The handwriting is on the wall – or at least it would be if the leaders of the holdout employee bargaining groups, the Davis City Employees Association and the Davis Professional Firefighters Association, were being realistic rather than chasing rainbows. The city has done their research, they have done the fiscal analysis and they are in the process of dotting their I’s and crossing their T’s.
When your fact-finder, who is typically pro-labor, writes, “There is not much margin for error,” and, “The DCEA failed to identify a source of money to fund generous pay raises or to retain lucrative benefits such as the PERS [Public Employees’ Retirement System] pick up and no employee contribution to health insurance premiums,” you are not going to win this.
While the print edition of the local paper ran the erroneous headline “City, union could be close to a deal” – that headline was contradicted by the body of the article (not to mention the fact that DCEA is not a union).
Sure, the DCEA leadership, under Dave Owen, their president, indicated that they would be inclined to agree to contract, under the conditions laid out by the fact-finder, viewing it as “an attempt to split the baby.”
But the city indicated that they cannot and should not accept the agreement. The fact that slowing down the mechanism for short-term cost savings would not only cost the city a bundle on short-term costs for DCEA itself, but also the “me-too” clauses would cause the deal to impact short-term financial solvency by multiplying the costs to each of the other bargaining units. Not just prospectively, but retroactively.
That was the protection mechanism for the bargaining units not to hold out for a deal.
The truth is that the handwriting is now on the wall – both DCEA and the firefighters have been unrealistic about the fiscal condition of the city and their request has not been realistic.
The fact-finding panel is recommending a 12 percent raise over the four-year term that they recommend for the contract, to offset some of the concessions. The firefighters reportedly are asking for a lot more than that – in the range of 16 or 17 percent.
The problem is that reality intervenes here. The city does not have the margin to make up those kinds of salary increases now. The city is staring down the barrel of about a $15 million deficit within the next few years.
There is and has been another way to approach this for the employee groups.
First, they need to end their holdouts and take the same concessions that every other bargaining unit has taken. The reality is that is what they are going to get anyway. But by holding out, they are actually making the next round more difficult for themselves as each month that goes by with no contract means that the city will have to find another $114,000 to cut somewhere else.
Over the last nearly 11 months since the other bargaining units settled, that means over $1 million.
So what is the other way? Work with the city. This is not ending. The continued holdout made the cutting of fire personnel and the firing of DCEA parks employees, including tree trimmers, a necessity.
Fire might have been able to avoid these cuts and other changes had they been willing to work with the city staff rather than fight them every step of the way. Their conduct has probably cost them opportunities to salvage some of the things they claim to have wanted.
Now other employee groups, who have long since taken the concessions and cooperated, have broken ranks to fight back.
These cuts have not been costless for either the city or the employee bargaining groups. As Matt Williams noted in a comment on Wednesday, “Said cuts have produced significant pushback from substantial portions of the Davis community.”
The reality is that not only have we had to make these cuts, but future increases in PERS, increased costs for deferred maintenance on roads, and deferred maintenance coupled with increased water cuts threaten a new wave of deficit and therefore cuts to city services.
Matt Williams offers the other path: “In order to balance its budget, it is apparent that Davis needs the tax revenue that derives from increased local business growth.”
“As a community, we have a responsibility to work with the university and other regional economic development entities to grow the regional economy,” he writes. “If UCD’s core competencies are collaboratively leveraged, then Davis could end up growing business at a controlled rate of growth per year that will mean that the municipal budget deficit will become a relic of the past.”
The new path forward, indeed a better alternative, would be for the bargaining units with the city to cooperate on the need for short-term cuts, and to work with the city to establish a plan for mid-term revenue enhancement, through the imposition of a new limited term sales tax, raising revenue to meet the immediate needs of the budget.
But it is clear that, in the long term, the way through this crisis for both the city and the bargaining units is revenue enhancement through economic development. That should be the push for employee groups. Otherwise, it really will not matter who is on council or the specifics of the contract they sign this time – the bills will come due and we will have to pay them.
If the employee groups are willing to buy into the short-term austerity program for longer-term gains, the city might be able to salvage a few of those 114,000 dollars that would otherwise be accruing in the time it takes for the city to finally impose last, best, and final offer – and to use that, as well as future growth potential, to pay back city employees for their sacrifices during these hard times.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
“If the employee groups are willing to buy into the short-term austerity program for longer term gains,”
There you go again advocating austerity, a Republican/conservative position if ever there was one. Why not have the workers negotiate a sequester. At least you see economic growth as the solution. Tea anyone?
What’s your plan to balance the city’s budget?
David wrote:
> But it is clear that in the long term, the way through
> this crisis for both the city and the bargaining units
> is revenue enhancement through economic development.
I don’t know exactly who is part of the “bargaining units” but I’m guessing it is not a lot of new hires (who are thinking of the “long term”). If you are close to retirement (like Bobby Weist) you are thinking “short term” and want as much as possible as soon as possible so you make as much as possible in retirement.
P.S. The San Francisco Chronicle had an article just yesterday that said: “Overall, 259 city execs and workers made more than $200,000 last year, and 2,325 city workers made more than $150,000”.
P.P.S. I also read yesterday that over 50% of the more than one million people working for Wal Mart make under $25K a year. I’m not saying that Davis should pay Wal Mart wages, but some people forget that a “modest” 15% raise for a guy making $175K is $26K (and the next “modest” 15% raise will put him over $230K)…
Mr. Toad wrote:
> There you go again advocating austerity, a
> Republican/conservative position if ever there was one.
Austerity is not a “Republican” position since they typically spend and borrow even more than Democrats (since they have a different donor base to pay off they spend on different things).
Austerity is a conservative position (few Republicans in office are actual conservatives).
If income drops for a conservative guy he will generally cut spending.
If income drops for a non-conservative guy he will generally keep spending and put the difference on his credit card.
I may be getting less risk adverse as I get older, but I have not seen things work out well for most people that don’t cut spending when income drops…
“What’s your plan to balance the city’s budget?”
We need to do some cutting but I don’t think you, who have spent years here pounding the unions should be giving them advise on austerity being in their self interest. Still there are other ways to skin the cat. Cut high paid administration more rather than lower paid workers in DCEA, grow our economy through innovation and housing for people to live, work and spend here, add some needed retail (but not to the extreme Vacaville model), raise taxes on the no growth community that wants services but is unwilling to let the community grow.
Anyway the real point of my post is that your continued focus on austerity is a conservative model. You are a conservative. Get over it. So are many others who see themselves as liberal in this town.
No Mr. Toad, in specifics, lay out your plan. You want to attack me, fine, let’s see your alternative.
Toad to David:
[quote]You are a conservative.[/quote]
David, I thought cussing wasn’t allowed on your blog. How dare Toad?
Apparently the city’s rank and file employees will have to balance the budget on their backs if property and social values are to remain acceptable to David and other Davis “liberals”. Considering his well known personal agenda and animus toward the FFs and who knows what hidden butthurt over other union employees health and welfare benefits, it isn’t surprising that David’s hyper-defensive about criticism, but frankly, I haven’t seen much from [u]him[/u] in the way of specifics on [u]operating[/u] the city with his hypothetical “austerity budget.” Historically, municipalities who go that route let the infrastructure bear the hidden deficit, until roads are un-driveable, parks dry up and the water becomes unsafe. Then they spend three times as much and create a much larger bureaucracy to rebuild.
בדדלנ
Its not my job. You’ve taken it upon yourself to tell people what they should do as if following your advise is in their own interest. I’m simply pointing out the conservative jargon you use and your lack of making demands on those who pay the bills. You didn’t ask for new taxes to share the pain. You could run as a Republican with your platform; workers take the hit, no new taxes. Its only an attack if you stay in denial about your political proclivities.
Toad:
[quote]Its not my job.[/quote]
Translation, he has no idea. At least David is trying to confront the problem.
That is why we elect the city council and they hire the city manager to work out the details and do the negotiation. I simply vote and pay the tax bill when it comes.
austerity a “conservative” idea?
Come on Toad. You croak with out doing a bit of research. Austerity is all over old Europe and there are no more conservatives in Europe. Austerity is what results when politicians – primarily left of center – have cleaned out the cupboard and the bank accounts, and racked up more debt than they can cover by paying off unionized public sector labor to help them stay in power.
Austerity isn’t a conservative strategy, it is a last ditch reality resulting from years of unsustainable spending.
Let’s just cut all the silly arguments.
I can distill it down to two simple principles we need to focus on:
[b]1. Balance[/b]
Let’s just focus on balance. That word and its meaning is a beautiful thing. We need a balanced budget. We need a balanced plan that ensures fiscal sustainability. We have neither today, and a big reason is that we have been paying our city workers far too much.
Some will continue to argue that point. But it is just another balance problem.
[b]1. Future versus present[/b]
The real question facing our city, our state and our country today is not public versus private, not larger or smaller, not taxes versus spending… The real question is the choice between [b]the present and the future[/b], between the generation that came after the Greatest Generation and all who come after us.
Baby boomers are afflicted with anxiety and narcissism. They require an army of therapists just to help them function. As anxious parents, they helicopter over their children ensuring they never learn how to struggle and persevere. In the process of establishing this anxiety-fueled impenetrable safety net, they have both destroyed self-determination and scorched the economic earth. In their emotional-driven quest to make things easy, they have damaged the very children they have been compelled to protect.
Now is the time to start focusing on the future. We need to stop kicking that can down the road.
It is absolutely ridiculous for anyone to continue to defend what we are paying firefighters. Any that do should be implicated in their lack of balance and their contribution to continued future damage to children.
This is what it comes down to.
If you are for continuing to pay firefighters obscene wages and benefits. If you are against building innovation parks and expanding our business and retail to help balance the budget and make our fiancees sustainable, then who are against the welfare of children and future generations.
“Its not my job”
you’ve taken it upon yourself to attack david at every turn, calling him disparaging names, and when he asks you to put up, you bail. nice.
“That is why we elect the city council and they hire the city manager to work out the details and do the negotiation. I simply vote and pay the tax bill when it comes.”
and if that’s all you did, no one would have asked to put up. but we all know that’s not all you do.
[quote]and if that’s all you did, no one would have asked to put up. but we all know that’s not all you do. [/quote]
I don’t often agree with D.P. but she’s got you there Toad.
I have a solution. Since we now have Big Sis running the UC system we might start negotiating with Kathleen Sebelius to take over the Davis budget problems if she soon gets fired. She knows how to get things done.
Boy, the conservatives are out in force today. What amazes me is that you all refuse to see it. Its not like I haven’t been pointing out for years that Davis Progressives are really conservatives or Republicans. Why can’t you own it. I remember a number of years ago David made some post and Matt Rexroad, who is never one to shy away from such labels, offered to bring David a voter registration card to change his status and join the GOP. Its not like it isn’t obvious.
But let me try to explain it differently. My problem with David today is that he is telling people they should take a pay cut in their own interest. Whether or not its true, it is rude, and whether or not its true its certainly in the interest of the city and the taxpayers for the workers to take a pay cut. If David were to say the city should hold the line to protect the taxpayers it would be one thing and we could have that discussion but to reach his hand into somebody’s pocket and then have the gaul to tell them its for their own good deserves a smack down. These people need to figure out for themselves what path to take. They are facing no good options. Something I learned teaching is when somebody only has bad options you let them make the choice on their own. Its bad enough for these employees need to take cuts. Nobody likes to take cuts. The last thing they need to hear is David telling them what they should do while claiming he is doing them a favor by kicking them while they are down.
Mr. Toad.
Most people are fiscal conservatives. Even most liberal-progressives.
David is just a more evolved liberal-progressive than you. He sees the problems caused by over-paying our city workers… and those problems lead to cuts to other programs he cares about.
I frankly am quite confused by your views on the firefighters pay and economic development. I think you are or were a teacher. So I suspect that you are sensitive to anything that feels like an attack against your union labor brothers in arms.
But I think you need to get beyond that and consider that your arguments for more business and housing in Davis are the other side of the same coin for the arguments to cut the obscene pay and benefits going out to our city workers… most of which have already accepted it… but not the firefighters.
I think you are fighting and battle of nostalgia and not putting your significant intellect to work to decide what is the right path.
David has done so.
He is one hop ahead of you.
The new and improved Frankly nicely trying to reason with a Toad.
“Baby boomers are afflicted with anxiety and narcissism” and the drive and will to change the social and economic order. I understand the current generation of young adults is “Waitin’ on the world to change”, So feel free to kiss my baby-boomin’ tush.
בדדלנ
+1-“The last thing they need to hear is David telling them what they should do while claiming he is doing them a favor by kicking them while they are down. “
בדדלנ
biddlin, are you signing your posts with Klingon?
Ah, as culturally attuned as ever, Frankly, but it’s very terrestrial.
בדדלנ
“I frankly am quite confused by your views on the firefighters pay and economic development. I think you are or were a teacher. So I suspect that you are sensitive to anything that feels like an attack against your union labor brothers in arms. “
Its really quite simple. There are different ways to skin the cat, we can grow our tax base, raise taxes, cut spending or borrow against future revenue. David suggested two ways, cut spending and grow, and, i’m glad he is coming around on growth. He left out raising taxes and borrowing. Since we are borrowing for infrastructure that is probably tapped. Davis has never been shy about taxing itself but who knows how long that can be sustained. So cutting is whats left and it may come to cutting by imposing a contract. My guess is the unions that haven’t settled know its coming but figure that playing for time is in their best interest. They may be right or they may be wrong but at least they are being the masters of their own fate going down fighting. Now if David had said, and my guess is you will hear this from members of the council, sorry but we need to do this, so regrettably, we are imposing a contract to get our fiscal house in order, it would be one thing. But David has the audacity to argue for austerity, and then tells the people who he is arguing should get a pay cut, that taking that cut is in their own interest.
This is what I find offensive, David does not, and has not had their best interest at heart. He has told the firefighters union president he should resign, so now for David to give them advise seems insincere. By the way, you can say anything you want about the FF union President but that guy has done a great job for his members. Like it or not he might be the best negotiator in the history of FF unions. David might be sincere about his beliefs on city budgeting and he might even be correct but that is different. Where David crosses the line is forgetting which side he is on and then giving friendly advise to his opposition while advocating that they get kicked in the teeth.
Mr. Toad. Thanks for that explanation. It helps.
Your explanation is exactly why I want to abolish public sector unions and shift ALL public sector compensation to a regional labor market pricing model.
Once you make a certain pay level you settle in to a lifestyle. You buy things and take on debt. Since you don’t qualify for government free stuff, you get used to having to pay for everything yourself. Then someone comes along as says “so sorry, we went overboard and now we have to reverse the clock and take some back.” I understand how that plays in the mind of an employee. Not well. Especially experienced employees that may not have the same level of intrinsic job satisfaction motivating them as when they were newer on the job (we all start to burn out in about 7-8 years of doing the same thing). It feels like a slap. It feels like you are not appreciated. It takes ANOTHER bite out of your motivation.
THAT IS WHY WE SHOULD NEVER PAY A DIME OVER MARKET RATES FOR OUR PUBLIC SECTOR LABOR!
I have talked to many police and FF in person over the years, and all of them have admitted to me that they know that their good fortune would not last. They are smart enough to see the great divide between what they make and what a comparable private sector employee makes. They know it is going to end… they are just trying like hell to delay that end.
I have had the misfortune of working for two large companies in my career during periods of downsizing. I have had to cut my employees pay and benefits. I have had to lay off people. I myself had my pay and benefits cut and was outsourced. The trick for getting through this is leadership. Good leaders can manage through the down slides just as they can manage for growth.
The problem is that the FFs have terrible leadership. Instead of working with them and the city to get to a point of rational compromise, the unions inflame them by amping up the natural bad feelings from seeing your career rewards go backwards.
What David and others are suggesting is for them to stop that fight and move toward a position of reasonableness. I think it is a good recommendation because they are damaging their reputation and brand continuing to use their same obstinate and stubborn tactics.
I think that makes sense. And at the same time, I think having and displaying empathy for the FF employees that FEEL like they are being screwed also makes sense.
It is the politicians that gave away the store that deserve our wrath.
Especially those that would continue to do the same knowing how bad of fiscal shape we are in.
‘Once you make a certain pay level you settle in to a lifestyle. You buy things and take on debt. Since you don’t qualify for government free stuff, you get used to having to pay for everything yourself. Then someone comes along as says “so sorry, we went overboard and now we have to reverse the clock and take some back.” I understand how that plays in the mind of an employee. “
Yeah, when Arnold had to furlough state workers it was because he gave everyone unsustainable raises when he was up for re-election. I always thought he got too easy a pass on that.
“The problem is that the FFs have terrible leadership. Instead of working with them and the city to get to a point of rational compromise, the unions inflame them by amping up the natural bad feelings from seeing your career rewards go backwards. “
It seems that way from your perspective but that obviously isn’t how the FF’s see it. They probably feel that the longer they can hold back the tide is to their advantage. Right or wrong David is the last one who should be giving them “friendly advise.” He has never been friendly towards them and takes every chance (and I mean every) available to bash them. Advise from David to the FF’s has the authenticity of advise from Tokyo Rose broadcasting to the Marines on approach to Iwo Jima.
Biddlin,
Looks like Hebrew to me.
“Something I learned teaching is when somebody only has bad options you let them make the choice on their own.”
That statement made me a little sad. I think, naively, that teachers should be the eternal optimists. They should give their students hope, guidance in tough times. Help them find the good options out there.
Toad:
Third paragraph from the bottom:
“The new path forward, indeed a better alternative, would be for the bargaining units with the city to cooperate on the need for short-term cuts, and to work with the city to establish a plan for mid-term revenue enhancement, through the imposition of a new limited term sales tax, raising revenue to meet the immediate needs of the budget.”
I await your alternative proposal. Until then, you’re basically doing what you accuse me of doing.
I’m not negotiating. I don’t know all the numbers to bargain. That is the job of the Council and the City Manager who we elected or hired to do the hard work. Its why the get the small bucks people are always complaining about. Okay, they knew the job was dangerous when they took it.
Its not that you argue for reductions, although i hate to see them and think you fail to exhaust all possibilities in you stance, its that you tell people what is in their own interest when you should let them figure it out for themselves. If you think the impasse is damaging the city make the case but don’t tell the unions its in their interest to capitulate. They can make those decisions for themselves without you telling them taking a pay cut is in their interest. Taking a pay cut is never in anyone’s interest. People may need to do it but its always a bitter pill to swallow. A pay cut is in the city’s interest or the taxpayers interest. My problem with you is you act like you are giving them friendly advise when you have done nothing for years but try to stick the knife in. You may have good reason for your positions but they conflict with the interests of the workers so you shouldn’t be giving them “friendly advise.” And don’t pretend your not a conservative when your doing it.
“although i hate to see them and think you fail to exhaust all possibilities in you stance, its that you tell people what is in their own interest when you should let them figure it out for themselves. “
Then give me other possibilities, otherwise all you are doing is what they tried in the factfinding and got shot down.
I’m sorry that you are offended by telling people what is in their interest. Their leaders have made mistakes on every turn here and it’s hurting them but it’s also hurting the city by $114,000 a month which will hurt every employee in the long run. Sorry, time is running out for them to figure it out for themselves because it’s going to hurt everyone.
So again, either show me other possibilities or let it go.
As a member of a bargaining team, I was taught a basic rule of negotiating contracts: The workers never recover the give backs. Historically, that seems to have been the case.
Mr Toad is, in all matters on this matter, correct.
Biddlin ;>)/
[i]vowels, who needs ’em?[/i]
Or, in the case of the firefighter’s contract, the public will never recover their giveaways.
Mr Toad wrote:
> Taking a pay cut is never in anyone’s interest.
I’ve taken a pay cut that was in my best interest when I was getting paid based on a lot of business and we were not doing a lot of business. I kept my job unlike the people at Hostess that recently said they would not take a pay cut and they all got fired…
Okay, we could raise taxes to cover all the costs. We wouldn’t need to make any cuts. How many millions will it cost? Q.E.D. You see its possible to do it in other ways there is simply not the political will to do it by any means that doesn’t squeeze the workers. Its interesting that in this entire situation over what workers are getting you have never, to my knowledge, argued for increasing taxes, you are always on the cut the workers side. You haven’t even argued to raise some taxes and cut some to meet in the middle. You are always on the cuts only side for city employees. That is a pretty conservative position.
“I’m sorry that you are offended by telling people what is in their interest. Their leaders have made mistakes on every turn here and it’s hurting them but it’s also hurting the city by $114,000 a month which will hurt every employee in the long run.”
You’re not sorry, although you should be, nor are you telling them what is in their interest. People don’t need you to tell them, believe me, they can figure it out for themselves. Their leaders haven’t made mistakes at every turn, in fact up until this round of negotiations their leaders did a fantastic job for their members. You are probably correct about it costing the city $114,000 a month but that is an argument for the city not the workers. You are confused about for whom you are advocating. Finally, it won’t hurt every employee in the end. In fact there is probably somebody whose pension will be higher because of the delaying tactics not to mention their income over the last few years. Bottom line, you want to argue like an anti-union conservative go ahead, but, don’t act like your the friend of a fire fighter giving friendly advise because you are not.
$114,000 a month/65,000 residents $1.75 per person or $21 a year. Less than the price of a half size trash can for one month would cover the deficit for a year. Now that is a liberal solution. Raise taxes on rich Davis residents to pay good living wages to its union employees. We are talking less than the price of a cup of coffee at Mishkas.
[i]Taking a pay cut is never in anyone’s interest.[/i]
Taking a pay cut can very well be in the interest of the employee. Except if you are a union member and you believe that there is no risk that your employer will fail, or you think we can keep kicking the can down the road, or you are fine making other employees and services take the hit instead of you.
Leadership makes the case for self interest. That is where the FFs are failing. They are pursuing defense of their unsustainable pay and benefits beyond their self interest. They are losing all that good will of hero worship and victimized public servant. They are re-casting their persona as the evil dark lords in opposition to the better loved and respected white nights of law enforcement.
They now only have Lucas, Mr. Toad and biddlin as fans.
Frankly, you overestimate the loyalty of at least one of those you cite as FF supporters. My complaint isn’t from a loyalty to unions its from being indignant that David is trying to tell them what they should do as if following the advice of those that oppose them is in their self interest. David has never done anything but bash the FF so he shouldn’t now act all magnanimous by giving them advise as though he’s just trying to help. If FF’s take cuts imposed by the city or through capitulation David will be popping corks of cheap champagne. Its clear he is on the side of the anti-union conservatives. He should own it.
Toad:
[quote]We are talking less than the price of a cup of coffee at Mishkas. [/quote]
There’s that coffee reference again. With the higher costs of school parcel taxes, paying for plastic bags, higher garbage fees, new paint disposal taxes, higher water costs, coming parking fees, etc………….
I think I’m now supposed to give up three cups of coffee a day, problem is I only drink two.
“problem is I only drink two.”
Its the high cost of no growth.
[quote]There’s that coffee reference again. With the higher costs of school parcel taxes, paying for plastic bags, higher garbage fees, new paint disposal taxes, higher water costs, coming parking fees, etc………….
I think I’m now supposed to give up three cups of coffee a day, problem is I only drink two.[/quote]
That’s ok GI. I only drink one and am happy to chip in to cover your third. I fully support being willing to pay in additional taxes for that which is of value to me. I also support not pretending that there is no “cost” to growth. Each strategy has its costs in which something valued will be compromised. The problem that I see right now on this and other threads is that some are attempting to portray “growth”, often unspecified in timing and amount as having “no cost”.
For the record i have never pretended there are no costs to growth.