The city is expected to approve a deal with the fire union
Monday night, but sources would not say whether that deal includes
layoffs. Meanwhile, the city and police union appear deadlocked, a
week after the council wanted to have agreements with all four
unions.
The city is expected to approve a deal with the fire union Monday night, but sources would not say whether that deal includes layoffs. Meanwhile, the city and police union appear deadlocked, a week after the council wanted to have agreements with all four unions.
After a two-hour closed session Monday night to discuss deals with Fire Local 2805 and the Police Officers’ Association, the council announced only that it had directed staff to keep talking with the unions. Officials with knowledge of the talks but who were not authorized to speak to the media said the council was divided over whether to lay off emergency employees – who largely escaped cuts Jan. 31, as only four firefighters and no police officers were among the 48 full-time employees who received pink slips. Both departments lost support staff, though, who used to assist police officers and firefighters with paperwork and other time-consuming tasks.
After all-day negotiations with city officials Wednesday, Fire Representative Jim Buessing said his union kicked back a proposal his members hoped would succeed.
“We feel that this is very close to what they asked for and should be something that hopefully satisfies both parties,” he said.
Last month, the council demanded each union cut about 16 percent of its personnel costs. For the 33-member fire union, that means about six firefighters. Buessing and other firefighters declined to talk about details of the proposal until the council sees it.
“Fire is different in nature because changes to our contract affect the parameters we use to negotiate concessions,” Buessing said, adding that he was unaware how council members were leaning even though their individual sentiments were conveyed to union officials, sources said.
Despite the urgency of reaching a deal – the positions of 10 sworn officers are on the line – POA President Mitch Madruga and City Administrator Tom Haglund said police union officials and city representatives have only been calling each other this week with quick questions and clarifications. Neither side has met to hammer out a deal since the council’s closed session Monday night. Both sides appear to think the ball is in the other’s court, according to statements Madruga and Haglund made.
“The POA has taken a hit due to layoffs and position freezes that have already occurred,” Madruga said Thursday.
The 58-member union includes officers, detectives and administrative staff who do not patrol the streets. With two officers leaving for the Watsonville Police Department, three additional officers applying with other agencies, two officers retiring and four officers out on injury leaves, Detective Madruga – who said he will return to patrol next month due to tight staffing – said the department cannot afford to lose anyone at this point.
“How are we going to do this? That’s the predicament we’re in. It’s like firefighters showing up to a structure fire and throwing water balloons at it,” Madruga said of the increased workloads officers face without a crime analyst and supporting non-sworn officers. “We need to help the council understand that public safety is their top priority. Having everything else is a luxury and a perk.”
The city has already reached deals with the other two unions that represent non-emergency workers – the Gilroy Management Association and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 101, Gilroy’s largest union with 100 members ranging from city engineers to emergency dispatchers. Both unions agreed to take every other Friday off without pay through the next two years and to accept temporary pay cuts rather than layoffs.
The move will save the city $1.6 million annually over the next two fiscal years – bringing next year’s general fund deficit to $3.6 million out of $37 million in expenditures. Council members said generating comparable savings for police and fire has been difficult because there is a fundamental disagreement among the elected body whether it should treat firefighters and cops the same as officers, managers and janitors.
Buessing said his union’s proposal was not the same as those approved by the council approved for the GMA and AFSCME.
While Local 2805’s contract – which expires Dec. 31, 2011, and includes a 7.5 percent raise between now and July 1, 2011, worth about $450,000 – the POA’s contract is set to expire at the end of this month with no planned raises. Aside from the forced unpaid days reducing management and municipal employees’ annual earnings by about 9 percent, AFSCME employees used their $400,000 worth of raises over the next near as a bargaining chip to avoid layoffs.
Freezing those so-called “cost-of-living adjustments” came after the city council already halted additional merit-based pay hikes earlier this year for all employees through at least June 30, 2010.
Because police and firefighters cannot strike, they have the ability to call in an un-elected arbiter to review their final proposals line by line and then pick their side or the city’s with room for mutual amendments afterward – a process known as binding arbitration. Firefighters have used it twice, but police never have.
“Binding arbitration is somewhere we don’t want to go, and we’ve proven that fact over the last 21 years,” Madruga said. Still, Local 2805 has and AFSCME had future raises to bargain with, whereas “we don’t have that ability,” Madruga said.
While Gilroy has typically relied on its robust reserve fund to resolve financial hiccups, council members have said they are unwilling to further drain the rainy day fund after a $4.7 million hit last year and an expected $8.4 million reduction by the end of the current fiscal. The fund will hold about $13.6 million next fiscal year, or about 36 percent of expenses. The fund will also have to cover any general fund shortfalls left after union talks.
Mayor Al Pinheiro – who has been critical of binding arbitration and also faces a mounting recall effort by conservative activist Mark Zappa for his stance on the issue along with other city spending issues – also said hoped to avoid binding arbitration.
“People will come to their senses and see that we’re being fair,” Pinheiro said. “At this point, it’s up to them.”
