HomeMy WebLinkAbout11. Reso to Impose-DSPAA
AGENDA MEMO
DATE:
November 22, 2011
TO:
Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Office of the City Manager
By: Irma Youssefieh, Human Resources Director
SUBJECT:
Adoption of Resolution to Impose the City’s, Last, Best and Final Offer to the
Downey Public Safety Auxiliary Association
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council adopt the attached Resolution:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY IMPOSING THE
CITY’S LAST, BEST, AND FINAL OFFER TO THE DOWNEY PUBLIC SAFETY AUXILIARY
ASSOCIATION PURSUANT TO THE CITY OF DOWNEY EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
ORDINANCE NO. 1118 AND GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 3505.4.
BACKGROUND
The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Downey and the Downey
Public Safety Auxiliary Association (DPSAA) expired on October 31, 2010. The City
commenced labor negotiations with the DPSAA on September 13, 2010, and the parties spent
seven months and six meetings negotiating for a successor agreement on the terms and
conditions of employment in spite of the City’s increasing financial challenges.
Under State law, the City of Downey is required to bargain in good faith and cannot unilaterally
make changes to the terms and working conditions of employment for represented employee
groups. Although the DPSAA MOU has expired, the parties must maintain the status quo and
continue to observe the terms and conditions of the expired MOU until a new MOU is
negotiated. While the City may not implement a MOU, Section 3505.4 of the California
Government Code provides the City the ability to unilaterally implement terms that change the
status quo following good faith negotiations and impasse.
As a result of discussion on proposals for a successor MOU, the parties were unable to reach
agreement and the City provided the DSPAA with its last, best, and final offer on July 28, 2011.
On August 17, 2011, the DSPAA formally rejected the City’s last, best, and final offer. Following
the DPSAA’s rejection, the City declared that the parties were at impasse. Pursuant to the City
of Downey Employee Relations Ordinance No. 1118, on September 8, 2011 the parties
engaged in an impasse meeting with the City Manager and on November 14, 2011, a mediation
session to resolve the impasse. The parties did not reach an agreement. Beyond such
discussions, there are no other required impasse resolution procedures.
Government Code Section 3505.4 authorizes the City to implement terms of its Last, Best and
Final offer as follows:
If after meeting and conferring in good faith, an impasse has been reached between the public
agency and the recognized employee organization, and impasse procedures, where applicable,
have been exhausted, a public agency that is not required to proceed to interest arbitration may
implement its last, best, and final offer, but shall not implement a memorandum of
CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA
understanding. The unilateral implementation of a public agency’s last, best, and final offer
shall not deprive a recognized employee organization of the right each year to meet and confer
on matters within the scope of representation, whether or not those matters are included in the
unilateral implementation, prior to the adoption by the public agency of its annual budget, or as
otherwise required by law.
DISCUSSION
On September 8, 2010, the City communicated to the DPSAA its fiscal concerns and alerted the
DPSAA to possible contract concessions to address the rise in personnel costs, specifically in
the areas of pension and medical/healthcare.
In response, the DPSAA communicated an understanding of the City’s fiscal challenges and
took the position of being at the forefront among other City bargaining groups to agree to no
economics and contract extensions during a difficult fiscal time. Their proposals were:
(1) one year contract term from November 1, 2010 to October 31, 2011 with a unilateral option
to extend the contract for one additional year (through October 31, 2012); and (2) no salary
increases during the term of the contract.
After additional fiscal review, on November 30, 2010 the City responded to the DPSAA and
provided proposals which focused on maintaining existing employee compensation and benefits
to avoid employee layoffs or furloughs, and communicated the need for a long term structural
budget change in benefit cost containment in the areas of pension and medical/healthcare
costs, specifically as it pertained to future new hires.
Below is a summary of the City’s response and additional proposals:
(1) Two year contract term (November 1, 2010 to October 31, 2012) to address economic
uncertainty and agreement on no salary increases during the contract term;
(2) Modest City proposals aimed at long-term concessions to reduce personnel costs through
implementation of the 2% @ 60 second tier retirement formula for new hires with the 7%
member contribution paid by the City with no impact to existing employee retirement
benefits;
(3) City paid medical coverage for new hires and their qualified dependent(s) in the Kaiser
HMO plan only (freezing enrollments in the City’s self-funded medical plan);
(4) Increase in the Kaiser HMO plan co-pay from $5.00 to $10.00 for premium savings; and,
(5) Activation of the City-wide Medical Committee with the goal of reducing costs in the City’s
medical benefits program.
Notwithstanding City action to constrain General Fund spending during labor negotiations,
which included holding personnel costs by imposing a freeze on full-time hiring, a freeze on
part-time employee merit increases, a freeze on purchase of new and replacement equipment,
and other focused efforts to meet year end budget deficit projections for FY 2010-11 and FY
2011-12, the City Council approved the $6.4 million General Fund deficit for FY 2010-11. This
deficit included $2.5 million resulting in frozen positions and deferral of across the board salary
increases previously scheduled for the Police Association and the Police Management
Association in July, 2010 and other cost cutting measures. According to the Finance Director,
the deficit was due to projected declining property and sales tax revenues and anticipated
increased employee retirement costs just to name a few operating cost factors.
Significant concerns with the continued General Fund revenue decline and overall budget deficit
projections, in late March and early April of 2011, City negotiators were tasked with the need to
revise proposals (Exhibit 2) to the DPSAA to include a shorter term contract from two years to a
one year contract and the change that future new hires would pay the full 7% member
retirement contribution rather than the City paying the employee’s (member) contribution for the
2% @ 60 second tier retirement formula. The DPSAA did not agree. The City maintained its
proposal to limit medical plan coverage for future new hires to the Kaiser HMO plan only.
The last negotiations session between the City and the DPSAA was held on April 25, 2011 and
concluded with both parties in disagreement over whether the DPSAA had rejected the City’s
January 24, 2011 proposal (City’s #2 - Exhibit 1) since the DPSAA began the meeting accepting
City’s #2 (Exhibit 1) and the City communicating withdrawal of its January 24, 2011 proposal
(Exhibit 1) and presented its revised April 25, 2011 proposal (City’s #3 - Exhibit 2). The City
sent the DPSAA a letter dated May 3, 2011 (Exhibit 3) that described the history of the
negotiations to date and reiterated the City’s belief that the DPSAA’s conduct and verbal
statements on January 24, 2011 communicated a rejection of the City’s January 24, 2011
proposal (Exhibit 1) prior to the April 25, 2011 negotiations session. The DPSAA asserted that
the City’s April 25, 2011 proposal (Exhibit 2) constituted improper regressive bargaining and that
the City had engaged in bad faith bargaining.
On June 21, 2011, the City received an Unfair Practice Charge filed by the DPSAA with the
California Public Relations Board (PERB). On August 2, 2011, the City filed its Position
Statement with PERB in response to the Charge (Exhibit 4).
Although there was disagreement on whether the City acted in good faith by revising two of its
proposals, it is important to acknowledge that the City and the DPSAA did have tentative
agreement on the remaining City proposals as follows:
(1) Agreement of no salary increases during the term of the MOU;
(2) Agreement to increase the Kaiser HMO co-pay change from $5.00 to $10.00 provided other
employee bargaining groups that were impacted by the change were in agreement; and,
(3) Agreement to activate the City-wide medical review committee to study the City’s medical
plans for cost savings.
From May 3, 2011 through June 28, 2011, the City submitted requests and provided dates to
the DPSAA to continue to engage in good faith negotiations. For a period of time, the DPSAA
did not respond to inquiries or demonstrate a desire to proceed with negotiations. On July 22,
2011, the DPSAA submitted a proposal to resolve the Unfair Labor Practice Charge and
continue labor negotiations. With the parties being unable to reach resolution on the Unfair
Labor Practice Charge, the City issued its Last, Best, and Final Offer (Exhibit 5) on July 28,
2011. On August 17, 2011, the City received written notice from the DPSAA rejecting the City’s
Last, Best, and Final Offer, therefore, the City declared impasse. On September 14, 2011, the
DPSAA withdrew its Unfair Labor Charge with PERB.
The City believes there are long-term systemic costs issues that a change in the economic cycle
and any upswing in revenues will not address. As communicated to the DPSAA, the City faces
major liabilities in FY 2011-12 such as the following:
(1) 23.3% increase in Miscellaneous employee retirement costs (Employer plus Employee rate
contributions) (approx. $810,000)
(2) 15.7% increase in Safety employee retirement costs (Employer plus Employee rate
contributions) (approx. $1,075,000)
(3) 5% reduction in property-related taxes (approx. $1.4 million)
(4) 22% reduction in permit fees (approx. $213,000)
(5) Major equipment replacement (approx. $1.2 million)
(6) Loss of Redevelopment Agency funding (approx. $1.2 million)
(7) Police Association and Police Management Association across the board deferred pay
raises (approx. $957,000)
(8) Persistent high unemployment rates in Downey and in surrounding cities - March 2011
rates: Downey at 9.8%, Gateway Cities 13.7%, LA County 12.2%, CA 12.3%, US 8.8%.
May 2011 rates: Downey at 9.6%, Gateway Cities 13.4%, LA County 11.9%, CA 11.4%, US
9.1%
To control future retirement costs, the City’s proposal to implement the 2% @ 60 second tier
retirement formula for future employees is understood to provide modest financial impact in the
early years of implementation, but would result in much lower costs over time. The second part
of the City’s retirement reform proposal for the new hire to pay the full 7% (of reportable
earnings) member contribution would provide immediate cost savings.
Although there is no impact to existing employees, the DPSAA has been persistent in rejecting
the two key features that were incorporated in the City’s proposals, as well as the City’s last,
best, and final offer:
(1) Implementation of the 2% @ 60 retirement benefit formula for new hires and new hires
paying the full 7% of the member contribution and,
(2) Kaiser HMO medical coverage for new hires only.
The DPSAA’s counter proposals to maintain the City’s existing 2.7% @ 55 retirement formula
with a new hire contribution in place for up to five years as allowed by CalPERS law were not
acceptable to the City because they did not meet the long-term structural change needed to
curb retirement costs into the future, especially with the constraints of CalPERS law that an
amendment to the City’s retirement contract for miscellaneous employees impacts all
miscellaneous employees regardless of bargaining group representation. At the time of the
DPSAA’s rejection to the City’s last, best, and final offer, the City had already obtained
agreement with the Downey City Employees’ Association – Miscellaneous and Maintenance
Units to implement the CalPERS second tier 2% @ 60 retirement formula for new hires with the
new hire paying the full 7% member contribution in addition to the Kaiser HMO only for new
hires and co-pay change.
Overall, with the exception of the Kaiser HMO medical plan co-pay change from $5.00 to
$10.00, the compensation and benefits for existing employees represented by the DPSAA are
not impacted. Existing employees continue to receive 100% City paid medical coverage under
both the Kaiser HMO plan and the City’s self-funded medical plan that provides a 90% In
Network/ 80% Out of Network coverage and $3.00 (generic) and $5.00 (preferred brand)
prescription co-pays and City paid member contribution of 8% of reportable earnings under the
2.7% @ 55 CalPERS retirement formula.
Staff regrets that a negotiated MOU was not reached, but that fiscal responsibility necessitated
difficult bargaining in an uncertain economy. Based on the City’s budget situation and good
faith efforts to reach agreement with the DPSAA for FY 2011-12, staff recommends that the City
Council adopt the terms and conditions of employment included in the City’s last, best, and final
offer (Exhibit 5).
FISCAL IMPACT
The change in co-pay in the Kaiser HMO plan from $5.00 to $10.00 results in premium cost savings
of $91,000 based on current enrollment in plan year 2012. For plan year 2011, premium cost
savings was estimated at $70,000. Cost savings on the 2% @ 60 second tier retirement formula
and the Kaiser HMO medical plan coverage as applicable to new hires only will be based on the
number of new full-time employees hired and will have modest financial impact in the short term,
but would result in much lower costs in the long term.
Attachments: Exhibit 1 - City’s Proposal #2 dated January 24, 2011
Exhibit 2 - City’s Proposal #3 dated April 25, 2011
Exhibit 3 - Letter dated May 3, 2011
Exhibit 4 - City’s Response to PERB Charge
Exhibit 5 - City’s Last, Best, and Final Offer dated July 28, 2011
Resolution
S:/Agenda Memos.CC.2011-12/Reso.ImposeLBFO.DPSAA.11-22-11
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY IMPOSING THE
CITY’S LAST, BEST, AND FINAL OFFER TO THE DOWNEY PUBLIC SAFETY AUXILIARY
ASSOCIATION PURSUANT TO THE CITY OF DOWNEY EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
ORDINANCE NO. 1118 AND GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 3505.4.
WHEREAS
, the City has engaged in negotiations with the Association pursuant to the
City of Downey Employee Ordinance No. 1118 and the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act in an attempt
to reach a successor Memorandum of Understanding; and
WHEREAS
, the parties did not reached an agreement outlining the terms and conditions
of employment for the Association to be incorporated into a successor Memorandum of
Understanding; and
WHEREAS
, pursuant to Government Code Section 3505.4, the City now desires to
impose its Last, Best, and Final Offer which outlines the terms and conditions of employment for
the members of the Association.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
That the City Council of the City of Downey pursuant to its rights granted
under City of Downey Ordinance No. 1118 and Government Code Section 3505.4 hereby
imposes the terms and conditions of employment outlined in the City’s Last, Best, and Final
Offer to the Downey Public Safety Auxiliary Association. A copy of the City’s Last, Best, and
Final Offer is attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 2.
The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the terms and conditions of
employment outlined in the City’s Last, Best, and Final Offer to the Downey Public Safety
Auxiliary Association on behalf of the City of Downey.
SECTION 3.
The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall
provide for appropriate distribution thereof.
SECTION 4.
The Resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption.
nd
APPROVED AND ADOPTED
this 22 day of November, 2011.
________________________
LUIS H. MARQUEZ, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
JOYCE E. DOYLE, Interim City Clerk
I HEREBY CERTIFY
that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the City Council of
the City of Downey at a regular meeting held on the 22nd day of November, 2011, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members:
NOES: Council Member:
ABSENT: Council Member:
ABSTAIN: Council Member:
_______________________________
JOYCE E. DOYLE, Interim City Clerk
EXHIBIT A
The following terms and conditions of employment as outlined in the City’s Last, Best, and Final
Offer to the Downey Public Safety Auxiliary Association are approved and adopted for
implementation effective November 22, 2011:
Medical Insurance
1. An employee hired on or after City’s November 22, 2011 shall have the election to
enroll him/herself and qualified dependent(s) in the Kaiser HMO Plan only.
2. The City shall amend the Kaiser HMO Plan co-pay from five dollars ($5.00) to ten dollars
($10.00). Such change shall be implemented on the first of the month following authorization
by Kaiser Permanente.
Retirement
1. The City shall amend its California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS)
miscellaneous contract to implement the benefit known as 2% @ 60 retirement formula for
employees hired or who become eligible for enrollment in the CalPERS Retirement Plan on
or after the effective date of the City’s contract amendment with CalPERS.
2. Upon the effective date of the amendment to the CalPERS miscellaneous contract to
implement the second tier 2% @ 60 retirement formula, all employees hired on or after the
amendment date will pay the full seven percent (7%) member contribution. Such payment will
be handled on a pre-tax basis by way of a bi-weekly payroll deduction.