I was thrilled to learn that Governor Andrew Cuomo called for the reform of the arbitration panel laws today. The Governor is suggesting that arbitration panels be barred from increasing compensation by more than 2 percent a year if a municipality meets criteria for a “fiscally distressed” municipality. New Jersey adopted a similar law a few years ago.
The Governor said that employee compensation should follow the same 2 percent
guidelines that municipalities face with the 2 percent tax cap. In addition,
arbitration panels will be required to take into account the rising cost of
health care when ruling on contracts.
I believe that this proposed law, if approved, will make it easier for every locality in the state to resolve contract disputes with public safety unions. Right now there is little incentive for unions to stay at the bargaining table if they disapprove of the local governments offer because they know that arbitration panels will probably mandate larger increases. Local governments settle contracts at higher amounts than they could afford because they know that the arbitration awards will be even more costly if they don't settle. During the height of the recession some arbitration awards were in the 4% salary hike range-state wide.
Personally, I'd like to eliminate arbitration panels. I think local governments should be able to set salaries for all employees. But, I recognize that lawmakers are unlikely to take that step. The Governor's proposal is a great step in the right direction.
A copy of a statement I made in 2010 about this matter follows.
PAUL FEINER
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WOULD BE ABLE TO REDUCE COSTS OF RUNNING GOV IF ARBITRATION PANELS ARE ELIMINATED
Release Date: May 17, 2010
Elected officials have to make difficult choices--do we settle contracts and award increases greater than what we would give other employees but less than what arbitration panels have awarded other localities to avoid arbitration panel determinations OR do we reject contracts --only to see an arbitration award made that is even higher than that we think we could afford? If we don't settle we are taking a big risk. If we do settle we may be granting increases that we normally would not grant, if there was no arbitration panel in place?
I believe that this proposed law, if approved, will make it easier for every locality in the state to resolve contract disputes with public safety unions. Right now there is little incentive for unions to stay at the bargaining table if they disapprove of the local governments offer because they know that arbitration panels will probably mandate larger increases. Local governments settle contracts at higher amounts than they could afford because they know that the arbitration awards will be even more costly if they don't settle. During the height of the recession some arbitration awards were in the 4% salary hike range-state wide.
Personally, I'd like to eliminate arbitration panels. I think local governments should be able to set salaries for all employees. But, I recognize that lawmakers are unlikely to take that step. The Governor's proposal is a great step in the right direction.
A copy of a statement I made in 2010 about this matter follows.
PAUL FEINER
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WOULD BE ABLE TO REDUCE COSTS OF RUNNING GOV IF ARBITRATION PANELS ARE ELIMINATED
Release Date: May 17, 2010
I
have sent letters to County Executive Rob Astorino, all the members of the
Westchester delegation to the NYS State Legislature, members of the business
community and Town Supervisors/Mayors in Westchester urging them to support a
proposal to eliminate arbitration panels.
The
county, local governments and fire districts have NO CONTROL over salaries of
police and fire fighters. We can negotiate salary agreements. However, if the
unions are not pleased with what we are offering our employees –they have the
ability to go before an arbitration panel which dictates the salary hikes. As a
result of this state law salary increases for emergency service personnel
usually exceed inflation. Paul Feiner
In
recent months many Westchester residents have complained about high property
taxes. The New York State Legislature could and should respond to the call for
reform by amending the state law that prevents local governments, fire districts
and the county of Westchester from unilaterally deciding on the salaries of
police and fire fighters. There is a need for an amendment to the Taylor law so
that the salaries of police & firefighters are not determined by arbitration
panels. In my opinion, the salaries should be decided by local elected officials
who are responsible for the approval of a budget. How can you expect local
elected officials to control budgets when we don't have any control over the
setting of salaries of a large number of our employees?
The
Police & firefighters benefit from larger salary increases than many
localities can afford because of a labor law (Taylor Law). This law was approved to prevent police
and emergency services from striking. In lieu of not being able to strike, the
police & fire fighters are able to go to an arbitration panel if they can't
reach a collective bargaining settlement. The arbitration is run by a panel that
has given very favorable contracts to the PBA & firefighters union over the
years because the PBA & firefighter unions has a voice along with local
governments in the selection of the panels.
The
reason why salaries of police and firefighters are so high is because the way
the arbitration panel comes to a decision is based on comparing like areas. Even
in these economic difficult times when so many people are out of work,
arbitration panels are awarding salary increases of over 4% a year.
Elected officials have to make difficult choices--do we settle contracts and award increases greater than what we would give other employees but less than what arbitration panels have awarded other localities to avoid arbitration panel determinations OR do we reject contracts --only to see an arbitration award made that is even higher than that we think we could afford? If we don't settle we are taking a big risk. If we do settle we may be granting increases that we normally would not grant, if there was no arbitration panel in place?
Another negative to the arbitration
concept-- if members of the PBA or firefighters union receive a large increase,
members of the Teamsters and CSEA (which are not subjected to arbitration
procedures) have a stronger case that they, too, should be entitled to larger
salary adjustments? How can local governments justify giving some employees a 4%
increase and others a zero or one percent increase? The CSEA and Teamsters use
the arbitration awards to push for salary increases for themselves.
If
our state lawmakers want to help local governments cut back on spending and if
they would like to see property taxes come under control - the elimination of
arbitration would be an important step.
Taxpayers who are concerned about the high cost of government should reach out to all candidates for state-wide office and our State Legislators and ask them to support this needed reform.
Taxpayers who are concerned about the high cost of government should reach out to all candidates for state-wide office and our State Legislators and ask them to support this needed reform.
Sincerely,
PAUL FEINER
Greenburgh Town Supervisor
1 comments:
I believe that if you makes mistakes that cost the towns people money it shold come out of your pocket
Post a Comment