05-05-08 Impasse HearingMINUTES OF THE HEARING HELD IN ATLANTIC BEACH COMMISSION CHAMBERS AT
6:06 PM ON MONDAY, MAY 5, 2008 TO SETTLE THE IMPASSE IN NEGOTIATIONS
BETWEEN THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH AND NORTHEAST FLORIDA PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES' LOCAL 630, LIUNA, AFL-CIO BLUE COLLAR AND WHITE COLLAR
UNIONS
Present: John S. Meserve, Mayor
Mike Borno, Mayor Pro Tem
John Fletcher, Commissioner
Absent: Paul B. Parsons, Commissioner (excused absence)
Carolyn Woods, Commissioner
Also: Jim Hanson, City Manager
Alan C. Jensen, City Attorney
Nancy Bailey, Administrative Assistant to City Clerk
Andy Bemis, Union Negotiator
Jack Baldwin, Union Steward
George Foster, City Negotiator
The Mayor called the meeting to order at 6:06 pm and explained this hearing was for the purpose of
resolving an impasse in contract negotiations with the City and Northeast Florida Public Employees'
Local 630, LIiJNA, AFL-CIO Blue Collar and White Collar Unions and asked the City Attorney to
explain the legal standpoint of the hearing.
Alan Jensen explained, under Chapter 447 of the Florida Statutes, there is a procedure set forth for
the resolution of impasses which requires, at this stage, for the City Commission, acting as a
legislative body, to conduct a public hearing. He stated at that public hearing both sides are required
to explain their positions with respect to the impasse issues after which the floor will be open to
public comments. The Commission will then take action as it deems to be in the public interest,
which would include the interest of the public employees involved, to resolve all disputed issues.
The Mayor reiterated it is the duty of this legislative body to take such action as it deems to be in the
public interest, including the interest of the public employees, to resolve all disputed impasse issues,
stating these procedures are intended to provide the parties with an opportunity to present their
position and have their position fully and fairly considered. He stated there are two issues, (1)
pension vesting change from five to ten years for new employees, and (2) the effective date of the
employee pay raises. Mayor Meserve explained the procedures that would be used tonight, stating
each party would have ten minutes to present their case with three minutes allowed for rebuttal,
following which the public would be given an opportunity to address the City Commission and
would be asked to limit their remarks to three minutes. He explained the City would go first since
they declared the impasse. Following the presentations and public comments, the City Commission
may ask questions and then will render a decision on the issues at impasse.
George Foster, Chief Negotiator for the City, stated prior to addressing the impasse issues he
would address the issues within the Union letter dated Apri14, 2008, as provided to the City and City
Commissioners on the impasse items. He explained the date of the letter is April 4, and it was his
understanding that it was hand delivered to the Commissioners on April 11, but was not received by
the City until April 16, with a postmark of April 15, 2008. He stated the letter indicates the City
came to negotiations with six items, plus wages to negotiate, which is in violation of the Union
contract. He stated this was not correct, there were only three articles plus wages presented for
negotiations. He stated, in the City's August 2 letter to the Union, it identified Articles 7,11, and 20,
plus wages for negotiation. Mr. Foster further stated the Union did not propose to open any Articles
at the first negotiation session. He stated the Union further incorrectly indicated within their letter
that the City proposed changes to health insurance. He stated the City did discuss with the Union the
changes being made to health insurance and the options the City considered and the City did propose
changing general employee pension vesting for new hires from five years to ten years. He stated the
Union's letter indicates they accepted the City's pay proposal, however, they did so only after they
had pay proposal increases submitted that were higher than those proposed by the City and only later
agreed to accept the City's wage offer. He stated the Union letter indicated they pulled the top out
bonus item offthe table, which he stated was withdrawn at one meeting but was reintroduced at the
next meeting. He stated this item was also listed within those items for impasse in the Union's
summary of open items for the Special Magistrate hearing. He explained during negotiations the
Union requested five items: a higher pay increase than proposed by the City; an increase to
employee comp time accrual rates; an increase to longevity pay; an addition to a cost of living top
out bonus for employees at the maximum pay; and a shift differential pay. He explained the City did
declare impasse in writing only after the Union had consistently stated they would never agree to
change pension vesting for new employees to ten years. Mr. Foster then presented the City's
position on the issues at impasse, as follows:
1. Pension vesting:
Referring to Tab 8, Exhibit PV 7 in the green notebook (which is attached and made part of
this Official Record as Attachment A), Mr. Foster explained the reasons the City wanted to
change pension vesting from five to ten years was to reduce the overall cost of the pension
plan to the City and to ensure pension benefits are provided to long term employees rather
than short term employees. He stated the funded ratio (the extent that the plan assets cover
the plan liabilities) has been relatively steady and is currently 72.4%. He stated the unfunded
actuarial accrued liability (which indicates the excess of any of the plan liabilities over
assets) has been increasing and is currently at 90.6%. He stated generally the smaller these
numbers, the stronger the pension plan but both of these numbers have trends that have been
going in the wrong direction. Mr. Foster also referred to Tab 8, Exhibit PV 8 (which is
attached and made part of this Official Record as Attachment B), which he stated indicates
2
an example of the benefit for an employee with five years of service upon retirement and
believes the current plan provides for a relatively generous benefit. He stated the City is
recommending pension vesting be changed for new employees only from five years to ten
years.
2. Effective date of pay increases for employees
Referring to the City Manager's letter, dated Apri17, Mr. Foster read the following excerpt,
"The past practice of the City Commission has been to provide retroactivity for pay when the
impasse is resolved. Non-union City employees received raises on October 1 S` and the raises
are budgeted for all City employees for a full year. However, full retroactivity does not
encourage timely resolution of Union issues. Input from the Unions should be received prior
to the budget workshops in August so that the Mayor and Commissioners can take their
concerns into consideration. During negotiation sessions last year, the first meeting could
not be scheduled until August 2 and the Union came to the first negotiation session with no
items to negotiate. At the following negotiating meetings, the Union added items and/or
changed items, but never had any counter proposals for the City's request to change pension
vesting for new employees. At the special magistrate hearing, the Union submitted a verbal
counter proposal that they would be willing to have employee pension contribution rates
increase in order to maintain the current five year pension vesting. The City Commission
should determine if any, or full, retroactivity of pay is appropriate." Mr. Foster reiterated the
union requested a higher pay increase than proposed by the City, an increase to employee
comp time accrual retention, an increase to longevity pay, an addition to an increase in the
cost of living, a top out bonus for employees at their maximum pay and a shift differential
pay.
Andy Bemis, Business Manager and Chief Negotiator for Loca1630, explained the City and the
Union hit a deadlock in negotiations which led the City to declare impasse. He stated the Union did
not feel as though negotiations had reached that point. He stated both sides then presented their sides
to the Special Magistrate who rejected the Union's proposal for top out bonus and increase in
longevity but agreed that the pay increase should be retroactive to October 1, 2007. He stated the
Special Magistrate compromised on the pension vesting for new employees by recommending seven
years. At that point the Union was willing to accept the Special Magistrate's recommendations, but
the City rejected them, which is why they are here tonight. He stated the pay increase was budgeted
effective October 1, 2007 but what is in question is the fact that the City's pay proposal and the
pension vesting proposal were presented as a package deal. He stated he contests that, stating they
were presented at the same time, but were not presented as a package deal. Referring to Exhibit H of
the Union's package (which is attached and made part of this Official Record as Attachment C) he
stated the Union agreed to the City's proposals in September. Referring to Exhibit R (which is
attached and made part of this Official Record as Attachment D), he stated it never implies that the
two proposals are a package deal until the minutes from the October 1, 2007 meeting. He stated the
3
Union had already agreed to the City's proposal, prior to the October 1 meeting. Mr. Bemis
presented the Union's position on the issues at impasse, as follows:
1. Pension vesting:
The Union opposed the pension proposal because they have already made several
concessions to the pension plan in the last few years. Mr. Bemis referred to Exhibit 8, PV-1
(which is attached and made part of this Official Record as Attachment E) which indicates
the history of the changes made to the pension plan in the past. He also stated the funded and
unfunded liabilities did change in the year after that for the better. He stated the Union does
not believe the changes made over the past few years have been given enough time to have
the effect as intended. He stated the new proposal has come too soon.
2. Effective date of pay increases for employees
Mr. Bemis stated he believes the City is threatening the Union and the employees with no
retroactivity to send a message that if they don't agree with what the City wants there will be
a penalty, which is an act of retaliation. He requested the Commission make an unbiased,
fair and just decision as the morale and financial stability of many of the employees depend
on it.
During rebuttal, Mr. Foster stated Union negotiations this year have been very disappointing and
frustrating due to misinformation being distributed. He stated the Union stated they would never
agree to change the vesting to ten years and at some point during negotiations you have to declare an
impasse when there are no counter proposals. He stated the City asked the Union to waive the
Special Magistrate hearing and come directly to the Commission but the Union did not agree. He
stated based on funding levels and trends, it was recommended by the pension committee to change
the pension plan from a defined benefit plan to a defined contribution plan. He stated the City does
not believe that is in the best interest of the employees and would like to keep the current plan, but
must get the costs under control.
During rebuttal, Mr. Bemis addressed the issue of the City contesting bringing six articles to the
negotiations. Referring to Exhibit A (which is attached and made part of this Official Record as
Attachment F) of the Union package, he stated it shows more than six articles and although some are
listed as for discussion, when they were brought forward to the negotiations, the Union saw them as
potential articles of negotiation. He stated because of this excess, it created a situation where the
Union was not ready to bring forward their articles because the City's proposal was vague. Referring
to Mr. Foster's statement that retroactive pay does not promote timely resolution of the issues, he
stated the Union agreed to the pay proposal prior to October 1, 2007. He also contested the fact that
the Union extended the negotiations because of going to the Special Magistrate. He stated there was
a period of approximately 1 1/2 months where there were no meetings because Mr. Foster chose to
wait for the new City Commission elections so they could have a shade meeting with the new
4
Commission. He stated he believed Mr. Foster could have met with the prior Commission. He
believes the Union did not delay the negotiations any more than the City did. He agreed the
negotiations were disappointing this year, but believes the Union has been upfront and honest. He
stated if impasse had not been declared by the City, they may have been able to come to a
compromise about the vesting which would have been favorable to both sides.
The Mayor opened the Public Hearing, explained the procedures and invited comments from the
audience.
Susan Gorman, 201 Colima Ct., Ponte Vedra, addressed the Commission requesting they consider
the proposal by the Special Magistrate.
Gil Flores, 271 Sailfish Drive E., addressed the Commission regarding the retroactive pay.
Michael Fields, Jacksonville, spoke in support of the retroactivity of the pay increases back to
October 1.
Jack Baldwin,1516 Bentin Drive N., Jacksonville Beach, stated the Union was misled and all he
is asking for is retroactive pay back to October 1.
Patty Drake, Neptune Beach, believes the employees should be paid retroactive and stated the City
has a lot of hard working dedicated employees who deserve the raises they were promised in an
email from the City Manager on August 24, 2007.
Glen Spencer, 2652 Moorefield Lane, Jacksonville, stated the Commission passed a budget on
September 24 for fiscal year 2007-2008 which included all raises for both union and non-union
employees but 64% of the City's dedicated employees still have not received their raises.
Desmond Green, 6935 Alana Road, stated he believes the City threatening to not pay retroactivity
is wrong and believes the pension issue should be the only issue on the table.
Karen Kempf, 1501 Challenger Ct. W., addressed the Commission regarding retroactivity stating
the merit pay was based on the previous year's evaluations that were approved by the City Manager
and Commission. She stated in all fairness the retroactivity should be paid as of October 1, 2007.
Jeri Benjamin, Deputy Finance Director, addressed the Commission regarding the pension
vesting. She believes ten-year vesting would put the City in a competitive disadvantage with the
other neighboring cities because both Jacksonville Beach and Jacksonville have five-year vesting.
Regarding the retroactivity, and speaking as a supervisor, she also stated there has been very poor
employee morale for the past eight months. She stated she believes the employees truly deserve
retroactivity back to October 1, 2007.
5
Since no one else wished to speak the Mayor closed the public comments and the City Commission
addressed each issue individually.
1. Pension Vesting
Commissioner Fletcher stated it was his understanding that the vesting issue affects nobody
currently employed by the City and believes a defined benefit pension plan will eventually
bankrupt the City. He stated the City should look at moving to a defined contribution plan.
He believes the 10-year vesting should be approved.
Commissioner Borno stated the Pension Review Committee suggested the pension plan be
reviewed after five years and that time is here. He also believes it is unfair that one issue is
being held hostage by the other issue and this should not happen in the future.
Commissioner Fletcher stated, during the budget process, the funds were determined for
merit and cost of living increases and asked whether that was affected by the decision to go
from a five to ten year vesting schedule. City Manager Jim Hanson stated there were several
cuts and changes proposed for the City budget and he and George Foster worked up a plan to
provide the recommended merit and cost of living raises. One of the budget items those
funds came from was the savings anticipated from the change in the vesting from five to ten
years.
Commissioner Fletcher asked if it was true that when the Union came to the table on August
2, it had no issues. Andy Bemis stated the Union held everything back until they were clear
regarding the issues brought up by the City proposal.
Commissioner Borno stated the issue of benefits will have changes in the future that will
have to be looked at but believes during future negotiations it needs to be done with an open
mind, rather than the way this vesting issue was handled, which only affects new hires.
Jack Baldwin stated the Union understands there will be changes in the future, but they ask
that they be presented on the table in a straight forward manner. He also stated on the
recording of the budget meeting there is no mention that the two items, vesting and pay
raises, were connected.
Commissioner Borno moved to adopt the City's position regarding changing the
pension vesting from five to ten years for new employees. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Fletcher. The motion carried unanimously.
2. Retroactive Pay Raises
Regarding the merit pay raises, Mayor Meserve recommended it be paid retroactive from
October 1, 2007. Since the delay was the fault of both parties, he recommended retroactivity
6
for the cost of living raise be from January 1, 2008.
Commissioner Borno moved to make merit pay raises retroactive to October 1, 2007
and cost of living raises retroactive to January 1, 2008. Commissioner Fletcher
seconded.
Mayor Meserve asked whether the merit pay raise is for work done previously and judged at
the end of the year. Mr. Foster stated merit pay is based on the evaluation of the previous
twelve months.
Following a brief discussion, the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Meserve adjourned the meeting at 7:10 n.m.
ATTEST:
Nancy E. B ley
Administrative Assistant to City Clerk
7
ATTACHMENT A
~t~L~2ED SUPPLEMENTARY INF(~RMATiON
SCHEDULE OF FUNDING PROGRESS@ .
- ~ Actuarial
Accrued Active Unfunded AAL as
Actuarial Liability Participan# a Percentage of
Value of (AAL) Entry Unfunded Fended Covered Active 1VIember
Valuation Assets age AAL Ratio Payroll Covered Payroll
_ Date @ (a)# (b) (b)-(a) (a)/(b) (c) ((b-a)/c)
1994 $4,549 $6,061 $1,512 75.1 % $3,068 49.3 °!o
1995 5,546 ?,200 1,654 77.0 3,054. 54.2
1996 6,517 8,290 1,773 78.6 3,107 57.1
1997 7,435. 9,275 1,840 80.2 3-,305 55.7
1998 8,457 10,404 1,947 81.3 3,609 53,9
I998(w/o Fire) 7,127 9,144 2,017 .77.9 3,007 67.1
1999 4,650 5,796 1,146 $0.2 2,185 52.4
2000 5,229 6,462 1,233 80.9 2,330 52.9
.2001 * 5,587 6,986 1,399 80.0 2,462 56.8
2002 5,747 7,479 1,732 76.8 2,768 62.6
2003 * 5,951 8,186 2,235 72.7 2,856 78.3
2004 6,273 9,005 2,732 69.7 3,051 89.5
2005 * 6, 802 - 9, 822 3,020 69.3 3, l 82 94.9
2006 * 7,609 10,505 2,896 .72.4 3,195 90.6
Dollar amourds are in thousands.
• After changes to benefits and/or actuarial assumptions and/or actuarial cost methods.
# The actuarial value of assets used before 9/30/97 plan year were at market value; the asset method used after that
date is shown on page B-4.
(a) Includes Police and Fire prior to 1999 except one case in 1998.
Analysis of the dollar amounts of the actuarial value of assets, actuarial accrued liability, or unfunded
actuarial accrued liability in isolation can be misleading. Expressing the actuarial value of assets as a
percentage of the actuarial accrued liability provides one indication of the system's funded status on a
.going-concern basis.. Analysis of this percentage over time indicates whether the system is becoming
financially stronger or weaker. Generally, the greater this percentage, the stronger the plan. The
unfunded actuarial accrued liability and annual covered payroll are both affected by inflation.
Expressing the unfunded actuarial accrued liability as a percentage of covered payroll approximately
adjusts for the effects of inflation and aids analysis of the progress being made in accurnulating
sufficient assets to pay benefits when due. Generally, the smaller this percentage, the stronger the
plan.
City ofAtlantic Beach General Employee Retirement System
D-3
City of Atlantic Beach Pension Vesting -Blue Collar Union EX3~3iT: PV _ 7
ATTACHMENT B
1tE~'~EMENT EXANIl'EE
STATEMENT: The current City Defined Benefit pension system is costly and should be utilized
to award long-team employees of the City.
Years of Service: 5 years 7 days
Salary at time of hire: $ 35,880.00
Salary at time of retirement: $ 46,259.20
Total paid (S yrs 7 days): $ 213,042.66
Age at retiremen: 66 years 1 morrth
Retirement. pay per month: $ 502.70
Retirement pay per year: $ 6,032.40
Projected years of retirement: 14 years i 1 mozrths
Total projected retirement paid: $ 89,983.30
(using life expectancy of age 81)
City of Atlantic Beach Pension Vesting - Blae Collar Union
.E~~IT: PV - S
BLUE COLLAR - ~TA.TUS AFTER 09 / 12 / 07 I1~IEETING
BLUE COLLAR - 09/12/07
AR'f. CITY PROPQSAL UNIUN PROPQS~,
~ 7.4 Delete paragraph on
probationary pe~~,
ATTACHMENT C
STATUS
09/1,2/07 -Union - No
Art I l Change method of selecting
Art 17.4 for arbitration. 09/12107 • Union - No
09/12/07
Increase maximum Camp Time 09/12/07 -Withdrawn by
Art 17.20 hours from 50 to 80 hours Union
09/12107
Provide shift differ o
f
5 ~
09112/07 - Withdrawn b9
~
for all hours work ~~ Union
~• 20
Change pension vesting for on the normal day ~.
new employees from 5 years 09/12/07 -Union _ No
to 10 years.
Art 20 Change health insurance
provided to employees 09/12/07 -
Being Implemented
..
26.1(a} ,~
.,
1. Pay Scale increase of %
9112/07
.
'` 0~8-02-07 ~ No Pro ossd
P ~ 'Pay Scats increase of 3% /1Z/07 -Union egre~ta °'
#2. Pay increase for employees
~ :09/12107 City Proposal
with less than six months service
of % 'Pay increase for employees with
08`02-07 = P
No Pro asal ,less than six months service of
3 /o
#3. Fay increase for employees ~ ~ ~ 09/12/07
wide more thaw six months of Pay increase for employees with
08-OZ-07 = No Poro oral
P more° than six months of service
of 6 /o
09/12/07
#/1=2.7%
#2 = a.r~°
ATTACHMENT D
BLUE COLLAR -STATUS AFTER Ob / 27 / 06 MEETING
BLUE COLLAR - 08/02/07
ART. CITY PROPOSAL UNION PROPOSAL ~ STATUS
Art 7.4 Delete paragraph on
probationary period.
Art 11 Change method of selecting
for arbitration.
Art. 20 Change pension vesting for
new employees from 5 years
to 10 years.
Art 20 Change health insurance
provided to employees
$
:Art 26.1(a) Pay Scale increase of % `~
4$-fl2-07 = No Propose!
Pay increase for employees with
Tess than six mantbs service of
08-0Z-t17 = No Proposal
Pay increase for employees with
mare than six months of service
of
.., , 08-0Z-Q7~= NaPro osai..... .
Art 26.6 Change wording on page
adjustmern for an employee
that is demoted due to no fault
of their own.
Signature Administrative update.
page
Exhibit A Administrative update.
BLUE COLLAR -STATUS AFTER 09 / 12 / 07 MEETING
BLUE COLLAR - 09/12/07
ARC CTI'~' PROP®SAL UNION PRCIPOSAL STATUS
Art 7.4 Delete pazagraph on 09/12!47 -Union - No
probationary period.
Art 11 Change method of selecting 09/12/OT -Union - No
for arbitration.
Art 17.4 09112f07 09/12/07 -Withdrawn by
luerease maximum Comp Time Union
hours from 50 to SO hours
Art 17.20 09/12!07 09/12107 - 'Wi#hdrawn by
Provide shift differential of+S% Union
for all hours worked other than
on the normal day shift.
Art. 20 Change pension vesting for 09/12/07 -Union - No
new employees from 5 years
to 10 years.
Art 20 Change health insurance 09/12/07 -
provided to employees
~ Being Implemen#ed
,~ ..
25.1(a) #1. Pay S~caCe increase of ~% ~ 09/12/07 Q7`=~~/Union agrees to
08-02-07 = Na Proposal "~ Pay Scale increase of 3% City Propose!
i
#2. Pay increase for employees D9112107
wi8e less than six moths service Pay increase for employees with
of _% less than six months service of
88-02-07 = No Proposal ~%
#3. Pay increase for employees b 09/12!07
with morn than six months of Pay increase for employees with
service of _% more than six months of service
~' (i8-82-ti7 = Na Pmposal ' of 6%
09/12/07
#1=2.r/°
#a = 2.r/°
BLUE COLLAR -STATUS AFTER 09 / I7 / 0'7 MEETIIVC`r
SLUE COLLAR. - {i~/I1107
A~~ Ci'1'Y P1~f1POSA.1. U1~O~T P'~OPOSAY.
Art 'T.4 Delete par~agrsph no
probationary period.
Art l l Change a
for
Art I--- ~ 4 _._..
Art 17,20
selecting
~. 26 Change pension vesting for
new employs from S years
to 10 years.
Art 20 Change healkh insurance ___.
provided #o employees
26.1(a) # 1. Pay Scale increase o:
os~-c12~? = xQ ~~apos~t
ours fmm Sgp ~~
419/1210?
Provide shift differ+et~.tial of +g'lo
far all hours worked other than
on tine noimsl day shift.
Pay Scale increase of 3%
#2. Pay increase for employees `~' p9/12Jtt7
with less than six months service ' Pay i for to
ctf % ~P yeas with
4148-07,-07 = Na Proposal 3 !o than sfx mom service t~f
0
#~• Pay increase for employees
with. axue than sloe of
service of _%
418-02-07 = No Proposal
4i9112r0'7
#1= 2.7%
#2 = 2.T/o
4!9112!07
Pay increase €,or e~iay~ with
more than six months of service
of 6°l0
09f12147 - Unr ao ~o
09~f17/Q7 -Union - ~o
09112/t1? - Union - i~o
419!1'7/07 - Union _ No
Og112/417 - ~lthdra~vn ~
Unioa
fl9112J417 - Withclta~va by
13•aion
09!12107 - Union _ Ta+To
4f9/17{Q7 - ~Tniaa - I°do
09/12107 - ~'
being lmplemente~
'tid(1'r - Ua~ianstgt~e~,~
City Proposal
'/17107 -Open
BLUE COLLAR • STATUS AFTER 10 / OI / 07 MEETING
BLUE COLLAR - 10/Oll07
~T• CITY PROPOSAII UNION PROPOSAL STATUS
Art 7.4 Delete pazagraph on 09/12/07 - Union - No
probationary period. 09/17/07 -Union - No
10/01!01 -Withdrawn by
Art 11
Change method of selecting Ci
09/12!07 -Union - No
party for arbitration. 09/17!07 -Union - No
10101/01 -Withdrawn by
Art 17.4
09/12/07 Ci
09112/07 -Withdrawn by
Increase maximum Comp Time Union
hours from SO to 80 hours
Art 17.20 09!12/07 09/12/07 -Withdrawn by
Provide shift differerrtial of +5 /° Union
for ail hours worked other rhea
on the normal day shaft.
Art. 20 Change pension vesting for 09/12/07 -Union - No
new employees from 5 years 09117/07 - Union - No
to 10 years. 10!01/07 -Union - No
Art 20 Change health insurance 09/12/07 -
provided to employees Being Implemented
~_
2ti.1(a) # 1. Pay Scale increase of % 09112!07 F1~7bT -Union agrees to
08-02-07 = No Proposal Pay Scale increase of 3% ~ City. Propps~ „ ~ i;
~
#2. Pay increase for employees ~ ~7/17111'?"'=~ (1`pen ~ ~`
with less than six months service ~' 09112!07
~ % ~ Pay increase for employees wit3~
98-0?~-07 = No Propose! ` less than six months service of
#3. Pay increase for employees 3%
w1ti1 n10Te than Srac months of
service of _% 09/12/07
OS-02-07 = No Proposal Pay increase for employees with
more than six months of service
09/12/07 of 6%
#1= 2.7°1°
#2 = 2.7%
#3 = 5.7% of new midpoirrt
~~
10/01/07
Above pay proposal based
upon agreement to Pension
vesting changes for ~w
em to ees.
SLUE COI..I.,AIt -12103/07
CLOSED ITEMS:
Art 7.4 Delete paragraph on 09/12/07 - Union - No
probationary period. 09/17/07 -Union - No
10!01/01 -Withdrawn by
C'
Art I 1 Change method of selecting 09/12107 -Union - No
Party for arbitration. 09/17/07 -Union - No
10/01/Ol -Withdrawn by
C'
Art i 7.4 09/12/07 09/12/07 -Withdrawn by
Increase maximum Comp Time Union
hours from SO to 84 hours
Art 17.20 09112!07 09!12/07 - Withdrawn by
Provide shift di$•erential of +5% Union
for all hours worked other than
on the normal day shift.
Art 20 Change health insurance 09/12/07 -
. provided to employees
,,. Being Implemented
.. .~.
26.1(a} #1. Pay Scale increase of % /12107 1210T'- minion agrees to
08-0?,-07 = No Propasg! Pay Scale increase of 3% City Proposal.
~ `:
#2. Pay increase for employees
' ~~
Upen,
with less than six momhs service 09112107 12/03/07 -union agues
of _~ Pay increase for employees with
OS-02-07 = No Proposal less than six months service of
#3. Yay increase for employees 3%
with more than six months of
service of _% ; ' Q9/L?J07
08-02-07 = Na Prnposai Pay increase for employees with
more than six months of service
0911Z/07 of 6%
#1= 2.7%
#2 =2.7%
#3 = 5.7% of new midpoint
;
;~ ;, ~
laoi/o7 ~
Above pay proposal based upon
agreement to Pension vesting
°°" ' e wording en pay 09/12/07 -Open
adjustment for an employee 09/17/07 -Union - No
that is demoted due to no fault 10/01/01 - Withdra~-n by
of their own. C•
BLUE ~OLLA~ -12/43/07
OPEN iTEM~.
Ax~i~. ; CITY PROPOSAL ~ UNION PR®P05AL STATUS
Art. 20 !Change pension vesting for 09/22!07 -Union - No
new employees from 5 years D9117I07 -Union - No
I ~ to 10 years. 10/Oi/07 -Union - No
E Art 26.1{a) 1
t
09/12107 1Z/03/07 -Union - No
09/22!4'7 -Open
i Add a lump sum "Top Out" 09/17/07 -City - No
~ I bonus of $1,000 if employee at 10/01/07 -Withdrawn by
~ top of pay scale. Bonus would
Union
r
1 be in addition to any COLA 12/03/07 -Reintroduced by
received
Union
09/12!07
t Changed Tap Out bonus to $500 'City - No
~ iz~o3~m
Changed Top Out bonus to
$1,000
j Art 26.1(b) 12/03!07 NEW ITEM 12103/07 -New item
j Increase monthly Longevity Pay -City - No
by $5 per each five years of
service:
YOS FROM TO
o-s o 0
6-10 23.00 30,00
i1-15 54.00 60,00
i6-20 75.00 90.00
21+ 100,00 120.00
ADM Administrative issues, dates, Completed after contract
signatures, etc. agreement
ATTACHMENT E
PENSION ACTIt?NS TAKEN
GENERAL E'VI1'LOYEE
PENSION PLAN
03/08!04 Established a "cost neutral" Age 55 Early Retirement
Established a "cost neutral" self directed 5 year DROP program
04/11/05 Decreased multiplier from 2.85% to 2.5% for new employees (savings: $27,238)
Increased employee contribution rate by 1% to 3% (savings: $24,762)
05/07!06 Increased employee contribution rate by 1% to 4% (savings: $24,762)
09/24/06 Increased employee contribution rate by 1% to 5% (savings: $24,762)
Proposed: Change vesting to 10 years (savings: $14,500)
(Total annual savings: $116,024)
City of Atlantic Beach Pension Vesting - Blae Collar IInion 1`aXSIBIT: PV - 1
ATTACHMENT F
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
800 SEMINOLE ROAD
ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA 32233-5455
TELEPHONE: (904) 247-5820
FAX: (904) 242-3498
www coab.us
August 2, 2007
Mr. Andy Benis, Business Manager
Northeast Florida Public Employees Loca1630
550 Balmoral Circle North, Suite 101
Jacksonville, FL 32218
RE: Union Negotiations - (Blue Collar)
Dear Andy:
Following is a summary of Articles submitted by the City for negotiation:
1. Article ? Delete Article 7.4
2. Article 11 Change arbitrator selection
3. Article 12 Discussion on Christmas
4. Article 13 Discussion an Personal Leave Cash In
5. Article 17 Discussion on overtime
6. Article 20
7
Article 26
1 Change Pension Vesting and discussion on Health~surance
.
. Wages
8. Article 26.6 Demotion
9. Signature Page Administrative
10. Exhibit A To be updated after agreement on Art 26
Sincerely,
George A. Foster
City Negotiator