Archived Story
Unions can’t be allowed to run city
Published 12:00am Sunday, June 17, 2012Sometimes the status quo simply isn’t good enough. That is certainly the case when it comes to the City of Ironton’s proposed new contracts with two of its three unions.
Last week, city leaders heard first reading of an ordinance with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees that reflects no significant concessions to help balance the budget, simply allowing six layoffs to fill the financial gap. Council declined to adopt it immediately.
In reality, this contract should have been torn up and the union told to go back to the negotiating table. The mayor, working with the council, must be the one to determine the staffing levels in the city’s service departments. This agreement essentially allows the union to dictate how many employees the city has.
That is unacceptable.
Plus, where will the city go from here? As revenue continues to decline and expenses increase, it is very likely concessions will have to be made next year and the year after.
Who will the unions throw overboard then? If we allow the unions to dictate services, why do we elect a mayor and council?
The police department looks to be taking the same approach.
The firefighters’ union made concessions above and beyond what was needed.
To preserve a system that requires no retirement contribution and an unheard of 5 percent toward health insurance premiums is ludicrous and absolutely not sustainable.
Until these items are addressed the city will never move forward.
Nearly all residents were already asked to pay more through the municipal fee increase and others were hit through income tax changes. The citizens of Ironton cannot be the only ones asked to foot the bill.
The firefighters’ union stepped up and did the right thing. The non-union employees did the same.
Now it’s time for the AFSCME and police unions to do the same.
Mick, as usual I find that you lack a basic understanding of economics. People do not start businesses because they just want to hire people. If they are investing their life savings, money from friends and families, great risks deserves great rewards. What do workers ever “invest” into the company other than 40 hours a week? Additionally you will whine about what managers make… Reminds me of P–is envy. Say a CEO gets a million dollars a year and has 10,000 workers. Say he gave up his salary… What’s that come to – $100 extra per worker… Big Whoop!
(Report comment)
79Tiger; I find your last comment a bit egotistical and lacking in understanding. Due to innate selfishness and greed, there will always be a need for Labor Unions to ensure the fair and just treatment of the working man and woman. If an employer is broke and cannot make a profit, it is time to close shop and call it a day. There is no excuse not to pay fair and just wages, and benefits are part of wages.
(Report comment)
tiger
Unions can’t help you when your employer is broke or can’t make a profit. What the unions fought for when they actually mattered is now law. They served their purpose, now their members are serving them.
(Report comment)
I can tell you without unions in some places like the human serves agency it was run by those power hungry people that had no respect for the rights of the individual worker. I know many disagree with unions as they are not being supported by anyone and at the power of those in charge. This may satisfy some but bet many would like the support of a strong union to back them in times of trouble.
(Report comment)
Would anyone have the percent of residents that actually pay income taxes? We have a high unemployment rate in this area and what percent actually carry the burden in Ironton at this time.
(Report comment)
Unless Ironton has a city tax, it’s funding is probably mostly from property taxes.
(Report comment)
And maybe voters are reluctant to increase the taxes they pay when they see public workers getting better pay and benefits than they themselves get.
(Report comment)
The rock is government and the hard place is unions. Tax payers in the private sector get sucked dry between the two of them. Time to fire them all, cancel all contracts and start over with accountable politicians and non-union public employees.
(Report comment)
citizenkane; Fees are an inequitable means of taxation. Generally speaking, they are levied on property owners only. A more fair and just means of raising money for the support of government is an income tax which is placed on all wage earning members of the community. However, an increase in income tax must be approved by the voters. Local government officials have no choice (if they want to maintain services) but to levy fees do to the fact, voters will turn down an increase in taxes. This is primarily due to a lack of understanding on the part of voters. Your local officials are caught between the rock and the hard place. They have my sympathy.
(Report comment)
Citizens were recently strapped with more fees.
Since the lay offs, when you call the city about an issue needing attention you get ” we will put it on the list, but we only have one employee in that department and we are swamped with work”
Seems local government cares about everyone except the people who live here and pay taxes here.
(Report comment)
Actually, when it come to asking the union to pick up some of their retirement they are not losing money. That money is being saved for them and will be returned to them at the end of their careers.
(Report comment)
Fair and just to who Mick? Surely not to the taxpayers who are funding their salaries.
(Report comment)
Cashmere & Keta; The logic I am using and the position I am coming from is; These Civil Servants have given up pay increases over the years in order to receive these paid benefits. They have sacrificed and given up pay raises in order to receive these paid benefits. In effect, by asking them to contribute to paying the premiums or part of the premiums, you are asking them to take a cute (significant) in wages. Looking at it from another point of view, if these employees are required to pay for these benefits or part of these benefits, then in return, don’t you think they are deserving of a wage increase to offset what they are giving up in benefits? I think I am taking a reasonable position, FAIR AND JUST.
(Report comment)
Keta, would you like to compare your salary with the city employees or would you be embarrassed
———————————————————–
Not an issue. Teachers pay a fixed percentage of their salaries into the state teachers retirement system. Policemen should do the same; the amount would depend on how much they make. And for so many people who can’t afford health care to pay 95% of ANYBODY’s insurance premium is ridiculous.
(Report comment)
Mick, I’m very well versed and knowledgeable about the history of labor unions. I’m sure the Knights of Labor and other early attempts at unionizing would be aghast and bewildered at the state of 21st century unions. Our idea of strikes and protests are factory made signs to wave at news cameras. Theirs was to have their heads knocked in by Pinkerton detectives.
Keta is right, these union members should be paying towards their pensions and health care. Our pension contribution is edging up from 10 to 14%, in part because as I mentioned in my other post, it has to in order to remain solvent, and the city of Ironton will have to deal with that, and I don’t think it’s fair for the rest of us to pick up their obligations as well. This isn’t about union bashing, it’s about facing some hard realities.
(Report comment)
keta; Would you like to compare your salary with the city employees or would you be embarrassed? And keta, it’s not a gift, it is part of their salary.
(Report comment)
No retirement contributions? And they’re only paying 5% of their health insurance premiums? I agree, that can’t be allowed to continue. That’s the kind of unreasonable benefit that gives unions a bad name. County teachers have hundreds of dollars deducted from our paychecks for things these employees are receiving as a gift.
(Report comment)
79Tiger and Cashmere; May I suggest, in order to become a little more familiar with Labor Unions and the necessity of their existence for the betterment of the working man and woman, a little research. Please take into consideration a read of; There Is Power In A Union: The Epic Story Of Labor In America, by: Philip Dray. The title is a bit deceptive. This is a well rounded account of Industry and Labor. I have found most union bashing is due to lack of knowledge of the Labor Union Movement.
(Report comment)
A rather childish, immature and insipid article, lacking in perception and understanding, not to mention, care and concern for city employees. The provocative rhetoric used is indicative of poor judgement. If the city cannot afford to support itself and pay fair and just wages to it’s employees, maybe it is time to cease being a city (incorporated), maybe it is time to become unincorporated and turn things over to the county. The writer of this article fails to comprehend that benefits are a major part of city employees pay and by reducing benefits or asking the employees to contribute more in contributions, you are in effect asking them to take a reduction in pay. In this day and age? A ludicrous suggestion. A more fair and just solution would be an increase in City Income Tax. This could be a minimal increase without due harm to the citizenry. Maybe they could give up one pizza a week in return for services rendered by the public workers.
(Report comment)
I wonder what is going to happen when pension reform takes place and the state raises the contribution level, which will be at least 2.5%. How is Ironton, or any small city, going to be able to continue to pick up those pension contributions? More layoffs, more taxes or more water fees? Apparently one union has already decided to throw laid off members under the bus.
(Report comment)
Public sector unions should not exist. The employee can’t serve two employers. Either work for the union or the taxpayers who pay your salary.
(Report comment)