Unions, Malloy reach a $1.6 billion concession deal

Here is the deal:

While the provisions are tentative, sources said the deal is a 4-year, no-layoff agreement through 2014. In exchange, there would be a hard wage freeze for all employees and managers that includes longevity pay, increments, and lump sums that would last for two years. There would also be no longevity pay for newly hired state employees.

After those two years, the unions would receive 3 percent pay increases on the first day of the new fiscal year on July 1, 2013, 2014, and 2015, according to sources.

In the labor parlance at the Capitol, the salary deal is 0, 0, 3, 3, 3 for the five years.

The plan calls for increasing the retirement age by three years for all state employees who retire after 2017. That includes employees of all ages, including those in Tier 1, which is the most lucrative, as well as Tier II and Tier IIa.

The plan also calls for extending the 2017 SEBAC agreement by five additional years, but there would be some changes.

In order to receive hazardous duty pay, employees would be required to work for 25 years.

Governor, please detail how you get $ 1.6 billion dollars and then invest my money for me. What a lot of bull? What took these people so long to agree?

This is absolutely the worst lies I have ever heard of. Malloy promised $1.0 billion in savings this year coming, not $21.5 billion over 20 years or $100 million a year. There is not one dollar of actual savings ,all of it is pure cost avoidance. Malloy is worse than Rell if that is possible. The bottom line is 90% of balancing the budget is coming from the tax increases on the public. What an absolute outrage. All of the outrageous pensions,health benefits,working conditions,overtimein last year etce etc continues.
This is absolutely the last straw for me . I can not believe Malloy is so corrupt. This is absolutely unbelievable to me. I can hadley wait to see how they explain saving $800 million a year with these changes. Where are the shared sacrifices.

DonG: We need to wait to see the entire deal, but for now, your math is off. If this does save $21.5 billion over 20 years, that is just over $1 billion a year, not $100 million a year.

Ohhh dear opticat, please know that medical is an area that will be affected of course. But that is not only for us, is as well the same or worst for the private sector. Managed Care companies get wealthier and our pockets with less. Hey go figure! Companies are here to do business you know. It don’t matter how many people get stomped and trashed in the process, they are here to do business.

On another note and maybe, and that’s only maybe, this entire non-sense with the union is over. I was very saddened by the hidden message of many of the blogs I read. I heard many times over and over that 50k a year is toooo much money for anyone to make, and I have a 40 year salary so that’s even less. Like many other people on the same salary or less, (god please take care of them) I struggle every day to provide my family with basic things and keep a roof over their head. My issue here is that very seldom people see the big picture. We are just working families, with the not so last model car, or going to the movies on seldom occasions ( wich by the way is a luxury lol) I see more than that. Why people has to settle for less while 1% of the population is taking dumps on gold toilets. God forbid think about retirement after most of my 401k was gone as well as most regular people’s retirements accounts and went in to you know who’s hands, bailouts on all of that crap. You guys know what I’m talking about.

So what’s the hidden message? Come on take I guess, I know you know! Yeap that’s it, you got it; You are worthless and will work for nothing until the day you die! Wake up people, we did not created this mess.

LOL, the guy gets a legit balanced budget and people are crying about the public workers not getting it stuck to them enough? Really? These people will be paying more in taxes like everyone else.

Let's step back from the mindless rhetoric and think.

Budgets run by projecting costs, Don. If the projected costs are down then less money is spent and that means more money is kept. It's a balanced budget - the 400 million will be made up a hell of a lot easier than 4 billion would.

I see Lawrence knows very little about finance as is usual.The highest rating is AAA not AA. Also for the record there are only 6 states out of 50 that have a lower credit rating then Ct. There are 25 that have a higher rating. I would not brag about a AA rating. Why don't you check you facts first.

middleoftheroad: I think we need to wait to see the whole package; there might be more savings than reported here.

One issue I have is that you say that no one is getting raises, and yet I have a relative in the private sector that has received 5% increases the last two years (and she was not alone in her company). So, at least SOME people are getting raises.

I also think that the structural changes in retirements and benefits are likely to be significant sources of savings down the road.

Oh, and DonG, two things. First, we have to wait to see whether there are actual savings (e.g. on health care). Second, raising the retirement age in a defined benefit plan is equivalent to reducing 401K matches in a defined contribution plan. The state will have to pay a lower % of the employees' salaries because of changes in the actuarial calculations.

Dear State Employee (above)

I think you mean $800M not $800B. Please tell me you do not work in anything related to finance.

We really do like you. In fact so much so that we would like you and the other state workers to join our club. We promote and compensate based on performance - and you sound like a high performer. No more worries about seniority or being limited in your job to a set number of hours. Its all up to YOU. If you do well, you can actually make a great living, pay for college tuition and a whole lot more. And no union dues!!

What do you say? Do you have what it takes?

Yes Don, it's 800 million in givebacks per year for two years from about 45,000 TAXPAYERS... And if i'm not mistaken, you miscalculated a bit today as well..

Thanks but no thanks Don...

But Don, you didn't answer my question... why should I be responsible to pay a bill I didn't create...??? Why Don...??? Why are regular state employees vilified...??? we work, we pay taxes...

Dear Don, you sound like a real angry guy. Your nearsightedness and strong opinions is just what state employees don't need to hear. As I said earlier not all employees get the big bucks and are lazy.
We pay taxes and are tired of hearing such negativity towards us. And I would love to be able to get job performance raises and promotions. But I'm sure there will be problem with that by the tax payers, should that ever come up. I'dl love to work OT too but that's gonna cost the state $. So doubt it'll happen.
I'll have to think hard as to what my vote will be. Somehow I'm not sure I get paid enough to be thought of or treated as a lesser person because I work for the state and am reponsible to CT finacial problems. Guess I'll vote for what best for my family and vote no....... I'm just one of the little guys but guess that doesn't matter to the residents of CT all state workers are the same.

Being a C/O I/m not happy with agreement. When I took the job it was 20 yrs for my hazard duty pension. Now its 25yrs. Now I and others have to decide if its worth it knowing in 2022 it can change again. Am glad its over though hearing non union people cry about stateworkers with share sacrifice. What, us union workers don't have to pay in the tax increases. Its a sad day when our union dues go to nothing, SEBAC gave in. Its not the C/Os pensions that are outrageous. Couple weeks ago Hartford courant top 10 pensions in CT UCONN professors 200k to 400k. Now thats outrageous. Should've capped pensions Malloy and unions got it wrong. A deceaced professor pension still getting collected by wife of 200k plus is outrageous. Now I must do 5 extra years with drafts, working holidays and so forth. So you non union workers crying about us union workers, get the facts right we will be paying those increase taxes as well with extra sacrifices.

The state financial problem is not the state workers, even though there are some ranks like the police and fire that get outrageous OT which will count towards pension that they can get just after 20 years of service -- then they can go on double dipping. The real problem lies with free loaders, the welfare people who can get fully paid tuition (even when some of them attend private colleges), free housing, free health care, free food etc. for generations (each family unit gets a benefit up to $65,000 a year) , even as they multiply children and make them wards of the state. Now you make the illegals into legals, your tax revenue (even after paying taxes at the hyped up tax rates) would not be enough -- almost 25% of the revenue is just eaten by them. Rest -- you just work and then give your pay check to those free loaders. In fact, the free loaders don't ask -- they demand all those freebies as their birth right. My advice to all of you is to fight the real cause of our welfare state.

This is a smoke and mirrors budget like the ones Rowland and Rell put together in years past. Malloy's budget is on steroids. The taxpayers are once again left holding the bag. Not one state employee is laid off or one department eliminated, or one department privatized. The Rolls Royce benefit packages given to state workers continue along with their raises, and other perks. The Unions held Malloy to the fire and won. They gave up NOTHING!, and the taxpayers gave everything.

In 5 years this state will be in a worse mess than it is now and the Democrats will still be in power.

Yes Larry 2011, you're right... I should have directed my comment above to middleoftheroad... woops

I don't have to worry about my job... I have enough seniorty they'd have to eliminate the entire department to get to me... Thanks union...:)

Angry??? your right I'm angry... what all you ANGRY people fail to comprehend is that we state employees are TAXPAYERS... Do you really think we are exempt from that...???
we didn't create this fiscal mess Larry2011. but we are constantly blamed and constantly giving back because of it...

And to Eric Nelson, you're right... I shouldn't complain, after all, I have a cushy job, job security and the rolls royce of benefits... i really don't have to give up a thing...

I'm voting no no no to any concession... let the chips fall where they may...

thanks guys for all your words...

Yup, and in 5 years, I'll still have a cushy job and great benefits... hehehehehe

I have been reading all this rhetoric for several weeks. All of you non-staties could have had a state job 20 years ago, but you didn't want one did you? The salaries were very low and you didn't want to take care of people with severe mental illness or severe mental retardation, you didn't want to deal with impatient, tempermental people waiting in the DMV line, you didn't want to deal with giant caseloads of needy citizens applying for benefits at the Dept. of Social Services, you didn't want to work several grueling shifts reparing roads on hot, steamy days or plowing on freezing cold nights, YOU DIDN'T WANT A STATE JOB. When I started working for the state over 20 years ago, my salary was $7.63 an hour. To make up for that dismal rate, I was promised a decent healthcare and pension benefit. You were offered the same opportunity, but didn't want to do the kind of work state employees do. You scoffed at the salaries, you scoffed at the jobs.

Now, you have no hope of getting a state job....there is a hiring freeze and you have screamed so much that all future benefits for state employees will be minimal and unattractive again.

State employees take care of Connecticut's most needy citizens and I applaud them for all their hard work and commitment.

And by the way....the cries that there are state employees who are loafers and deadwood in the ranks.....I didn't realize that in every private business, organization, and company, that there are no loafers, no deadwood, and every single employee was a stellar performer. Wow.....

Looking at this great deal that has been negotiated (just those provisions that have been revealed anyway) I can look forward to not receiving the 7/1/11 wage increase that was part of the previous concession package. I will now, in addition to the health care concessions agreed to less than 2 years ago, can expect more cutbacks yet to be announced. most State employees can look forward to a mandatory 3 additional years before retirement (till 65), giving them more time to thank the powers that be for the privilege of serving all the wonderful citizens of CT who would prefer that all state employees be crucified.
I will also be working 3 years without my contracted longevity goldmine (averaging less than $500/yr for us overpaid State employees), no chance of a promotion (unless I have some political connection) and being subject to agency consolidations and reorganizations that could relocate me to where only God knows (whoops, did I say God).
And with all of these concessions, plus those I have yet to be informed about, I will also have to bear all the other tax increases that our poor poor poor private sector workers will be forced to pay because of the huge salaries and extraordinary benefits lavished on us unproductive, ungrateful and selfish State employees.
Well, to live up to all of the negative opinions that the wonderful citizens of CT have toward us State employees, I will be voting NO to any agreement that requires more from State employees than it does from the rest of the CT citizenry.
Everyone wants shared sacrifices; then lay off those thousands of employees as threatened by the Governor. This will give the CT citizens what they want, and also give them a taste of the compromised “safety net” that will result. I wish all you private sector citizens the very best while you wait in the long lines at various State agencies, while you wait for emergency assistance at home or on the highway, while you wait the additional amount of time it will take for the highways to be cleared of snow and ice, while you watch all those proposed boondoggle, overpriced, wasteful and filled with corruption projects (the bus way, “high speed rail”, etc.) to be built with “unanticipated” cost overruns and delays, and while you watch the CT politicians somehow increase their assets way beyond any visible or reported income sources.
GOD (whoops, I did it again) have mercy on all of us, even the despicable State employees.

Social security and Medicare are the real assets of working people.

Individual workers put in 7.65% of their pay (to cover social security and medicare), and their employers pitch in another 7.65%, that is a total of 15.3% of their gross pay every year into this social security and medicare funds.

Forgetting for a moment the caps, let us say that an individual's average earning is $50,000 per year. Then 15.3% of $50,000 would come to $7,650 per year. If you joined service at 22 years of age, you have to work for a minimum of 40 years before you can claim social security (Age 66 or 67 would be normal retirement age). So, the total amount sent to Social Security and medicare would be $306,000 before you take early social security. Then, if you add compound interest to this fabulous sum, the total kitty in your favor will rise to more than $1,000,000 over the 40 year period. However, the maximum social security you can get per year would be say $25,000. This means that you can not get even a normal rate of return (i.e. interest) on your assets invested with the federal government. FORGET TO RECEIVE BACK ANY TIME DURING YOUR LIFE SPAN, THE AMOUNT YOU PUT INTO THIS FUND. AND HERE IS THE CLINKER. WHEN YOU DIE, THE ENTIRE $1,000,000 WITH ANY ACCRUED INTEREST, WILL BE FORFEITED BY THE U.S. GOVERNMENT AND YOU CAN NOT PASS ON ANY OF THIS KITTY (EVEN A PENNY) TO YOUR CHILDREN.

Medicare will kick in only after you are 65.

Now about the pension schemes. If you do not also have a pension scheme, in addition to social security, especially in your sunset years, you can be
relegated to the poorest of the poor category person in the economic sense. So, employers may offer one of the two types of pension schemes to their employees, in recognition of their long service.

First, defined benefit pension plans: These are the pension schemes, which are separate from and in addition to social security. Employees and employers pitch in their contributions to such a plan (there are several combinations and permutations here). The employer has a plan and he assumes responsibility to pay certain defined benefits, irrespective of employees' contribution and irrespective of how much is in the kitty of the pension assets at any given time. Any potential payment assumed or presumed to be payable to retired workers will also be forfeited by the state and municipal pension funds and nothing of the deemed "due to" amount is passed on to the children of the dead state employee. In a way this is like the social security system that we discussed above.

Defined Contribution Plan: On the other hand, if a private employer offers a 401K plan to its employees (and state employees are also eligible to join similar 401K plans) it is known as a defined contribution plan. Defined contribution plan means that the employer will be off the hook once it puts in its share into that fund. Under this 401K plan, when an employee dies either before or after his or her retirement, the balance in that kitty goes to his children.

Then, of course, there are individual retirement accounts (IRA) which are akin to defined contribution plans.

Then, there is the golden plan, namely the Roth IRA where the amount you draw in your old age is not subject to taxes, unlike the other IRAs and the 401K, and pension plans where the amount of pension you receive is subject to federal taxes and in some states, even subject to state income taxes.

Malloy claims that his predecessors of the Republican Party played games with unfunded liability to the defined benefit pension plan for state workers. There is no absolute one way in these accounting matters. Remember that until very recent years, most of the state defined benefit pension plans (in the Union) were accounted for on a pay-as-you-go basis. We can always change laws, as we please. Accounting for these plans is a state subject. Even now, the federal government is on the same scheme with regard to liability to social security recipients. In the long run, whether you go by cash basis or accrual basis of accounting, the total cash to be paid out to the retirees will be the same. It is just a matter of timing difference between the two schemes.

Heavens are not going to fall to the grounds, say if we go by "pay-as-you-go-" basis. The difference is politics, good politics, bad politics, and then the dirty politics. Malloy seems to opt for the last category, because it is easy to rouse the passions of everybody and get elected.

I find it very,very strange that when I point out real issues and facts concerning the current situation I get criticised as if I caused them. Who was the one who said I am going to make the state workers give up $1.0 billion a year to balance the budget. It wasn't me. It was Malloy the new governor who you elected . Any criticism you have should be directed to him.I have seen almost no criticism of him in any of these posts.
You may not like it but the problems with the huge underfunded pension plans and the lack of any fund for retiree health benefits is getting worse year by year and there is no way this problem can be solved. The numbers are far to large.
Pension Obligations Teachers /State Workers $44.8 Billion
Assets $24.0 BIllion
Short $20.8 Billion

Health Benefits Teachers ?State workers $29.6 Billion
Assets 0
Short $29.6 Billion
If I was a state worker or teacher I would be asking my union leaders or Malloy how do you propose to make up this shortage of $50.4 billion.I can guarentee you that you can not increase taxes enough to cover this shortfall.If you want to complain about a real serious problem then ask about this situation with your mentors(The Governor,The Democratic Legislators and your union leaders).If I was a state worker I would demand a meeting with these people plus our state tresurer and ask her how she plans to solve as it is impossible to solve.

Don and Art, this is a complex problem and the focus on state workers alone and directing your reference to state workers as a single whole is simplistic and misguided.

State workers WORK. They PAY taxes. There are many who do not make very much money. Are you suggesting that the police and fire workers who put themselves at risk are to blame?

There were massive spending cuts. There were wide ranging tax increases. There is an increase in pension and healthcare contributions by the workers as their salaries are frozen. Despite this all you can offer is state workers got off easy?

There is no smoke and mirrors, this budget is a real balanced budget compared to what we've seen.

This will NEVER pass a vote.

Dan will have egg on his face when he has to issue the layoff notices all over again!

To Larry2011:

You say it is unfair for taxpayers to have to pay for "tier one, tier two or tier three pensions."

On the contrary: it is ABSOLUTELY FAIR that taxpayers pay for the state employee pensions. Why? Because that's the deal your elected representatives made with the state's workforce.

If you don't like the deal, then you need to take it up in the voting booth (rather than bludgeoning workers who happen to be employed by the state.)

One other thing you should be aware of: whether they like the deal or not, the impotent mob posting here can't unilaterally change it. Sure, some state employees may be layed-off --but the ones that survive WILL get what was legally promised to them and there's nothing that can be done about it.

Instead of being spiteful, you should be thankful that the unions are considering giving anything back at all.

Not all unions have bumping. Many of agency will have have some loss of positions regardless what Malloy says. Cutting spending results in layoffs. Some have already taken place. That's just the way it is. Malloy is reducing departments and consolidating others. Jobs are gonna be lost, they just won't be given as media attention as this has. I am not confident in Malloy and his promises.
If my health benefits are affected I will vote no, if my health benefits change when I retire I will vote no, my 401k is mine, I won't get a pension, so if pensions are affected, oh well, I can't tap my 401K till I'm 59.5 anyway. And really how much will 40g a yr get me in ten or twenty years anyway.
There is no glory working for the state, especially when the private sector resents you and treats you badly. Yes I am thankful for my job, but it is a thankless job.

To state punching bag What I said was if state employee did not feel he should be paying for tier 1 then why should I be responsible You need to be consistant I thought state employees were tax payers too

The state pension and medical benefits will be owed by who ever lives in ct in the future. If they had funded the liability properly we would be paying for it now. Seeing that I plan on living elsewhere the liability will not be mine. We baby boomers see the writing on the wall. You will have to collect from someone else. It will not be me.

To Larry:

Please do move. But know that it is YOU, not state employees, that caused this mess.

By the way, it doesn't surprise me that, as a Baby Boomer, your solution is to skip out on your obligations and run away. Your generation is well known for living beyond its means.

Good luck to you.

Yes, it's YOUR fault as a member of the voting public, Larry.

YOU (the voting public) voted-in the representatives that chose to under-fund and/or rob the state's pension system rather than make the responsible payments.

Now the bill has come due, and instead of owning up to it as a taxpayer, you're busy vilifying state employees for wanting what was promised to them.

It is no different than using your house as an ATM instead of paying down the mortgage (something a boomer like you might know about) and then blaming the bank when you can no longer afford your house.

Please don't assume all state employees voted for Malloy, because I didn't!!!

Opticat Keep putting into your 401k. Over time you will be surprised how much you can save. You are not a hater like state_employee and punching bag. I did not vote for Malloy but I do not blame him. We will all take a beating the next couple of years but things will get better if he can get the legislature to slow spending

There was 13 million cut from the community colleges this year and another 1-2 next year. Not alot I know but considering they make money for the state, that's sad.

Increasing Age by 3 years for all Tiers and adding 5 years to Hazardous Duty is NOT appeasing the majority of members who have to vote on this "tentative" agreement. And....no word has come out about Healthcare which was just increased two years back.

Simply can't see this passing....I see Corrections, Protective Services and State Police voting against this at the very least. I'm sure there will be quite a few more as well.

This is no deal for the State (where's the savings?) or the State Employees (Too much given back by current employees and not the NEW ones.)

Reps from Norwalk/ Fairfield indicated that the plan is there will be a large # of people leaving ( by choice) once the proposed conditions are announced. I don't think early retirement is being offered. Rumors from a couple of sources are that all employees will be paying into their pensions, and less contribution from the state into 401k. Health ins goes up with increased premiums and copays. Of course we'll will have to wait and see exactly but the mass exit is where the savings begin.

And Larry, we have paid increases to our health ins. with decreases in benefits.Everytime there is a new contract our health benefits change, truly they do. Perhaps you feel state employees shouldn't get any health ins. I'm not Jim Calhoun and making 200g+. These concessions effect people who make 40g with families, I'm sure Jim will not feel the effects like I will. ( Jim also gets alot of perks) Again I'm thankful for a job but please remember not all state employees are equal and some us really can't afford continued increases in healthcare, we too, have to pay the increases in taxes. So it really does feel like a double wammy to me.

Ooops my bad Jim made 1.58 million Football coach 1.3m and womans basketball just over 1m. Seriously?! No wonder athletes feel entiled, they have to make more than their college coaches..,Uconn tutitions should increase. I don't feel that I should contribute to the salaries of the highest paid employees of the state. The adminstration is even over paid. It's these people who are creating such a lopsided view of state employees and their salaries. Seriously 1.58 million for a college coach.

DonG: I have looked at the budget as well, and it is hard to parse out where the cuts are in many areas because of the agency consolidations. The easiest cuts to see are in higher education. Each unit received a 10% cut int its block grant. I did a quick addition of these, and they are roughly $67 million I think. These are perhaps not massive, but they are certainly not theoretical.

I heard that Rell's lieutenant governor just retired @ age 51 with full benefits. Gee I didn't know that was a hazardous job. Seems even the politicians are looking out for themselves, and obviously protecting each other's own interests. How can this be OK with either the private sector or state employees or even Molloy? Why should the low guy like me be willing to accept concessions when the lawmakers aren't even following the present guidelines. This decision is really swinging towards NO for me.

The comment on the lt gov is exactly why I think the pension fund will run out. Here is a person at age 51 who may live for another 30 years. The math does not work

The consumer is being crushed by gas, food, healthcare, income tax, sales tax etc ect. 3 small business in my town have gone under in the last 5 weeks. The reason is no customers. The more we pay to the state the less there is to spend. Our spending is the next persons income.

Sorry Larry, I thought you were implying we didn't pay increases towards our health ins. I must be getting sensitive to the fact that so many people believe stateworkers are given everything for free, and we all get such high salaries because that is not the case. Really, I believe there is a small percentage of overpaid people( way over paid) working for the state and the average Joe is getting the brunt of the negative and downright mean things said of them. Conclusions that we are all greedy, lazy, overpaid and feel a sense of entitlement is an unfair and unjust to the average employee.

My issue with the lt gov is that I believe he was lt gov for 6 years and was in the legislature part time for all his other years. Yet he receives a pension based on his highest pay. I know that is how the agremnet is but I think it is not right. I think only full time years should be included.

Spending is always the next persons salary unless you spend on charities and even then someone's probably being paid.

But many do, and I am a state employee of 17 years, and I do get the sense that even some of my co workerswho have even more senority have a false sense of security. They were talking about layoffs of more then 10% of the workforce.The article here does not really sound all that bad, because if you are retiring within the next several years, you should be unaffected, but if you are retiring after 2017, and you vote no then the agreement for 2017 could be torn apart. It looks like we are not going to have all the facts until we get back to work and get all the details. From what I am reading here, I am thinking that I am going to vote YES, but if I learn that they are going to destroy my pension and health benefits then I will vote no.

To MichaelThoughts I would appreciate the source of your statement that block grants have been reduced to Higher Educatuion by $67 million. It is interesting in that here is no budget as of today. I have a document from the office of fiscal analysis (OFA) indicating that every area of the current services budget has increased year to year(From current year 2011 to 2012 Malloys Budget). Against this increase is one line item of $1.0 billion for savings from state employees savings/concessions.There is a plan B which lays off 4700 state workers and then reduces other expenses but this will only happen if the workers reject the proposed so called agreement. The jury is still out on that.In conclusion there are no reductions as of today.and no budget.
To the individual who mentioned the article on state workers in the Courant today. You should take that with a gain of salt as he can not even get the number of workers correct.He indicates that we have 43,000 workers. This is totally wrong and not even close. There are 45,000 union workers alone . The actual total is about 50,000 and the source of this is the official study of the pension status which indicates there are 50,064 active workers. I have a very recent document from the Comptroller of the State who indicates there are 54,900 state workers.To be reasonable I am using 50,000 not the higher number even if from the comptroller.

DonG: Just one other thing. My $67 million calculation was based upon the current services projection for FY12. This projection is what it would have cost the state to continue funding the same services given increases due to inflation, contracted wage and other employee expenses, and the fact that there are 27 paydays in FY12 instead of the usual 26. This latter fluke of the calendar is why FY12 expenses will oftentimes seem higher than FY13, but these "increases" are just a matter of timing of employees' paydays.

With the SEBAC agreement extending for 5 more years, this is a win/win for state workers and taxpayers! This is a no brainer "vote YES"!

TO DON G......

There is an article from this Sundays Hartford Courant called `Overpaid State Workers and Other Myths`.by Michael Cibes. It claims that Cts budgets betwwen 2000 and 2011 grew by 63.6% while persnal income of Cts residents grew by 63.3%, and that the workforce has decreased by 2,703 positions during that time. It also cited that the Political economy research instititute found that public employees are earning about 2% less than the private sector workers, and that the cost for the pension system has little to do with the employees who have already agreed to modifications to their pensions back in 1997, and that it has far more to do with the overhang left from employees who retired in the 1980s.
When you post I have also noticed that you never mention the tax loopholes in CT as being kind of a problem. Is it a fact tat companies such as Bank of America and ATT are not paying taxes on their income to the state of Connecticut? It seems like it is something that is never mentioned by either you or any of the people who seem to agree with you, and I am just wondering why? Are you a Republican lehislator? You seem to have a lot of information, but it is vert selective information.

Opticat.....Moody was Tier 1 with just under 29 years of service time. There was legislation (1992?)that allowed certain employees to retire early with penalty if they were not reappointed and had 25 years of service. The article states at 55 she would collect $5,270 a month instead of the $4,600 she has begun collecting — or $63,240 a year, instead of the $55,200. Currently, the penalty for early retirement is 2.5% per year. So 4 years early is about a 10% penaly. The numbers are close to the article.

I am not a fan of Moody's but under the rules she is allowed to start collecting her pension money early with a penalty. To me those numbers are actuarily determined so, yes she gets it early, but the amount is less for the rest of her life, so theoritcally, all things being equal the numbers should be about the same.

I am annoyed on why the specifics on the deal are taking so long to come out. While I am a State employee, if I have a work assignment due on a Monday, I will work all weekend to get it done. I heard SEBAC was meeting at 10 AM to agree on the documents to share with union members.

DonG; You should have read Cibes editorial more closely. You can certainly criticize it, but you missed some of the ways to do s. The editorial is not blatantly "false."

Cibes wrote: "The number of positions funded in the state budget for fiscal 2010 was 46,570, but the number of positions actually filled on May 31, 2010, was 43,583..." The key point here is that he is giving the number of positions listed as funded by the state budget. We would have to do more investigating to see why this number is lower than your numbers, but I suspect that much of it has to do with positions funded by other sources (e.g. federal or other grants) and the fact that the budget is based upon Full Time Equivalent (FTE) positions. You might argue that it does not matter where the funding comes from if the state pays for employees' retirement and benefits (I am not sure it does so, but I am assuming it for your argument's sake), but the other side might say that people paid on federal or other grants actually help the state by providing services without costing CT taxpayers, at least directly.

To those just above, active (approved) and filled positions are two very different things.

I also read the Cibes piece, and even as a state employee was a little "surprised" at some of his conclusions. Neither side is right or wrong when it comes to public pay. There are positions which are overpaid and, contrary to popular belief, positions which are underpaid. I think one thing that isn't considered very much is that the State has quite a few doctors, lawyers, and other professionals who contribute significantly to the payroll tab and could likely be earning more elsewhere. I'd be interested to know how many state employees have above a bachelors degree. I do and it did not come cheap. Not everyone is the snooty DMV clerk or the guy in the orange vest sipping his coffee while you drive by. There are a lot of professional staff.

Some other "food for thought", the state did not always put money away for pensions. Current year payments used to be made from operating funds. At some point it was switched to be architecturally funded. This is a big reason why the Tier I plan is so underfunded. The Tier II plans do not suffer the same shortfalls.

Bottom line, some adjustments to total compensation are justified. However most state employees do not have it nearly as good as most like to think.

Don, here you go again. I find some merit in some of your points from time to time but you need to be corrected on census. I do not know who you are but you are a bundle of misinformation at times. Do you know that in the state census is classified by Headcount and FTE? Headcount is the absolute number of employees whether they work 10 hours a week, twenty hours or 351/2 hours , and FTES convert all of those physical employees to one full time equivalent employee. So you can have 40 employees working 10 hours a week and that is only 10 FTES for a 40 hour work week. As a result, when you have the gall to call anyone a liar, you are totally ignorant to state finance. It all depends on what question you asked OSC and the knowledge of the person to whom you addressed the question.Secondly, all budgets, state or private industry( I have done both) include additions to staff, their costs are included in budgeted personnel costs and fringe before they are hired. Since there was an ongoing freeze in state hiring for 2010, of course I would expect the number of actual positions to be lower than the number of funded ( or budgeted) positions. If agencies were allowed to hire what they budgeted, they would not be a difference. Stick to your area of expertise and leave finance alone. I think you owe Mr Cibes an apology. I have no intention of getting into trivial comments with you, just trying to educate you a liitle bit.

To Don G....

Huh??? I just goy home after working very late, and have not had a lot of time to think about this, but it seems that you are asking the Hartford Courant as well as those of us who are still bothering to to take the time to keep posting here, whether we should believe Mr Cibes, or the numbers of two official reports. one being the official pension report, and the other being a report from the comptrollers office. The problem here is that the numbers that you give here are different, so why should I not believe mr cibes?

To Set and Skyreacher- I have question for you concerning Cibs comments about it being a Myth that state workers being more highly paid than private sector workers.
Lets accept for a minute that Cibes is correct and that there are 43,583 state workers. The facts are that the total wages/salaries and benefits for state workers included in the budget is $5.0 billion .Of this, approximately $1.0 billion is for legacy costs meaning costs that do not apply to the present workers. This is for payment to retirees for health care for which there is no fund and also includes money to make up for past underfunding of the pension fund caused by our Politicians.
This then leaves $4.0 billion for the present workers. Of this $3.0 billion is for wages and salaries and $1.0 billion is for fringes. Using 43,583 workers then we arrive at the following :This does not include teachers wages/salaries.
Average wages/salaries per employee $69,000
Average fringe benefits per employee $23,000
Total average cost per employee $92,000
If true, would any of you consider that these are average wages in private industry.All the figures that everyone is talking about is an average wage for state workers of approximately $50,000 per year .Could you therefore please explain how we get from $50,000 to $69,000 per year. The only way you can do this is to increase the number of workers. As I said before I stand by my numbers.

You do not seem to have all the facts. The change for hazardous duty is for NEW employees(25 years or 20 years with a mininum age of 50 based on highest 5 years) You will still be able to retire after 20 years with all overtime and shift premiums claculated in. Also the highest 3 years remains in effect. After the a 2 year wage freeze you would receive a 3% cola for 3 straight years(plus all step raises & longevity on time!)This is a win win deal for all! Be realistic & vote yes.

From a concerned fellow C/O.

Looks like Mr Gonsalves is choosing not to answer the last questions.

In Response to your post i am in full agreement, I also called Anthem they can't send any Program becasue as their is no Program.
I agree with your questions.

"Yes and No Voters...There is not a health plan that has been "created" yet ... read the framework agreement.
If you call Anthem Insurance (as I did today) they will tell you there is no "value added" program for State Employees to send you information about. This agreement allows the Malloy administration and Union leaders to "create" whatever they want. If you vote yes... you are voting for something that does not exist yet....there is no plan ....only a concept! This plan could end up costing you thousands "out of pocket" and you are not being told that!

Can you answer these questions based on the info you have been provided in the framework?

Is your family covered? or only the State Employee? If so, are they also required to sign a binding "commitment contract"?
Other than preventive care....what is covered?
What is the reimbursement rate and how much are the co-pays for diagnostics not related to preventive care?
Do they pay for MRI's or Ultrasounds...what is your share?
Surgery room expenses?
Would they pay for a needed knee replacement or tell you that what you get is a cane and pain meds?
Do they pay for psychotherapy or are you required to take psych meds instead....or would you be forced to take them to comply with the health management team?
Define non-compliance with the plan completely.

These questions need to be answered before the vote is taken. "Value Added" and "Value Based" Healthcare is a whole different concept than what you are used to dealing with! Call the number on your insurance card and ask the representative for information for the announced "State Employees Value Added plan"
As I was told earlier today...they have no information about it, yet this plan is supposed to start up July 1, 2011....???

We do not have enough info to vote on this package!

To Don G,

From the start I do not think you have understood a single word I am saying. For all I know your 69k a year for the `average`salary could be right on the money. However, if you were in some way able to subtract all the higher end earners from the numbers then you might actually start to get somewhere to a ball park figure as to what the average state employee might earn. I also have no idea of how many unionized employess there are as opposed to non union employees. I am sure that there are far more union employees than non union, but I am sure that it is the non union people that are earning a disproprtionate amount of $, and I think that this would incude the m $ salaries from the UC coache`s, , and all the 500k plus salaries to a lot of the university administrators as well as a lot of the political appointees of Rowland, Rell, and now Malloy.Do not give us different numbers when you post, and give a hard factual number, and then take into considering all of the things I said above before doing calculating, and then see what happens. The fact is Mr Gonsalves is that you probably cannot do this, and I know that I cannot.

TO THOSE WHO SAY "NO" -

In deciding whether to vote for or against the new SEBAC agreement, it's INCREDIBLY important to understand Connecticut's overall political and economic situation and the consequences of the voting's results.

WHAT HAPPENS IF IT GETS ACCEPTED: Everyone gets to keep their jobs for *at least* 4 years. With resumption of step increases, longevity payments and the 3% across-the-board increases in the last 3 years, and no more unpaid furlough days, you actually get RAISES in spite of the 3% contributions to your retirement health insurance fund. You get improved on-the-job IT support to help make your jobs EASIER. Your options for *transfers*changes INCREASE should future program eliminations or downsizing occur. You get to KEEP a defined-benefit retirement pension along with your current health insurance benefits and virtually ALL of your prescription benefits - all of which are FAR better than what 99.99% of the REST of the population has ANYWHERE. The chances of extremist, anti-government employee politicians being elected in Connecticut diminish CONSIDERABLY over the next couple of elections.

WHAT HAPPENS IF IT GETS REJECTED: At *least* 5,000 employees get laid off within a year. PRIVATIZATION of programs and services will increase DRAMATICALLY, resulting in even MORE layoffs. Public animosity towards State employees will grow out of control, resulting in right-wing anti-government and anti-government employee politicians winning the governorship and both houses of the legislature. Consequently we'll see the LOSS of the right to bargain collectively over pension and health insurance benefits PERIOD. Contracts currently in effect will NOT get renewed upon their expiration, and arbitrators will side with the STATE - resulting in NO pay raises AT ALL for the foreseeable future, defined-benefit pensions for active employees will be REPLACED with a defined-contribution 401(k)-style plan, health insurance coverage will be REDUCED to what typical private businesses offer (the most basic plan with sky-high deductibles and co-pays), and transfer-in-lieu-of-layoff opportunities will be SHARPLY curtailed from what they currently are. Of course, government employees will continue to lack the legal right to strike. Needless to say, the financial losses to State employees would be CATASTROPHIC, and the ONLY people likely to not see financially catastrophic losses would be those State retirees who are CURRENTLY collecting their pension.

If you *really* think this "rejection doomsday scenario" is unlikely, you'd better think again. Virtually every major newspaper in the state - both "liberal" and "right-wing" alike - are urging union members to vote "YES" for good reason... the alternative is the destruction of the State, its politics and its government employee collective bargaining rights as we know them.

A vote of "No" is a vote for your own political, financial end economic suicide. If you're not willing to vote "yes" for the benefit of the State of Connecticut and its citizens, at least vote "YES" for your own self-interest.

The public sector part of agency may not even exist within a few years,(DDS), and there will be troopers weho will be laid off, and at least one prison that will close. Many of the samaller agencies are already destined to be gone, and over the next few the other agencies on the chopping block will be the bigger ones. There will be drastic cuts cuts and layoffs to DOT, all state technical schools will likely close, and there will be additional to to 5k that are already proposed.

THIS IS NOT A LITTLE ECONOMIC SLOWDOWN WE ARE IN THAT IS GOING TO GO AWAY BY NEXT YEAR! WER HAVE NO NEGOTIATIONG POWER RIGHT NOW!UNLESS YOU HAVE A VERY SHORT TIME SPAN SET ASIDE FOR RETIREMENT THEN THERE IS A CHANCE MANY OF US WILL LOSE OUR JOBS!