FBD
07-21-2011, 11:34 AM
Boy, supposedly Unions protect its workers instead of just changing the bylaws for how many votes something needs to pass muster! The thief of the governor's seat issues a big list of crap he'd close down if the unions didnt make some concessions as a nice big threat, so big that people would freak out and support what he wanted to do....
...almost looks like he took a page from Obama threatening grandma's SS!
(but at least Obama legitimately won!)
Corruption's alive and thriving in CT...and its funny, gotta laugh at all of the union members who did what they were told and voted for Malloy and are now getting tossed under the bus by their "representation" - regardless of whether its all that realistic or not - pretty much every plan put forward by malloy has had the side effect of greasing entrenched constituencies, and now these union members are finding out that hey wait a minute, I thought were were in the protected class? Guess not, suckaaaaas!!! You're a crappy peon like the rest of us.
http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-sebac-bylaws-decision-0719-20110718,0,7740091.story
State employee union leaders voted Monday to change their bylaws in a last-ditch effort to save thousands of their members' jobs.
The move came because rank-and-file union workers rejected an initial savings and concession deal last month with Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, who in return announced plans to eliminate 6,500 state jobs and cut services to fill a projected budget gap of $1.6 billion over two years.
The unions in the next few days are expected to speak with Malloy's negotiators to craft a deal that would be very similar to the previous agreement. The first deal had been approved by 57 percent of those voting, but the agreement was still rejected under the complicated union rules.
In a drastic change from the earlier bylaws, only eight out of the 15 unions — representing 50 percent of the overall membership — would now need to approve changes in their health care and pension benefits. Previously, 14 of the 15 unions — representing 80 percent of the membership — needed to approve any changes to ratify them.
A new union deal would prevent most of the layoffs and block a series of deep program cuts.
Without a deal, Malloy's proposed cuts would be among the largest in state history and would involve closing courthouses, welfare offices, Department of Motor Vehicles branches, law libraries, a juvenile jail in New Haven, beds for patients undergoing detoxification, and the state Council on Environmental Quality. Malloy's plan also calls for increasing fares on the Metro-North Commuter Railroad by 15 percent and eliminating two seasonal ferries across the Connecticut River. The ferries, which are highly popular during the summer season for tourists and commuters alike, have been constantly in the news since Malloy proposed their elimination.
Some of the largest cuts would be rendered on the border town of Enfield, where three key employers — the courthouse, a major prison, and the Department of Motor Vehicles office — would all be slated to close if there are no union concessions.
There are still many issues that need to be resolved.
It is still unclear when a union re-vote would take place or how long it would take. The previous round of voting lasted two weeks. Some union members complained that the earlier vote was tainted because some state employees spoke out against the deal even before their fellow employees had the chance to vote.
Malloy has said that there would not be a wholesale re-negotiation of the deal, but that it could be clarified on points such as changing the state employees' health benefits.
In addition, tens of thousands of union members in 13 of the 15 unions received pay increases July 1. Members in a newly established union at the University of Connecticut Health Center in Farmington did not get a raise because they do not yet have a contract, and the Connecticut State University faculty is scheduled to receive raises on Aug. 23. Since Malloy's initial plan called for a wage freeze for two years, there could be some complicated legal discussions over whether the money would be given back and how the future freeze would be imposed.
Union leaders met throughout Monday morning to consider whether to change their bylaws to allow a new vote on a revised deal between Malloy and the unions. If the unions agree to the new deal, the deep budget cuts proposed by Malloy would be largely avoided.
"It's good news that the unions have changed their ratification process to one that respects the will of the majority,'' Malloy said in a statement Monday. "Over the next few days, [administration negotiator] Mark Ojakian will be speaking with SEBAC leaders to understand which issues in the agreement need to be clarified. Given the limited number of issues that have been identified as problematic, it shouldn't take more than a couple of days to have a clarified agreement that's ready to be voted on by all state employees.''
A major stumbling block was the deal's health care provisions. There were widespread reports on the Internet that the state employees' health care plan would be merged into the state's SustiNet health care plan. Despite repeated denials by the Malloy administration and union leaders, the reports continued to circulate — and some state employees said they did not believe their union leaders. As such, they said that their "no'' votes were correct.
The next step would be for thousands of union members to cast their votes again on a clarified deal with Malloy. In the first round, a majority of those voting approved a four-year, no-layoff deal with Malloy that some legislators said would have been an absolute slam dunk in the private sector, where in recent years workers have faced pay cuts, pension freezes and layoffs.
Union leaders hailed the bylaw change but others had a different view. Deputy Senate Republican leader Len Fasano said the entire imbroglio was an orchestrated, cynical gambit with a pre-determined outcome in a smoke-and-mirrors concession deal.
"This entire process — with its proposed cuts to public safety, transportation and education — has been orchestrated to scare the public,'' Fasano said. "It's all been a big game, and that's wrong. This was about pressuring the unions to revote and ratify a new deal. The legislature will not get a vote on this, and there will be no oversight on where $1.6 billion in concessions come from. The numbers didn't add up before, and they will not add up now."
As of 11:30 a.m. Monday — at about the time that the SEBAC decision to change the bylaws was apparently being made behind closed doors — union spokesman Matt O'Connor was telling reporters outside the Capitol that it wasn't definite that any decision would come by Monday night, or even in "the near future."
O'Connor said he was "not sure if that will be today, or in if in fact that's going to be at any point in the near future." When he was asked about the widespread reports that there would indeed be a decision on the bylaws change Monday, he said, "I know that that's on the table as a topic of discussion" but there would "not necessarily" be a decision Monday. Within 90 minutes of his saying that, the word was out: The decision was made.
The two top state Senate Democratic leaders — Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams and Majority Leader Marty Looney — said state employees had been waiting for some good news amid talk of layoffs.
"Union leaders should be commended for working together to change their bylaws and helping to facilitate the potential for a successful vote by union members,'' they said in a joint statement. "Approval of the concession package is critical for Connecticut's fragile economy. We urge union leaders to quickly get clarification on any needed items, call for another vote and for all union members to vote yes. This is Connecticut's last — and best — chance to resolve its fiscal crisis without undermining its recovery."
House Speaker Christopher Donovan said: "I thank the SEBAC leadership for voting today to change its bylaws in a way that respects the opinion of a majority of state employees. This is the responsible course of action, as we look to avoid the terrible cuts and layoffs that would do so much harm to our state."
...almost looks like he took a page from Obama threatening grandma's SS!
(but at least Obama legitimately won!)
Corruption's alive and thriving in CT...and its funny, gotta laugh at all of the union members who did what they were told and voted for Malloy and are now getting tossed under the bus by their "representation" - regardless of whether its all that realistic or not - pretty much every plan put forward by malloy has had the side effect of greasing entrenched constituencies, and now these union members are finding out that hey wait a minute, I thought were were in the protected class? Guess not, suckaaaaas!!! You're a crappy peon like the rest of us.
http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-sebac-bylaws-decision-0719-20110718,0,7740091.story
State employee union leaders voted Monday to change their bylaws in a last-ditch effort to save thousands of their members' jobs.
The move came because rank-and-file union workers rejected an initial savings and concession deal last month with Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, who in return announced plans to eliminate 6,500 state jobs and cut services to fill a projected budget gap of $1.6 billion over two years.
The unions in the next few days are expected to speak with Malloy's negotiators to craft a deal that would be very similar to the previous agreement. The first deal had been approved by 57 percent of those voting, but the agreement was still rejected under the complicated union rules.
In a drastic change from the earlier bylaws, only eight out of the 15 unions — representing 50 percent of the overall membership — would now need to approve changes in their health care and pension benefits. Previously, 14 of the 15 unions — representing 80 percent of the membership — needed to approve any changes to ratify them.
A new union deal would prevent most of the layoffs and block a series of deep program cuts.
Without a deal, Malloy's proposed cuts would be among the largest in state history and would involve closing courthouses, welfare offices, Department of Motor Vehicles branches, law libraries, a juvenile jail in New Haven, beds for patients undergoing detoxification, and the state Council on Environmental Quality. Malloy's plan also calls for increasing fares on the Metro-North Commuter Railroad by 15 percent and eliminating two seasonal ferries across the Connecticut River. The ferries, which are highly popular during the summer season for tourists and commuters alike, have been constantly in the news since Malloy proposed their elimination.
Some of the largest cuts would be rendered on the border town of Enfield, where three key employers — the courthouse, a major prison, and the Department of Motor Vehicles office — would all be slated to close if there are no union concessions.
There are still many issues that need to be resolved.
It is still unclear when a union re-vote would take place or how long it would take. The previous round of voting lasted two weeks. Some union members complained that the earlier vote was tainted because some state employees spoke out against the deal even before their fellow employees had the chance to vote.
Malloy has said that there would not be a wholesale re-negotiation of the deal, but that it could be clarified on points such as changing the state employees' health benefits.
In addition, tens of thousands of union members in 13 of the 15 unions received pay increases July 1. Members in a newly established union at the University of Connecticut Health Center in Farmington did not get a raise because they do not yet have a contract, and the Connecticut State University faculty is scheduled to receive raises on Aug. 23. Since Malloy's initial plan called for a wage freeze for two years, there could be some complicated legal discussions over whether the money would be given back and how the future freeze would be imposed.
Union leaders met throughout Monday morning to consider whether to change their bylaws to allow a new vote on a revised deal between Malloy and the unions. If the unions agree to the new deal, the deep budget cuts proposed by Malloy would be largely avoided.
"It's good news that the unions have changed their ratification process to one that respects the will of the majority,'' Malloy said in a statement Monday. "Over the next few days, [administration negotiator] Mark Ojakian will be speaking with SEBAC leaders to understand which issues in the agreement need to be clarified. Given the limited number of issues that have been identified as problematic, it shouldn't take more than a couple of days to have a clarified agreement that's ready to be voted on by all state employees.''
A major stumbling block was the deal's health care provisions. There were widespread reports on the Internet that the state employees' health care plan would be merged into the state's SustiNet health care plan. Despite repeated denials by the Malloy administration and union leaders, the reports continued to circulate — and some state employees said they did not believe their union leaders. As such, they said that their "no'' votes were correct.
The next step would be for thousands of union members to cast their votes again on a clarified deal with Malloy. In the first round, a majority of those voting approved a four-year, no-layoff deal with Malloy that some legislators said would have been an absolute slam dunk in the private sector, where in recent years workers have faced pay cuts, pension freezes and layoffs.
Union leaders hailed the bylaw change but others had a different view. Deputy Senate Republican leader Len Fasano said the entire imbroglio was an orchestrated, cynical gambit with a pre-determined outcome in a smoke-and-mirrors concession deal.
"This entire process — with its proposed cuts to public safety, transportation and education — has been orchestrated to scare the public,'' Fasano said. "It's all been a big game, and that's wrong. This was about pressuring the unions to revote and ratify a new deal. The legislature will not get a vote on this, and there will be no oversight on where $1.6 billion in concessions come from. The numbers didn't add up before, and they will not add up now."
As of 11:30 a.m. Monday — at about the time that the SEBAC decision to change the bylaws was apparently being made behind closed doors — union spokesman Matt O'Connor was telling reporters outside the Capitol that it wasn't definite that any decision would come by Monday night, or even in "the near future."
O'Connor said he was "not sure if that will be today, or in if in fact that's going to be at any point in the near future." When he was asked about the widespread reports that there would indeed be a decision on the bylaws change Monday, he said, "I know that that's on the table as a topic of discussion" but there would "not necessarily" be a decision Monday. Within 90 minutes of his saying that, the word was out: The decision was made.
The two top state Senate Democratic leaders — Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams and Majority Leader Marty Looney — said state employees had been waiting for some good news amid talk of layoffs.
"Union leaders should be commended for working together to change their bylaws and helping to facilitate the potential for a successful vote by union members,'' they said in a joint statement. "Approval of the concession package is critical for Connecticut's fragile economy. We urge union leaders to quickly get clarification on any needed items, call for another vote and for all union members to vote yes. This is Connecticut's last — and best — chance to resolve its fiscal crisis without undermining its recovery."
House Speaker Christopher Donovan said: "I thank the SEBAC leadership for voting today to change its bylaws in a way that respects the opinion of a majority of state employees. This is the responsible course of action, as we look to avoid the terrible cuts and layoffs that would do so much harm to our state."