Finance Committee Taking Another Go at Approving Local 150 Contract

The first time the proposed contract between McHenry County and Local 150 International Union of Operating Engineers Facilities Department came before the Finance and Audit Committee it stalled because of a tie vote.

The vote was 2-2.

Jim Heisler and Robert Nowak voted in favor.

Tina Hill and Nick Provenzano were in opposition.

Not attending were

  • MIchele Aavang
  • John Hammerand
  • Bob Martens

Here’s what the contract proposes:

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.

The Committee meets again today.


Comments

Finance Committee Taking Another Go at Approving Local 150 Contract — 7 Comments

  1. The 1% hike refers to what?

    – All employees individually receive a 1% hike?…meaning each employee receives a 1% hike?

    or

    – Since some employees are retiring, and others are starting, some individuals will receive more than a 1% hike, because the 1% just refers to the total pay for all employees is getting hiked 1%?

    Or does the 1% refer to something else.

    ———-

    Here is the path to the collective bargaining agreements (labor agreements) which the County has with various employee groups.

    http://www.co.mchenry.il.us > County Government > Departments A – I > Human Resources > Collective Bargaining Agreements

    ————-

    Illinois state law needs to be changed so the public can provide input on the collective bargaining agreement before it’s approved by the board and membership, just as the public can provide input on the budget before it is approved.

    There are many collective bargaining agreements that hike property taxes which the voter is largely left in the dark.

    The exact number of agreements varies per each government unit.

    Here are some common ones.

    – Police
    – Fire Department or Fire Protection District
    – Municipal workers
    – Park District
    – School District (Teachers, Support Staff, Maintenance, Transportation).
    – County Sheriff, Transportation, Facilities, Coroners Office, Animal Control, Hospital, Circuit Clerk.

    So it’s not unusual for 10 collective bargaining agreements to be buried in property tax bills.

    And for most collective bargaining agreements there is a pension and separate retiree healthcare and other post employment benefits (OPEB).

    Plus current healthcare benefits and other current benefits for active workers.

    So there’s 40 costs.

    So even with FOIA that’s a lot to keep track of.

    We need a lot more transparency of that and other controls to reign in costs and hikes, especially at the pension level, which is by far our biggest problem.

  2. Why are we paying for employees to be on call?

    They should only be paid if they are called.

    Here is the formula:

    Flat tax levy + Flat budget + Wage increase = Fewer employees or reduced services.

    Joe and SOME Board members claim credit for fewer employees while it should be the union taking credit because they negotiated the higher wage rates.

    Unions cause lower employment?

  3. Should Heisler be voting???

    Allowance for heavy duty shoes??

    Doesn’t Heisler sell them??

  4. Questioning on, paying for on call makes the employee libel if they don’t respond to a call.

    Just having a list of people to call gives them a out saving they went out and weren’t expecting to be called out.

    Forewarning of a call would have to be given, or the out is usable.

    During none snow events, it’s hard to predict an emergency in need of a call out.

    Village of Cary uses a two hour call out stipend per employee per weekend.

    Weekends are the hardest to get people to respond in a timely manner, typically.

  5. The Nob: Understood.

    My entire career has been in the private sector and I have been on call for many years.

    I only get paid when I get called.

    If I do not respond – I lose my job.

    I expect the same to apply in the public sector.

    This is just one more example of the phenomenal discrepancy beteen public and private sector employment!

    And just when was a public sector employee held “libel” for not responding?

    I also understand: “Weekends are the hardest to get people to respond in a timely manner, typically.” My response is the same. If my employer tells me I will be on call and I do not respond, I lose my job.

  6. I didn’t make the rules, just had to live with them.

    Gov is not like the real world, it never will be no matter what.

    Politics are not the same, therefor the rules are different.

    People hardly ever get canned, but it does happen believe it or not.

    It’s easy to suit the gov, and often they will settle rather than waste $$$$ on lawyers.

    The wind direction is critical.

  7. On this vote I was the sole disincting vote.

    And will vote against it again.

Leave a Reply

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