Fatcow Icon
More Budget Woes For Mayor, Council: City Workers’ Union Won’t Give Up Pay Increase
by Frank Lewis
May 20, 2010 | 5189 views | 5 5 comments | 13 13 recommendations | email to a friend | print
The city of Portsmouth’s largest union has voted not to forego the scheduled 3 percent pay increase, sending the city’s budget back to square one. AFSCME (American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees) Local 1039 met Tuesday and voted.

“We voted no,” AFSCME Local 1039 President Keith Nylund said. “There’s a lot of situations going on that just wasn’t fair to us. They were not guaranteeing that there wouldn’t be any layoffs; they need to create a couple of positions at the Wastewater Plant. We’re not going to get reimbursed for the time when we didn’t get our raise when everybody else got theirs. And we wanted no new hiring, no raises. It’s just a big mess.”

In March and April, Portsmouth City Council worked on the city’s budget deficit, and finalized the budget after the FOP, Firefighters Local 512, and apparently AFSCME members, decided to forego a scheduled 3 percent pay increase to help City Council cut the city’s deficit. However, the city still ended up with a deficit of more than $1 million, and Portsmouth Mayor Jane Murray could not promise there would not be layoffs, leading AFSCME members to re-think their decision.

“We don’t want to make it sound like we’re not trying to work with them. That wasn’t the problem at all,” Nylund said. “But we just sat back and waited for them to come to us and come to us, and it hasn’t happened yet. So a lot of the members didn’t agree with some of the things that were going on. So they just voted no, and will take their chances with layoffs. When it does come down, the city workers are going to get the blunt end of it anyway, so, we’re just kind of cutting our throat more than once.”

So what effect does the vote have on the recently passed budget?

“I guess the budget is not operational now,” President of Portsmouth City Council David Malone said, in reaction to the AFSCME vote. “It was contingent upon the unions’ accepting it. So I guess we’ll have to regroup, and get with the Mayor and see what steps she wants to take, and go from there.”

Murray was asked what steps need to be taken to respond to the union’s latest move. However, she had just learned about the situation when asked the question.

“I just learned of this from your report, and I have not had time to look into it,” Murray said. “My main concern was that all employees be treated equally.”

FRANK LEWIS can be reached at (740) 353-3101, ext. 232 or flewis@heartlandpublications.com
Comments
(5)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Pepprkorn
|
May 22, 2010
Mr. Doyle, you are sick in the head.
ACitizen
|
May 20, 2010
Is that not interesting, people change their tune when they finally get their head of the "sand" and see the reality of things, hello...........Oh, there's much more to come, all those contracts that the Auditor, Solicitor and Kalb got done before Kalb left. You may only be seeing the tip of the Baughman, Mohr, Kalb, et al iceberg. Fasten you seat belts.
stillhope
|
May 20, 2010
it's a shame. the proposal was written and adopted by the unions to be fair to everyone. if afscme thinks they are going to take the brunt of it regardless, why didn't they take the cut to lessen the blow?
justafewthoughts
|
May 20, 2010
I can see why the city employees are frustrated. They really have waited a long time for something to go their way and it always seems like they are the ones who get the short end of the stick. This reminds me though of the problems Toyota had at the beginning of the recession. The Cincinnati plant presented an idea to it's workers. It bascially said "We don't know what the future will hold, we only know what it happening now. Right now, we can either lay off a bunch of people right now, or everyone can take a pay cut, continue to have a job, continue to have health insurance for their family and try to buckle down and wait it out." The employees at Toyota voted to take the pay cut and maintain their positions, but only because the company wanted to work with them. I think with a little more negotiation, some sort of an agreement can be met. This doesn't just affect the city employees, this will affect everyone in the city; that is the biggest problem with deficits. They are always long term problems that we can only really wait it out on.
lunaticfringe
|
May 20, 2010
The City is looking at a $1 million deficit and the AFSCME union president believes there are a lot of situations going on that are not fair to them, wants guarantees there will be no layoffs, and wants a "couple" positions at the wastewater plant.

In Mr. Nyland's next breath the union is upset they won't get reimbursed for the raise they won't receive, wants no new hirings, no raises and finally states, "it's just a big mess." Be happy you have a job.

If anyone was paying attention to Mr. Nyland's comments, don't a couple new positions in the wastewater plant equal "new hirings"? So he is saying, no "new hirings" refers to all other departments/unions - not AFSCME.

Based on Mr. Nyland's comments the AFSCME union needs new leadership. Have union members paid attention to what is happening with budgets and employment in cities and states across this country?

Not accepting a raise or taking a reduction in pay and keeping his fellow union brothers and sisters employeed would be a much better option than just voting no and taking their chances with layoffs.

All elected officials, management and employees need wake up, work together and do whatever it takes to balance the budget and keep the city fiscally sound.
Weather
Sponsored By:

Lottery
Sponsored By:

Stocks
Sponsored By:

Gas Prices
Sponsored By:

Featured Businesses
Recipes
Sponsored By: