Pension ruling favors union

The mayor contends an arbitrator's exchange with a city attorney was off the record.
By DENISE DICK
VINDICATOR TRUMBULL STAFF
WARREN -- A conciliator has sided with the police union regarding the amount of members' pensions for which the city is responsible.
"When the city accepted the [Ohio Patrolmen's Benevolent Association] offer without comment, it understood or reasonably ought to have understood what the union meant," wrote Jonathan Dworkin in his decision this week.
Mayor Hank Angelo said he can't imagine what the arbitrator was reading when he made his ruling. He estimated it will cost the city about $100,000.
"I consider it a ruling against the citizens of Warren who voted with their pockets to increase the [income] tax to have more officers on the streets -- instead, this arbitrator put more money in the officers' pockets," Angelo wrote in a statement.
The police contract, approved after negotiations last year, included a provision that the city will pay 5 percent of the employees' contributions to the police and fire pension and disability fund, effective July 1, 2002. Effective July 1, 2003, the city's share increased to 6 percent of the employees' contribution. That language had been submitted to the conciliator by the union.
After it was approved, the union contended that wasn't the intent of its proposal. The union intended the city to pay half of the employee contribution.
The union thinks the city knew what the union meant.
Attorney's comment
In his decision, Dworkin, who also was the conciliator involved in the negotiations last year, referred to a comment made by a city attorney.
Dworkin wrote that he started to question the language submitted by the union. He noticed it because it seemed a significant departure from what he had advised the union to bring back as a concession. The union had given up many of its other requests in an attempt to get the pension pickup, according to the decision.
"At that point, the city attorney stopped him, saying something to the effect of 'Just put it in the contract as it is. We accept the union's proposal,'" Dworkin wrote.
"In the conciliator's judgment, this incident lends meaningful force to the OPBA claim that the employer knew from the start that there was an error in the language and was anxious to capitalize on it," the decision says.
Mayor's response
Angelo points out that the exchange was "off the record" and therefore not part of negotiations. He said the city didn't discuss pension pickup, thinking it's not a proper subject for bargaining.
Angelo also said that for the city to know the union's intent, the negotiating team would have to be clairvoyant.
"The union hired an attorney; he wrote the language, not once but by our count, at least six times," he said. "Then the arbitrator makes use of information that was not even part of the hearings and cites those issues as evidence."
Atty. S. Randall Weltman, who represents the union, was pleased with the decision and called it "a long time coming."
"We're just totally delighted with the decision," Weltman said.
"I'd be delighted too if I'd just won the lottery," Angelo countered.