Strike Worthy? You Decide

Buzz · January 26, 2019, 02:05:47 AM

Now, you might be wondering, (as I was), in the worst case scenario, would it not be better to pay a few more dollars into the fund per week rather than go on strike?

The answer is no, because it would cost us much more than a few more dollars a week.

Ernie took the question to the actuaries and they estimate that to make up the $10 million deficit over 5 years, each member would have to contribute an additional $15 per week, per year ($15 first year, $30 second year, etc.) ... so that in 5 years we would be paying an additional $75 per week besides what we already pay, bringing our total to over $100 per week by the 5th year.

Worth striking for? You decide.

PROUD MEMBER · January 26, 2019, 02:35:47 AM

First of all obviously I want the owners not us to pay. Having said that in a worst case scenario if we were to make up the 10 million ourselves the math here just doesn't add up.
My math is
5000 Members x's $10 a week = $50,000 a week.
$50,000 a week x's 40 weeks = $2,000,000 a year.
$2,000,000 a year x's 5 years = $10,000,000

Something is definitely wrong here and I don't think it's my math.

Buzz · January 26, 2019, 02:56:33 AM

Your math is definitely correct. Ernie is going to ask the actuaries for an explanation as to how they came up with their figure. Hope to have an answer for you on Monday. It may not be as cut and dry as it appears.

(I would certainly opt to contribute $10 more a week vs. a strike. Just my opinion.)

LMR · January 26, 2019, 03:56:07 AM

Don't even talk to me about strike because if even in the worst case scenario it's ludicrous to think that a strike would change one thing in a positive direction.And why are we having this conversation 7 months after our last contract expired.And why is it that we get this negative news at this juncture and have not heard anything else positive or negative pertaining to the contract negotiations.And how is it the City is just standing by as a spectator as this all goes down.If we have to contribute more to the medical, that's fine but I haven't heard anything anything cost of living raises for the new contract.These money hungry owners can't have it just one way.All we are hearing is the bad news.Why haven't we been kept informed about the results of the meetings as they take place and not be left in the dark.Now all of a sudden the sky's falling.

Buzz · January 26, 2019, 07:49:36 PM

I agree with you 100% LMR and have expressed the same in other posts.

However, we will eventually (probably soon) be given an MOA (their best and final offer) to vote on. We can either accept it or vote it down ... meaning, go on strike.

Eucerin · January 27, 2019, 01:10:32 PM

Have we been given the"MOA" by the owner's as of yet?

Buzz · January 27, 2019, 02:45:44 PM

Quote from: Eucerin on January 27, 2019, 01:10:32 PM
Have we been given the"MOA" by the owner's as of yet?

No.

Buzz · January 28, 2019, 01:43:09 AM

Eucerin: Accidentally removed your post (and my reply) asking if there was an estimate as to when there might be an MOA. I answered "No." (Sorry for the deletion.)

Eucerin · January 28, 2019, 10:06:00 AM

not a problem

Buzz · January 29, 2019, 02:18:25 AM

Quote from: PROUD MEMBER on January 26, 2019, 02:35:47 AM
First of all obviously I want the owners not us to pay. Having said that in a worst case scenario if we were to make up the 10 million ourselves the math here just doesn't add up.
My math is
5000 Members x's $10 a week = $50,000 a week.
$50,000 a week x's 40 weeks = $2,000,000 a year.
$2,000,000 a year x's 5 years = $10,000,000

Something is definitely wrong here and I don't think it's my math.

OK ... and I know you know this already, PROUD MEMBER, but for everybody else ... there was a miscommunication between the actuaries > city > union. The notice above should say the shortage is $10 million per year .... NOT over a 5 year period. So it is $10 million per year that, if we had to make up ourselves, would be an additional $15 increase per week, per year, and at the end of 5 years we would be paying just over $100 a week.

PROUD MEMBER · January 29, 2019, 03:05:32 AM

Or if instead of paying a progressive increase over the 5 years just start paying the same amount each year right now. Which would come out to about $65 to $70 a week total. Either way the 10 million a year is covered. The only difference is at the end of the 5 years when a new contract comes up we're paying $65 to $70 a week instead of a $100 a week. Makes more sense to me.
Or we could have the owners pay it!!!

Buzz · January 29, 2019, 11:02:37 AM

Quote from: Buzz on January 26, 2019, 07:49:36 PM
I agree with you 100% LMR and have expressed the same in other posts.

However, we will eventually (probably soon) be given an MOA (their best and final offer) to vote on. We can either accept it or vote it down ... meaning, go on strike.

I should mention that this is assuming that there eventually is an MOA to vote on ... as there has been in the past. There is always a chance that an agreement cannot be reached and there is no contract to vote on. In that event a strike could be called at any time.