to servers and systems that they won’t share.
How will a strike or lockout force the strikers/locked out workers to give up necessary passwords to scabs or non-union workers?
I know this sounds crazy, but I suspect this might turn out to be a big deal — and I’m guessing it’s nothing Big Brain Bruce has given any thought to.
Comment by Frenchie Mendoza Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:58 am
Most don’t understand that the AFSCME contract isn’t Rauner’s problem. R can terminate the contract; however, the personnel code lies under it. That will be Rauner’s legal challenge, and is one that can be arbited in court rather than by the ILRB. Ask yourselves how can Rauner get where he wants to go within the margins of the personnel code.
Comment by Madison Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:59 am
@- RNUG - Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:52 am:
=This year you may see the under 65 retirees carved out separate from the workers. I haven’t seen any of the proposals. so all I can do is read the CMS web site and guess. =
Thanks for you information and input. yes, seems like instead of the under 65 retiree getting same plan as the employees (based on the Rauner demands list) looks like they are trying to separate out the under 65 retire. Suspect it is because they realize if they go too farm Kanerva will come into play as you point out.
I think if they can divide out the retiree it may strengthen Rauner with current employees. Could the dental be pushed so far that a legal case could be made there, or since it was not challenged when premiums started it is too late?
thanks again
Comment by facts are stubborn things Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:04 am
I saw my brother in law over the weekend, who is on the AFSCME negotiating team. He didn’t go into detail, just saying that the administration doesn’t seem serious about bargaining. I then told him the obvious, which was if the Union made concessions on even half of what the administration is asking, they are committing suicide. There is a feeling that Rauner believes that he can benefit politically if there is a shutdown.
Comment by The Dude Abides Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:08 am
== How will a strike or lockout force the strikers/locked out workers to give up necessary passwords to scabs or non-union workers?
I know this sounds crazy, but I suspect this might turn out to be a big deal — and I’m guessing it’s nothing Big Brain Bruce has given any thought to. ==
- Frenchie Mendoza -, it potentially is a very big deal. While there are ways to recover and reset passwords, that is just the tip of the iceberg. Who knows what other traps might exist? I know of one instance where a lot of the state’s computer operations came extremely close to melt-down because an employee had left some code in place that required them to log in every day or certain critical functions shut down after x period of time. Wasn’t pretty or easy to fix.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:11 am
== Ask yourselves how can Rauner get where he wants to go within the margins of the personnel code. ==
The only way is one person at a time …
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:12 am
This really comes across as Rauner hating on the lesser classes.
Comment by Stage Left Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:13 am
Gotta wonder if BVR and the out o state stooges can mastermind the attack the devils in the legislature AND the lock out…..how will they barnstorm if they are moppin’ floors?
Comment by Anonin' Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:14 am
Madison, could you say more? I’m not getting what you mean? Thanks
Comment by Honeybear Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:16 am
wapak, those notices are routine in contract negotiations. I would be shocked if both parties did not file the required notices.
Comment by Peoria Guy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:20 am
Shut down or lock out- it would be interesting to see if Rauner can hold out for more than a few days.
Rauner: I may have to take a strike and shut down the government for a few days. (Miller 2013 You Tube post)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuljgljmyxI
Comment by Liberty Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:20 am
I wonder what affect a lockout is going to have with the various consent decrees the state is bound to abide by. Granted a Strike lets BR blame AFSCME and do the whole it’s not my fault bit but if he locks out isn’t the onus on him?
AFSCME should go by a simple philosophy if the gov. wants it do the opposite.
Comment by Mason born Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:22 am
Help please - what are semi-automatic promotions and step increases? Also, which items on the above list will the union be willing to give up a little?
Comment by southwest Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:22 am
Visions of robber barons, Haymarket and Pullman are dancing in my head…
Comment by D.P.Gumby Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:28 am
Trainee positions are semi-automatic. You either get the position or you don’t after the specified training time. I believer there are others.
Comment by RetiredStateEmployee Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:30 am
=Wrong.= Just a foolish comment. These people work and get paid, therefore earned.
“Fair market value?”- Please, you have no clue as to what fair market value might be for some of these folks. I earned more in the private sector than I did for most of my years in the public sector. That is a fantasy statement.
=and grossly overpaid educational administrators and senior faculty in public schools? You are clearly detached from reality, JS. It’s the common middle (and lower) class taxpayer who’s the most damaged through this extortive system that keeps taxes too high and school fees excessive. Of course, if you weren’t part of the privileged “public ed” class, you’d know that.=
That desert sun really heats up the ole’ tinfoil hat Bob. Find some shade.
You are trying to antagonize with baseless comments, completely ignorant of facts. There is no privilege in my role. It is not a privileged class. There are some districts that pay their people well. Ours is decidedly lower than suburban districts. But your snide assertion, clearly meant to put people down earning better than you, that some how anyone in that category is not giving “fair market value” is absurdly trite. Your howling does no good and will change nothing. It is pointless and meaningless. That has to be frustrating, I can only imagine as I work hard to advance the interests of children, every day. I only respond from time to time because it is fun to do so, since it is so easy to dispel your ignorant rants.
Have a wonderful day and stay out of the sun!
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:30 am
Wait for the lockout and force Rauner into court. Between this and the budget, he can’t paralyze the entire state.
Comment by Wensicia Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:30 am
RetiredStateEmployee @ 10:39 am: == The robber-barons plan is to destroy the middle class. ==
Yes that seems to be the plan. They are also determined destroy teachers’ unions then privatize our public K-12 schools and make billions in profits.
Comment by Enviro Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:31 am
Southwest: “Semi-automatic promotions” With some titles, (typically entry-level) if you work for a period of time (6 months or a year) and your performance is acceptable, you’re automatically promoted to the next higher title without having to go through bidding or interviews.
Step increases: Each title has a pay range with steps (like 1 through 10) of increasing pay in that range. For each year you work in that title, you move up one step.
Comment by Skeptic Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:31 am
I have never gotten a semi-automatic promotion. I do get a step increase every year on my anniversary date.
Comment by Onlooker Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:32 am
semi auto promotions are specifically bargained inside the AFSCME contract. These titles give the employee a right receive a promotion to the next higher title in their series (for example Parole agent semi auto promotion to Sr. Parole Agent). The promotion title is reserved for the employee once they meet the agreed upon requirements. The title is not posted for outside bidding.
Step increases are built in raises for each year the employee is in service in their title (I am not sure but I believe they are 5% increases each year?). The steps are 1a, 1b, 1c, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Comment by SoILL Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:32 am
===Between this and the budget, he can’t paralyze the entire state.===
Yes, he can.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:33 am
The larger issue — apart from the individual workers — is whether this kind of posturing — or an actual strike or lockout — is good for business. Rauner claims he’s a winning business guy. He’s never lost. The State, on the other hand, is a juggernaut. It’s bigger than Rauner — although he’s loathe to admit it — and is considerably more complex than just “it works — or it doesn’t” (which seems to be Rauner’s binary thinking these days).
How can these continued threats possibly encourage the kind of growth Rauner wants? I mean, assuming Rauner succeeds in stopping the juggernaut in its tracks to “redo the contracts” as he so famously claimed. Then what? Businesses will lose money, workers will lose money, and it’ll cost millions to get back up to speed. How is this a sound business practice?
Yeah, he rewrites the contracts. Makes workers suffer a bit — okay — he can chisel a notch on his Harley belt for “punishing the middle class” so his biker boys and gals can nod and moan about how it was about time and how, yeah, you really did doggone it shake things up.
Meantimes, millions are lost — and wasted — that could have gone elsewhere — like the social service providers, for example. I don’t get it. You can’t slash-and-burn the juggernaut in order to get plaudits and national, conservative bona-fides without the juggernaut biting back — in a big, big way. This is sound governing? This is negotiation?
Comment by Frenchie Mendoza Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:33 am
The health costs are huge for employees. What is being proposed is the equivalent of a bronze plan offered under ACA. These plans cap out-of-pocket expenses in 2015 at $6,600 for individual plans and $13,200 for family plans. Often the plans do not pay anything until the person has reached this cost. So the dollar amount for out of pocket is basically the plans deductible. The cost does not include what the person pays for their premiums. So this could be a huge pay cut. Most employers offer better plans as they want to use this as a way to keep good employees. As comparison to private industry: one person I know has a $250.00 deductible which is really sweet, another a $2000 individual deductible and $4000 family. Medicare has deductibles of 1260 for Part A, $147 for Part B and $320 for Part D for a total of $1727. If you pay for Medigap those costs get covered except for the Part D deductible. Compare that to the state offered Medicare Advantage plan where you have those costs. Retiree health though premium free could become real costly if he gets his way. We will voluntarily opt out…and what about the retirees who don’t have Medicare and get the coverage offered to the employees? They will see their costs increase drastically
Comment by illinifan Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:36 am
SOILL: No where near 5%. For example, RC-06-09, Step 1 = $3195, Step 2 = $3259 = 2%. And the steps 1a, b, c have been eliminated.
Comment by Skeptic Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:40 am
well said Frenchie
Comment by Peoria Guy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:43 am
(and for those of you who are about to comment that 2% isn’t much different from 5%, just think about all the howling about our recent income tax rates before you say anything.)
Comment by Skeptic Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:44 am
Re health costs for current employees: Benefits Choice enrollment for FY16 is going on now and ends May 31. Whatever you sign up for, or keep, during this period, you are supposed to be locked into starting July 1 and for the entire year after that. I didn’t see any major changes in the benefits offerings for this year. If changes are made as a result of contract negotiations/strike/lockout/whatever, will they kick in immediately for everyone or do they take effect on July 1, 2016?
Comment by Secret Square Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:44 am
== Help please - what are semi-automatic promotions and step increases? ==
I may be a bit off because my information is dated, but this is how I remember it. For the various coded positions (this pre-dates the union), there were seven ’steps’ that covered the salary range for that position. For seven years after you were hired, you automatically got the equivalent of about a 5% raise based on the theory you had gained experience and were better at doing the job. This was in addition to / on top of any cost of living increase, which were rarely granted in those days. After the unions came in, it was in addition to any negotiated union raise. And later on there were some longevity increases for people ’stuck’ on step 7.
The step system, which I’m personally not that fond of and think could probably go away, is not the only way to raise your salary. If your skill level has increased, you can always test and bid for any open titles above yours. For example, and I’m not picking on any title just making up an example, there would be a Clerk 1, Clerk 2, etc.
== Also, which items on the above list will the union be willing to give up a little? ==
If I were on the union team (I’m not on either side), I might look at changing the 37.5 hour work week to 40 hours, maybe a holiday or two, eliminating or slowing down the step increases (but I think that requires changing the underlying Personnel Code), and maybe some stuff on the grievance process. That’s about all that is on the list that I could see as being reasonable changes.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:47 am
I know for those agencies who require employees to work a ton of overtime, changing to a 40 hour work week from 37.5 will make a budgetary difference but on the grand scheme of things, is this really something that is worth haggling over? It seems just like a “take away” when there are so many things to negotiate.
Comment by Small Town Girl Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:49 am
== I know for those agencies who require employees to work a ton of overtime, changing to a 40 hour work week from 37.5 will make a budgetary difference but on the grand scheme of things, is this really something that is worth haggling over? It seems just like a “take away” when there are so many things to negotiate. ==
I think the union should give on it because of the public relations image it has; people relate to 40 hour work weeks, not 37.5 hours plus the union would look reasonable in agreeing to it.
Make no mistake, this is going to be more of a public relations battle than anything else … and the reasonable side will get the public’s support during the coming shutdown.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:57 am
=== Yes, he can. ===
True, Rich. And we should keep in mind that there are some life-safety positions that would remain on the job.
But it seems to me that the worst thing that Rauner could do for himself is remind the public of everything that state government does, and a lockout, strike or budget impasse would accomplish that.
This is starting to read like Moby Dick.
Comment by Juvenal Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:58 am
===The larger issue — apart from the individual workers — is whether this kind of posturing — or an actual strike or lockout — is good for business.===
That is the question. I always cringe whenever I hear a politician say they’re going to run things like a business. Most of them actually realize the difference and only use that language as campaign rhetoric.
I’m beginning to wonder if Governor Rauner realizes that the State isn’t a profit center and it’s real purpose is serve the it’s citizens. We can argue how about much service and at what cost, but it looks more and more to me that he really believes you can run this state like a business.
And that’s pretty scary.
Comment by Sangamo Sam Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:02 pm
Thank you to everyone who answered my questions - especially RNUG because of the details. I’m a sole proprietor with no benefits and a big tax bill every quarter. I look at this list of cuts and think it is logical. I think everything should be cut by 10%. Every salary, benefit, program, and service. No matter how sad or hard it is - everyone should share the pain. Then increase taxes to 5% and start taxing services and retired. Increase the amount employees pay into their pension fund. Seriously - a 2-5% raise just for showing up to do your job year after year?
Comment by southwest Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:06 pm
==Secret Square==
I was told the current health contracts were extended for 3-6 months as is allowed. I suspect a 2nd benefit choice period will be coming then.
Seems like people should have been preparing for a strike or lockout the day after Rauner was elected. A little late to begin setting aside emergency funds
Comment by Anotherretiree Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:07 pm
@RNUG or anyone else who can shed some light,
Legally there is no way that AFSCME can negotiate for retiree health insurance. Yes, pattern bargaining has traditionally done that informally with no one challenging it. We are in a new era and things will not be surfaced over so easily from now on.
Which leads to the question who represents retirees? Can Rauner just unilaterally make co-pays and deductibles so high that in effect one does not have insurance? (Remember there are many out there who were hired before April 1, 1986 and are not under Medicare.)
How does Kanerva affect this?
Also, the laundry list put out by the union is not very specific as to how precisely this will affect those already retired. Anybody have more detailed information.
Comment by Federalist Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:09 pm
If the union agreed to the 40 hour week, that could be an issue for non union employees right? In some cases non union Supervisors would have to work 40 hours in order to supervise their union employees. I don’t mean to belabor this little point. Things that appear to be simple to change are not always that simple when they are delved into. I believe every constitutional office is on a 37.5 hour work week as well. I must say, as a long term (now) union employee, I wouldn’t have a huge issue with it if it improved relations.
Comment by Small Town Girl Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:11 pm
Remember the lawsuit over dental insurance?
Whatever happened to this and what is it ’s status since Kanerva?
Bet a lot of people have forgotten about this. I have not.
Comment by Federalist Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:11 pm
== on the grand scheme of things, is this really something that is worth haggling over? It seems just like a “take away” when there are so many things to negotiate.==
Everything that costs the taxpayers money to run this state is worth looking at and “haggling over”. Everything.
Comment by Responsa Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:11 pm
@JSMILL
= I can only imagine as I work hard to advance the interests of children, every day. I only respond from time to time because it is fun to do so, since it is so easy to dispel your ignorant rants. =
You might want to try facts and logic instead of insults and bullying, JS. It might actually make it seem like you you’re thoughtful and intelligent. So, if someone, not through merit but through union intimidation, is making $120K for doing a job no better than someone in the same district making a fair $60K, the higher salaried person has “earned” it? Only in the stilted world of public ed, JS. There’s apparently a concept of which you’re completely ignorant, or which you intentionally ignore;COMPENSATION ANALYSIS. This determines what the value of someone’s skills and outcomes are, and assesses value based upon that analysis. This practically never happens in public ed, except for admins who also have their compensation tied to the union scales, which is why they’re only too happy to see them escalate beyond value and reason.
For example, in my old Illinois HS district, teachers with 20 years experience and 30 hrs past a masters were paid $120K for about 174 work days a year. Did they “earn” that amount, especially the ones who couldn’t care less about the kids and were there for the paycheck? Of course not! But in your twisted world they do.
JS, you’re just one of the folks re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Seems like you could use some sun, JS. Too much gloom affects your brain and makes you delusional, as your post so clearly prove.
Comment by Arizona Bob Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:12 pm
@Arizona Bob
I agree, lets slash the salaries and benefits of Illinois teachers…
Basically that is exactly what you are saying…we all know the ‘admins’ you speak of especially that make it into the media/news, are abusing the system, and I am willing to bet that would only be 1% of all union teachers, and no one is disagreeing with you on that…it’s just the 99% of other teachers that make a modest living that will feel the brunt of the ‘cuts.’
Comment by olIllinois Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:27 pm
Note the sarcasm on my first sentence, just in case anyone didn’t pick up on it.
Comment by olIllinois Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:28 pm
Here’s what’s fair to me:
• No wage increases FOR ONE YEAR
• Freeze all step increases FOR ONE YEAR
• Eliminate almost all semi‐automatic promotions.
• Eliminate the Upward Mobility Program in its entirety, as well as all other forms of tuition reimbursement, continuing education, and licensure reimbursement.
• Calculate overtime pay based on over 40 hours worked in a full week (and excludes benefit time).
• Redefine grievances to refer only to violations of the “express provisions” of the contract.
• Require employees to use their own time for grievance meetings.
Comment by Politix Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:29 pm
I don’t LIKE any of these takeaways but I’d go with them in the interest of compromise.
Comment by Politix Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:30 pm
Won’t it be interesting to see what our new Comptroller does? She, for obvious reasons, is a Rauner cheerleader. Traditionally, in the case of a shutdown, the Comptroller would go to court and seek permission to pay employees. Will Rauner try and force her NOT to do so? Will Munger knuckle under?
It’s my understanding that the Treasurer’s and Comptroller’s offices are not AFSCME. It would be great if both sides could leave them out of it so the state’s financial functions could continue to operate.
Comment by Blago's Luxurious Grey Mane Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:31 pm
AB, pot meets kettle.
Comment by Jorge Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:47 pm
I don’t believe a lawsuit was filed over retiree dental premiums. If it changes again I don’t know if the Statute of Limitations it’s possible it was waived by not filing sooner. Maybe Kanerva would help with that issue.
Comment by Fed up and retired Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:48 pm
Federalist, the premium free health insurance was statutorily tied to SERS and SURS annuitants, which is why the ruling in Kanerva came down the way it did. The free dental wasn’t in statute anywhere, so it is very unlikely it’s coming back.
And to add to Politix’s list, please give up on Election day as a holiday. It was ridiculous to begin with, but with early voting and mail in voting it is just completely absurd now.
Comment by Juice Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:54 pm
@olIllinois - my apologies, I jumped too quickly. My post was pointed directly at the troll.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:54 pm
Fed up and retired, a lawsuit was filed. The State won.
Comment by Juice Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:55 pm
• No wage increases FOR ONE YEAR
I could live with that.
• Freeze all step increases FOR ONE YEAR
I could live with that.
• Eliminate almost all semi‐automatic promotions.
Super bad idea for management. Most in this catagory are trainees moving to full status. Without this you would immediately see a drop in trainees. The state would not be able to find frontline workers.
• Eliminate the Upward Mobility Program in its entirety, as well as all other forms of tuition reimbursement, continuing education, and licensure reimbursement.
Again management shooting themselves in the foot. This is a program to advance good workers into front line workers. Especially in rural areas you won’t find workers with requisite educational requirements.
• Calculate overtime pay based on over 40 hours worked in a full week (and excludes benefit time).
Fine
• Redefine grievances to refer only to violations of the “express provisions” of the contract.
No way no how. I can’t tell you the number of times something is not expressly in the contract and yet needs to be grieved/discussed, negotiated. This is a license to abuse.
• Require employees to use their own time for grievance meetings.
What person would want to be a Steward? Not me. I’d quit being a steward.
So for the big ones I agree, there again we are reasonable people and not Rauners negotiators.
Comment by Honeybear Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:58 pm
Politix.
Forgive me if I missed it but with proposals like yours and all the rest, and I specifically refer to cuts in salaries and future increases, would/should/could they also be applied to our General Assembly?
If I’m not mistaken, aren’t theirs set by commission or some similar mechanism? I mean, haven’t they become a protected class or has this changed?
Comment by LINK Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:03 pm
==Which brings up another question: how is Rauner going to LEGALLY hire replacements? This isn’t a private business where you can just suspend all the procurement and personnel rules and immediately hire people off the street or issue a contract without bidding. Even ’sole source’ / ‘emergency’ contracts have limits on how they are handled in terms of amounts and duration.==
This question presumes that the Superstars have been tasked with figuring out how to actually govern the state.
I am not convinced that has ever been put on the Superstar task list.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:06 pm
Juice. If you’re referring to Kanerva, it only applied to health insurance not dental insurance premiums. What case was filed for the dental premiums and if we won why I am still paying a portion of the premium every month? No snark intended - genuine curiosity.
Comment by Fed up and retired Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:07 pm
Honeybear - All good points. I am ignorant about things don’t directly impact me.
Comment by Politix Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:07 pm
Retirees don’t pay union dues like the private sector does with reduced dues?boost the rolls.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:08 pm
Pretty sure the superstar job description reads:
40% Unionbustin’
30% Jawin’ ’bout it
20% Whinin’ to donors
10% Other duties as assigned
Comment by crazybleedingheart Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:09 pm
==You might want to try facts and logic instead of insults and bullying==
Look in the mirror, Bob. You’re the poster child for insults and bullying.
==through union intimidation==
Does the union hold a gun to management’s head and force them to agree to anything? No, they don’t. Your argument is utter cow dung.
Bob, I’ve asked before and I’ll ask again. For a guy who used to be a teacher, why do you hate teachers so much? It’s beyond comprehension.
Try and offer something constructive instead of spewing hatred towards anything and anybody who disagrees with you.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:11 pm
• Eliminate most seniority rights during the layoff process including eliminating all bumping rights.
This would be a big one. Rauner would be able to cull the Tier 1 herd and their more costly compensation and benefits for new labor (Tier 2) or no replacement labor at all. Assuming normal legal discrimination considerations in any WFR, this would be Rauner’s legit way of “diminishing” Tier 1 benefits via employment status. In essence, the ISC ruling might have effectively priced some folks out of a job.
The most vulnerable employees will be mid-level Tier 1 employees hired before 2011 with maybe 5-10 years experience. They will probably be on the younger end of the age scale (30’s), making them more vulnerable in a WFR. Yet another instance where Gen X/Y pays another bill the boomers skipped out on.
Comment by nixit71 Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:17 pm
The strike vs. lockout optics have been clear for months, but the list of management demands is truly, er, striking. They might as well not have a contract at all.
Comment by David Starrett Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:24 pm
Mama certain positions like state cops and prison guards are not allowed to strike. However I would predict a blue flu would occur in solidarity with those who do strike or get locked out - I have seen plans for this in the past. As to the list of demands yes go to 40 hour weeks (the private sector has always had heartburn over the 2.5 hour difference), give up a couple holidays, give up raises for a year, etc and remember these are all things that can be negotiated in future contracts. Good optics for the union, shows negotiating in good faith. I can’t imagine the majority of the public, even the state worker haters, feel this administration “offer” is a fair one. Soooo happy I retired before the last election, saw this coming a mile away!
Comment by Former Merit Comp Slave Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:24 pm
And to add to Politix’s list, please give up on Election day as a holiday. It was ridiculous to begin with, but with early voting and mail in voting it is just completely absurd now.
Can we get Christmas/new years eve/good Friday like the private sector gets?
Comment by foster brooks Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:35 pm
“I would predict a blue flu would occur in solidarity with those who do strike or get locked out”
And what if, God forbid, some disaster or riot erupts during this “flu” outbreak? Whom would the public and the media blame — the cops/guards/etc. for walking off the job, or Rauner for provoking them to do it?
Comment by Secret Square Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:36 pm
@Demoralized- “For a guy who used to be a teacher”, if memory serves me correctly it was mainly as a substitute teacher or in a series of one year positions, moving from job to job.
Reading between the lines- sounds like he couldn’t keep a job which would explain his anger.
I also recall him saying something about engineering, but memories fade.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:38 pm
I sure hope AFSCME does not vote to strike. Lockout should be the path taken if necessary. That puts Rauner as the separating party and the employees at more of an advantage. If this does go to a shutdown situation, certainly all the people of Illinois know that it will not be just the State of Illinois employees affected. I also have to wonder about federal money that comes into the state agencies. If programs are not worked or timelines not met according to federal guidelines, Illinois looses.
Comment by Clodhopper Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:43 pm
Does this explain the Donald Stolworthy departure from IDOC? Maybe he was the only candidate in America who didn’t know this was coming until it was?
Good luck finding some other schmuck to take THAT job…NOW.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:46 pm
Lots of people opining here on what they think the union should give up. In return for what? In the spirit of collective bargaining, please be fair enough to suggest some equivalent concession which should be made by Rauner.
Comment by anon Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:47 pm
folks, election day wasn’t a vacation day so people could vote, for crying out loud
Comment by steve schnorf Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:51 pm
You don’t always need a return in a compromise. Negotiating in good faith means you won’t take advantage/attempt to dictate.
I will quit my job before agreeing to that set of takeaways as a whole.
Comment by Politix Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:53 pm
Sticks, lockout, solidarity, stand strong or fight for your rights are all terms guaranteed to turn off the public and bolster the Governs stand. These old terms where great many years ago.
Unless the Union negotiates with public opinion in mined its is likely to end in a stalemate. Unions and the Governor look willing to shoot themselves in there foot here.
So what do we do?
Learn from recent past battles. (put away the old play book)
Educate the public of the positive benefits of Union workers.
Educate there member that if we take small steps (some even going back) is better than “All or nothing” negotiation Union and the Governor wants.
Id rather take small steps back over time and not be left standing in the street. Sorry just my opinion…
Oh I almost forgot. Any reductions and agreed terms of upcoming contract MUST also be enforce to the privilege few including. Governor, all Representatives and there staff and Judges included. NO exception to anyone.
Comment by working man Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:55 pm
==folks, election day wasn’t a vacation day so people could vote, for crying out loud==
Really…I don’t envy any leg or cabinet staff on that day.
Comment by Politix Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 1:55 pm
“election day wasn’t a vacation day so people could vote”
Exactly. It was made a holiday (as I understand it) so that state employees could help GET OUT the vote, or serve as election judges.
Comment by Secret Square Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 2:06 pm
Most state jobs could not be filled from the street. Prisons and Highway jobs are good examples. Training would be necessary that could take up to 6 weeks on these positions. The training is done by union employees at the prison or in Springfield. Fire everybody and who trains the new help? Fire everybody and who watches the convicts until staff is trained? Understand too that a lot of state jobs are not under the control of the gov. office. Sec. of State being a good example. I firmly believe Cousin Brucie has bit off way more than his beautifully capped teeth can chew.
Comment by Nieva Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 2:07 pm
@- JS Mill - Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:30 am:
“That desert sun really heats up the ole’ tinfoil hat Bob. Find some shade.”
Yup, civility has really improved…
Comment by Mouthy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 2:17 pm
“• Require employees to use their own time for grievance meetings.”
Sure as long as there’s a provision that grievance hearings can be scheduled before and after regular work hours. During the day the boss will still get paid for grievance time but if it’s off hours the boss won’t like working after hours for nothing..
Comment by Mouthy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 2:26 pm
“It’s my understanding that the Treasurer’s and Comptroller’s offices are not AFSCME”
The rank and file are IFT and Teamsters..
Comment by Mouthy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 2:28 pm
A major reason that we’re in our fiscal mess is our state income tax rate, which has been low for decades. Many Illinoisans enjoyed state-funded services at very low costs for so long. We were on the “state credit card” for so long. To try to make state workers take such draconian cuts–to pay for the past “sins” of the many–is just plain wrong.
Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 2:42 pm
Grandson–I do not think state worker’s will take “draconian cuts”. Lots of bluster right now.
Unfortunately, everybody will have to share some pain to get out of the mess we are in.
Comment by Peoria Guy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 2:50 pm
@Juice,
Dental insurance? Not in statute and therefore not relevant to Kanerva? Don’t see that logic as the constitution does not talk about a statute at all. And no, I am not taking an expansionist view of the ISC since, again, there is not mention of a statutory requirement as related to benefits.
If you can legally explain how not being a statute affects this, please do so? Just saying it does not is not sufficient explanation given the ISC.
I believe you responded that a lawsuit was filed on the dental issue and the state won. I was not aware of such a decision.
Would you please provide the name of that decision.
Comment by Federalist Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 2:53 pm
@Mouthy- No problem, I guess I should allow someone to regularly defame a very dedicated segment of our tax paying public. No problem there, just roll over an take it.
=” and grossly overpaid educational administrators and senior faculty in public schools? You are clearly detached from reality, JS. It’s the common middle (and lower) class taxpayer who’s the most damaged through this extortive system that keeps taxes too high and school fees excessive. Of course, if you weren’t part of the privileged “public ed” class, you’d know that.”=
How sophisticated and civil.
Sorry to offend your sensibilities. I will wait for you to handle these transgressions in the future.
On the topic at hand- no doubt there are places for give and take. Having bargained with unions in the past, they can make requests that cause you to scratch your head, I am sure they feel the same about us. But, I have never gone in to try to force a strike. I have always had a prioritized set of goals ie, what do we want to accomplish, we do we have to accomplish?
Fairly compensate the employees and maintain economic stability. We have a job to do, lets get this worked out and get to work.
Instead our governor and his team dream about eliminating seniority and salary schedule and benefits. Think that the pension is negotiable and seem to be encouraging a work stoppage which is neither good for the state, it’s workers, or the economy. Real leaders know this.
With regard to salary schedules there is no evidence it getting away from them saves any money. I would guess this applies to more than just schools.
People often think that each person will be paid specifically based on their efforts and that there is an opportunity to, or latitude to, base compensation on the individual without a necessary framework to shape compensation levels. That type of process often ends up costing more, as our new governor demonstrated. He certainly believes in his people, and he might be right. But, through the lens of a different administration they may be grossly over compensated.
The point is salary schedules can contain costs and make them predictable and very useful for future cost projections.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 2:53 pm
Federalist, it’s still being discussed by the folks that will have to pay for the lawyers. That discussion could heat up if Rauner takes the premiums to excessive levels.
Comment by Norseman Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 3:00 pm
I was just thinking how a strike/lockout would have effects throughout the state. Not only would state services be affected but the entire criminal justice system would be hindered. Forensic Scientists are almost entirely civilian employees of the State Police. If they are locked out criminal justice trials grind to a halt and speedy trial rules will force the wholesale release of persons accused of crimes. What a mess.
Comment by Vitaman Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 3:03 pm
I think the Statute of Limitations has run on the dental insurance premium issue. If filed timely I think we would have won.
Comment by Fed up and retired Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 3:05 pm
There is no doubt salary schedules lend themselves to an orderly system of compensation. I guess the questions are what are the built in salary increases and what are the salary levels?
Comment by Peoria Guy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 3:09 pm
====Many Illinoisans enjoyed state-funded services at very low costs for so long.====
This is the disconnect. Illinoisans don’t think this. They don’t think public employees have suffered with low wages.
Nothing you say after a sentence like this will be heard at all.
Comment by A guy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 3:12 pm
Juice, you’re wrong. Kanerva focused on health benefits not dental. A new lawsuit could argue Kanerva principles to seek to overturn the premium.
Comment by Norseman Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 3:12 pm
I hate to tell Rauners folks, but demanding somone givenip a consitutionaly protected right is actually illegal. The courts have even held that such agreements are void ab initio. Asking somone to surrender a protected right is also usually considered to be bad faith.
No contract and no budget are coming. The state is going to shut down: the question is who will the public blame….
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 3:24 pm
I think Ghost nailed it. Yippee.
Comment by The Unknown Poster Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 3:27 pm
I think some people are losing sight of the fact that the step increases are there for the first 8 years of employment because the starting salary is really, really low. It takes 5 or 6 years to get close to a private sector equivalent job. Freezing people at step 6 or 7 is one thing but freezing someone at step 1 or 2 is another.
Comment by Anon Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 3:29 pm
=== I think the Statute of Limitations has run on the dental insurance premium issue. If filed timely I think we would have won ===
No statute of limitations per se, but timliness would be an opposing argument.
Comment by Norseman Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 3:29 pm
First in the union contract there is and always has been a provision for “no strike clause” so even if they wanted too the union can not strike due to the nature of the job. Second there has been in the past several times no contract has been agreed to, that being said the old contract remains in force until such time a new one is ratified. Second if required a arbiter is called in to negotiate, this has happened twice that I can remember, both times the arbiter ruled in favor mostly with the unions. So Rauner should sit back and think politically what this will do to his party, some will love it but if the state shuts down it will be de asking to him. It will give the other side a lot of fuel to add to the fire. Besides at no point would the union agree to this because this contract does not just affect afscme it in a lot of ways affects other unions such as electrical, plumbers, steelworkers, etc. because then it opens the doors to hurt them too. Look at the full picture this is a full press to make this state like Wisconsin or Tennessee, or others .
Comment by Blumax Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 3:34 pm
Rauner’s confusing battles with wars. He’s already got some victories — but he doesn’t realize it. Just getting Right to Work into the conversation is a victory. He won this.
Insisting that it be implemented — and dismantling years of union negotiations in weeks — is unrealistic (as Brown said last week).
Someone should come-to-jesus Rauner and explain that if the state shuts down — strike, lockout, whatever — his agenda stops. It won’t be forgiven or forgotten. And it’s a black mark. Sure - Scott Walker may feel like his union victories are good enough to take on ISIS — but Walker did it with a willing legislature and without a shutdown or strike. Rauner can’t claim that he, too, can take on world problems because he shut down a state, cost the state millions, and disrupted the operations for months to come. That’s not cool. And not presidential. And not statesmanlike. And probably not in the best interests of the donors he’s trying to court. There needs to be a working relationship with labor to get money made — on both sides. As Alan Alda said in ‘Crimes and Misdemeanors’ about the structure of comedy — if it bends, it’s funny. If it breaks, it’s not.
Comment by Frenchie Mendoza Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 3:40 pm
Think we can make it to 200?
lol
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 3:50 pm
I hope I’m wrong but I worry that Rauner will view a shutdown as a badge of pride. No matter how it happens. He may actually like being blamed for it.
I could see Rauner changing work conditions after june 30 and daring AFSCME to strike instead of a lockout.
Comment by Mason born Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 3:58 pm
– Illinsoisans don’t think this. They don’t think public employees have suffered with low wages.
Nothing you say after a sentence like this will be heard at all.–
Guy, the low cost that was referenced is in the form of taxes kept artificially low by borrowing from pension contributions over the decades.
I think that point has been made a couple of times over the years. Doesn’t seem terribly difficult to understand.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think some Illinoisans have heard that. Let us know what they all think when you get a chance.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 4:00 pm
“I could see Rauner changing work conditions after june 30″ Seems to me that would be more a cause to file an unfair labor practice complaint than hold a strike. But that’s just me.
Comment by Skeptic Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 4:00 pm
==I could see Rauner changing work conditions after june 30==
I’ve always been of the opinion that he will do just that and force an arbitrator or a judge to tell him he can’t.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 4:05 pm
Reaching 200 is an achievable goal….contract negotiations is another story.
Comment by illinifan Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 4:09 pm
===Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think some Illinoisans have heard that. Let us know what they all think when you get a chance.====
I already let you know. But I’ll go back to get more intel just for you. Illinoisans do not think that their taxes have been kept artificially low. They consider themselves to be overtaxed in the aggregate.
I understand the point of pension borrowing– shouldn’t have been done, especially to the extent it was. Remind me who on the lending side was against it.
Truthfully I’m trying to help our captain here get to 200, since I believe he expressed a desire to get there. I would really like to see all of this get settled as amicably as possible. Hope there’s a chance.
Comment by A guy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 4:09 pm
Yeah, I have never heard one friend or acquaintance of mine ever say Illinois taxes were low. And that includes a bunch of CPA’s.
That said, maybe they are low, but people generally don’t believe that.
On to 200!
Comment by Peoria Guy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 4:11 pm
Ugh, the lawsuit over dental was AFSCME v Sledge. Most of the lawsuit focused on process, and the courts did not really address the constitutional issues, but it did see it’s way into a courtroom. And the reason why I brought up the language in statute is because Kanerva specifically stated “eligibility for all of the benefits is limited to, conditioned on, and flows directly from membership in one of the State’s various public pension systems” which there is less of a clear case with dental coverage.
Comment by Juice Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 4:15 pm
Labor law is complex and serious negotiations are complex. If an impasse is reached and the old contract is not extended the “no strike” clause no longer applies. Management cannot impose a “no strike” clause if no agreement is reached. If an impasse is reached, the two sides can agree to an arbitrator or a moderator, but this is not automatic. If an impasse is reached management can impose their final offer, which gives the union the option of striking (in order to force further negotiation) or of accepting the imposed working conditions (which would end negotiations and leave the union without a contract). During a strike management can impose a lockout if allowing people who cross the picket line to work is not to management’s advantage. If the union does not decide to strike it is unrealistic to expect management to unilaterally and capriciously lock workers out. Note: strikes and lockouts can be initiated preemptively before the expected imposition of unfavorable working conditions or the start of an expected strike.
Comment by Tibicen Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 4:24 pm
A guy and P guy: My guess is that if you ask just about anyone anywhere in the world, they will say their taxes are too high. It’s just the nature of humanity.
Comment by Skeptic Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 4:32 pm
==Many Illinoisans enjoyed state-funded services at very low costs for so long.==
== taxes kept artificially low by borrowing from pension contributions over the decades.==
Yet bring up taxing retirement income, which essentially taxes the generation(s) of folks who consumed said services without paying the true cost for them, is met with vitriol.
And raising income taxes back to 5%, which has younger generations paying the tab for services they were not around to consume, and at a higher cost than previous generations, is somehow the answer.
Comment by nixit71 Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 4:32 pm
@JSMILL
=if memory serves me correctly it was mainly as a substitute teacher or in a series of one year positions, moving from job to job.=
Nope, full time HS physics and math teacher for years at the same place and adjunct faculty for math and science at college.
I also subbed at about a dozen South suburban high schools while I was doing engineering consulting and real estate management to find out what was going on in public and private schools.
Comment by Arizona Bob Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 4:48 pm
“This is the disconnect. Illinoisans don’t think this. They don’t think public employees have suffered with low wages.”
With respect, I didn’t say that Illinois suffered because of low state worker pay and benefits. I said that Illinoisans have enjoyed state-funded services at low prices for a long time.
I’m just saying it’s not fair for union members to be scapegoated and assigned a disproportionately large share of the blame and sacrifice. There’s that along with the insults, repeatedly calling union leaders corrupt.
Many union members are not going to take this, nor should they. Being the willful sacrificial victims of very wealthy people who made great money in Illinois at very low state income tax rates over the years is unbecoming and speaks poorly of us as Illinoisans and Americans.
Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 4:51 pm
== Increase the amount employees pay into their pension fund. ==
-southwest-, that was already done for new hires back in 2011. The IL SC just recently ruled that the ‘Tier 1′ employees / retirees are entitled to their pensions under the ‘Tier 1′ rules because the pension contract (basically) starts at time of hiring … so you can’t require ‘Tier 1′ employees to increase their pension contributions.
Since I’m assuming you are new here, I will repeat a fact most the regulars know: had the State made it’s annual contributions, the various pension funds would be properly funded and instead of it costing the State over $7B a year it would only be costing the State a bit under $2B a year. The pension problem is not the employee contributions; the problem has been the EMPLOYER contributions off and on for the past 45 years but especially the last 13 years.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:03 pm
@Juice,
Not certain your logic on the dental insurance is 100% sound but it is worth considering. And as good (or bad) as anyone else seems to offer.
Thanks.
Comment by Federalist Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:19 pm
== Which leads to the question who represents retirees? Can Rauner just unilaterally make co-pays and deductibles so high that in effect one does not have insurance? (Remember there are many out there who were hired before April 1, 1986 and are not under Medicare.)
How does Kanerva affect this? ==
Answering the second question first, the issue was raised during the Kanerva questioning but not specifically answered. The questioning made it sound like the IL SC justices would look very closely at any changes that appeared to be cost shifting from the State to the retirees.
Back to the first question, the retiree is basically on their own with the possible support of any retiree organization(s) they may belong to. Rauner can try to do that and maybe even get away with it for a very short period but, given the questioning in Kanerva, the retirees can probably go to court and get at least a temporary stay. The big problem will be the legal cost to the retirees to pursue the case all the way back to the IL SC.
Re the people who are not under Medicare, this is my understanding of it. Some of those people may be eligible for premium-free Part A if they have a deceased spouse who paid into Medicare; they will have to pay quarterly for Part B like everyone else. Translation: they should be able to get the state Medicare Advantage insurance just paying for Part B. (My mom was in that situation so I’m pretty sure that is accurate.) In addition, somewhere between 10-20 years back (I’m not looking up the date right now) a change in federal law allowed people who never paid into Medicare to purchase Part A. So those pre-1986 people can probably get Medicare; the only question is at what cost.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:21 pm
Retired State Employee said it well a number of posts back. When you have a few billionaires deciding to bankroll efforts to wipe out union membership in this state — this is the definition of class warfare. I never thought I would see the day when this might happen. What did middle class once mean? It meant a halfway secure income with decent health benefits, a good retirement plan, enough money to buy a modest home and save for college for the kids. Obviously, the Rauners of the world do not want us to have that. They want a desperate underpaid workforce with no representation and no organized ability to fight them politically. To the Rauners there is no such thing as a public good, just more opportunities to privatize so that the good jobs are gone and the owners get rich. But I still have to shake myself and ask, “To what end?” What a crummy society to live in.
Comment by kimocat Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:22 pm
== If the union agreed to the 40 hour week, that could be an issue for non union employees right? ==
MC employees have to work overtime w/o pay already, so I don’t see an issue.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:23 pm
I looked at the dental case. AFSCME grieved because the imposition of a dental insurance premium was done without negotiation with AFSCME. Stays were issued on 2 counts (including the one that argued constitutional protection) pending outcome of action before IL Labor Relations Board, but I can’t find out if there has been any decision there yet. Does anyone know?
Comment by Fed up and Retired Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:24 pm
- kimocat - @ 5:22 pm:== But I still have to shake myself and ask, “To what end?” ==
They desire money, but above all else, power.
So sad!
Comment by Enviro Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:36 pm
Does anyone know what the average, full cost of a monthly health insurance premium is? State share plus employee share? I thought it was somewhere around $800, which seems awfully high given the number of employees in the group.
Comment by up2now Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:36 pm
== Retirees don’t pay union dues like the private sector does with reduced dues?boost the rolls. ==
Some retirees pay to be a member of one of the various retiree associations. AFSCME has one; the university and teachers groups have one, even the retired MC people have RSEA.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:41 pm
Going for 200;
I haven’t posted in a really long time cause others say it better. Wordslinger I always agree with your comments and rarely if ever with “a guy”–sorry guy. But he may be right about the citizens and their view on taxes. I don’t know anyone who acknowledges that we have low taxes. They all angry/mad/jealous of public sector employees. (No, I don’t know millions of Illini but a few). You are correct : it isn’t hard to understand that our taxes have been kept low because of ‘pension’ holidays. Folks I talk to don’t know this; they don’t care either. And some are progressive democrats. It’s sad but true, even though you’re speak the facts, they don’t care.
Fwiw.. I am/was a career public servant. And I do think some part of my pension s/b subject to the income tax.
Well I feel better. Keep up the good work WS and you too OW
Comment by IIll_Will Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:41 pm
- up2now - @ 5:36 pm: Does anyone know what the average, full cost of a monthly health insurance premium is?
Check out Teacher’s Retirement Insurance Plan for those who do not take the Medicare Advantage Plan:
http://trs.illinois.gov/members/trip.htm
Comment by Enviro Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:43 pm
Woo Hoo
200!!!!
Comment by IIll_Will Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:46 pm
== Does anyone know what the average, full cost of a monthly health insurance premium is? State share plus employee share? I thought it was somewhere around $800, which seems awfully high given the number of employees in the group. ==
That sounds like the number the State puts on a statement they send us every year. And I agree it also sounds like the State is being taken to the cleaners on the premium level. Until they changed the retirees to the Medicare Advantage program, they were paying the same for retirees as workers … and their costs should have been a lot less because the State was only responsible for what Medicare didn’t cover after Medicare knocked the billed amount way down. The insurance companies were paying pennies out compared to what the same procedure would have cost on a covered worker … but the State didn’t seem to see any savings.
Might be time to bring back serious regulation of the insurance industry again, especially since the State didn’t see much savings and the employers didn’t see any savings from the last round of Work Comp reform. Someone should put that is bill form and watch Rauner and his 1% buddies go postal!
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:47 pm
On the SERS site it shows full non-Medicare monthly premiums of approximately $900 for HMO and $1128 for Quality care,up from $757 and $952 for the last fiscal year.
Comment by Fed up and Retired Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:49 pm
@RNUG,
Sorry to bother you again but you stated:
Answering the second question first, the issue was raised during the Kanerva questioning but not specifically answered. The questioning made it sound like the IL SC justices would look very closely at any changes that appeared to be cost shifting from the State to the retirees.
Do you know where I can find a copy of this ‘questioning’ by the ISC? Sure would like to read it.
Comment by Federalist Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:52 pm
RUNG
The current hours are 8:30 to 5:00, how would they do the 40 hours, take it out of the lunch time or make employees work 8:00 to 5:00 or 8:30 to 5:30?
I prefer a smaller lunch and already don’t take the hour much anyways.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:56 pm
Up2Now - I believe it depends on which health plan you belong to and if you have dependents etc., but for a single person in an open access plan your estimate is very close to the portion the State pays for an employee’s insurance. The amount the employee pays depends on their salary.
Comment by ABC123 Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:56 pm
If negotiations go to an impasse, thereby voiding previous contract, state workers will have two choices: accept the governor’s terms or go on strike. Lock out is not an option. I’ll be voting to strike when that day comes.
Comment by DHSJim Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:57 pm
Absolutely shameful. He deserves his due, but no one else does. He’s going to tank the Illinois economy for nothing more than a pathological hatred of unions. This country prospered when we had a thriving middle class, which just so happened to coincide with the rise of unions. Why are these people, like Rauner, out to stomp on the little guy? It’s like their jealous of some dude making 50k per year. Why don’t they try raising a family on that?
Comment by me too Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 5:59 pm
There’s a link to the Kanerva decision on the SERS website.
Comment by Fed up and Retired Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 6:01 pm
== Do you know where I can find a copy of this ‘questioning’ by the ISC? Sure would like to read it. ==
Rich posted a link to the video at the time of the hearing. You should also be able to find it on the IL SC web site.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 6:05 pm
Rich you need to recruit a labor law expert of RNUG caliber to run down the legality of what might happen and what cannot happen in the union negotiations. Lots of speculation lately but not much solid information.
Comment by Johnny's in the Basement Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 6:07 pm
== The current hours are 8:30 to 5:00, how would they do the 40 hours, take it out of the lunch time or make employees work 8:00 to 5:00 or 8:30 to 5:30? ==
Have no idea what the State would do except I know some agencies already have only a 1/2 hour for lunch, so that would not be an option for those agencies.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 6:07 pm
Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 12:58 pm:
• Freeze all step increases FOR ONE YEAR
You must have maxed out and it doesn’t effect you.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 6:09 pm
== Rich you need to recruit a labor law expert of RNUG caliber ==
- Johnny’s in the Basement -, not my specialty but I know a bit about Civil Service rules on a couple of items. Given his age, he is probably no longer with us, but at one time the person who actually wrote the State’s Civil Service Code was in back in private practice. I happen to know because many years back I urged a family member to hire him for a dispute with the State that was covered by the Civil Service Code … which they ended up winning (tough to defend against the guy who wrote the rules).
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 6:14 pm
RNUG, what about non-code folks? If there’s no contract are they effectively double-exempt?
Comment by me too Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 6:17 pm
== RNUG, what about non-code folks? If there’s no contract are they effectively double-exempt? ==
I don’t know but that’s what I would assume for non-coded positions … basically at will employees unless they have a written contract of some kind, which some of the top people might have.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 6:27 pm
Rng 11:12 spot on. It’s already happening but not much being shared about it.
Comment by 10 people in 3 weeks Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 6:29 pm
Is it just me or does this “Conduct away from the bargaining table may also be relevant. For instance if an Employer were to make a unilateral change in the terms and conditions of employees employment without bargaining, that would be an indication of bad faith.” from the NLRB maybe have a connection to the fair share fiasco?
Comment by me too Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 7:10 pm
With respect to health care costs, I’m wondering if, over time, the ACA will become the standard and employers will mimic these ACA categories. The only question will be, which “color” plan the employer will spring for, and perhaps that will depend on how much the individual employee signs up to pay.
This is not a criticism. I’m a big supporter of the ACA. I think it will be one of the, if not the, highest of the achievements of the Obama admin. But it’s such an elephant in the health care marketplace, that it makes sense that all employers would hew to its general guidelines. Meaning, if state of Illinois employees get more benefits than an ACA plan would provide, well,
you’re not living in the 21st.
Comment by Cassandra Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 7:13 pm
AZ Bob
Curious what kind of engineering consulting you were doing? Never heard of a high school physics teacher consulting. No offense to high school physics teachers.
Comment by Mason born Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 7:22 pm
-full time HS math and physics teacher for years-
Say it ain’t so, Arizona Bob. Are you drawing a State pension?
Comment by Arthur Andersen Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 7:35 pm
“Meaning, if state of Illinois employees get more benefits than an ACA plan would provide, well your’re not living in the 21st.”
And that is exactly the attitude of those of us who opposed to ObamaCare in the first place were afraid of and warned about.
Thanks, though, for confirming our suspicions.
Comment by Federalist Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 7:38 pm
Seriously, what the state pays for employee health insurance doesn’t make sense. A friend of mine who is a realtor, on her own, a “group” of one, was paying about $700 a month for good Blue Cross coverage, downstate. With 10’s of thousands of employees, you would think the state could get a better deal than an independent contractor. BTW, she switched to ACA and now pays about half as much as she used to.
Comment by up2now Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 7:43 pm
Many private sector people seem to think that it is fine to have AFSCME degraded and ousted. But they forget that unions in the State workforce help keep the bar raised for everyone. Many employers that hire professional workers must also offer decent benefits in order to compete as well. Keep in mind that most State workers are educated and many have college degrees. Most jobs with the State require a level of knowledge and can’t just be replaced with someone off the street. If the State had no benefits, then other companies would stop offering benefits as well and we would start to experience the trickle down effect and soon, no one would have benefits and everyone would make less in wages. And if everyone is making less wages, many of the professional people would move elsewhere. Illinois has the 6th largest economy in the nation, we should therefore be at the top in pay, benefits, job opportunities, education, etc. Rauner is determined to bring that all down.
Comment by Crispy Critter Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 7:59 pm
@uptonow,
I have tried repeated to get a breakdown oh health care costs expended by the state for its employees. I mean net costs after premiums, deductibles etc. and broken down by employee spouse and child dependents.
Never can get an answer. I have become more and more convinced that their figures are ‘flawed’ or they are incompetent or they are not being truthful.
Comment by Federalist Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 8:00 pm
- Cassandra - Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 7:13 pm:
Bitter and jealous
Race to the bottom
Sad
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 8:11 pm
A non-Code employee is not the same as at will. My understanding is that most non-Code employees have employment protections from their State employing entity. It’s just from a source other than the Personnel Code. Not all, but most.
Comment by Original Rambler Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 8:17 pm
== The pension problem is not the employee contributions; the problem has been the EMPLOYER contributions off and on for the past 45 years but especially the last 13 years. ==
Yes. And both the “employer” (the state’s politicians) and the Union’s top leadership knew this was going on and would eventually hit the fan. Yet both sides allowed it to continue and let it escalate as they negotiated new contract after new contract (and kept their nice cushy jobs) without bothering to bring the funding crisis to the surface or doing anything to force the proper funding. Neither the various “employers” over the years or the union bigs over the years have clean hands or can have clean consciences in all this. As a tax payer who is now watching it all hit the fan it would certainly be nice for people in the union rank and file to admit they see this reality as well.
Comment by Responsa Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 8:28 pm
Responsa - Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 8:28 pm:
I am a CPA and a State Employee. Many of us were strongly against the “pension Holidays”. Get over yourself and your high horse.
You are so bitter and jealous.
I am not to blame and the state was sued to stop them from skipping payments but the Supreme Court did not force the payments.
You are a drive by troll.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 8:38 pm
Responsa, your revisionist history is nonsense. The unions sued the state in an effort to get them to make full pension contributions.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 8:39 pm
Actually I’m not a drive-by troll, “anonymous”. LOL.
Comment by Responsa Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 8:41 pm
RNUG, to purchase Part A if not eligible for premium free coverage costs a person $407 a month. The person then pays Part B of $104.90 and a Part D premium of about $33.00 and then a Medicare Supplement of about $75. Total cost about $619.90 a month. Relatively cheap insurance for a person over 65. I have also done some research and it appears Medicare rules do limit the amount of maximum out of pocket costs the MA plans can have with the maximum at $6700 a year in 2015, so how much the plans cost the employer can vary. If the state is contributing much to the MA plans I would be surprised since many plans on the open market take the Part B premium and nothing more or a just a small amount extra for special benefits.
Federalist, Under Obamacare persons can choose from 4 metal plans with a range of deductibles and copays. Some plans had deductibles as low as $500 so ACA does not impose a one size fit all plan. Persons select plans based on what they can afford and their health care needs. The state should offer people plans based on the full range and agree to a certain contribution to the plan and then let the employee decide which plan is best.
Comment by illlinifan Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 8:47 pm
Responsa, you’re wrong about the blame for pensions and you know you’re wrong. It’s been clearing referenced in the Cap Fax dozens of times before - especially by RNUG - that the employees have been complaining about underfunded pensions for ages. A lawsuit challenging this underfunding was rejected by the SC which said that while benefits were protected, the constitution did not require a specified contribution level by the state. The recent SC ruling restated that point.
Comment by Norseman Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 8:52 pm
selective memory and selective hearing. a lot of that going around these days :/
Comment by PoolGuy Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:05 pm
Federalist @8:00 “I have become more and more convinced that their figures are ‘flawed’ or they are incompetent or they are not being truthful.”
I was thinking the same thing as I read down through the comments. I’ve seen the numbers when I get my statements from CMS and they just seem exorbitant. Also have to agree with an above mention for those of us on Medicare. How can the premiums CMS quotes for a secondary policy after Medicare covers 80% be so high?
Comment by Finally Out (and now very glad to be) Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:26 pm
BVR, looks more and more like Nero. Just with a really clean Carharrt instead of the fiddle.
Comment by Jorge Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 9:56 pm
====Do not strike, be locked out.
Be locked out, no rallies, no picketing… just stay home, let the phones ring off the hook, agencies flounder, and a daily podium “talk” by the union;
“We want to work, the people of Illinois are suffering, but the Governor wants us gone.”
Anything that gives Rauner his “demonstrations” is a loss for the Unions.
Know that.===
This is actually the best possible strategy, but sometimes its hard to be quiet when you feel like you are being wronged.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:12 pm
Hara-Kiri
Comment by Dos Hermanos Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:39 pm
Norse and others, Responsa may be referring to the Blagojevich pension holidays in FY 06-07 that were “not opposed” by the teacher unions, as the alternative presented was to give K-12 a substantial haircut.
Beyond that, all the labor groups have been pretty consistent in opposition to my recollection.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 10:43 pm
The Egyptian pharoahs gave the pyramid builders a better offer than this.
Comment by CrazyHorse Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:04 pm
Rich, could you please forward this entire blog entry to council 31?
We need all the legal wrangling we can get, and many of your posters are brilliant. They probably have forgotten more, and have seen more, than younger members care to!
Now, I will be needing a volunteer to hold my hair back, while il throw up every day until this is over…I’m not joking.
Comment by Property of IDOC Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:06 pm
“Rauner to union: here’s a gun, now shoot yourself. By the way, you’ll pay your own medical.
Rauner is who we thought he was.”
And thank God for that. If the opposition sees Rauner as William Wallace provoking the English prior to the battle of Sterling Bridge, all the better.
Look, the Supremes just ruled that the already-retired cannot share in the pain that’s coming due to the state’s teetering on the edge of default. So, it will be shared to an even greater extent by the folks still working. Are you listening, AFSCME? We simply cannot afford what you have gotten used to anymore. And before the outcry begins, an anecdote: An associate of mine did his career in a local suburban school district. His last year of pay was about $75K with OT and cashing in unused sick days ($54K base salary), all negotiated by AFSCME. Upon retirement, his IMRF pension provided a starting benefit of $48K per year, with better insurance than most folks get in private industy, and a 3% fixed bump in benefits annually. Oh - don’t forget about the “13th check”. What was his position, you may ask? Janitor. Read that again, no mis-print. Janitor. Sorry, AFSCME, the state of Illinois simply cannot afford you any more. Let the outsourcing begin.
Comment by Tom K. Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:37 pm
- Tom K. -
Sound like you need to take that case up with your local school board that apparently signed off on the salary and benefits.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 12:33 am
Strike no unemployment comp. Lock-out collect comp. Thanks Bruce
Comment by jimk849 Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 6:06 am
I don’t see him locking folks out. I think he’s going to try to pick off as many scabs as he can, then attempt to force the union into Tier II. I have to admit, it is kind of a good idea. The consideration is the contract, and folks may, after some time, choose it over Tier I. Their offers are clear attempts to allow him to get rid of all the Tier I employees as soon as he can, and get them off the State payroll, freezing their benefits. In return for an offer of re-employment they’ll be asked to voluntarily go into Tier II. That isn’t negotiating in good faith, and it is also ridiculous to attempt to do it, but that’s Rauner for you.
Comment by me too Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 6:30 am
When I said ‘good idea’ I didn’t mean that it was appropriate or acceptable or good, just that it is a means which could succeed. Doubtful, but…
Comment by me too Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 6:44 am
And thank God for that. If the opposition sees Rauner as William Wallace provoking the English prior to the battle of Sterling Bridge, all the better.
Rainer is NO William Wallace
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 7:08 am
Rauner
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 7:11 am
- Tom K. - Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:37 pm:
I do not believe you and your story.
You are a jealous and bitter person.
Since your “associate” had a public sector janitor position that was better then your janitor position, you exaggerate.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 7:16 am
Tom needs to stop trying to sabotage others and start advocating for himself. Race to the bottom and Tom is the perfect example of the type of folks who go for that sort of thing.
Comment by me too Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 7:25 am
Angry people often attack the wrong targets.
Comment by CharlieKratos Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 7:50 am
You reap what you sow. Recall would be a good starting point when the session ends…..if it ever does. But this time all of Chicago needs to get out and vote.
Comment by Pizza Delivery Guy Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 8:36 am
How can he do this to us. I have 4 kids to feed. I am already working so much to provide for them now u want me to live at work with half the benefits how am I supports to survive!
Comment by Lovemyfamily Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 9:24 am
Yeah, Tom K, while you were busy “racing to the bottom” in your career choice, others chose a sector with a monopoly on products and services offered, closed to competition and other free market factors, with a customer base that lacks the option to take their money elsewhere.
You chose unwisely. Now please redirect your anger.
Comment by nixit71 Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 9:45 am
- Tom K. - Tuesday, May 26, 15 @ 11:37 pm:
“I do not believe you and your story.
You are a jealous and bitter person.
Since your “associate” had a public sector janitor position that was better then your janitor position, you exaggerate.”
You may believe or disbelieve as you wish, but every word is true, and verifiable - his salary and pension are in the public records. I cannot print his name without his permission, as that would not be ethical. If there were a way to bet you real dollars as to the veracity, I would be happy to do so. And, yes, I AM jealous, but more than that, I am outraged that my taxes are TOO HIGH, and are going to pay the TOO HIGH salary and retirement benefits of those that had jobs that require so little education, responsibility, and skill. Note that the subject of my anecdote worked for approximately four hours out of an eight hour shift for YEARS, and made no secret of it. Illinois is indeed broke, and those of us who voted for Rauner are saying NO to paying ever higher taxes. Since retirement benefits cannot be cut, the people earning those benefits need to be put under the microscope. If it makes sense to outsource the work, it must be done. If it makes sense to lay off a certain percentage and increase the workload of those still working, it must be done. Thirty thousand memebers of AFSCME can no longer be allowed to hold the state of Illinois hostage, and Rauner was elected to stop this. Go, Bruce, GO!
Comment by Tom K. Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 8:15 pm