Senate Republicans Continue To Call On Gov. to End Longevity
by Christine Stuart | Oct 6, 2011 11:30pm
Google
(7) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Labor, State Budget
Christine Stuart file photo
Sen. Minority Leader John McKinney
All 14 Senate Republicans sent a to Gov. Dannel P. Malloy Thursday calling on him to rescind the October longevity payments expected to go out the door in the middle of the month to about 3,600 non-union state employees.
“We are writing this letter to you to ask that you rescind any planned October longevity payments to non-union state workers,” they wrote. “This action is critical to restore the trust of state workers and legislators in your leadership and in our government.”
Roy Occhiogrosso, Malloy’s senior adviser, replied by saying, “the Governor’s position is clear: he doesn’t think anyone should be getting longevity payments.”
In order to accomplish that “legislative action is necessary, and it’s not even clear that that will be enough because there are legal questions that also need to be answered,” Occhiogrosso said.
Minority Leader Sen. John McKinney, R-Fairfield, strongly disagreed.
In his letter last week to Malloy, McKinney argued that the governor has the power to limit the payments of some non-union employees to $75 to $300. There are exceptions to the rule, such as judges and state attorney’s, whose contracts require the longevity payment to be a percentage of their salaries.
Last week the unions expressed their disappointment in the decision to dole out the longevity payments to non-union employees. The bulk of the unions forfeited their payments this October in accordance with the SEBAC agreement. A smaller number of union employees forfeited 25 percent of their payments.
“It is clear that union state employees voted for the SEBAC agreement based on the understanding that the terms and conditions of that agreement, including the forfeiture of the October longevity payment, would be applied to all non-union employees,” the 14 Republican Senators wrote Thursday.
“Their frustration and disillusionment upon learning that highly paid executive managers will be receiving longevity payments in October—many totaling thousands of dollars—is understandable and justified,” the Republicans wrote.
There had been language to make the non-union longevity payments comparable to what was in the SEBAC agreement—which would have essentially eliminated them—but that language mysteriously disappeared in Section 11(c) of the final draft of the bill passed by the General Assembly in special session June 30. There was language in the May budget bill to eliminate these bonuses, which is why so many lawmakers were surprised to learned they will still be given out in mid-October.
But Occhiogrosso said the administration has concerns about the legality of eliminating the payments.
“As to the request made by the Senate Republicans, they know full well that the Governor can’t do what they’re asking him to do – it’s not legal,” Occhiogrosso said.
Longevity payments, which date back to the 1960s, begin on an employee’s 10th anniversary and increase after 15, 20 and 25 years of service and are made in April and October each year. Malloy signed an executive order in January capping them and eliminating them for any new members of his administration.
The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that longevity payments, along with unused vacation and sick days, had to be included in the pension calculation for retiring state employees.
Tags: longevity, payment, McKinney, GOP, Republicans, Malloy, Occhiogrosso, payments, unions
(7) Comments
posted by: Fairness First | October 7, 2011 1:57pm
Lets be fair. Twenty years ago private sector jobs from lawyers to data processing to accounting and other jobs for skilled workers earned higher salaries than what state government paid. If you took a a state job, part of the inducementt was longevity pay along with other benefits to make up for the lower salary. So now having kept their part of the bargain and stayed in the job nonunion employees’ deal is to be changed. Keep in mind that between 2009 and 2010, many unions got pay raises while non-union employees got NOTHING. Many of the senior managers left when the golden handshake was offered in 2009, while the managers who stayed inherited huge increases in workload with no increase in pay from 2009 to 2013 while also being hit with furloughs, increases in health insurance as well as taxes. By the way did anyone ask the General Assembly if they were cutting longevity pay for their employees? This is just scapegoating. If someone wants to save some state money killl the New Britain -hartford busway.
posted by: Upset.Citizen | October 7, 2011 7:13pm
Ha Ha Ha! Article H of the SEBAC agreement doesn’t cover this! What’s that you say? You never saw Article H and never even heard of it! You can’t find it anywhere you search? The SEBAC agreement you voted on ends at Article G…
Nope! The state and SEBAC added Article H and you never saw it! Rumor has it that there were a number of changes made after the vote… Article H says the state and SEBAC hold each other harmless for anything to do with the agreement so this grievance will be thrown out! Our fraudulent union leaders are trying to make themselves look like they care about the members to save face and keep them from going to different unions!
Hey Rinker Nortz, Peterson, etc how about that debate your members want? http://sites.google.com/site/p4upseu/
Typical! Change the rules, screw the working man, give the overpaid do nothing managers more money! The unions are in bed with the politicians!
2014 baby! VOTE FOR THE OTHER GUY! Until then I have my popcorn ready and a ring side seat for this never ending drama! (What are we up to, Act 22 or 23?)
posted by: AL | October 7, 2011 9:04pm
McKinney is an idiot. So are the unions. Managers don’t share in the $250 million in annual overtime the union members get, managers work the hours they need to to get the job done and just hope they aren’t killed by standing near the building exit when it is quitting time for the unions and they stampede out the door, managers haven’t received a pay raise since 2008, they received no “no lay-off” guarantees, they actually lost their jobs in the lay-offs and are still gone, longevity has always been considered part of basic pay plus it doesn’t get added to base salary so it isn’t a gift that keeps on giving. The unions are cry babies and opportunists AND on the one hand file a grievance against the managers and on the other, invite them to join their union to get protection (and pay more dues for the unions) from being treated this way. The managers are the only real friends the administration has in the state workforce. The unions are just vultures. Don’t let McKinney and his cronies kick them around any more than they have been.
posted by: Noteworthy | October 8, 2011 6:10am
Oh No Ocho must wake every morning and take a lying pill. Malloy says longevity payments should end. Ok. End them and don’t pay them. Take a leadership position on it in the same way as you did when you came up with the great idea to shove $3 billion in new taxes down our throats. What a pantload.
posted by: Upset.Citizen | October 9, 2011 9:00am
@Fairness First - Your post 1:57pm during the work week shows you are working hard! Keep up the great ‘work’ pal!
@AL - Typical do nothing manager - double talk in one sentance! ‘work the hours they need to to get the job done and just hope they aren’t killed by standing near the building exit when it is quitting time’
Which is it? Do you work long hours or are you already at the door waiting for the whistle to blow?
You guys are proving that the longevity and most of the managers have to go!
posted by: ASTANVET | October 10, 2011 8:37am
End Longevity - a bonus to be an employee for 10 years and longer… ummmm… yeah. That’s a no brainer. End it. While they are tinkering with state statutes, they could end the requirement for state troopers to be on highway construction jobs - that would save BILLIONS in overtime and retirement calculations.
posted by: CTResidentForLife | October 13, 2011 8:42pm
The longevity payments don’t bother me as we didn’t care when we made more than state employees and got our bonus payments. The union mentality is what bothers me. The lazy employee gets the same raise as the productive employee. The union mentality is the problem. This time, the state should not just replace retired employees. They should replace the bad employees. This business about longevity is a waste. The legislature and governor are not doing their part either. STOP SPENDING on new projects we don’t need!!!