Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-10-26 Finance Committee Minutes - Executive Session S '1fiY ED Finance Committee, Board of Selectmen, School Committee R N� Mq Joint Executive Session October 26, 1994 SEP 28 12 03 py '95 The Executive Session was called to order at 7:35 p.m. The following parties were present: from the Finance Committee were Chairman Dick Coco, Vice Chairman Fred Van Magness, FinCom members Nathan White, Gerry Vitale, Jim Keigley, Carol Grimm (Steve Blewitt came late). Present from the School Committee were Chairman Tim Twomey, School Committee members Matthew Cummings, Susan Cavicchi, Tom Stohlman, Robin D'Antona (George Shannon came late). Also in attendance were Superintendent Bob Munnelly and Assistant Superintendent Dennis Richards. Present from the Board of Selectmen were Chairman Dan Ensminger, Vice Chairman Bill Burditt, Secretary Sally Hoyt, Selectmen Camille Anthony and George Hines. Also present were Town Manager Peter Hechenbleikner, Finance Director Beth Klepeis. Labor Counsel Allan Drachman was present. The Town Manager introduced Labor Counsel Allan Drachman, and reviewed the status of Town and School union contracts to date. Also reviewed were charts that show the time off benefits available for School employees and for Town employees. Bill Burditt noted that his daughter is a tutor at the Coolidge Middle School, and if tutors are going to be discussed then he would have to absent himself. Allan Drachman noted that tutors are not now in any bargaining unit and this would not be a problem. If tutors are to be discussed in detail, this will be taken up at the end of the meeting at which time Mr. Burditt could absent himself. Allan Drachman noted that he has been asked in the past whether there is a conflict in his representing both the Schools and the Town, and he indicated that there is no conflict. He noted that labor settlements are driven by three issues: inflation or cost of living; comparability both external and internal to the organization; and the ability to pay. It used to be that the cost of living was the most important issue. He noted that the public sector has become more unionized over the past years whereas the private sector had become less unionized. In the last three years, he has seen settlements in the 2.5% to 3% range unless this amount is discounted in some manner because of an inability to pay. This is assuming there are no catch up problems as there were with the Fire Department. In projecting one, two or three years in the future, one needs to be aware of the rate of inflation which appears to be beginning to accelerate. Because of that he feels that settlements for FY96 and beyond will be close to 4% rather than 3%. He noted that State settlements in the "out years" are in the 4% range. The pressure from the unions will be to settle at at least the rate of inflation, the thought being that the economy is improving and they want their "share of the action." FinCom,BOS, School Com. Executive Session - October 26, 1994-page 2 What he is seeing from management is increasing demand for productivity improvements on both the Town and School sides. The approach seems to be that we will pay what we should pay, but we demand productivity improvements as part of a package and not something that management will pay extra for. He noted that this is happening particularly in the Schools. In Reading we have very active parents in the schools, and it will be interesting to see how this issue of productivity improvement with regard to more teacher contact time plays out. The public is demanding better schools. He noted that other School Committees are seeking to bargain a requirement that there be more community outreach - that the teachers do more "marketing" for public education. With regard to length of contracts, some communities are reluctant to negotiate three year or even two year contracts. When they go out three years, they sometimes put in language that the agreement is subject to funding. He feels that the community should get the longest term that they can negotiate, and with the economy on the up swing,two to three years may be appropriate. With regard to consistency of benefits, he noted that some of the core benefits should be consistent, but that the management team should recognize the uniqueness of some positions and the need for other benefits to be different. With regard to the issue of comparability, it used to be that unions were looking primarily for internal continuity, and therefore will follow the 'lead buffalo" and that the Town often would do the teachers first to set a pattern. The trend now seems to be more to look at external comparability particularly among teachers, fire fighters, and police officers. Drachman noted that the Town of Reading has an excellent relationship between the Town and its unions. There have been some ups and downs, but it is basically a very sound relationship and that would be important to retain. Dan Ensminger asked what is happening with regard to Ed Reform in the collective bargaining process. Drachman noted that some School Committees are concerned that they have lost fiscal autonomy, and now the Town Manager sits in on the bargaining. Town Managers can in fact be in on the collective bargaining teams. There is also a question as to whether or not they can or should participate in grievance hearings. He noted that there has been legislation filed for school department collective bargaining to be subject to funding, and/or to be done by the municipal government and not the schools. George Shannon asked how communities were responding to the issue of the lengths of the school year and whether this has come up in other communities. Drachman noted that there appears to be no pattern set yet. Communities that have an FY96 or later contract expiration are in a better position because the guidelines are different for bargaining expired contracts than they are for mid-term bargaining. In new bargaining, if an inpass is reached then there is a fairly long process before the Town can implement its last and best offer. In mid-term bargaining, the process is not as difficult. We appear to have some conflicts in laws - between Ed Reform and bargaining law. Bob Munnelly noted that Revere, in settling a past two year contract that was fairly generous, the teachers "threw in six additional work days." FinCom, BOS, School Com. Executive Session- October 26, 1994-page 3 Van Magness asked about performance issues and what is really happening. The Town has done a pay and classification program hopefully with a performance system tied to it. How do we move towards a performance based system and performance measurements and how can we get rid of some of the niceties like steps in the long term. Drachman noted that pay for performance is slow in coming to the municipal and school contracts. Part of the problem is measuring what we want for performance, and how we define productivity and how you measure it. General issues like attendance are clear productivity issues and not something that the Town should have to "pay" for. With Police and Fire it's particularly hard to identify performance. Physical fitness and wellness issues are probably a good measure of performance in these areas, but it takes more than a contract language - it takes leadership. With respect to steps, some people view it as a boon doggie. Others view it as a way of spreading the salary costs over the career of the employee. Some school departments have reduced steps in order to be competitive with hiring rates. Van Magness noted that this is a buyers market and he also noted that we should have a coordinated strategy to deal with these issues. Drachman noted that one thing the Town should look at is a manpower plan to go out over time, using age and experience of workers as one measure. These could be used with budget and revenues projections. Van Magness expressed concern about the comp time language in the Fire Department contract, and the Town Manager noted that this was subject to mutual agreement with the Chief and had a requirement that it could not cause overtime. Sue Cavicci asked about fact-finding for custodians and how the issue of promotion conflicts with the Education Reform Act. Drachman noted that assignments and transfers are mandatory subjects of bargaining but that there does appear to be a conflict with the law. Dr. Munnelly noted that he would argue for a multi-year "mature contract" process. Based on the discussion, the Town Manager suggested that we look at two year contracts with 3%the first year and 3%the second year. In addition, in each contract the Town should get some significant improvement such as pay for performance, productivity improvements, elimination of I I IF language, etc. George Shannon noted that the major area of concerns should be the Teachers, Police and Fire Fighters, and the rest of the unions should be able to be brought on board. Camille Anthony asked if we should be looking for a "lead buffalo", and there was considerable discussion with regard to this. The Town Manager did not feel that the Fire Fighters would be the "lead buffalo" since they were the first union in previous negotiations to take two years of zeros, and it was also difficult to close a contract with them this year. It was suggested that perhaps the Police Officers should serve in this role. F Nate White asked if inflation was a factor, and Drachman noted that it was a big factor - the [�/ unions would start with trying to keep up with inflation at 3.5% -4.5% per year. FinCom, BOS, School Com. Executive Session- October 26, 1994 -page 4 The consensus was that we should look for two year contracts with 3% increases each year and tied into one major concession, and the Town and School unions should stay together. Munnelly argued that increases should not be viewed across the board because of some differences in settlements in the past year. There was some discussion about the past salary increase negotiations and the override, and the consensus was that that was in the past and that we should all try to stay together on negotiations this time around. On motion by Van Magness seconded by Keigley the Finance Committee voted to adjourn to Open Session at 9:20 p.m., with all seven members present on a role call vote voting in favor. Respectfully submitted, Secretary