Costs are still rising in the Township... see why... We may have AAA rating now... but...how much more are YOU willing to pay to keep up appearances? How many age 50+ employees are ready to cash out and retire this year?
1. Bloomfield Township made some information public this week: the dollar amount paid each month via Prudential retirement contract.... to the Bloomfield Township retirees. (see chart below)
(This does NOT include the cost for retiree health care. I don't have those figures...yet.)
2. The Township also discussed the 2015-2016 proposed budget. View it: choose: MARCH 9, 2015
3. Our former Supervisor, David Payne, "retired" before the end of his elected term for health reasons in 2011. I am assuming he is Participant Number 31...in the chart below.
With $11,122 per month as retirement....which is $133,464 yearly, why work?
4. Prior to Payne's "retirement", the Township Board already had approved a four day work week... supposedly to save money... but it did make a nice three day weekend for trips up north to the cottage or other activities for all employees. The Township continues to pay overtime for Friday work... and the services the residents receive are one day short. Why won't they go back to M-F work week? Answer: They like what they have.
5. A month before "retiring", the Board, under Payne's leadership, signed a six year contract with the employees. Our current Supervisor, Leo Savoie, has suggested that the wage opener for 2015 most likely will have a 2% wage increase for all....just as it happened in 2013. It would be wonderful to have a copy of that contract. In 2011, I saw part of it...and asked friends for comments. See #6.
6. The following are comments made in 2011... concerning the six year contract... sent to me in an email.
1. Comments from a CPA
Why no changes to Health Care coverages - NO changes in co-pays, NO changes in coverages, nothing. Why should this be locked in for 6 years. This only means that the projected significant cost increases will be solely on the backs of the taxpayers. Certain pundits have predicted 15+% per year cost increases yet the township is asking for nothing more from its employees.
Retiree Health Care benefits - looks like there will be a change for new hires, but the basic question is why do we need to offer retiree health care in the first place. The use of an HSA is a real smokescreen since and employee can put away a contribution today and use it tomorrow. It doesn't have anything to do with retiree health care.
How can the township deem it appropriate to put a 1% increase in existing retiree benefits. It looks like this will be an annual increase for the next 6 years.
The township wants a 6 year contract so that, in the words of Mr. Payne, they can lock in their costs for the next 6 years in order to be better able to enter into share services agreements. This makes no sense. The township says that 80% of their costs are personnel related. Yet they won't know their future retiree health care costs for existing employees, regular employee health care costs in the future, AND the contracts can be reopened for salary changes one or two times in the future 6 years. The six year term only seems to insure that other benefits can get adjusted downward for the next six years. Wages can increase but benefits cannot be cut. Looks like a bit of feathering the nest to me.
2. Comments from a HR Consultant and Labor Negotiator
The Township Union Agreement is flawed and clearly well above current market for public unions in the State of Michigan.
The six year contract provides for a wage freeze through 3/31/2013 while the private sector has been negotiating wage concessions in the double digit range (10-50%) for the past 3-5 years.
After 2013, there are two wage opener clauses for 4/1/2013 and 4/1/2015 completing the six year term of the new CBA.
The question has to be asked? Why no concessions? What Benchmark data was used to justify this agreement based on what is happening with the public unions in Wisconsin & Ohio?
Is there a “No Strike Provision “ for the wage opener periods? The summary is silent on no strike??
No Changes in the DB & DC pension plans? Why?
Many public unions have eliminated Defined Benefit Pension Plans (DB) and only maintained Defined Contribution Plans (DC) we still have both.......Why?? And at what cost to the Public? No discussion on the Unfunded Liability for these plans?
There is a 1% COLA for the DB plan............Cost of Living Increases were eliminated over a decade ago in the private sector and very rare in today's economic environment. Again Why do we provide these benefits & at what cost???
Why does the Township still provide Retiree Health benefits?
Again the private sector has eliminated these benefits over 10 years ago??
Longevity Pay? Why do we continue this practice?? Not in the private sector? at what cost??
No improvements for productivity in this agreement,,, only a few economic changes and no contract changes which often are the most costly with ongoing operations. Can we combine jobs & or eliminate jobs in this contract to save money?
You need to see the details, costs and “Benchmark Data” to be fair with the evaluation of this agreement.
On it’s face it appears to be very costly and not in step with the current economic conditions of the state.
7. WHO NEGOTIATES the contracts? Would it be people that actually BENEFIT from the contract? April...2015.... wage opener.... let's see who is doing what !
8. Below is PART of the chart found in the Board of Trustees Board Packet for the Special Study Session on March 10, 2015
There are 268 current RETIREES collecting a Pension... or their beneficiaries. A LOT OF MONEY!
No comments:
Post a Comment