IT’S NO – PEF President Ken Brynien announces the total vote on the tentative PS&T contract. —Photos by Richard Dillard


Members


By DEBORAH A. MILES For the first time in the 34-year


history of PEF, members voted to reject the tentative agreement with the state. Nearly 70 percent of the membership


voted, resulting in a “no” vote by a count of 19,629 to 16,906. The ballots were counted September


27 by the American Arbitration Association in Manhattan, with members and reporters awaiting the results that afternoon. In a press conference following the


vote count, PEF President Ken Brynien said this contract was one of the most controversial in the history of PEF. “The decision to reject the tentative


agreement was made by our rank-and- file members who clearly feel they are being asked to sacrifice more than others, particularly in light of the pending expiration of the state’s millionaires’ tax. “We will ask the governor to direct his


negotiators to immediately return to the bargaining table to work out an agreement which our members will ratify. “PEF is calling on the governor to


resist laying off thousands of our members as he has threatened and, instead, work with us to identify savings that would preserve the state’s depleted workforce and services, especially during this economic downturn and in light of the recent flooding. “Our members’ response to the floods


that devastated many areas of the state is just one example of how much they are needed to tackle the state’s problems and


Page 4—The Communicator October 2011 keep its residents safe,” Brynien said.


The rejected pact The agreement would have preserved


the pay scale, the employment and the careers of thousands of PEF members. It would have maintained increments and salary-grade parity, longevity payments and co-pays for doctor visits at their current levels. The pact included no salary increases


for three years beginning in 2011. Salary increases of 2 percent were included for years 2014 and 2015. Lump-sum payments of $775 would have been made in 2013 and $225 in 2014. In the rejected deal, the state


proposed an increase in the percentage share members would pay for health insurance premiums, plus five days of unpaid furloughs and four days of deferred pay. In exchange, PEF employees would


have been protected from layoffs resulting from the circumstances that gave rise to the state’s need for $450


contract


million in workforce savings. PEF Vice President and Contract


Chair Tom Comanzo said, “Although the agreement contained a provision stating workforce reductions caused by the closing or restructuring of facilities, as authorized by legislation or the Spending and Government Efficiency (SAGE) Commission determinations are excluded from layoff limitations, we would have worked hard to make sure they didn’t affect our members’ jobs.”


Bargaining, round two The tentative agreement was approved


by the PEF Executive Board in August to send to the membership. Prior to the vote, the PEF contract team visited every PEF region to discuss the specifics of the deal. Hundreds of members showed up


across the state with questions about the agreement and what would happen if the deal passed or failed. “This vote shows our members feel


they are not responsible for the state’s fiscal crisis,” Brynien said. “They meet the needs of the state every day by performing necessary services to keep the state functioning. We ask the governor to come back with a plan that is fair to our members and the state. We ask him to review the high cost of consultants and bargain with us fairly, so our members can vote again and ratify an agreement.”


COUNTING—AmericanArbitration Association employees open PEF ballots.


PEF Information Line: 1-800-553-2445


REJECT


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36