43
Fact finder favors city in cops' contract dispute
YOUNGSTOWN
A fact finder’s nonbinding proposal to resolve a contract dispute between the city and its police patrol officers union calls for a 1 percent raise this year and salary freezes for the next two years.
The 32-page report from Dennis M. Byrne of Munroe Falls largely sides with city administration officials, painting a bleak picture of the city’s finances.
The 113-member Youngs-town Police Association union is to meet tonight to vote on Byrne’s proposal, and is expected to reject it as it favors the city.
City council met for nearly 30 minutes Wednesday behind closed doors to discuss the recommendations. Its members declined to take a vote.
Rebecca Gerson, deputy law director, said council has until Monday to accept or reject the contract. If no decision is made by then, the city automatically accepts it under state law, she said.
For the recommendations to take effect, both sides must agree to them.
Mike Anderson, union president, couldn’t be reached Wednesday by The Vindicator to comment.
If the union rejects the proposal, the two sides state their cases to a state conciliator, and that decision is final.
That’s what happened in April 2014. The union at that time had been working without a contract since Nov. 30, 2012.
That deal expired Nov. 30, 2015, meaning the union has been working without a contract for close to two months. Under state law, police officers aren’t permitted to strike.
The city wanted a wage freeze for all three years of the deal, while the union sought a contract with 3 percent annual raises.
Byrne recommended a 1 percent raise this year – the same increase received by other city unions in 2016 – and no raises for 2017 and 2018.
Byrne’s report cites city officials who told him during a Dec. 11 hearing that Youngstown’s general fund “will be in a deficit by 2017. The city believes that it is in financial distress.”
He added he “believes that the evidence in the record shows that the city of Youngstown faces severe financial problems. There is little prospect of a significant increase in revenues, which means the city must find ways to curtail expenditures or it will face a situation where it must institute layoffs.”
Mary Schultz, a certified public accountant, reviewed the city’s finances for the union, and, according to Byrne’s report, “testified the city’s finances were as bad as the city contended. Schultz, however, did not agree with the city’s contention it could not afford to fund the union’s wage and benefit demands.”
She said the city “made some decisions that have led to the problems appearing worse than they are.” She stated in Byrne’s report there was $5 million of spending identified by a consultant, PFM Group, “which could be saved by changing the way that various city departments were staffed and operated.”
He also wrote there was “no evidence that convinced him that the city’s financial decisions were either reckless or unwarranted.”
Byrne also rejected the union’s proposal to increase the $30,000 starting annual salary for new officers.
He stated the starting salary is among the worst in the Mahoning Valley, but the city doesn’t have “the ability to pay the union’s wage demand, especially because that would lead to a ripple effect on wages throughout the city.”
Byrne also wrote that the top of the pay scale, $55,751 a year, is among the highest in the area.
The union wanted to reduce the years it takes to get to the top of the pay scale. During a previous contract, the union agreed to increase the time to get to the top of the pay scale from four years to 12. This is the second contract in which they tried to reduce the number of years.
The report also sides with the city on hiring part-time officers when staffing of patrol officers is at 107 full-timers. The current contract allows part-timers when there are 125 full-time officers. There are currently 113 full-time patrol officers.
Byrne sided with the city as well as a plan allowing the city to hire an additional five part-time officers when five full-time officers are hired.
The proposal also kept the union members contributing 10 percent of their monthly health-care premiums, but removed monetary caps of $80 for single coverage and $150 for family coverage effective July 1.