Dear Members:
Two issues in the recently ratified "concession" vote involved a misunderstanding in implementation. The good news is the first misunderstanding very much worked in our favor, while the second one did not. It's also important to note that both proposals outlined below are actually better economically than the one you voted for. In a nutshell, on the positive side, we were operating on the premise of a ten (10) hour day when in fact the city was using the eight (8) hour day for their calculations. That means that we saved an additional twenty hours in compensation from what we believed to be the case.
Secondly, while we knew the net gain in year one would be 1.6%, we believed that the 4% figure would still be reflected in the base for purposes of overtime and premiums. The city did not agree! I ask you to carefully read the differences in the two proposals and then confer with your station representatives. I sincerely apologize for the miscommunication and hope that after you review the language below you will be able to communicate your wishes to your representatives.
OPTION 1
Year One (1)
48 Furlough hours
(Value $2,550)
Smoothed out over 26 pay periods
($98.07 per pay period)
Raise reflects 1.6% increase after
furlough days are taken into
Account.
Difference in overtime income
Based on 1.6% vs. 4% = $1.23
per hour.
Average amount of overtime worked
By Q-4 (step 5) last fiscal year $7,380
Net loss on $7,380 = ($175 per year)
Year Two (2)
32 Furlough hours
(Value $1,768)
Smoothed out over 26 pay periods
($68 per pay period)
Raise reflects 4.0% increase after
furlough days are taken into account.
Overtime now based on 4% all pay
Total Value of furlough days $4,318
Total raises as of 7/1/2012 (9%) $10,057
OPTION 2
Year One (1)
56 Furlough hours
(Value $2,975)
56 Furlough hours
(Value $2,975)
Not smoothed out over 26
pay periods but assessed
during pay period taken.
Would reflect 4% raise on
check but would still be a 1.6%
Raise after backing out furlough
days.
Difference in OT rate $1.23
per hour
Member would have to work 350
hours overtime to surpass savings
of taking furlough hours
(48 vs. 56 hrs.)
Year Two (2)
40 Furlough hours
(Value $2,176)
Not smoothed out over 26
pay periods but assessed
during pay period taken
Would reflect 4% raise
on all pay.
Total value of furlough days $5,151
Total raises as of 7/1/2012 (9%) $10,057
To break it down further, let me reiterate that both of these proposals are BETTER than what you voted on. The advantage to "Plan One" is a savings of an additional $833 by taking less furlough hours. You would need to work 675 hrs of overtime in Year One to make up for the savings. Remember in "Year Two" the overtime premium is 4%! The only disadvantage to Plan One is the fact that the overtime and premiums will be based on the 1.6% figure rather than the 4% figure. We were aware that the net gain in "Year One" would be 1.6% but we believed the base rate for overtime and premiums would reflect the 4%. The reality is that the $833 savings over the two years far exceeds the benefit of the higher percentage for overtime and premiums in Year One. "Plan One" is clearly the better economic package! For those of you who fear we will not receive the additional 2.4% next July 1st. I assure that WILL be implemented. That will not be negotiable under any circumstances.
Again, I am sorry for the inconvenience.
Gary Delagnes |
Click here to download the related PDF File
Contact the President