I wrongly used the tragic LODD of two firefighters as fuel for a post about the current climate concerning public sector unions, especially firefighters unions. For that, I apologise. I've never retracted a post here at Rescuing Providence, and have no intention to do so now. I did delete the commentarry from that post out of respect for the deceased and their families. If anybody has any furthur commentarry concerning contractual issues and disability pensions or anything else that is bothering you, feel free to comment here.
I rest on my comments to the earlier post, which were deleted, apparently.
I would, however, like to repeat my offer that if you were ever to make a good faith effort to address the role your union regarding the current 58% tax-free accidental disability pension rate, the 5-6% COLAs that around half of the retirees from your department currently receive, and the quid-pro-quo politicial campaign donations to criminally-convicted politicians, then I would be happy to engage in a respectful and open discussion on those topics.
Dan, I as a retired fire captain share your concerns, however I would like to take a minute to address some of them. I retired after 26 years disability. I was knocked unconscious at a building fire. I have had two surgeries and will undergo another on my neck. I receive a 3% cola and only after 4 years. I cannot do any work around the house because of my injuries, nor can I enjoy my lifelong pastimes (baseball,golf, and martial arts) I did not receive a settlement like the private sector does and cannot collect SS although I’ve paid in on all my part time jobs. Many years I’ve paid in the maximum 5 or 6 thousand a yr in to SS. Much more than the average tax payer in Providence pays in property tax. The days of everyone getting disability are long gone. You have to be half dead to get it. The past is the past and drumming up corruption from past politicians or union officials is fruitless. After the city is done with me I will probably end up on welfare. I have an advanced degree in chemistry, but they will try to take the rest of my pension away if I attempt to work. This is my real name I don’t hide behind pseudonyms. Peace
Steve – Thank you for the thoughtful response. I agree with much of what you say. Perhaps you can convince Michael to finally come to the table on these issues.
I do not think your 3% COLA is inherently unreasonable, although I would rather see it tied to inflation, since that is supposed to be the purpose of it. 5-6% COLA, by contrast, is insanity, and while you do not receive that rate, around half of the current retirees from your department do. These need to be cut and, morally speaking, the union should stop opposing this and get behind reform efforts, especially since they were the ones that pushed it through in the first place. Even though the COLAs were awarded in the past, the effects are being felt today, and due to the awesome power of exponential growth will assuredly wipe out the city within the next decade if they are not rescinded, regardless of what other reforms are put in place.
Similarly, while I appreciate and acknowledge that reforms have been made to the disability system and the disability retirement rates have returned to more reasonable levels, most of the disability pensions that were wrongfully (fraudulently) awarded in the 1990′s are still being paid out and are increasing at an exponential rate. The questionable cases need to be investigated and rescinded now, and the union is in the best position to assist with that process. They have promised as much and should keep their promise according to their own anti-reform rhetoric.
I am not hiding behind a pseudonym. This is my real first name. I choose not to use my last name because my job is politically sensitive and I do not wish my career and family to be jeopardized because of my political views. People have been threatened and harassed by RI labor unions for expressing their political views online. While many would say I deserve that treatment, I feel that my family and employers do not.
Dan, thanks for your response. However as I have said before, 3% is not unreasonable since since SS started giving cola’s the average is higher than my 3%. I did not receive a raise for 4 years, and I have been retired since 05. So in 7 years, I have received 9% raise, hardly 3% a year. In fact after 10 years my average raise will be 1.8%. Now I am in severe pain and can hardly drive, what do you suppose is a “fair” compensation for this? If I had the same injury in the private sector, I would have sued and a lawyer told me I would have made well over a million dollars. I paid 9 1/2 % every week, while the city paid nothing for many years. They did not have to pay SS so this saved millions. Instead of paying this money into the system, they gave the taxpayer’s no tax raises for several years. Surly even you know every househole budget goes up, even the cities. Hope all is well in your job and I hope no union person I know would ever interfere with someone’s employment or family. Peace
Steve – I don’t think what you describe about your own circumstances is “the problem” in the City of Providence. I do believe that firefighters, and especially injured firefighters, should be fairly compensated, no more, no less. That’s why I would support COLAs tied to inflation – it’s not about whether it’s over or under 3% to me, it’s about the amount being fair and justified. If inflation is 5% one year, then give firefighters 5% – but we know very well that 5-6% COLAs will not only outpace inflation, they will jet past it at the speed of sound. In a similar vein, I would support a disability system based on functionality and offset by relevant factors, such as what the military uses with success to compensate disabled veterans. A blanket 66% tax free pension makes no logical sense to me and therefore I cannot abide it, but understand that it’s not centrally about the total cost.
What I would like is for the union to take a reasonable approach and stop its blanket obstructionism of all things reform. Concede that disability abuse was/is a problem and concede that 5-6% COLAs are outrageous – then the sides will have real matters to discuss upon which reasonable minds can differ and come to a settlement. Until that happens, there isn’t any reasonable way to proceed. Similarly, they should stop actively supporting and donating to those in part responsible for the crisis, especially if they are deplorable political characters like Ruggerio and Ciccone.
Hello Steve, hope things are okay with you, all things considered. I’ve been down this road with Dan for years, I hope you can get some sense into him, I gave up.
Michael – To say you’ve been “down a road” implies that you have gone some distance on it. More accurately, you removed yourself from the car at the bottom of the driveway and kept walking, only to turn around at several points to give the rest of us the finger. As my discussion with Steve illustrates, you get out of these discussions precisely what you put into them, which is why you always find yourself walking away with nothing but contempt.
Dan, I don’t think anyone is not conceding disability abuse was a problem. What the public doesn’t know is just how those figures got to where they got. In the times questioned, the CITY not the union pensioned many of the firefighters off injured. They were making room for a new school to increase manpower that a judge forced them to do. Instead of giving a person time to heal, they just pensioned about 60 men (some against their will). Now they use their tactics against us. Now the 5 and 6% I do not know 1 firefighter that thinks this is right. Again please know Dan, this was done behind closed doors without our consent. I know we seem to close ranks when challenged, but who do they parade out in the news? My pension? No the big pensions. Dan FYI many on that list were chiefs when I came on the job in 79, and were not members of local 799. Have a good day.
Michael implicitly denies that it is or was a problem. He refuses to give the subject an honest treatment and, when presented with the numbers, replies only with sophomoric statements like, “It’s a hard job.” While technically factual on its face, a statement like that is really just a form of dishonesty – specifically lying by omission, or economy with the truth.
While I agree with much of your comment, I must again take issue with your characterization of the problem as past tense, since the vast majority of those individuals are still receiving payments today. It would take decades for the problem to “resolve itself” through attrition, and the city would go bankrupt long before that point unless the fraudulent payments were rescinded and 5-6% COLAs ended (the union opposes both efforts).
Dan, I can assure the union opposes none of those reforms.
I have seen absolutely no indication from the union that it would support those reforms, and I have seen much to the contrary.
If you can link me to something that demonstrates otherwise, then I would be happy to look at it and note it in future posts on the topic. I do want to represent organizations accurately.
Dan, maybe Mike is right, you just don’t listen. Here it is in plain english. No one I know working or retired thinks 6% cola is justified, period. Except I guess the guy getting 6%. Plain enough for you?
Steve – I am listening, but perhaps I was not clear – I am not talking about individual firemen. As a large and diverse group, I would expect their opinions to vary on just about any topic. What I am talking about is the union as a single politically representative organization.
I have asked you to link me to anything that demonstrates that the Providence firefighters union, Local 799, supports (or at least would not oppose) the types of reforms we have discussed. I have not seen anything of that nature to date. What I have seen is downplaying of the issue (“Only some firemen got those COLAs”), year-after-year campaign contributions to many of the politicians responsible for the 5-6% COLA (Ruggerio, etc.), demands for tax increases instead of pension reform, and moral arguments that the firefighters have met their terms of the contract so the city should also (including the 5-6% COLAs, presumably). Again, if you can link me to anything that indicates the opposite – that the union would be on board with reforms – then I would be happy to read it and make a note of it in my future posts on the subject. I think that this is a reasonable request.
Dan, I now know why Mike has lost patience with you. Local 799 is a labor union. Do you know what a labor union does? Giving up anything shows the other side weakness. Again behind closed doors who knows. Just like teachers unions are for teacher pay and benefits. Is that a surprise to you too? Does your accountant find ways for you to pay MORE taxes? Does your doctor give you disease? Does your lawyer try to get you convicted? Most union officers were not involved in the 5 and 6% colas. And guess what? There is nothing they can do, they no longer represent those retirees. WAKE UP!
Steve – I understand the purpose of a labor union – it is to represent its members. I am a licensed attorney, so I understand the role of a representative well. However, the ethical duties of a representative do not begin and end with the interests of the client, and the client must ultimately accept some responsibility for the actions of its representative.
I agree with you that needless concessions can demonstrate weakness in negotiations, but making reasonable and socially responsible concessions can also be a gesture of good faith to management and the public. I do consider misrepresenting costs and defending benefits that were not ethically obtained in the first place to be unethical, regardless of whether it is a part of the bargaining process or not. Attorneys can be sanctioned or disbarred for doing so, although I understand that there are no such restrictions for labor representatives.
Dan, as an attorney, you more than anyone knows the rules of ethical behavior is in the eye of the beholder. I guess you never defended a guilty person? I always wondered how do lawyers sleep at night?
“Ethical behavior is in the eye of the beholder.”
Hmm. Maybe that can be the new Local 799 motto, emblazoned on its seal and all of its letterhead. It can appear on signs at rallies.
Only kidding around. But it’s actually not subjective for attorneys. We have to pass a fairly rigorous Rules of Professional Conduct examination as part of the bar examination. Violation of the rules can and often does result in fines, sanctions, or disbarment.
All I’m saying is that the ends don’t always justify the means, and representatives have ethical obligations to more than just their clients. Based on the historical record, Local 799 has done a pretty lousy job of upholding that principle, in my opinion. Perhaps you disagree.