January 9, 2009 3:42 pm

Norwalk Clerical Workers Contract Includes Yearly Raises

I’m somewhat torn by this news item in the Advocate:

The city is poised to give a 13.25 percent raise over four years to some municipal employees, when the Common Council reviews a new contract Tuesday.

The council Personnel Committee OK’d the pact Wednesday with the Norwalk Municipal Employees Association, the union that represents about 125 clerical staff members.

Personnel Committee Democrats said the contract is a fair one for both sides although the recession is battering city revenues.

Michael Geake said trying to save the city money by negotiating lower raises with the union would not have been fair.

“It would be unfair to take it out on them because they are the last group (to reach a contract agreement),” Geake said.

The contract is retroactive to July 1, 2008, and expires June 30, 2012.

The proposed contract calls for a 2 percent raise in the first six months of the contract, and another 2 percent as of Jan. 1. The second year would see a 3.5 percent hike, with a 3 percent rise in the third year. The final year would see a 2.75 percent increase.

Laurel Lindstrom agreed with Geake.

“To treat certain groups different than others isn’t right. You have to be fair and make sure you are not going to create a hardship for people because it is a difficult time right now,” she said.

She said she is leaning toward backing the contract when the full council votes, unless she hears an argument or new facts, which convince her to change her mind.

“I am always going to be open to what the public says or other council members say,” she said.
Douglas Sutton also said he supports the contract.

So we have a 4 percent salary raise in the first year, 3.5 percent in the second, 3 percent in the third and 2.75 percent in the fourth. My first thought is that the City can’t afford the contract. This is the same thought I had when the administrators contract for the BOE came through. I get that you don’t want to penalize one set of workers over another, but that’s the result of having different unions negotiate different contracts. Timing is everything, and at this time, the concept of pay raises when the City of Norwalk is cutting services is a hard sell.

Meanwhile, the Common Council is risk adverse to raising user fees for City services. So we aren’t increasing revenues that way. And, the preliminary revaluation says that for about 70 percent of single family residences, property taxes are going down. Something has to give. Or at least add up.

source: Advocate, Norwalk city workers to get 13 percent raise, By Frank MacEachern, 01/09/2009

Diane C:

TG: I’m torn as well. A guest speaker at a CACLD conference once told the audience, in reference to siblings of special needs children, that “fair does not mean equal”. It has stuck with me all these years. What is fair is what is needed. What is needed may or may not be equal. What is fair may not be available. Life is not fair.
I realize its not “fair” to penalize the last ones in, but also agree that the timing is critical here, and that these seemingly large union increases seem neither “fair” nor realistic given these economic difficulties. Why can’t increases be tied to CPI or some other barometer of economic health?
not to beat a dead museum…

…but isn’t Soo Gunn a member of this union? She gets a raise for her no show, no accomplishments job?
Anon

There are many, many people out there who will not be getting raises and who do not have the benefits and retirement advantages of a City employee. There is no money, city services are being cut to the bone…enough, no raises. It’s not fair to the taxpayers to have enough money found for raises but no money for the library and parks, streets and amenities. Timing is everything, they’re too late.
Astounded

It seems that the council never negotiated a contract they didn’t give in to. These people continue to fiddle while Norwalk burns. We continue to read how there is no money for basic services, but they continue to give more money to city workers, teachers and other municipal workers, with no productivity requirements. One of these days, either the voters of Norwalk will wake up, or those of us who have to work hard to make our livings will find other places to live.
Yeah, yeah, I can hear the comments coming…. “Why don’t you get the hell out of town”, “if you don’t like it you can leave”, and other similar erudite arguments, which a large majority of this blogs readers seem to love to spew.

Be careful what you wish for, because one day, you might get it.
Townie

Hey you guys running the City…..even in good times 4%, 3.5% & 3% is alot more than the custodians, maintenance guys, security people, secretaries and non-cetified workers get at the BOE. What is this, do as I say, not as I do. Listen up folks….screw giving raises during these difficult times…unfair is not having a job with benifets at all.
What the???

What do these people think they are doing? Obviously they do not want to get re-elected.

Maybe they should look at the CT and National unemployment rate. How many of these people were up for raises and bonuses but got the boot instead?

How many are losing their homes because of no income? Are you people off your rocker or what?

Tell the union workers either get layed off or accept that there are no raises until the city services can be covered.

Or guess again when it comes election time. You can be assured they won’t be making any decisions.

Does anyone listen to the news? We are in a recession folks and its the worst since WWII. I should think the decision should be an easy one.
anonymous

The city workers should not get automatic raises. Most of them do not deserve them. Maybe its time for the unions to go. They protect the lazy worker. Thats all that they are good for. There are a few people who work there that deserve much more than they get. The majority though are either talking on the phone all day or hanging out in the hallways chatting with coworkers. No pay raises for at least the next couple of years.
Retired from DRG I

Just in case it makes sense to anyone, you do not add the percents together to get the total percent of increase.

Just as when you have an interest rate you figure the second year on the first. So to report that the % of increase over three or four years is 13 1/4% is irresponsible.

It is detrimental to the contract understanding and also to the public who takes the writing as correct.
anon

these people will keep getting elected, no one will remember this, democrats keep voting for democrats, and democratic politicians keep giving unions pretty much whatever they ask for, the unions keep donating to the democrats and the cycle renews itself.

we’re all doomed
hopefully a former norwalker

soo screws the city and gets a raise. what else is new?
anon

hey #8, here’s what’s detrimental ANY public employee getting a raise of ANY kind while our country is crumbling around us.

My company cut my pay 5%, canceled 401k matching for 09, and maybe ’10. People are being laid off all over the place, losing their homes, and our incoming President is about to spend $1 trillion in bailouts.

Our poor oppressed admins can get by without a raise.
Diane C: absent that day…

Retired: then WHAT is the increase over the 4 years? Looks like 11.74% to me in this simple example:

START: 10,000 SALARY
YEAR 1: 10,100 (2% INCREASE PART 1 6 MONTHS)
YEAR 1: 10,201 (2% INCREASE PART 2 6 MONTHS)
YEAR 2: 10,558 (3.5% INCREASE)
YEAR 3: 10,875 (3% INCREASE)
YEAR 4: 11,174 (2.75% INCREASE)

TOTAL % INCREASE OVER 4 YEARS: 11.74%. Still not a bad deal if corporate America now gets 0-2% annually..
Diane C: day of reckoning..

#6 and #9: And speaking of getting re-elected: Let the tally for “who voted how” begin in this most glorious of all seasons known to man: local election year! They seem to think we forget what they’ve done in the 1st quarter come the 4th quarter. And truth be told, I AM having a lot of senior moments these days. But fret not. I am popping gingko biloba and much like the other fatso you see around town this time of year, I have devised ye olde tally sheet to record the naughty and nice deeds of each councilperson, and yes, the big man, too. No need to wait for the Half Hour to publish the political bio’s and platform crapola. If you are an incumbent, it’s not what you’re GOING to do come November, it’s what you’ve ALREADY done. And challengers, for pete’s sake (or mine), please tell us specifically what you would do differently than the incumbent and why it would be better for the city. That’s all. Short rant. (Oxymoron, again, eh?)
Harry Patzer

Diane C:

Normally I would never dream of correcting you, but math is one of my things. The right way to look at the increase is:

START: 10,000 SALARY
YEAR 1 (first half): 10,200 annualized; 5,100 actual pay(2% INCREASE PART 1 6 MONTHS)
YEAR 1 (second half): 10,404 annualized; 5,202 actual (2% INCREASE PART 2 6 MONTHS)
Total YEAR 1 pay: 10,302
YEAR 2: 10,768.14 (3.5% INCREASE on 10,404 annualized rate)
YEAR 3: 11,091.18 (3% INCREASE)
YEAR 4: 11,396.19 (2.75% INCREASE)

So the increase over the life of the contract is 13.9619%
ENOUGH ALREADY

“Not FAIR”???????? WHEN are we going to have a CC member who is NOT in the unions pocket?????
It can’t be that difficult to realize that the Norwalk Taxpayers can’t afford to keep paying these overinflated salary’s!!!!
NO MORE !!!!!
Everytime Geake opens his mouth it just further illustrates his real agenda as an ultra left wing Socialist.
I’m sure a lot VOTERS will have very good memory’s when the next election comes around.
Anonymous

Um, the contracts were negotiated by the city, and the city workers are just expecting the city to live up to them. In good times, municipal workers – and especially teachers – don’t do as well as the other fat cats. What they do get is job security. Maybe the people who posted those notes hating this fact are just plain JEALOUS? And the “big guy” doesn’t have a contract, he can be voted out if you hate him. From what I hear, his ex-girlfriend, who has more reason than any of you to hate his guts, still wants him to be re-elected ’cause she thinks he’s doing a decent enough job to keep her house marketable so she can get out of here!
Anonymous

I’m a public sector employee, but I worked the first half of my career in the private sector for a large corporation that was bought out, merged and faltered. You know the rest of the story. I love my job here in Norwalk (I also have lived here all my life) and think that it’s a wonderful place to work, with great benifets & conditions. I often wish that I had started my career in the public, rather than private sector. 30 years ago I wouldn’t have said this, because I had nothing to compare it to. Now that I do, I wish more of my co-workers understood. If they did they would be better off and be better workers. The only place that Unions in this country are flurishing is in the private sector. Why, because you will always have two-bit politicians, in empty suits and skirts, that know nothing about reality and only want to please the Unions, since they view them as a huge chunk of votes at election time. Why should they be prudent or show any fiscal responsibility? Many of these politicians seem to view us taxpayers as having deep and endless pockets full of money to be grabbed. Reading Geake’s comments makes me sick. Seeing that Lindstrom and Sutton agree with Geake only increases my anger. Where does the buck stop with these people. UNFAIR? Does one bad deed or decision deserve another and another? Just because someone else in the past failed to be responsible, should this set the standard for these council members to follow and hang their hats on? Mr.Geake, Mr. Sutton, Ms. Lindstrom, Grow some round ones and stop playing political games with the taxpayers money. You should be ashamed of yourselves and your actions.
Anon

Why don’t they just increase salaries each year equal to cost of living increases. This way it will increase in proportion to the times instead of by the contracts.
Diane C:

Harry Patzer: I suck at math! Thanks very much for correcting my entry.
Barnstorm

I’m no math whiz, so I’ll let Harry’s #14 post speak for itself. Diane C,Bravo your comments #13.

I’m in a union, and we’ve been getting raises in the 1.1-1.2% range for the past several years. I can’t see how any councilperson who votes for these proposed raises could look a taxpayer in the eye.

I would have to see some productivity figures first, in order to see if ANY raises are warranted.Otherwise, they ought to do what everybody else in this country is doing right now….making do with less.
Old Timer

Maybe if the HOUR published the salaries of these people, like they do some others, it would put all this in better context. City ashamed to release those numbers ? The contract, with present salaries, is available online at the City’s website.
Diane C:

Barnstorm; thanks, and bravo yours too re: productivity. I don’t think that is asking too much by anyone’s standards.
OldTimer, double bravo #21! I’m going to website to look at the salaries, but will wait for my blood pressure meds to kick in!
Another Anonymous

16 – why not leave the ex-girlfriend out of it. I personally know her and have never heard her voice the sentiment you attribute to her. Her fiancee died very suddenly and sadly this summer and she just wants to get out of this town with all its bad and sad memories and go somewhere warm. It has nothing to do with the ‘big guy’ – she doesn’t hate him or love him, she just mourns the guy who died. She’s also asked all of her real friends – who you obviously aren’t one of – to “stay out of the whole thing and try to avoid making comments.” but not because she wants him to be re-elected, because she wants to be high-minded.
anonymous 2

You can’t really compare private sector jobs with municipal unions Typically, in good times, private sector employees get higher salaries and raises, including end of year bonuses, stock options, paid business meetings, seminars, and incentive rewards in places such as Florida, California, Texas, etc. In the good times, the municipal union employees get their salary and benefits.

In poor times, private sector jobs lose those perks, and sometimes their jobs. The municipal union employees get their salary and benefits.

When the economy is booming, people don’t often jump up and down demanding that the municipal employees receive bonuses and incentive trips. They don’t demand that city employees receive huge wages.

Private sector trade job security and many benefits for the higher pay, bonuses, and incentives that occur in good times. Municipal employees trade the big money and bonuses for benefits and job security. In the end, you get what you pay for
Old Timer

http://www.norwalkct.org/Personnel/NMEAUnionContract.pdf
is the link to that contract. Salaries now range from $35,690 to $90,191 in pay grades 8 to 22, covering people in every city department, including Personnel and Labor Relations, the dept. in charge of negotiating contracts. It would take a lot of digging through the budget to figure out the real cost of the raises.
Diane C:

Thanks for the link Old Timer. Lots of interesting stuff in there, especially accumulation of unused sick days (payments up to 60 days worth!) and is it unlimited unused vacation pay instead of standard “use it or lose it” policies? And are you saying that the staff of personnel and labor relations that negotiate on the city’s behalf are in the union themselves? Yikes.
You’re right about hours to figure out true costs of raises, especially since we don’t have the number of employees at each grade level and length of service.
Anonymous

Anonymous 2 – Unless people have an employment contract, or are covered under a collective bargaining agreement, where is it written in law that anyone is automatically entitled to a yearly raise. In the public sector here in Norwalk, where the bulk of funds needed to provide for services & pay for salaries comes from real estate taxes collected from home & property owners, the rate of employees raises should always be determined on the cities ability to pay. The ability to pay is based on the ability to collect enough taxes & revenue to cover the expenses. When expenses exceed revenue, you cut expenses and one of the first things you do to combat this in both sectors is by freezing salaries and approving no raises. If employees are unhappy with these conditions and find them to be intolerable, they have the right to find a better employmemnt opportunity for themselves. You said “in the end, you get what you pay for.” I say, “if you don’t like working for the City of Norwalk and not being able to get what you think is a “fair” raise, then leave.” Someone else will be sitting in your chair on Monday morning with a huge smile on their face.
Anon

I think the point of anonymous 2 was that municipal employees don’t expect to get huge bonuses when the city has an overly good year like private sector employees do. If you want to cut their salaries in the lean years, are you going to give them huge bonuses if the city has a good year?
hopefully a former norwalker

Municipal employees shouldn’t expect bonuses. If they want one they should seek employment in the private sector. Shouldn’t they be satisfied with the pension they earn? The rest of us have to save and invest as retirement isn’t given to us.
David Brown

Negotiating union contracts isn’t as cut and dry as some might think. As a commissioner of the Third Taxing District we negotiated a new contract for our employees this past year. It is a public document and would invite anyone interested to ask for a copy at the District office.

Our meetings are open to the public, but if weren’t for Diane CC, there would never be anyone there to look over our shoulders to see if we are doing what the community wants.

I’ll allow anyone who gets the TTD Bargaining Agreement to make it public within this post rather than me and I will answer any of your questions to the best of my ability.

Bargaining for the contract is a give and take negotiation. I’m not real proud where the contact ended up, but am satisfied it was the best we could do for the community without costly attorney’s fees to argue a point before a Arbitration Committee which is historically pro labor anyway.

The specter of going to arbitration over shadowed nearly all our decisions. It didn’t make any difference whatever the rest of the local work force in Norwalk is making, it had to do with whatever the TTD employees were accustomed to earning and how any common sense changes in their wages or health benefit contributions would detrimentally effect their current earning capability.

I think we made some good headway in getting employee contributions to their health plan while trying to keep the wage increases within sensible ranges.

As a negotiator, it makes no difference what the economy is doing or what is affordable, you have to way the financial advantage against the cost of arbitration.

It isn’t easy – at the end of the day you have to be satisfied you did the best job you could and in politics, hope the voting public some how realizes what you did for them and re-elects you to continue to fight for them in the future.

Dave Brown
Anonymous

I must say that I have really enjoyed the comments & viewpoints shared by everyone on this matter. I can’t say that I agree with all, but at least I better understand and respect some of the thinking and rationale of others. Isn’t it good to have an open discussion on things and to hear both sides of arguments and disagreements. Perhaps Geake, Lindstrom, Sutton and other council members that lack such communication skills should take a lesson from this. Often it is not why you do something, it is how.
turfgrrl

hopefully a former norwalker: A municipal worker who earns a pension, does in fact earn it. It’s part of the compensation, except that its deferred. No different than a private sector employee that takes 401k or ROTH IRA deductions with employer matches.
Diane C:

David Brown, nice try, but am not bringing cookies to next TTD meeting!
Thanks for “another view” in the discussion on contracts, arbitration, concessions, etc. No doubt negotiations are tough, but I think we mere mortals always want to think there is some give and take that is meaningful, and not just posturing that only ends up where everyone thinks it would to begin with!
I wouldn’t want to be in your shoes or the council’s, (which does not preclude me from critiquing, though)when faced with these tough decisions, but always want to ask that elected folks use some common sense, seek feedback from constituents when appropriate, and follow your heart. Only you can know if you’ll feel good about yourself and your representation of us when you lay your head on the pillow at night. Honestly, I don’t know HOW some folks in this town sleep at night, but will leave that for another time.
Old Timer

Actual cost, first year of the contract, which is already half over, is about 3%. If you are one of the full time people at the low end of the payscale, that amounts to about $20 a week, hardly enough to make a big difference, probably not enough to keep up with the change in your local tax bill. Wonder what the union had to give back that wasn’t reported by the HOUR. That will probably be in the council members packets.
Diane C:

Old timer: That brings me back to the fact that council packets should be published on line with the agendas, and folks can print the pages that are important to them and review in advance. In the absence of attending endless committee meetings, packets are often the only way to get up to speed and speak intelligently during the public participation portion.
Nuts in this day and age that you have to use gas to drive to city hall and kill trees getting hard copies of agenda-related documents.
hopefully a former norwalker

Hi TG,

Thank you for agreeing with me that municipal employees do earn their pension. However, #1 employers do not match Roth IRA’s, and #2 municipal employees are not restricted from funding their own IRA or Roth IRA (Roth has income limitations).
turfgrrl

hopefully a former norwalker: Yeah I shouldn’t of lumped the types of 401k, in my response. My bad.
Anonymous

At least Norwalk’s not doing what I hear Danbury is doing – this morning’s news story was that TEACHERS may have to be FIRED if their 4.5 increase goes through, but the ADMINISTRATORS are still going to get their 4.5 percent raise and won’t be losing THEIR jobs.

Disgusting.
Old Timer

The papers are calling it a clerical worker’s contract, but that is only partly true. There are clerical workers in it, at the low end of the pay scale, but there are some pretty good supervisory jobs covered, at the higher end.
Old Timer

It apparently got approved by the council with nothing reported by the HOUR as to what the union had to give up to get a contract.