Good reasons to ratify new tentative agreement


By KENNETH BRYNIEN Last month, our PS&T members


rejected a tentative agreement that was based on what the state’s negotiators thought was a one-size-fits-all pattern. That rejection created an opportunity


to craft a new agreement, one that meets our needs. We worked to balance the needs of all of our members, the 3,496 who were facing layoff and the 50,000 who were not, all within the backdrop of the state’s fiscal crisis. Within two weeks, we completed negotiations on a revised agreement that, if ratified, saves the jobs of our members and is significantly better than the last agreement. We addressed key areas our members


identified as concerns: layoff protection, furloughs, the length of the contract, and health insurance costs. • Job Security —The new tentative


agreement more clearly defines the intent, and covers the entire term of the agreement. It incorporates a side letter that spells out the existing protections. • Furloughs —While the contract still


contains nine days of “deficit-reduction” leave; it now converts furlough days into deferred pay. This means that over the term of the agreement, our members face


no loss in wages associated with the furloughs. Additionally, since the furloughs are a wage deferral, there is no effect on final average salary for purposes of retirement. This was achieved by exchanging


the $1,000 lump-sum payment provided in the rejected agreement for complete reimbursement of the nine furlough days under the new agreement. Under the new terms, the average member comes out $600 ahead of the lump-sum payment. • Length of Agreement —Many of


you said you thought the five-year term of the rejected agreement was too long. By keeping the new agreement to just four years, we now have the opportunity to negotiate our next contract in an economic environment that may be significantly better than the current one. Additionally, we will no longer be in the same negotiating cycle as the Civil Service Employees Association, reducing the possibility of being forced into a contract pattern that doesn’t meet our needs. • Health Insurance —Unfortunately,


the state flatly refused to make all of the changes to health insurance premiums


STILLTRYING – PEF President Ken Brynien talks to reporters and members about contract talks. —Photo byMario Bruni


that we wanted. However, to help mitigate the effect of the higher premiums, we negotiated more flexibility in the Productivity Enhancement Program (PEP) as well as changes that will allow vacation accruals to more closely reflect their actual cash value when used to offset health insurance costs. These contract changes are


significant, and the new agreement deserves a strong “Yes” vote. By ratifying this agreement, you will


demonstrate we, as a union, are willing to sacrifice to preserve the jobs of 3,496 of our co-workers and fellow members, and to maintain the vital services we provide to New York’s citizens.


Workers’ comp tide turned against workers


By SHERRY HALBROOK Attorney Robert Grey painted a grim


picture of changes at the state Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB) and the state Insurance Fund (SIF) for PEF convention delegates attending their annual Health and Safety Breakfast in September. “I have nothing


positive to say this morning,” Grey, who specializes in personal injury and workers’ comp law, warned the delegates as he began. “We’ve seen a 180-


Extremely high rates of on-the-job


deaths and injuries sparked enactment of the first workers’ comp law in 1910. It was declared unconstitutional in 1911, but that happened the day before 146 workers died in the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in New York, and the public was determined to stop such dangerous conditions. By leading to the creation of the WCB


and SIF to protect workers, “Their deaths saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of others,” Grey said. The federal Occupational Safety and


degree turn in how the WCB and SIF are being run. They’re now the enemy of the injured worker.” Many of the problems are “coming


GRAY


Health Act followed in 1970, but the declining power of organized labor has allowed protections for workers to again decline, Grey said. The state kept raising the rate of


from the top,” Grey said. The history of the labor movement


also has been the history of workplace health and safety, and landmark safety legislation often has been passed in response to workplace disasters.


www.pef.org


compensation for injured workers through the 1970s and ’80s. But that stopped in the 1990s and the rate wasn’t raised again until 2007. In a drive to cut costs, the WCB


stopped holding hearings on cases unless the injured worker requests them. The board let workers manage their own cases, and the law judges (represented by


PEF) were told to decide more cases based on just filings and affidavits, Grey added. The number of cases dropped by half


between 1996 and 2006, Grey said, but the drive to cut costs went on. Workers who were permanently, but only partially, disabled were required to look for jobs or lose their benefits. About 80 percent of them never re-entered the workforce. Now, the board limits certain medical


treatments to eight weeks. “The doctor may request more


treatment, but it will likely be denied,” Grey said. “The guidelines don’t recognize your pain. Functional improvement is all that matters. Pain is irrelevant. “The board, itself, has even joined


cases against claimants at the state Court of Appeals,” Grey said. “These issues are being created by the


influence of the governor’s office and the Business Council,” Grey said. “The unions and their members must


fight it and stand up and say, ‘We’re sick and tired and we’re not taking it anymore!’”


The Communicator November 2011—Page 7


PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE


HEALTH & SAFETY


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