It seemed like the new year was off to a good start yesterday until the sirens started in the late afternoon. A few phone calls and we learned of the fatal car crash and the search for a missing snorkeler, later found to have drowned. It’s not the best way to get Kaaawa into the news.
Then this morning we got more of the story. The victim in the drowning part of a family renting a beach house that we walk past every morning. We’ve most likely seen them over the past several mornings in and around the house, which is in a narrow section of homes tucked between Kamehameha Highwy and the ocean. They got into trouble in the same spot where a teen diver drowned back in 2007. Knowing all this makes it feel much closer to home.
Jerry Burris had an interesting take on the current public union budget negotiations in a column this week.
He meanders around the point, but his point is that the collective bargaining system has worked in the past because there were some common understanding that led to deals.
Get the key people in a room and work it out.
Sometimes it was a matter of handshake agreements between labor leaders and top government officials that offset pay raises in the short term in exchange for promises of decent increases once the economy turned around. Other times, unions worked through the Legislature to win benefits that served as “in lieu” replacements for outright salary hikes.
Then Burris concludes:
…we seem to have moved into a culture of self-interest and distrust where obvious solutions fall to short-term interests and the desire to maintain whatever place on the game board that has been achieved over time.
Perhaps I misunderstand, but that sounds like he ends up blaming the unions for not wanting to give up gains built over time, although he leaves lots of wriggle room.
I don’t profess to have any insider knowledge of what is at the bottom of the failed negotiations. But here’s another piece of the puzzle.
The chief negotiator for the state in the UH negotiations is John Morton, UH vice-president for community colleges.
The complaint heard from the union side has been that Morton isn’t authorized to actually negotiate. He hasn’t been given the power to commit to anything. He can take proposals back and forth but, when push comes to shove, can’t make that handshake agreement that seals a deal.
The same thing has been happening in the HSTA negotiations, with deals put together by negotiators later dismissed by the governor.
I know that when you go into a formal mediation proceeding, the people involved have to have authority to reach an agreement. It’s got to be the same in labor negotiations.
It seems to me plain old common-sense that to get these contracts done requires the direct involvement of people who have been given the authority to make a deal. If the governor won’t delegate that authority, then she should be the one putting in the hours at the negotiating table. Same thing at UH. Without that, there can never be those “understandings” that allow negotiations to move forward in difficult times like these.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
We all know this Governor is a micromanager. She started as one – she’ll end as one. So lets not act surprised. Send in Barry. Keep Linda Smith out of the room. Cut the deal.
Isnt it interesting how UPW has stayed so low on the radar? Whats going on there, Ian?
So Morton is just a messenger boy.
Negotiating is about getting to yes. If Morton can’t say yes, who can? UH admin says they need a 5% cut for two years (actually it’s a 14% cut with pay lag and medical benefit cuts included). What does the UH faculty get in return? The faculty asks for a pay raise after two years to recover the 14% cut. The administration says they can’t do it. OK what can the administration do?
If the administration really wants that 5% pay cut what will make the faculty willing to settle besides money? Have they ever asked the egg heads?
Some faculty will lose their homes and others will have to pull their kids out of private school (being faculty they value education) so the pay cut will hurt a lot of them. What will the administration give that merits that sort of sacrifice?
It doesn’t necessarily have to be monetary. The administration could be creative. It could be something that would really improve faculty working conditions or the university so much that faculty, being altruists, would buy into it.
It might take all of two hours to settle this if the people showed up who could settle this and they really wanted to settle. Otherwise this is like a tennis match when only one player is on the court at a time.
Seems pretty clear that Lingle doesn’t want negotiations to be successful.
My understanding is that UPW is willing to go with more or less the same deal that HGEA got. The sticking points are those positions that are 24-7 such as corrections officers, etc.
Oh right Ulu, someone that takes a 5% pay cut is going to “lose their home”…..quite a stretch don’t you think? And OMG, might have to take their kids out of private school, OUCH. I think this type of thinking is an example of gross exaggeration that prevents any progress in the talks. I realize this is basically a pro-labor blog site….but geez.
ACOs and school janitors and school security type are under UPW, right, Charles? So, what is the current plan for the 24/7 jobs and/or those on school grounds? Straight pay cut?
To Get Real,
The pay cut is 14%, not 5%. The ability to read much less to comprehend has been one of the problems apparently in the negotiations and in the public debate.
In China, India, Europe and much of the mainland, education is valued and parents put their children in private school , as do many teachers and professors here. At the salaries paid, the rents charged, the private tuitions are hard to afford.
Dearest ULU,
You yourself said the actual PAY cut was only 5%. You threw in the kitchen sink to get to the 14% (pay lag and reduced benys). I was only sayin that the PAY is short 5% which would hardly lead to “losin the house”. And yes, we still value an education. Get off your high horse, its tough all over.
hipoli, yes, you’re right. UPW also represents the school cafeteria workers as well. I would think for the DOE staff, it would mirror the teachers. That is, they would be furloughed on the same days as teachers. Keep in mind that the principals are currently furloughed one more day than the teachers so there will be one day during the contract year that the schools will operate without their principal/vice-principal.
As far as the 24/7 jobs, I would think they would go with the same approach that applied to the hospital personnel under HGEA and take a five percent pay cut or thereabouts.
For Ulu, comparing private schools in China and so forth is very dicey. And in many mainland districts, private schools are not valued as highly as public schools since the private schools are mainly parochial and parents send their children to these schools for religious reasons.
And why is a payroll lag considered a pay cut?
Lastly, won’t all government employees see an increase in their health premiums, not just professors?
I mentioned education as the problem, private schools as the solution. On the mainland, one doesn’t need to send a child to private school. Here most members of the Leg and school teachers themselves seem to feel private schools are a necessity. So do many professors.
The pay lag is a pay cut in that you receive one less pay stub in the first year. Yes I know it is only delayed five days but remember this union went to court and won against Cayetano on this issue so it has an importance for many members.
Yes all government employees see an increase in health premiums BUT UHPA members in addition also lose their “favored nation” (I think they call it) status such that they automatically got the best deal negotiated by ANY other public union. They end up with another 5% or so deducted from their pay stubs. Yes, this is effectively a pay cut.
Cumulatively that’s about 15%. You can dismiss the pay lag but there is emotion attached to it and it is still a pay cut. Either way this is not the 5 or 6% pay cut that is being bandied about in the press.
Anyone actually serious about getting to yes would have to start by respecting the concerns about the size of the cut, what might be involved in giving up the lag and addressing impact on faculty staying at UH (solutions: a needs based scholarship fund to keep kids in day care or private school? Emergency mortgage help? If it costs $100-250 to hire a new professor, how much should you spend to retain one? )
I have no idea what the faculty would want in return for a 15% cut. I would suspect one thing might be a road forward on how faculty salaries are going to recover. That seems to be what they asked for in their counter offer.
Remember faculty are already not well paid compared to nationally. UH may be able to hire in the future but people will leave as soon as they get a better offer. High turnover would be very expensive and basically make teaching and research difficult.
So how do we avoid that? Maybe that’s the key to the negotiations? Worth talking about.
sorry a correction, it costs $100- 250 K (S100,000 – 250,000) to hire a new professor. A ‘big shot’ can cost millions.
Ulu, I’ve never seen surveys done to indicate that “most” legislators and school teachers send their kids to private school. You must be privy to that information.
As far as the payroll lag goes, in my mind, it’s a pay cut if and only if you don’t get paid. You actually do get paid eventually. Otherwise, when the pay lag went into effect years ago for all public employees (besides UHPA members), it should have been opposed as a pay cut.
It wasn’t.
(By the way many private employers pay out the last paycheck to workers after they already have left and not on the day they leave.)
In any event, if you use your methodology, then every state employee also suffered a double-digit pay cut if you take into account the 8+ percent reduction in pay due to furloughs, increases in medical premiums, and the payroll lag enacted years ago.
Now whether or not UHPA members ought to have similar reductions is up for debate but what’s not debatable is that a heck of a lot of public employees took it on the chin.
I’d look at the Honolulu magazine survey of schools several years back for the teachers. For the Leg, one January someone did do a breakdown in one of the two dailies or maybe the weekly as part of a wider article. I’d have to look for it. It won’t be a priority.
UHPA members are already lagged in that they are paid over 12 months for nine months work. I guess it was this that made them the only union to stand up to Cayetano when he imposed the previous lag. I don’t know why the other unions didn’t oppose it.
Yes, many state employees took a big hit (although I am not sure why you would drag in the Cayetano period pay lag). Just to demonstrate their solidarity would not seem to be a great reason for UHPA to agree to “similar reductions”.
This brings us back to where we were before in the conversation. What would it take to get to a successful outcome in the negotiations? Do we really want to continue the “pressure until they settle” tactics? HSTA has gone so well, hasn’t it?
Uh, Ulu, you may not be aware that all DOE employees on 10-month contracts are paid over 12 months.
So come again on this payroll lag business?