Committee Votes Down Maintenance Workers Contract

Last Tuesday, the McHenry County Board’s Facilities Management Committee could not muster a majority to recommend the maintenance workers union contract with Operating Engineers Local 150.

The vote was 2-2 with three members absent.

Jim Heisler

Jim Heisler

Nowak looking left L of WV talking

Bob Nowak

Voting in favor were

  • Jim Heisler, Chairman
  • Bob Nowak
Nick Provenzano

Nick Provenzano

Tina Hill

Tina Hill

Opposed were

  • Tina Hill
  • Nick Provenzano

Absent were

  • Michelle Aavang
  • John Hammerand
  • Bob Martens

Here’s what the committee members saw in the meeting packet:

Background and Discussion: The collective bargaining agreement between The International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 150, Public Employees Division, Facilities Department employees – and the County expired on November 30, 2015.

Pursuant to good faith negotiations regarding wages, benefits and terms of employment, both the County and the Union have reached tentative agreements for the renewal of the labor agreement.

The contract is for a 3 year term with an expiration date of November 30, 2018. Key items that have been changed due to these negotiations have been summarized and attached.

Impact on Human Resources: This agreement establishes terms and conditions of employment for the bargaining unit members. Impact on Budget (Revenue; Expenses, Fringe Benefits): Bargaining unit employees are to receive wage increases as follows:

  • December 1, 2015 – 1%
  • December 1, 2016 – 2%
  • December 1, 2017 – 2%

The 11 members of this unit will move onto the Local 150 insurance plan.

Once off the County plan, employees can not return and we no longer pay a percentage for retirees.

The annual cost is show below:

Cost figures for the proposed contract between McHenry County and the Operating Engineers Local 150 union for maintenance workers.

Cost figures for the proposed contract between McHenry County and the Operating Engineers Local 150 union for maintenance workers.

Contract changes are summarized below:

Negotiated changes in the contract with maintenance workers.

Negotiated changes in the contract with maintenance workers.


Committee Votes Down Maintenance Workers Contract — 9 Comments

  1. Can’t wait for the inevitable do over.

    Just like when Kurtz filled the Board room to get a do over for Healthcare Navigators, the union supporters will work to get a do over for this vote.

  2. Cal, what’s the starting rate now?

    A tad generous, but not really over the top.

  3. Kind of an important vote, three missing doesn’t look good.

    Cell phone voting is permitted is it not?

  4. It is disheartening to see so many (3 of 7) committee members absent for an important vote.

  5. What is the path to the collective bargaining agreements on the county website?

    If there is no such path, and I can’t find one, the county needs to for transparency reasons put the current collective bargaining agreements for all the bargaining units on the website, including all side letters, appendixes, amendments, addendums, letters of agreement, riders, etc. or any other document that adds to or otherwise modifies the base agreement.

    These collective bargaining agreements need to be indefinitely archived on the county website for historical purposes, not taken down when the new agreement is posted.

    Taxpayers will never be able to track what is happening without those documents.

    Does the board represent the unions or the taxpayers?

    Why not make it easy to find and access the agreements.

    They certainly are not easy to find now.

    Where are they?

    Human Resources?
    County Board?

    The agreements need to include the start and end date of the agreement also.

    And preferably (2) agreements.

    1. The agreement.

    2. The Change document, which is the agreement with strike throughs for deletions, underline for additions, something to that nature.

    Otherwise it’s impossible to compare two 50 or 100 page agreements line by line to see every single change.

    Or it’s too tedious to flip between the “summary of change document” and the cga.

    The summary of changes is good but we also need the change document.

    Taxpayers don’t even have these basic tools at their disposal without hunting and pecking all over the lace, making phone calls or sending emails or submitting FOIA.

    And then people wonder why their taxes are so high.


    What is the unfunded liability of the pension fund in dollars and percentage.

    That is part of the overall compensation picture.

    How many days did board members have to review the new contract before they voted on it?

  6. Mark, I have never seen a complete union contract in the Packets posted on-line.

    I would be surprised if you could find a Board member who has actually even read and understood a Union contract.

    The Board pays a contractor a lot of money to do the negotiations.

    I have located union contracts on-line for other cities.

    Where are the Board members DEMANDING that these contracts be posted?

  7. I see $135. for work boots.

    Would those workers be purchasing them from Jim Heisler’s store?

    Have they purchased them from him before?

    If so, should Heisler have voted on this?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *