Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Rauner, Teamsters agree to new contract

Posted in:

Illinois

* It’s a small bargaining unit, but, still…

After several productive rounds of good faith negotiations, the Illinois Governor’s Office and Teamsters Local 700 have agreed to terms on a new four-year collective bargaining agreement. The current agreement expired June 30, 2015.

The new contract covers nearly 350 workers at IDOT, CMS, IDES, and DHS in Cook County. The employees work as highway maintainers, heavy equipment operators, and building service and maintenance workers. Negotiations are ongoing for employees represented by Teamsters locals at locations covering the rest of Illinois.

The terms of the tentative agreement include:

Maintenance of the current level of health care benefits for employees and their dependents as part of the State’s continued contributions to the independent Teamsters Local 727 Health & Welfare Fund.

A four-year wage freeze, continuing the 75% in-hire rate.

Continuation of a 40-hour work week.

A new performance incentive program to reward employees with bonuses for cost-saving measures and meeting or exceeding performance metrics.

A collaborative program that allows management and the Teamsters to work together to provide low-cost alternatives to outsourcing.

A reduction in the payout for accumulated unused vacation from 75 to 45 days for employees hired after January 1, 2016.

The tentative agreement will be submitted to the membership of Teamsters Local 700 for a ratification vote.

As a continuation of the productive negotiating sessions, the Teamsters and the Governor’s Office also pledged to form a long-term relationship to improve employer-labor relations in state government.

Discuss.

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:24 pm

Comments

Divide and conquer, Walker-style. He did this with the Operating Engineers and State Patrol union in Wisconsin. Anything you can do to break union solidarity you do it. Here goes…

Comment by Albany Park Patriot Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:29 pm
I wonder what AFSCME will have to say about this?

Comment by Cassiopeia Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:30 pm
“continuing the 75% in-hire rate”

What does this mean?

Comment by chi Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:31 pm
Sounds good to me.

Comment by Southwest Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:34 pm
Anything you can do to break union solidarity you do it.

A union does not “break union solidarity” by entering into a contract with an employer.

Comment by chi Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:35 pm
The 75 percent rate means the persons 1st, year, they are at 75 percent of negotiated rate. Each year it bumps up til the employee makes the negotiated rate

Comment by Idot guy Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:35 pm
I hear Frerichs settled with the Treasurer’s office with 7% raises for the union workers.

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:36 pm
If Rauner offered that to AFSCME now, I’d give him big-time props for compromising. Of course the other side would bash him for caving, but whatever.

Comment by Skeptic Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:37 pm
== A new performance incentive program to reward employees with bonuses for cost-saving measures and meeting or exceeding performance metrics. ==

I’ll believe that one when I see it. In the past, the State has managed to mess up every one they implemented.

Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:37 pm
== A four-year wage freeze==

Makes AFSMEs demand for 11.5 % increase look even worse

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:37 pm
So no cut in worker health care —-TeamBungle had $800 million savings in their “budget”— and it looks like raises are called “performance incentives” and folks still getting paid for unused vacation time. Nice template for the others

Comment by Anonin' Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:39 pm
– …the Teamsters and the Governors office also pledged to form a long-term relationship to improve employer-labor relations in state government.–

“Anders Lindall? Won’t see him no more….”

Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:39 pm
More proof that the Governor is “extreme” in his views and can never work with any union, correct?

Comment by Percival Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:40 pm
CHICAGO TEAMSTERS not all of the state teamsters.

Comment by Ben Franklin Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:40 pm
This a pretty fair contract.

It accomplishes two things Rauner wants: a wage freeze and an incentive program.

It accomplishes two things the Teamsters want: no marked increase in health insurance costs and what could be viewed as an end to outsourcing of services.

AFSCME - take note. This is how you do it.

Comment by Team Sleep Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:42 pm
Rnug, has the state offered bonuses before? How were they suppose to work? I always thought they got bigger increases in salary for exceeding expectations on performance reviews, but not sure.

Comment by Southwest Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:42 pm
wage freeze including step?

Comment by Johnnie F. Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:43 pm
I Hate to be a Kill Joy, But I have a couple thoughts…..

I believe the members in that local will vote “NO” on that contract.

Secondly, that small group of people will not move the needle on negotiations with any other union.

Traditionally, every union waits on Afscme’s contract because it is always the heavy lift.

I wonder what nefarious activity is afoot because there appears to be no rationale for this from a members perspective.

Just a few thoughts…….

Comment by TROOPER Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:47 pm
“Makes AFSMEs demand for 11.5 % increase look even worse” It does. It also makes Rauner’s demand for a 400% increase in health benefit costs, lay-offs, privatization, unlimited overtime etc. look pretty pathetic as well.

Comment by Skeptic Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:48 pm
Ben - but it will be used as a template for the rest of the state. Most unionized employees at IDOT are Teamsters, and my best is that the offer and final agreement with the other Locals will look very similar to this.

Comment by Team Sleep Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:49 pm
We used to have to rate non union employees prior to the fiscal year. Once ratings were in you could not change them. The Bonus clause is a joke, it will only go to the connected.

Comment by He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:49 pm
Do these employees get overtime? A lot of AFSCME employees do not and can’t bump up their paychecks during a supposed wage freeze.

Comment by anon Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:50 pm
Anonin’, perhaps you were referring to sick leave, not vacation time? I’m in a different Union, but sick leave payouts are part of the pension contract. It was written out some time ago and only applies to the most senior employees at this point, but for them are not negotiable.

Comment by PolPal56 Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:52 pm
Maintaining the current level of healthcare benefits is huge in this day and age. The healthcare benefits, and the relatively amount of money I pay for them, are the most important factors of my current (past 15 years) job.

Comment by illinoised Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:55 pm
This is what Rahm did with all the CPS unions not named CTU and look how that turned out.

Comment by From the 'Dale to HP Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:55 pm
I’m wondering how the state will award bonuses since they are not contemplated for in the statute, and therefore for now at least an un-budgeted item. I suppose you could put in a lump sum for bonuses, but how would a multi-location agency dole out the bonuses in a manner that is equitable?

Comment by Commonsense in Illinois Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:58 pm
I’m not a fan of Rod Rauner, but I have to say that four years without a wage increase sure looks like a nice win for him.

Comment by Gooner Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 1:59 pm
How to eat an elephant? One bite at a time.

Comment by Nick Danger Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:00 pm
Commonsense - I’m not a state employee or in a union, but shouldn’t bonuses be paid only to the top performers?

Comment by Southwest Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:05 pm
Looks like Rauner and his “crew” did a pretty good job. Now, on to the next contract. Would have preferred to see the health care costs taken over by switching employees to ObamaCare, but I guess they don’t like the plan, either.

Comment by Apocalypse Now Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:07 pm
“Makes AFSMEs demand for 11.5 % increase look even worse”
I’d like to know what the Teamsters asked for at the beginning of negotiations for a wage increase. There is no way they went into this asking for a wage freeze. That’s not how unions negotiate.

Comment by Bulldog58 Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:08 pm
Doesn’t everyone covered by the State of Illinois Group Insurance plan pay the same premium depending on the plan chosen, salary level and number of dependents? Because this is now agreed to for this group, shouldn’t the increase for AFSCME be off of the table now?

Comment by Small Town Girl Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:09 pm
Elections have consequences.

The parameters of the deal reflect that, and both sides seem pleased.

A block to build upon…(?)

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:12 pm
I wonder why the governor settled without steep benefit cuts and wholesale loss of workplace rules like he wants from AFSCME?

Comment by nona Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:17 pm
These employees are not in the Group Health plan. The Teamster’s have their own health insurance plan, which these employees and the State pays in to. That makes it a lot easier for this deal to get done.

Now my question, does the deal continue the deduction of fair share dues?

Comment by Juice Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:19 pm
Concur with Willy.

Comment by Norseman Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:22 pm
I see bonuses as a big headache and potentially a hotbed for grievances. In theory, it’s a great idea.

But how do you objectively reward bonuses in state government where you aren’t trying to increase sales or profit? I mean do we really want the State Police giving bonuses on the most speeding tickets written or some such criteria?

Comment by A Jack Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:22 pm
@Southwest…nor am I a state employee. Bonuses should be paid to top performers…my question remains how to you assure fairness throughout the state. Here in private business, if a company has multiple sites, each site generally deals with bonuses based on the needs, goals and objectives of that site. That really doesn’t work well in a government situation since all sites are controlled by the enabling statute - a benefit in Chicago is the same benefit in Cairo. So, how does someone actually qualify…by doing something extraordinary whether authorized by the statute or not? I’m not saying don’t do bonuses, I’m just interested in implementation.

Comment by Commonsense in Illinois Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:23 pm
==Divide and conquer,==

Willy asked the other day why Rauner would sign the k-12 ed funding bill. The IEA is the largest union in the state and schools are already underfunded. He pledged to make education a priority so he kept a promise and cut a big union out of the fight. If this is approved, one more is moved to the side.

The Teamsters are a private sector union and they have a realistic view of what the economy is really like. It shows they are smart enough to take a reasonable deal to stay out of the fray and risk losing the union completely.

This isn’t a game where the employer is holding out on the workers to drive stock prices up. The Teamsters see a 4 billion dollar hole no one has any idea how to plug. Smart move is to stay alive and keep working.

Comment by the Patriot Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:31 pm
And AFSCME wanted 11.5% over four years after spending millions of dollars to defeat Rauner. Not to mention Quinn gave them 12%.

Smart move by Rauner team to avoid the side shows for the big showdown with AFSCME. He would have even better standing if he stopped going after other unions and poisoning every bill with right to work legislation.

You have to wonder what AFSCME leadership is thinking right now. They basically said they would strike if their conditions aren’t met. If AFSCME had any leadership or direction they would have been coordinating with Teamsters to see how their contract negotiations were coming along. Even though they are a much smaller union, they have a realistic idea of what can be accomplished. Now they are way out in left field with no other option besides to strike. Good luck rank and file, you are on a bus with no driver.

Comment by Almost the Weekend Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:36 pm
4 year wage freeze means around a 12% cut in the employees standard of living if you assume a 3% cost of living increase and dont compound. They arent standing fast, they are racing backwards.

Comment by relocated Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:37 pm
Um….Quinn settled at 4% over three years and also got increases in insurance premiums and co-pays from employees.

Comment by Johnnie F. Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:43 pm
“They basically said they would strike if their conditions aren’t met.” You make it sound like AFSCME will strike if they don’t get the 11% raises. I don’t think that’s anything close to the truth.

Comment by Skeptic Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:47 pm
@Almost the weekend, It’s possible I missed it but I don’t remember AFSCME threatening to strike it their conditions weren’t met.
What this means IMO is that AFSCME won’t agree to any change in their health insurance since the Teamsters didn’t have too. They may have to accept a wage freeze though if the Teamsters go on to ratify this agreement. Historically the Teamster agreement has mirrored pretty much the AFSCME agreement.

Comment by The Dude Abides Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:49 pm
===Elections have consequences===
===The parameters of the deal reflect that and both sides seem pleased===A block to build upon…(?)==

Willy, for once you’ve lurched into the truth!

Comment by DuPage Don Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:52 pm
Holding the line on health insurance increases = a raise, IMO. I would hope that AFSCME takes note if the rank and file in the Teamsters union vote to accept.

Comment by dupage dan Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:56 pm
===Elections have consequences===
===The parameters of the deal reflect that and both sides seem pleased===A block to build upon…(?)==

Willy, for once you’ve lurched into the truth!
Correct.

Comment by Apocalypse Now Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:57 pm
” I would hope that AFSCME takes note if the rank and file in the Teamsters union vote to accept. ” And I would hope the Rauner administration would pay attention to what might be an acceptable contract.

Comment by Skeptic Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:57 pm
It creates a baseline for AFSCME. Many AFSCME members tell me they would take the pay freeze if the health insurance piece stayed the same. Rauner at least needs to move with AFSCME on this piece of the negotiation and this may result in AFSCME moving off the 11.5% piece. Both made ridiculous offers. Welcome to the world of negotiation.

Comment by illinifan Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:03 pm
Skeptic and Dude Abides,

I respectfully disagree. AFSCME leadership can’t go back to rank and file telling them they requested 11.5% pay increase and come back with nothing. Rank and file will want new leadership or will want to strike.

AFSCME currently has new leadership who haven’t solely negotiated a new contract yet, to show their clout, and demonstrate to rank and file that they are the right people for the job, will want to strike.

This is not even factoring past poor leadership decisions, such as, waiting three weeks out from the 2014 Republican primary to endorse Kirk Dillard and give him $300,000 with no backup plan if he lost. Then failing to unite around PQ in the general because they bashed him for the past several years.

Bottom line elections and political donations have consequences. AFSCME is trying to avoid these consequences,and time is running out.

Comment by Almost the Weekend Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:04 pm
“- DuPage Don - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 2:52 pm:”

DuPage Don = DuPage Dan’s illegitimate cousin

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:04 pm
“telling them they requested 11.5% pay increase and come back with nothing” Sure they can. They can say “We didn’t get what we asked, but look at all the other things he wanted that we fought off!” As for me (as an AFSCME rank-and-file member) I would want new leadership if they stuck to the 11% and called a strike.

Comment by Skeptic Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:07 pm
As a rank and file AFSCME member, I agree with Skeptic. An 11% raise is not reasonable, period.

Comment by Defeated Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:11 pm
“As a rank and file AFSCME member, I agree with Skeptic. An 11% raise is not reasonable, period.”
Especially in light of the 35% annual raise that Private industry managers just got this year. - times are tough.

Comment by Qui Tam Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:16 pm
==can’t go back to rank and file telling them they requested 11.5% pay increase and come back with nothing. Rank and file will want new leadership or will want to strike==

I have yet to talk to an AFSCME member who have even thought, much less said such a thing. Ask any AFSCME member what a “win” is and I bet you 90% of them would tell you that they would be happy if they got out of this making what they make now and not having to pay much more for health insurance. Nobody in their right mind - including AFSCME leadership by the way - thinks they are going to get an 11.5% raise. The Governor came out of the gate with a ridiculous proposal so AFSCME countered with their own ridiculous proposal. Once they each decide to stop being ridiculous then things will move forward. They aren’t there yet.

Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:22 pm
I worked for IDOT DURING Blago days and was executive staff. They had a. Certain amount of bonus money. They have each director the ability to award. The director picked the connected people and then told their supervisors to mark their evaluation as above and beyond normal assignment duties. That qualified you for the bonus check. Please understand how evaluations happen at the state. I have wrote my own evaluation every year. Because my supervisor changed often, the person who signed it did not always know anything about what I did. I received the bonus until the teamsters sent me a letter that they wanted to unionize my position and I signed the card. I understand the game and that is fine, but unless you work at the state and realize how the evaluation process goes it is easy to say that rewards should go,to those that deserve it. At my office we are under staffed and everyone is over worked and doing a fabulous job but I could make a prediction of who would receive the bonuses.

Comment by mom at home Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:25 pm
Reminder, voluntarily accepting Tier 2 benefits is still on the negotiating table. I think maybe this is so far out of the question that we forget that it is even really still there. I know I can’t really move towards any other issue until this non starter is removed and no longer included in the list. I checked and it is still there.

Comment by Small Town Girl Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:27 pm
He negotiated contracts for 350 employees…doesn’t merit all that much discussion really.

Comment by Politix Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:38 pm
I think most AFSCME members would be fine with same contract.

Comment by Politix Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:39 pm
== Rnug, has the state offered bonuses before? ==

At least twice that I know of … for ideas that saved the State money.

Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:40 pm
new performance incentive program to reward employees with bonuses for cost-saving measures and meeting or exceeding performance metrics.

That will be used as leverage by management to control workers. Never seen these things work.

Comment by facts are stubborn things Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:41 pm
==
He negotiated contracts for 350 employees…doesn’t merit all that much discussion really.==

Teamsters represent many more in some other agencies. I would say this is s sign of reaching a deal on those others as well very soon

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:41 pm
SOOOO after being “anti-union” he caved to a union’s demands after all. That’s shall we say it “rich.”

Comment by All the answers Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:48 pm
“- Demoralized - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:22 pm:”

And Step increases

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:50 pm
I understand some people think it is outrageous for AFSCME to ask for 11.5% pay increase. Do people understand this is over a four year period? So they are asking for something like 2.75% a year, and it compounds to 11.5 over the four years. AFSCME is not asking for 11.5% annual payraises, which it appears is what some people think.

Comment by Beaner Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:50 pm
If someone is lower in the Steps, they will want to leave if they do not get their Steps and they are mostly Tier 2.

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:53 pm
To quote Kevin Bacon in Animal House, “Thank You Sir, May I have another.”

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:54 pm
If Afscme strikes, the state will not have to pay them, and they will be the cause of the shutdown. Plays right into the Gov’s plan. And most of us would not notice any impact on our lives.

Comment by Let'sMovetoTexas Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:57 pm
“- Let’sMovetoTexas - Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 3:57 pm:”

Is that you Kass?

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:05 pm
Please, please do move to Texas if you’re so unhappy in this blue state.

Comment by PolPal56 Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:07 pm
==
These employees are not in the Group Health plan. The Teamster’s have their own health insurance plan, which these employees and the State pays in to. That makes it a lot easier for this deal to get done.==

This is worthy of repeating, to those who think the a Rauner will agree to the same with AFSCME on health costs. The savings with Teamsters aren’t there like with the AFSCME workers.

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:09 pm
It is an attempt to divide and conquer by reaching an agreement with a small unit. Rauner still has his poison pill in place in his turn back agenda. He is trying to reshape his image, not his core beliefs. His I am the baddest enemy anyone can have has been a failure. Don’t be fooled.

Comment by Anon Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:14 pm
A wage freeze with an inflation clause might be acceptable and a benefit for both sides. I think most are concerned that inflation will creep back in while wages fall further behind.

It would benefit the administration because it would retain good people as prices skyrocket. And since inflation also boosts revenue, it would have little impact on the ongoing revenue stream. Perhaps a 3% raise annual raise when any previous four quarters of inflation goes over 3%.

Comment by A Jack Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:16 pm
Small town girl

I really wonder at the legal analysis he thinks he has that lets the union negotiate that individual right. Even if the union agrees how could u say a fair share individual agreed.

Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:18 pm
–Plays right into gov’s plan–

Yeah, you’re part of the “braintrust.

If anyone ever really let you in on “the plan” about anything, would you notice?

Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:20 pm
Keep negotiating everything away and soon you’ll have nothing. The members would be wise to reject.

Comment by Say what? Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:25 pm
Bravo

Comment by Peoria Guy Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:25 pm
relocated @ 2:37 pm:
I can do math too.
When Blagovich was sworn in 2001, my merit comp pay was ‘frozen’.
When I retired in 2012, I had had only 2 pay raises.
(let me get my abacus out..) 11 years minus 2 equals 9.
9 times 3 = 27 (percent loss of anticipated income).
For those who say, “why didn’t you get out?”, I had 25 years in by that time.
By definition, State employment is ‘political’. When ‘your guy’ is in,
you do okay, or better. When the ‘other guy’ gets in….not so much.

mom at home @ 3:25 pm:
I concur. Did the same thing (pretty much wrote my own eval, or at least,
my ‘goals’. My boss put his own touches on it).
Up the chain-of-command, it was decided who got what, in terms of a pay-raise.

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:26 pm
Say what

Please tell me you are joking. If Rauner made the same offer to AFSCME I’d lay anything the vote to accept would be overwhelming. If not their darn fools.

Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:44 pm
I proposed legislation that was passed which basically said interest payments to vendors under $50 would not be paid unless specifically requested in writing by the vendor. Saved the state lots of money, mostly in man hours spent processing vouchers. There was a bonus program in effect then too. I got a nice letter from someone in CMS and then 7 years with no raises. Hope it’s different this time

Comment by Former Merit Comp Slave Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 4:52 pm
To those that think these Teamster employees have insurance through the union, you are totally wrong. They are insured under the State! So this would be a very good thing for AFSCME to consider–no raises, keep insurance as-is. (BTW, this local represents Cook County only.)

Comment by Gone, but not forgotten Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 5:37 pm
Watch how the combo public sector and trade unions distance themselves from the traditional public sector folks (IUOE) , it’s about dues money , patronage, Union leadership survival and big union bosses incomes ( keep those sky boxes and golf outings going) and assumed legislative power. It’s time for the AFL and the CIO to define themselves and either combine and concur or separate and win !!!!!

Comment by railrat Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 5:54 pm
If the summary is accurate, health benefits for these Teamsters is provided by what is popularly known as a Taft-Hartley welfare fund, which is a separate entity from the union, and by law is administered by an equal number of employer and employee trustees. The State has agreed to pay contributions to this fund, so these Teamsters’ health benefits are not provided by the State plans and are not paid for under the State’s self-funded scheme for most State employees. Nevertheless, it’s important that this group of State employees will apparently continue their current health benefits without additional costs to them.

The importance of the Teamsters CBA, if it is ratified, is that it may provide a comparator in the event of interest arbitration. Remember that even under current law, there’s thousands of State employees — e.g., prison employees — who are subject to interest arbitration in the event the State and union cannot agree. One of the factors that may be considered by the arbitrator is the terms and conditions provided by CBAs for other groups of State employees.

Comment by RS in Elgin Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 6:02 pm
Congratulations to Teamsters, Local 700, for serving as the first wedge in Rauner’s divide and conquer plan for public sector labor. It appears that keeping their health and welfare fund flush with state money outweighs their previous rhetoric about the governor and his egregious proposals.

Solidarity, my eye…

Comment by Courser Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 6:09 pm
I would like to know how anyone is certain that AFSCME has demanded a wage increase other than what was reported in the Tribune. I have heard the opposite. That AFSCME has yet to engage in anything related to wages. That they are still discussing several non-economic items where there is huge divide between both sides.

Comment by mr brightside Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 6:41 pm
No one is here to read this since i am way late but you all are mixing apples and oranges.

First the teamsters dont have steps, they have this 75% thing where you get increases each year to 100%. They agreed to keep that, so they still get wage increases if they are not maxed.

Afscme and rauners recerence to the 11.5 is to colas which also increase the cap or steps. If rauner agreed to do steps, but no cola and o health change, and keep semiautomatics… That would be the same as the teamster deal…. Anf afscme would probably agree.

To those who think afscme was not with the teamsters look again….this is a good deal for afscme if its duplicated for them. Its no health change, step increases and semiautomatic continue, bonuses for performance, just no colas and no increase in the step caps.

As for bonuses the lottery has done them for a few years. They have a neutral model that can be used

Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Jul 1, 15 @ 8:28 pm
Courser what about the unions that agreed to pension reform?

Comment by foster brooks Thursday, Jul 2, 15 @ 5:14 am
Mr. Brightside…I have heard the same thing. And technically they are not suppose to discuss negotiations. I have not seen one report from AFSME staying what they are attempting to negotiate. They are way to professional for that.

Comment by mom at home Thursday, Jul 2, 15 @ 7:19 am