FONT SIZE
Email this
Print this
POST A COMMENT
Concessions save 3 county jobs
Daily World’s lead local story today:
By Steven Friederich
The Daily WorldMONTESANO — The county commissioners rescinded the layoffs of three road crew employees Monday morning.
Five employees had been given a pink slip back in December. A mechanic was brought back when another employee volunteered to be laid off, instead, under the terms of the county’s union contract.
The other employees remained in limbo. Thanks to union concessions, the county road crew members will return to work as of Feb. 1. An office worker will still be unemployed, however.
Furlough days were discussed during a 90-minute executive session with union members of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees Local 275.
County Commissioner Al Carter and Kathy Brown, the union’s business agent, talked about the union concessions immediately after the executive session.
They said road crew members had turned in union concessions in excess of $150,000. Carter said he didn’t have an exact number, but it’s “enough to cover the three laid-off positions.”
Carter said employees will take several days off without pay throughout the next year.
The money saved would go back into the county’s general fund to save jobs.
“I used the word gut-wrenching in our discussion today,” Brown said. “When you’re talking about people’s lives and being able to put food on the table … and I’ve got to say jointly it’s a hard process, but I think it’s a good outcome.”
Last week, Carter said he thought there would only be enough concessions to cover 1.3 positions. He said the calculations used to come to that figure “were in error.”
County Commissioners Terry Willis and Mike Wilson also applauded the concessions. Both said the thing they hated the most about their jobs was issuing layoff notices.
Wow this is making less and less sense. Emotions and mob mentality? That’s quite a leap. Ok, I give up, your post made no sense. Please stop putting jibbrish on here.
I guess we should use emotions and mob mentality. Oh, that would make us like Haiti. Maybe you should leave like you threatened.
I guess it is greener on the other side. I hope the city has enough money to pay all the people rushing out to the big city to work like dogs there too!! Hay, I wonder if they are cutting jobs in Seattle?
Great. More irrelevant statistics…
Taking a page from a previous poster,
Hoquiam:
Estimated median house or condo value in 2008: $145,751 (it was $75,500 in 2000)
Hoquiam: $145,751
Washington: $308,100
Median gross rent in Hoquiam, WA in 2008: $681
Ocean Shores
Median gross rent in Ocean Shores, WA in 2008: $865
Note that even with a higher median household income, home values are higher. Also rents are higher. The result is that mortgage payments are higher.
Disposable income, the fund by which people pay their taxes and living expenses from are limited.
Also, our population is around 5000 people vs. Hoquiam’s of 9000 people.
Read more: http://www.city-data.com/housing/houses-Ocean-Shores-Washington.html#ixzz0d4tgHVtx
Read more: http://www.city-data.com/housing/houses-Hoquiam-Washington.html#ixzz0d4t5bEYq
Tom, Good point, but in poor inner city neighborhoods the people are not paying property taxes. The landlord is. He gets the rents from many individuals and generally in real estate you find that the cost per square foot is really high even with low quality housing. Hoquiam and Aberdeen have low incomes and also a higher renter population. Those landlords still are paying the taxes. Have you looked at some of the housing stock there? Maybe it is time to move back to a larger volunteer department. Look at what they want to pay volunteers. If I recall, they also got grants to pay for firefighters in Hoquiam and Aberdeen..
The important thing to remember is Mayor Flunkers likes to have a play with words. He calls them concessions when they are defferrals. Just like on posting stated there is a huge difference between concessions and defferrals and that is exactly what this person full of hot air is doing. I feel that everybody should demand from the Mayor an explanation of what these alleged concessions are that the fire department gave to the city. The actual writing and agreement that was signed not just the hot air that comes out of Mayor Flunkers mouth. I believe that any person can do this with a proper public records request to the city.
This is just me, but I think merely comparing the highest (or even the average) wages of city workers to “median household income” is a bit of a trap. Aberdeen and Hoquiam have similar city employee salaries, and even lower median incomes ($37,244 and $35,999), compared to O.S.
And comparing, say, a firefighter’s income in D.C. to median incomes in an inner-city neighborhood would look even more “unfair.”
*Not saying stats and arguments presented here are not logical, just adding a little perspective.
**Getting back to “concessions,” perhaps it’s time to ask other communities how they have had success?
Remember that in the Law Enforcement and Fire fields the opposite is true. Many get tired of the big city crime and stress and move to little towns where the quality of life is better. The youth may move for more income, but the older officer will move to where they can enjoy their family and life more with less stress and danger. We offer that. Our current and past “professional” employees in other titles also have followed the same path. We just need to do a better job of background evaluation for key positions. If the young one values what the community offers, they are willing to forgo the high salary for the quality of life. That has greater value in these days too.
Thank you Imagine for the link with such good comprehensive information. I certainly wasn’t suggesting that the firefighters or police were being paid median wages. I do understand the concept of fixed income, facing that ourselves in a couple of years and all plans are being made with that in mind. However, what I was saying, was that their levels of income didn’t seem that out of line with others in those fields. I also know that young people starting out in those fields will gather experience and knowledge and then take that with them to another area that can or will offer them more. I’m sure you all are aware of that too. We have had that same problem with our teachers here in Washington State being poached by states like California in recent years with offers of more money and better benefits. Of course, with the situation in California right now, I don’t imagine that continues to be the case.
You are right with the $42.000 median household income, but this breaks it down even more. It gives a more complete picture I believe, since it says per capita income is $23,000 and there are many single person households here. I would question how they collected their data for the median household income since it has been reported so many residents are struggling to get by and the food bank always needs donations. We live on less than $42,000 and felt we were doing ok until reading this report.
Males: 2,429 (48.3%)
Females: 2,600 (51.7%)
Median resident age: 51.6 years
Washington median age: 35.3 years
Zip codes: 98569.
Estimated median household income in 2008: $42,050 (it was $34,643 in 2000)
Ocean Shores: $42,050
Washington: $58,078
Estimated per capita income in 2008: $23,975
Estimated median house or condo value in 2008: $252,893 (it was $131,000 in 2000)
Ocean Shores: $252,893
Washington: $308,100
Read more: http://www.city-data.com/city/Ocean-Shores-Washington.html#ixzz0d0NE1LUh
$42,000? I’m surprised it’s that high!
The median household income for Ocean Shores is about $42,000. So, 100,000 is a great deal of money here. Many are on fixed income because this is a retirement community first and a tourist community second. Then there are the working poor that support the tourism business here. The jobs here for all but the government employees are at significantly lower wages. That is why citizens are upset about the wages. If one lived in Seattle with their prices and costs of living, then maybe these wages are reasonable. However, that is not the case here. We are in Grays Harbor County.
I want to add that I am not convinced that city responsibilities are adequately documented by process descriptions, procedures and desktop guides. It is impossible for citizens to assess city performance by any other means than hearsay and assertion until this is done. Maybe we need something like the police log for city tasks. Maybe we have it and I just don’t know about it.
When I was managing the work of “overhead” analysts in the private sector, to keep order and prove my team was productive I required each member of my staff to keep a task list. Every time someone came to us with a request for service it was added to one of our lists and we kept a status for reports. Everyone hated keeping the records, but when the boss asked why we needed so many analysts, I had something to point to.
Well said marymary! Thank you for your side of this picture. Having been a union members wife for many years now, I do know that with every contract negotiation there is give and take. No one side wins or loses it all. Every contract negotiation brings with it the spotlight of media coverage, which is usually so biased as to be unbelievable or at the very least totally one-sided. I do have to comment that I think the ‘media’ based in Ocean Shores does seem to have a level hand when dealing with stories about this subject anyway…knowing that there are two sides (at least!) to every story. I’m not entirely sure what differences there will be to our cost of living when we retire and move to Ocean Shores as our home, being from the Seattle area. I know for sure already that our new home over there will cost a great deal less (the land already did) than home prices in this area. That said, everything else seems to be on a par. I used to think that people who made close to or over $100,000 annually were very comfortable to say the least. I no longer believe that from personal experience. I do know, that I don’t go to the grocery store with calculator in hand, like I did when we were young and earning poverty level wages. That seems to be one of the strongest improvements in our lifestyle. We certainly don’t live ‘high on the hog’. So when Tom lists the wages for some city employees, I guess I not as shocked (should say not at all shocked) by them, they seem to be in line with todays economy. My question instead would be, why all the hiring in 2007. Did Ocean Shores grow so much (no, it didn’t) as to require that many more people to take care of things? So, why are we surprised that one of the most reasonable ways to recover from this downturn in the economy is lay offs? There again, having lived with that as a cyclical possibility in our life, maybe I have a more accepting response to that possibility. I do know that life goes on, and those laid off find other means of support sooner or later. I’m not advocating it, I know personally how painful it can be, but I do know that it is survivable. Just my 2 cents worth.
That’s exactly it, from what I heard, the mayor didn’t define those conditions, despite repeated requests from the union to clarify, in writing, exactly what it was the unions were supposed to agree to. Since it was still unclear, the vote was no. You wouldn’t buy a car without knowing the price, why agree to concessions that are unclear?
I have no feelings and make no assessment about the competency of our leadership or the content of city employee character in the negotiation of contracts. I must assume they are all doing the best they know how to do and that they reflect on their moral content when making choices, since I haven’t the time or inclination to get involved right now finding the facts and truth or speculating on the matter (but many thanks to those of you who do!). I just want to reiterate something here that we already know about unions.
In business, a union represents employees who are responsible to produce a profit. Their contract demands are accepted or denied based on profit. If this principle is breached, the company loses money and the union loses people. The only other alternative (assuming all other waste has been cut) is that they go out of business. The incentive for employees to renegotiate in a bad situation is the fact that no one will have a job if they don’t.
In government, this principle is lost. The city government cannot go out of business. What is the incentive for city employees to renegotiate? Most of them will retain a job, whether the city is the equivalent of “profitable” or not. Citizens will be forced to pay union benefits to those who are left when layoffs are done. Therefore, renegotiation of the city employee benefits would be an act of sacrifice by the majority of employees. To sacrifice is to give up a greater value for the sake of a lesser value (if you do the opposite, it is not a sacrifice, but a budget, like giving up cable so you can have a nicer car or vice-versa).
Maybe the county employees are altruists, though I have never actually met one. I suppose enough social pressure could be applied to make employees behave as altruists, but then, that would not be altruism either, but coercion. Maybe they are such a tight bunch that they would all have suffered the loss of coworkers enough to outweigh the reduced benefits. I worked with a staff like that once. We were friends outside of work also. I would have gladly taken a cut in hours to keep my friends on the payroll. I lived within my means and I valued my free time and friendships more highly, so no sacrifice would have been made. But that was clearly an exception to the rule and I hold no bad feelings toward our city employees for wanting to keep what they gained in previous negotiations.
Another point I want to make is that to separate the “union” from “employees” is a mistake. The employees *are* the union. If the Teamsters leadership does not in fact represent the desires of the employees, the employees can decertify. We need to keep this in mind and quit blaming the “Teamsters” and place responsibility for the labor part of the contract negotiations ultimately on the employees, where it lies.
The union is free to put their case here but it seems all they want to do is bash the Mayor and taxpaying citizens for not coming up with more money from a flat broke city.
Before comparing union and city proposals definitions have to be agreed to. A concession may be that but it still costs the city money if the cost is just deferred to the future. A true concession would be if the employees concede promised money back to the city so it would not have to be payed back. The city has no money and it does not appear it will have any for a very long time so a concession which is really a deferral solves nothing. It just postpones a possible crash on taxpayers after a lot of people are retired or out of office. What that does is stimulate every taxpayer to get out of here before this city of cards collapses.
Everybody would loose the least if there was some attempt to improve productivity. That means more work per unit of pay but the unions are always against that and department heads may be too inept or uneducated to lead in this area.
Are the letters and emails that were exchanged between the union and the mayor public? I keep hearing a lot of conflicting information, and some probable assumption and would like to see exactly how the mayor proposed these concessions and exactly how the unions responded. What I am hearing is not at all consistent with “they refused to give concessions”. I think the reasons for the refusal were a little more involved than the public is being led to believe. All this bantering can be entertainment, that’s for sure, but is there any way to put speculatin aside and give fair and factual responses to what actually ocurred? It seems we are making judgements on the employees when all we are given is what the mayor says and what is reported. Just doesn’t quite seems right.
“Hasta”: If you are indeed a former city employee who was “shown the door,” I would be happy to hear and (if it’s verifiable) print your takes on labor negotiations. I understand there are two sides (at least) to most stories.
Of course, this could just be someone with a fake name making things up.
If not, my email is tscanlon@northcoastnews.com, phone 289-2411.
*I understand that some, even without fear of repercussion, would not want their real names used; personally, I prefer to use “un-named source” only in unique situations.
Yes, thanks to the Fire Department for giving in, and thanks for all of us who are already actively searching for new jobs in other areas where we will get the pay, and be appreciated for our efforts! Enjoy the replacements if you can find them, they will be of a lesser standard because who would want to get involved in this dysfunctional city? Thanks to our Mayor for showing all of the quality employees in the city the door! It’s a lot better on the other side…
PWI = Posting While Intoxicated
Watching the fun: “sickofit” comment was a blatant violation of the comment policy, and “unapproved.”
The difference here is that the employees sacrificed to save those jobs. They should be commended. We know that the Fire Department Personnel did make some concessions. The exact details of those concessions is stll unknown. If it was a true concession or a deferral needs to be indentified. If it was a deferral, then we will still be in a whole lot of hurt next year.
If there is some specific details regarding Ocean Shores that is different from the County experience, without the rage, then bring it forth.
What is PWI, Google says it is http://www.perfectworld.com/
Tom, what happened to the comment from sickofit?
Do I detect PWI??
Sounds like we have a new candidate for the next council election.
Maybe the reason O.S. employees won’t make conession to save their fellow workers could be “teamsters”!
It’s too bad workers in O.S. have not been able to come to a similar solution.