Bain-Blog: Another Area Code

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Another Area Code

The Public Service Commission of Wisconsin currently is exploring relief alternatives for the 920 area code. According to its Web site, "[t]he decision for the PSC is not whether to implement area code relief (a new area code must be introduced once an area code approaches exhaust), but how to implement it." Recent projections indicates our area code will run out of prefixes by mid-2010.

While an area code change is not new to Oshkosh, it seems the recommendation this time is to implement an overlay rather than a geographic split. This means a person would need to dial the area code and seven-digit phone number when calling within local dialing areas, including within the city. It also means that no one would need to change area codes.

The PSC will be conducting public hearings regarding the implementation of a new area code. A hearing will take place in Oshkosh on Wednesday, October 17th at 7:00 p.m. in room 404 at City Hall. If you cannot attend a hearing, you may file comments electronically.

Do you think our area code should be split (again) or should we go with an overlay this time? I look forward to your thoughts and discussion.

-Bryan

126 Comments:

Greetings.
A "sister city" resident here, because I see we are continuing the trend. We (in Eau Claire) have just seen the news today as well about our 715 area code being about to overload (in 2009 I beleive).

Oddly, we have been advised by "the experts" that an overlay makes no sense what-so-ever and that, while inconvenient for some, a split is clearly the way to go.

The recommendations seem rather random - do they spin a big wheel? Or perhaps we are all under behavioral observation in some big market response test - you 920 guys in the "Overlay Petri Dish" and we 715-ers in the "Split Petri Dish".

My expert recommendation is that we all behave very badly and skew the results in a humanitarian effort to stop this non-uniform experteeism from being duplicated on unsuspecting populations across this great land of ours.

By Anonymous, at September 19, 2007 3:08 AM
It's not uncommon to type the area code before the phone number now.

The only numbers we call that don't have to include the area code area local, and that's not the majority of calls we make.

If you call outside of Oshkosh (to Berlin, Wautoma, Appleton, Fond du Lac, etc.) you still need to type the area code before the phone number. So what's the dif?

Why not allow residents to keep their existing area code and assign the "new" one to new phone numbers?

Save them the trouble and COST of informing all their telephone contacts, reprinting their stationary and business cards, and all the other hassles involved with a number change.

-CJ

By Anonymous, at September 20, 2007 7:26 AM
Independent Thoughts has observed that the popular local discussion board Questioning Everything, Always has closed shop. This is a pity because QEA often had very lengthy discussions on local matters involving a variety of people. So to fill the void, I've decided to attempt on a trial basis to offer the same service here at the Chief.

Here's how it'll work:

I'll maintain a link just below The Chief's header that will lead readers to a discussion area pertaining to a pertinent local issue. Readers and potential commentators won't have to scroll down or anything -- the link will be located just the right of the main blog thread and will always be the first item displayed on the "sidebar." The topic will change as circumstances dictate, meaning according to news events or the rhythm of the conversation.

Suggestions for improvement will always welcome. Please use the comment section of this post to make any recommendations. The most pressing issue right now is a name. What should this little forum be called? I'd like to think that the collective brain power of the Oshkosh online community can come up with something better than OshKonversation.

At the moment I have very few plans to "edit" the conversation thread on a regular basis. I may skim over the dialog from time to time, but this will be on no fixed interval. So everyone's on their own. It's just not something I enjoy doing. Plus, I'm kind of interested in seeing what a "Lord of the Flies" internet atmosphere looks like. All of this will change if the discussion becomes abusive. I do not mind filthy language, so long as it is not directed at specific individuals (fellow commentators or otherwise). Racist and/or bigoted language will not be tolerated. Again, I do not plan on monitoring the discussion religiously so I will hope users will maintain a sense of decorum and etiquette.

This will be an experiment. We'll see how it works.

You can find out more here.

By Jb, at September 21, 2007 1:08 PM
The site has been around for a while now and it's nice to see it offering something new. I see Kent Monte says he's not going to recommend it (like anyone would care if he did or didn't). The Chief has written several criticisms of Paul Esslinger in the past and that's why Monte won't recommend it.

Speaking of Kent Monte, based on his last couple of posts about his favoring the city manager form of government, he must have severed all ties with Esslinger. Didn't take long for the bloom to fall off that rose.

By Anonymous, at September 22, 2007 2:40 PM
I don't know if the Mayor or a different Manager is the best option for Oshkosh. All I know is reading how much is spent on the city labor vs what goes for operating Oshkosh, the thing is totally out of wack. Right now these council people hassle with a buck here an a buck there when the BIG BUCKS are going for workers and I guess health insurance. Whoever we get in there they better have a big set a balls so they can make some changes because Im mad as hell at spending all that money and seeing a prison inmate riding on the back of a garbage truck. Right now the way things are run is just wrong.

By Anonymous, at September 24, 2007 11:20 AM
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

By Anonymous, at September 24, 2007 11:40 AM
Our annual city budget is $60,000,000.00. We spend $52,000,000.00 of that budget on employee wages and benefits.

Discussion about the spending habits of 87% of our entire annual budget is certainly not unimportant.

If anyone has issues you’d like to discuss, by all means feel free to post them.

Wages and benefits are certainly not the only issue facing the city. But it is without a doubt a fact that wages and benefits (95% taxpayer funded healthcare) that have the greatest financial effect on taxpayers!!

By Anonymous, at September 24, 2007 12:24 PM
Thousands of United Auto Workers walked off the job at General Motors plants around the country Monday in the first nationwide strike against the U.S. auto industry since 1976.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/
id/20920334/site/newsweek/
site/newsweek/

Who Should Pay for Health Benefits?

The costs of providing health-care insurance have risen 78 percent this decade, according to a study by the Kaiser Family Foundation and Hewitt Associates.

Private industry has said that they and the consumers are no longer able to pay the cost of rapidly rising healthcare.

Our public sector unions, somehow, continue to believe that the property taxpayer and rent payers are still able to fund 95% of their healthcare costs.

This can’t continue! Our public sector employees must share a larger percentage of the healthcare cost. 80/20 would seem to be fair. 95/5 is clearly robbing the taxpayer!

By Anonymous, at September 24, 2007 12:31 PM
Copy and paste dud(e) is a real snooze and so is this topic...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

In this man's mind this must be the only thing we have to worry about.

By Anonymous, at September 24, 2007 12:52 PM
So now you're calling city employees thieves??? So much for not bashing them. What a jerk.

By Anonymous, at September 24, 2007 12:53 PM
Oshkosh City Employee Union
Local 796 - AFSCME, AFL-CIO

Rates Effective Pay Period 1, 2006

Vacations:
1 year of service = 2 weeks vacation
7 years of service = 3 weeks vacation
12 years of service = 4 weeks vacation
20 years of service = 5 weeks vacation
25 years of service = 5 weeks + 1 day vacation

Sick Leave:
1 day of sick leave for each month of service.

Holidays:
12 paid days per year.

Medical Benefits:
Employee contributions for PPO

Effective January 1, 2006 employees will contribute 5% up to a maximum of $30 per month toward single; $45 per month towards dual and $55 per month towards a family premium equivalent.

Employee contributions for EPO

Effective January 1, 2006 employees will contribute 4% up to a maximum of $20 per month toward single; $40 per month towards dual and $50 per month towards a family premium equivalent.

Retirement Fund:
The Employer shall pay the employees mandatory contribution to the fund, up to 6.5% of the employee’s gross wage.

Longevity Plan:
The following longevity plan is in effect-

$2.77 bi weekly after 5 years of service
$5.54 bi weekly after 10 years of service
$9.23 bi weekly after 15 years of service
$12.92 bi weekly after 20 years of service

WAGES…………………

Clerk Dispatcher - $15.79 - $16.66 per hour
Shop Laborer - $18.05 - $18.67 per hour
Transit Operator - $18.05 - $18.67 per hour
Service Technician - $18.05 - $18.67 per hour
Sanitation Operator - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Groundskeeper - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Zoo Specialist - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Traffic Painter - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Maint. Shop Worker - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Sewage Plant Maint Worker - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Street Maint Worker - $18.48 - $19.49 per hour
Parks Maint Worker - $18.48 - $19.49 per hour
Utility Operator - $18.99 - $19.65 per hour
Park Trades Tech - $18.99 - $19.65 per hour
Arborist - $18.99 - $19.65 per hour
Water Maint Worker II - $18.81 - $19.79 per hour
Park Maint Leadperson - $18.81 - $19.79 per hour
Traffic Painter II - $19.06 - $20.05 per hour
Water Meter Reader Service - $19.06 - $20.05 per hour
Equip Oper III - $19.06 - $20.05 per hour
Solids Plant Oper - $19.06 - $20.27 per hour
Parks Maint Tech - $19.06 - $20.27 per hour
Solids Plant Oper - $19.06 - $20.27 per hour
Sewerage Plant Oper - $19.48 - $20.66 per hour
Filtration Plant Oper - $19.48 - $20.66 per hour
Equip Mechanic - $19.48 - $20.91 per hour
Transit Mechanic - $19.48 - $20.91 per hour
Welder - $19.48 - $20.91 per hour
Lead Mechanic - $19.79 - $21.32 per hour
Mechanic III - $19.48 - $20.91 per hour
Electrician Ii - $21.10 - $23.03 per hour

On top of these benefits, we property taxpayers and rent payers fund 95% of healthcare costs for city workers.

By Anonymous, at September 24, 2007 2:18 PM
Bryan,

How does this work?

Sick Leave:
1 day of sick leave for each month of service.

So in one year you receive 12 sick days??? Do employees get to accumulate these and then cash them in at retirement?

So if I was a 25 year employee I could get 300 days of paid sick time if I didn't ever use any?

Can I get an explaination please.
Thank you

By Anonymous, at September 24, 2007 4:35 PM
Copy and paste dud(e) is a real snooze and so is this topic...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

In this man's mind this must be the only thing we have to worry about.

By Anonymous, at September 24, 2007 5:16 PM
I care how my moneys spent and I hope Bryan answers that question.

By Anonymous, at September 24, 2007 9:15 PM
I suspect you know the answer but want to hear it so you can then act shocked and spout off again about salaries and benefits. Booooooorrrring. If you realy want to know the answr, why not call city hall and ask them? Could it be that wouldn't give you a platform for more complaining, copy and paste dude??

By Anonymous, at September 24, 2007 10:19 PM
Bryan,
Another question while you investigate the sick days question.

What is a Longevity Plan?
These people just get extra pay for just doing their jobs? So even if their performance is sub-par, just because they are an employee for 5+ years they get extra pay?

How can that be justified?

I guess that doesn't disgust me as much as paying 95% of the health insurance though. That just stinks!

By Anonymous, at September 25, 2007 12:21 PM
If you want to know about the sick leave payout, look at the contracts. They are public record, and you can go digging if you want.

But no, I can tell you no city employee gets paid out more than about 40 or 45 days of their accumulated sick leave. There is a formula spelled out in the contracts.

The sick leave payout is a common fringe benefit for any public employee, not just in Oshkosh. So you can cry about it, but there is no way it's gonna disappear.

I love the grumbling about the fact that 87% of the city budget goes to employee expenses. Why? They provide a service! What else does the city provide? Water, maybe, but what else? They pick up garbage, a service. They plow snow, a service. They mow grass, a service. They patrol our streets, a service. They put out fires, a service. They fix busted streets, a service. There is very little in tangible products that city employees produce. It's service based, SO OF COURSE THE MAJORITY OF COSTS ARE GOING TO BE FOR EMPLOYEE WAGES AND BENEFITS. But it's simple. If you don't want to pay so much, just cut the services you don't want. You CAN save your money--just let your city leaders know what you want to do without. (You can save the 'be a good union brother and take a pay cut to save his job'-- no one's interested in that)

City employees aren't going to stand for a pay cut or a benefit cut, and they have the law on their side to protect what they have rightfully bargained for.

I think I read all of the cutting and pasting on Kent Monte's blog. Why don't you keep yourself over there, so we don't have to read your drivel?

I thought this thread was about area, codes, anyways.

By Anonymous, at September 25, 2007 12:24 PM
What a wonderful comment. Thank you for speaking what's on my mind and that of many of my neighbors and friends. We have watched this debate for a while now and have come to the conclusion that those doing the loudest complaining about salaries and benefits are either those who for whatever reason can't get a job that offers good wages and benefits or someone who has one but begrudges others in a similar yet different capacity, sort of like what we see from Kent Monte, since you brought his name up.

He whines about benefits and wages but is a federal employee living off our gravy train. When asked if he'd voluntarily take a 5% cut in pay or benefits like a few of you many expect city workers to do, he ignored the question. It's much the same as what we keep seeing from Paul Esslinger.

The man's father was a fireman for the city for years. Those nice wages and benefits helped baby Paul all his life while he fed at the trough of public sector employment. Now as an adult he wishes to deny others from having the same. These are nothing but typical hypocritical responses and they're shameful. These are the very reasons why I wold never vote for Monte, Esslinger, or anyone else of their ilk.

By Anonymous, at September 25, 2007 1:45 PM
10:19, you sound almost embarrassed to acknowledge what your benefits are. It seems you’d rather have these benefits hushed up and not published so people wouldn’t be able to see them. Interesting.

As far as the statement:
“You can save the 'be a good union brother and take a pay cut to save his job'-- no one's interested in that”
I find that very telling too. The Union brotherhood stops at your wallet it would seem. Not the “All for one and one for all “ concept so often associated with the union crew.

It still is a crime that we property taxpayers fund 95% of healthcare. That seems to be the biggest problem. Something needs to be done to even out the burden, and it just might have to be job reductions.

I heard the Library Director state that he can no longer rely on the tax levy to provide his monetary needs. I think the same might hold true for the city staff. Taxpayers and increasing tax levy’s will not be tolerated by the property taxpayers.

The UAW is feeling the sting of rising healthcare costs. I expect that that will eventually trickle down to Oshkosh, when is the only question.

By Anonymous, at September 25, 2007 4:32 PM
A bigger crime is rogue copy and pasters who commit personal affronts on any blog they can and use words like "crime" and "robbing" to describe the benefits bargained for and received in good faith under Wisconsin law. Maybe if ignorance or stupidity and the inability to understand basic laws were considered criminal we wouldn't hear so much of people like copy and paste dud(e).

By Anonymous, at September 25, 2007 5:18 PM
You're right, the true crime is put upon the taxpayers who struggle each and every day to support their families, many who can't afford healthcare for themselves, yet through their property taxes or rent payments fund 95% of city worker healthcare.

That is the tragedy. Unable to provide healthcare to their own family, yet expected to pay virtually all of the city workers.

By Anonymous, at September 25, 2007 6:07 PM
A bigger crime is rogue copy and pasters who commit personal affronts on any blog they can and use words like "crime" and "robbing" to describe the benefits bargained for and received in good faith under Wisconsin law. Maybe if ignorance or stupidity and the inability to understand basic laws were considered criminal we wouldn't hear so much of people like copy and paste dud(e).

By Anonymous, at September 25, 2007 6:24 PM
You can pay less for the health care premiums of city employees. Just increase their wages appropriately. They DID give up pay raises in the past to maintain the healthcare benefits they now have. So pony up, and you'll get your wish.

QUID PRO QUO

By Anonymous, at September 25, 2007 6:31 PM
Thanks to Cheryl Hentz (http://www.eyeonoshkosh.blogspot.com/) for recognizing the healthcare crisis is America, and providing the devastating static’s of just how horrible this problem is.

"While it is true that any form of public health care may be expensive, it is my opinion that that is not an excuse for doing nothing to resolve our nation's health care crisis. In fact, with 44.8 million Americans uninsured, and millions more underinsured, I would think everyone - whether in business or just as private citizens - would want to help solve the problem, especially since these high numbers of un- and underinsured people cost all of us money too. So perhaps instead of one state trying to woo business from another that is trying to do something positive about health care issues, they all should either help pave their own way or work with others for a common solution."

...I would think everyone - whether in business or just as private citizens - would want to help solve the problem, especially since these high numbers of un- and underinsured people cost all of us money too.

City employees could help ease the financial hardships of many Oshkosh residents by contributing a more fair share to their healthcare plan.

By contributing 20% rather than the current 5%, city employees would still have a wonderful plan at an affordable cost to themselves and the taxpayers, who then might be able to use the savings to improve their own healthcare situation.

I would think everyone - whether in business or just as private citizens - would want to help solve the problem.

What a wonderful, helpful solution. 20% rather than 5%!

By Anonymous, at September 25, 2007 8:55 PM
Sure, they'll contribute 20%. Just make up for the money they have turned down over the years to keep their current benefits by giving them more of a pay increase. Then they'll be happy to pay 20% of their premium.

QUID PRO QUO

By Anonymous, at September 25, 2007 9:21 PM
Sure doesn't look like these people turned down much!

Nobodys going to stand in line at Father Carrs with is package!

Looks like they are very well compensated, and have us taxpayers funding 95% of their healthcare!

Oshkosh City Employee Union
Local 796 - AFSCME, AFL-CIO

Rates Effective Pay Period 1, 2006

Vacations:
1 year of service = 2 weeks vacation
7 years of service = 3 weeks vacation
12 years of service = 4 weeks vacation
20 years of service = 5 weeks vacation
25 years of service = 5 weeks + 1 day vacation

Sick Leave:
1 day of sick leave for each month of service.

Holidays:
12 paid days per year.

Medical Benefits:
Employee contributions for PPO

Effective January 1, 2006 employees will contribute 5% up to a maximum of $30 per month toward single; $45 per month towards dual and $55 per month towards a family premium equivalent.

Employee contributions for EPO

Effective January 1, 2006 employees will contribute 4% up to a maximum of $20 per month toward single; $40 per month towards dual and $50 per month towards a family premium equivalent.

Retirement Fund:
The Employer shall pay the employees mandatory contribution to the fund, up to 6.5% of the employee’s gross wage.

Longevity Plan:
The following longevity plan is in effect-

$2.77 bi weekly after 5 years of service
$5.54 bi weekly after 10 years of service
$9.23 bi weekly after 15 years of service
$12.92 bi weekly after 20 years of service

WAGES…………………

Clerk Dispatcher - $15.79 - $16.66 per hour
Shop Laborer - $18.05 - $18.67 per hour
Transit Operator - $18.05 - $18.67 per hour
Service Technician - $18.05 - $18.67 per hour
Sanitation Operator - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Groundskeeper - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Zoo Specialist - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Traffic Painter - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Maint. Shop Worker - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Sewage Plant Maint Worker - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Street Maint Worker - $18.48 - $19.49 per hour
Parks Maint Worker - $18.48 - $19.49 per hour
Utility Operator - $18.99 - $19.65 per hour
Park Trades Tech - $18.99 - $19.65 per hour
Arborist - $18.99 - $19.65 per hour
Water Maint Worker II - $18.81 - $19.79 per hour
Park Maint Leadperson - $18.81 - $19.79 per hour
Traffic Painter II - $19.06 - $20.05 per hour
Water Meter Reader Service - $19.06 - $20.05 per hour
Equip Oper III - $19.06 - $20.05 per hour
Solids Plant Oper - $19.06 - $20.27 per hour
Parks Maint Tech - $19.06 - $20.27 per hour
Solids Plant Oper - $19.06 - $20.27 per hour
Sewerage Plant Oper - $19.48 - $20.66 per hour
Filtration Plant Oper - $19.48 - $20.66 per hour
Equip Mechanic - $19.48 - $20.91 per hour
Transit Mechanic - $19.48 - $20.91 per hour
Welder - $19.48 - $20.91 per hour
Lead Mechanic - $19.79 - $21.32 per hour
Mechanic III - $19.48 - $20.91 per hour
Electrician Ii - $21.10 - $23.03 per hour

On top of these benefits, we property taxpayers and rent payers fund 95% of healthcare costs for city workers.

By Anonymous, at September 25, 2007 9:46 PM
Boooorrring!!!

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Get a life copy and paste dud(e).

By Anonymous, at September 25, 2007 10:39 PM
So you're saying city workers should be compensated at the rate that they need to stand in line at Father Carrs? Are you kidding me?

The highest city employee on your list, Electrician II, makes $47,000 a year. That's a living wage. It's not exorbitant. It's not out of line. Your gonna feed us the line of crap about people working mininum wage and all that crap, but if they want to make more, go to school!

The wages paid by the city are comparable to the education they have and the jobs they do. The benefits are an offset to the raises city employees didn't get over the years. Wages and benefits are not going away. You want to save money? Cut the services you don't want. It's really pretty simple.

By Anonymous, at September 25, 2007 11:11 PM
What Carl Sosnoski said last night about City Staff seems to be a broken record we've all heard so very many times. I think this idea that city staff is not genuine and attentive to citizens requests was a big part of Dick Wollangks downfall.

Beyond the advisory referendum, I would encourage the next City CEO (Mayor or Manager) to get the broom out and sweep the dead wood out of 215 Church Ave and all the other little City Department Head enclaves throughout Oshkosh.

A new broom sweeps clean...I hope our new guy brings in a really big broom! There is lots of dirt to be swept up.

By Anonymous, at September 26, 2007 12:02 PM
11:11 said:
"The wages paid by the city are comparable to the education they have and the jobs they do."

Traffic Painter - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour

So what type of a degree is needed to earn $40,000.00 + $10,000.00 in healthcare benefits to be a traffic painter?

I just don't think the average Oshkosh property taxpayer or rent payer can afford to pay the wages and benefits city workers demand.

By Anonymous, at September 26, 2007 12:11 PM
It says "education they have and the jobs they do." It's that last part you don't seem to want to understand and are grasping the education component only. If you would like to be out in traffic, especially with some of the rude and careless drivers in Oshkosh, setting up cones and painting lines, apply at 215 Church Street. I'm sure staff would love to have you join their ranks, unless you're going to perpetually complain on the job too.

By Anonymous, at September 26, 2007 12:41 PM
Spend more time reading instead of griping about something you can not change.
Ohkosh is no different than other cities Sheboygan or Eau Claire, etc... What do you think state employees or university staff receive for healthcare benefits?

THIS THREAD was about area codes.
Please delete off subject posts!

By Anonymous, at September 26, 2007 3:03 PM
Interesting to read all the anti union comments posted on the liberal MSNBC website. I can only imagine what is posted on FOX is all these anti UAW comments are listed on MSN!

1) Here in Michigan auto workers still have a wage package that is about twice that of non autoworkers in my area. Also the big three have too many workers who do not work. For example I have a friend who works at night as a machinist line repairman. He has a deal whereby he sleeps all night except when some repair is needed. Then a friend wakes him by a cell call. So then he can stay up full time when he is home and run another business. He makes about $60-70k / year working with holiday pay which is double or triple time. And this structure is present throughout the big three. It is like working for the government.
Competition may make the companies more efficient or the customers may make pay for the inefficiency. Time will tell.

2) Labor union entitlement...u can't beat it!!

3) Unions built America....Unions will bring it down. They are no longer relevant in today's global workplace.

4) Hopefully GM will start turning a profit or else. GM needs to put its foot down and get rid of these jobs where high seniority people hardly do anything to collect their pay check! The jobs bank needs to go too! My biggest concern is that the UAW gets a GOOD investment company to handle the retirees benefits because I have little confidence in the UAW to manage it on their own! I support the UAW but times have changed and enough is enough!

5) We can always count on those overpaid yankees to help drive the auto industry South, where workers appreciate what they earn. Toyota caught on...not long till the big three catch up to the rest of the world either. Thanks for your greed, we need the jobs down here....

6) Unions have passed there prime they are no longer needed. Union workers want free trade and fair market except when it comes to labor rates. As an employer I put union workers at the bottom of the pile for review. My view on unions is that they are at the top of the list to what is bringing down this countries manufacturing abilities.

7) And we wonder why foreign countries call us Fat, Lazy Americans!

8) Michigan has a government that is orientated around the unions also. We have a governor now that is controlled by the unions. And it does not matter whether the Republicans or Democrats were in power. The state employees are very much over paid in wages and benefits.
Another example: Michigan is now broke with a budget deficit of $1.75 trillion.
Yet the governor supports what is known as "the prevailing wage law". So if a private company bids and wins a contract to provide work to the state the company has to pay a wage set by the state. So if a worker normally makes $15/hour on private jobs for his company if the his company works on a state job then the state requires that the company pay the employee "the prevailing wage" set by the state. So the employer would be required to pay about double or $30/hour. And who knows how the $30/hour is determined.
So Michigan is going down the drain and there are many good reasons why.

9) I'm from Michigan and yet again UAW stands for "U Ain't Workin'"... I agree that when the unions were first organized they were necessary to prevent the large companies from abusing the workers. I agree that management is paying themselves unnecessary bonuses however, now I believe the unions have gained so much leverage that they only abuse their employers. I have heard stories of UAW workers colluding to cover shifts so that they could take extra time off while being paid over time. Various examples of such abuse of power have only encouraged Ford and GM to expand production to countries such as Mexico where assembly line workers do not have to be paid over $100,000/year for work that should really cost a fraction of that. Does "buying an American car" really support the US economy any more? Look under the hood and see that your "US car" components (if not the entire thing) are only produced abroad. Can someone verify if its true that about $2,000 USD of every US car produced is allocated to covering Union members' medical costs? The UAW's abuse of its leverage over the years has only been a contributing factor to the struggling Michigan economy. Why would GM and Ford want to maintain production in Michigan if they have to give in to unreasonable wage and concession demands? I can buy a better quality Japanese car today that is still produced entirely in the US for a comparable if not cheaper price that the average US car. Well done UAW, well done; your abuse of power and unreasonable demands have only led to your own demise.

10) The auto industry unions won't get my sympathy especially when their wages are 50-60% higher than the average manufacturing job. For years they were laughing in many of our faces all the way to the bank but their greed has caught up with them. Their shoddy workmanship has also cost them. Look at some of the independent consumer groups. Many of the U.S. models are at the bottom of the list in terms of quality.

11) Labor unions are still thinking in the 1970s. Until that changes there is little hope of true competition with the foreign auto makers. The move toward a global economy can not be stopped. We have to learn to compete on a global scale, and that will be very difficult for Ford, GM, and Chrysler to do with the mill stone of union retiree and employee health care coverage, and other benefits that Honda, and Toyota don't have to contend on the same level. I have two american products in the garage and refuse to buy foreign made products if I can help it. But unions better stop living in the past.

12) I've been in the auto industry all my life in sum fashion or another and wish we could just once and for all give the UAW a good swift kick in the a--. One of these days their going to put all the US carmakers out of business. It will be both a sad and happy day. I must agree with the one post when he said that when he receives an application of a former union work it go's on the bottom of the pile. All of them feel they are intitled to everything no questions asked. Little do they seem to know you are not until you bust your a-- and earn it.

By Anonymous, at September 26, 2007 6:50 PM
More blahblahblah from those who can't.

By Anonymous, at September 26, 2007 7:02 PM
Wow never thought so many "Liberals" had that much hatred towards the UAW. But maybe comments like this one are taking their toll on once staunch UAW supporters.

"For example I have a friend who works at night as a machinist line repairman. He has a deal whereby he sleeps all night except when some repair is needed. Then a friend wakes him by a cell call. So then he can stay up full time when he is home and run another business. He makes about $60-70k / year working with holiday pay which is double or triple time. And this structure is present throughout the big three."

I suppose ultimately the unions demise will be at their own hand.

By Anonymous, at September 26, 2007 7:24 PM
More UAW/GM comments. I find these comments fascinating, especially as they are posted on a website that tends to favor the liberal/organized labor views. They echo the common theme that organized labor appears to be even greedier that those it pretends to appose. Perhaps the AFSCME, AFL-CIO and other locals should consider the consequences.

1) I am happy to see this negotiation take a hard line. GM should take a hard stance, and get what is necessary for their company to survive. The job markets all over America have changed, and are getting more competitive, based on international competition. I would like to see the health care coverage being tranferred for $.65 on the dollar. Still hard to swallow for GM, but will make a long term difference, which will ultimately be better for the American car worker.

2) The sun set on GM and the UAW twentyfive years ago, when Japan thrashed Detroit on reliability and longevity. What we’re seeing is just the death throes of two dinosaurs.

3) It is about time the American auto makers bust up those unions. Unions were a great thing back in the dark ages when hazardous work conditions and slave wages were the norm, but they don’t have any place in America today. The unions may even do some good if they go over to China and help the Chinese workers earn better working conditions and wages. How can the UAW not realize that they’re driving these American companies into the ground with policies like having to pay workers when they do nothing at all and giving so many breaks as to hamper productivity? Greed of company owners to the detriment of the employee was one reason the union momentum flourished. What do you do when the tables are turned and it’s the greed of the union that is killing the company? Where’s the outrage?

4) The UAW has for decades, held this gun to GM’s head, and GM has given in everytime. Thats why it cost so much to buy a GM vehicle today._When you finally pull that trigger UAW, you will only be killing yourself._I hope GM holds it ground, and breaks the thugs.

5) As a one-time union member of a coal company, I sure appreciated the tough stand of John L. Lewis and his efforts to improve generally wretched mining practices. No miner drove around in Cadillacs or had a second home, boats, swimming pools and the like as many GM employees have today. The union representing GMC workers and the GMC workers have been getting huge wages, salaries and attached benefits, all out of line with those of of most American companies. If GMC goes down thr tube, so what, We’ll have a lot more workers to take the place of illegal farm workers, Yes, it is time to break up unrealistic and uneconomic wage demands and other union demands which make American products and services more costly than they properly should be. Indeed, all of us Americans are going to have lower standards of living unless we become more educated and more productive.

6) I am not for or against anyone. All I have to say is they should all give something. I mean come on, they make what 30 an hr to mostly push buttons.. DO NOT DENY IT, I USED TO DO IT TOO! If a pay cut (5-10 an hr) is what is needed to save your job… what choice do u have? They can easily move your job to mexico or wherever, they have made that a known fact! I understand the fight our fathers gave, I understand the tears and blood shed of the past, I also understand that today, u are lucky to have a home, food, a car, and money for gas! Bill said it best, both sides need to get REAL! aS A MATTER A FACT bILL IS THE ONLY ONE WHO MAKES SENSE! BILL U SHOULD LEAD THE NEGOTIATIONS!

7) To me the answer is very simple. We live by several of the GM facilities in Michigan. The people that work in these plants make incredibly good money and have great benefits. While jobs are STILL hard to find, especially jobs that pay this well, I think it’s absolutely absurd for these people to be going on strike. They should be grateful they have the good job they do.
The UAW on the other-hand inside of GM has become quite extreme. In fact, there was a man who didn’t work for over 30 consecutive days. Not sick, he just didn’t want to come in. It took that long for them to finally get rid of him. IMHO, the UAW is a crutch to GM. They had a good thing going when they got started, but now it’s out of control. Maybe they should think about that before they go toying around with a big company once again. They already lost a HUGE number of jobs in Flint in years past because they didn’t want 100 people let go. So instead thousands upon thousands of jobs were lost. Come on UAW, get a clue and stop toying with people’s lives.

By Anonymous, at September 26, 2007 7:48 PM
Public unions are completely different than private unions. Private unions are part of a process designed to generate revenue for a company. Public unions provide a service for taxpayers. To compare them is comparing apples to oranges.

Your multiparagraph drivel doesn't play into ANY city discussion whatsoever. You merely sit on the right side of your fence and spew your anti-union hatred. Keep it up. The more you gurgitate, the more you prove yourself to be an idiot.

How do you compare what public sector employees do to the private sector? Most of the jobs don't exist in the private sector. Some do...ask Dennis McHugh how his wage for the city compared to private electricians. Pretty damn close, if not LESS. He made up for the discrepancy BY HIS BENEFITS.

So how do you determine what's fair for public employees? You compare their wages and working conditions to others who do the same thing in similar sized cities in the state. We know taxpayers pay the wages of these employees. If the med/arb laws didn't exist, people like the right wing drivel master that just spewed his hatred would have public employees making next to nothing. We would be standing next to Wal Mart employees in the Medical Assistance line.

The system is fair. The compensation is fair. The benefits are fair. If it's too much for your wallet, contact city councilors. Tell them what services they should cut. Attrition will take care of the 'extra' employees that are created, and you won't have to worry about putting someone out of work. Nor will you have to remind the union brothers to look out for one another. You have no idea what it means.

QUID PRO QUO

By Anonymous, at September 26, 2007 8:22 PM
It was mentioned:
“Public unions are completely different than private unions. Private unions are part of a process designed to generate revenue for a company.”

This is totally true. Profit and loss control the benefits provided to private sector union members. In the public sector, there is no similar control mechanism. Public sector unions tap into property taxpayers and rent payers for their compensation, without regard to the ability to afford their services.

That is the problem now facing Oshkosh and many other cites. Can Oshkosh taxpayers continue to afford funding 95% of city employee healthcare, on top of 2.75% - 3% wage increases?

City labor unions really have no compassion for the tax-payers ability to pay. They apparently don’t even have compassion for their own union brother, as it has been submitted by a union member on many occasions that rather than all the members share the burden, we should eliminate jobs so those that remain can continue to have the wages and benefits they currently enjoy…toss their co-workers under the bus to save their own jobs.

What can we do about this? We can keep pushing to hold the line on sky rocketing labor costs by continuing the dialog with our elected officials. They need to know that although there are laws which limit their ability to really fix the problem, we as taxpayers can not continue to absorb these increasing costs, especially related to healthcare.

By Anonymous, at September 27, 2007 6:57 AM
"toss their co-workers under the bus to save their own jobs"

You try to paint this doom-and-gloom picture, but it just doesn't work this way. There is turnover is every city department every year. New employees are hired to fill the vacancies left behind by retirements and resignations. If it's decided that services need to be cut to control costs, the city simply won't hire to fill these vacancies. No one loses their job, there are just fewer people working for the city because of attrition. It's funny how this scenario has been shown to you several times and yet you consistently ignore it. It's not sensational enough for you.

"City labor unions really have no compassion for the tax-payers ability to pay." Sure they do. THEY WORK FOR YOU. They provide services for you! They are dedicated to their jobs and perform necessary functions to keep the city rolling. That's their compassion!

"we as taxpayers can not continue to absorb these increasing costs, especially related to healthcare.
" And for the umteenth time, you don't have to absorb the costs! Look at it like a salary cap in the NFL. If the team can't afford a player, they have to get rid of him. If the city can't afford services, they have to get rid of it.

Your taxes aren't going to go up more than 2%. The law is on your side. This argument on your part is really more about jealousy than it is ability to pay. A levy controls how much you'll have to pay. But your disdain for city employees continues to cloud your judgement, but I have hope for you. Eventually, you will see the light.

QUID PRO QUO

By Anonymous, at September 27, 2007 8:03 AM
Cut & Paste Man,
There are several job openings posted on the city's web site if you actually want to work for money and benefits. You can even apply for city manager now. I doubt you qualify for any of them since they all require good oral and written communications skills. Most of them also require specific technical skills, professional knowledge and a degree. However, you might be able to get the part-time receptionist or the school crossing guard sub jobs for $7.50 an hour if there aren't any other applicants. Or, you could just change your Area Code to Michigan.

By Anonymous, at September 27, 2007 9:37 AM
9:37 your true character shows through again. You appear to certainly have all the attributes of a labor union leader and representative.

By Anonymous, at September 27, 2007 12:23 PM
Ok so I was looking at what is really in Oshkosh and I guess I understand that the city isn't where the rich people are. The people who are more wealthy don't even live in Oshkosh. They live out west of town and south of town all along the lake. There isnt much space to build houses anymore in town and most of the land we have is apartments or condos. So what does this mean? Well the way I see it, the people with the bucks don't pay city property taxes. We on the East side and South side and University do. That whole idea of city labor getting to expensive makes sense when you figure the weathly upper middle class people in the town of Algoma don't pay into the taxes that pay city employees. The people who are middle to lower middle class and make up a good part of actual Oshkosh do pay those taxes. I think its true that people that really pay the taxes are getting to a point where the stuff is to expensive and we might have to cut people in the parks and forest department and areas like that. I don't want to cut cops and fire but other areas should be looked into. That healthcare cost is way to high to keep up the way it is right now.

By Anonymous, at September 27, 2007 6:45 PM
It would be interesting to know how many of the about 680 city employees live in the city.

By Anonymous, at September 27, 2007 8:05 PM
Why don't you move to another area code, as was suggested before? Better yet, start your own area code with the services you want and paying the people what you want. Since you'd be your own island you might even be able to have slave wages.

By Anonymous, at September 27, 2007 8:28 PM
6:45 makes an excellent point. Those with higher incomes are not locating in the city, they live in the surrounding townships. Those in Oshkosh are in general, of a lower income and therefore more unable to absorb rising costs, including property taxes and rent payments. The rising cost of city labor (680 city employees) is becoming a burden for these lower income residents. Many living on the East and South sides are elderly and attempting to remain in their homes rather than go into an assisted living or eldercare environment. These elderly and low income people cannot continue to afford the services offered when they pay 95% of the 680 city workers healthcare.

I think we should start looking at cutting back on some city employees. Let’s start with the parks department and maybe also look at the forestry department and street departments. I would rather not cut police, and the fire department is actually a profit center as they serve the surrounding townships and small cities with paramedic services and make money for the city. I’d also say maybe we could look at our trash services and see what savings could be made by cutting staff and maybe using more prisoners. We seem to use them now successfully so we can increase their use as I’m thinking they are a source of much lower cost labor, and do just as good of job as the much higher cost city workers. What we need is a good manager or mayor that will demand staffing reductions, not somebody like we had who just rubber stamps department head recommendations. We need some creative thinking about cost savings and developing a lean workforce.

By Anonymous, at September 28, 2007 12:10 PM
I read with great interest that the Police Department is moving to a new method of policing Oshkosh. Actually new is an incorrect term for the program as they are actually reverting back to a fixed beat concept.

Rather than have a bunch of cops rotating throughout Oshkosh, we will now have a set group who will always be responsive to specific areas in Oshkosh. They will be responsible to patrol there district and become aware of what people need in their assigned area. As they are dedicated to this geographic area, the notion is that they will have a better buy-in for the success and well being of these residents.

As I look at this new plan, all I can conclude is that the Police are actually changing to an “Aldermanic” method of policing Oshkosh. No longer is the “cop at large” appropriate to meet the cities needs. We now need to have cops who get to know, and are advocated for very specific areas in Oshkosh.

I say if it works for the OPD, it can work for the rest of the city. Time to give the Mayor – Alderman form of government a chance, the city cops did it and I think everyone thinks it’s a great idea!

By Anonymous, at September 28, 2007 12:38 PM
Define higher incomes. What's the threshhold?

What source do you have that indicates city employees are not living in the city?

If the taxpayers are poor, and can't afford city services, wouldn't it make sense to cut some city services?

By Anonymous, at September 28, 2007 1:10 PM
On the other hand if they can't afford their homes (or the taxes on them) they could sell and rent, thereby avoiding the tax bill all the way around. Also, if they're that poorly off federal housign programs are available to assist them.

By Anonymous, at September 28, 2007 2:14 PM
If I would have to guess I'd say the average Oshkosh house was maybe in the $100,000.00 range.

The townships would be $150,000.00 - $200,000.00.

Does anyone keep track of how many of the 680 city employees actually live in the city?

By Anonymous, at September 28, 2007 3:07 PM
What difference does it make? Wherever they live they're paying taxes somewhere and the salries and bennefits provided in Oshkosh are comparable to those elsewhere. By virtue of their not making it an issue (except for the rogue copy and paster and maybe a pal or 2) voters have shown this isn't an issue for them. Those who think Oshkosh is so out of line with wages and bennies are free to try their luck in another area code. Yabbadabbado, good luck to you!

By Anonymous, at September 28, 2007 3:34 PM
Frank Tower said...

The city is in the service business, so labor will always be a majority of the operating budget. Because of this all city employees (represented or otherwise) need to understand the realities of the private sector and what's happening with increasing costs (especially health care). We cannot afford to keep increasing taxes.

The recently approved contract with the police union is a step in the right direction (a step, not the end). I'm anxious to see how the other contracts come out.

12/08/2006 4:34 PM

Frank is a stand-up guy. He along with several others truly represent the average Oshkosh resident and taxpayer.

I do believe there is a far more hightened awareness of the taxpayers concern with rising employee labor costs, especially healthcare. I further believe, that taking a bargaining unit to arbitration shows that there is a concensus to attempt to do whatever is possible to stop this ever increasing tax pressure. The result of rising taxes is most often no better city services, just more wages and benefits to existing employees. That doesn't help taxpayers.

By Anonymous, at September 28, 2007 5:30 PM
"The result of rising taxes is most often no better city services, just more wages and benefits to existing employees."

Pretty general statement. How about backing it up with some more tangible examples?

The consensus throughout the city is that the bargaining units will win the arbitration cases. The money spent by the city hiring their attorney to go to arbitration is going to be money flushed down the drain. Maybe you cut and pasters oughtta look at that cost sometime.

By Anonymous, at September 28, 2007 5:45 PM
The proliferation of messages from Copy and Paste Dude shows he has a one-track mind and obsessed with posting to those who care nowhere near as much as he does about those who he is insanely jealous of.

By Anonymous, at September 28, 2007 7:23 PM
I applaud Frank for saying this. He has really turned out to be an asset as our Mayor!

Frank Tower said...

The city is in the service business, so labor will always be a majority of the operating budget. Because of this all city employees (represented or otherwise) need to understand the realities of the private sector and what's happening with increasing costs (especially health care). We cannot afford to keep increasing taxes.

The recently approved contract with the police union is a step in the right direction (a step, not the end). I'm anxious to see how the other contracts come out.

12/08/2006 4:34 PM

How ever the arbitration turns out, I'm just glad our council had the votes and didn't cave in to the demands. I think our council has turned a corner and is starting to look out for the average Oshkosh taxpayer, not special interests.

By Anonymous, at September 28, 2007 8:56 PM
Didn't we read this shit already? It's deja vu all over again.

By Anonymous, at September 28, 2007 9:07 PM
Funny how the union guy says they dont have anything to worry about that everything the cut and paste guys says is wrong, yet union dude keeps on trying to bash cut and paste. Its like union dude was afraid of something. If he really wouldn't care or feel that he was threatened, he wouldn't give a crap what the other guy writes. I think that tells you something. These city worker guys know they gotta keep this benefit talk hushed up so people don't catch wind of it and then if they do, they know that the crap is gonna hit the fan.

By Anonymous, at September 28, 2007 9:59 PM
Yeppers, it tells us cut and paste "dude" is really, really dumb and has no respect for people or thread topics. "He" uses any chance to interject "his" scratchy old message. "He" doesn't get that people don't care like "he" does and "he's" jealous that "he" doesn't have the same kind of benefits. If "he" wasn't so stupid that might not be the case. Hell, even Kent Monte finally saw the light and is not posting "his" crap anymore. So now "he's" going to pollute other sites. What a sicko.

By Anonymous, at September 28, 2007 10:09 PM
Union guy here...I am hardly worried about things being hushed up. What do you want to know about my wages and benefits? I would be happy to share anything with you!

It's the same shit over and over and over again. It's not even original. He just takes the same verbiage from older posts and regurgitates it. How is that beneficial to a discussion? You don't think we got it the first time? It might just show WHY Oshkosh is so poor. A bunch of freakin' dummies that aren't smart enough to get their point across once, so they have to cut and paste. No wonder they can't afford anything.

Ever heard Palmeri's definition of insanity? It almost applies here....

By Anonymous, at September 28, 2007 10:12 PM
Almost applies??? I think it absolutely applies. Excellent post. Cut and past or copy and paste dude is just a jealous dope that thinks his mission in life is to save the city from some social injustice. With every post he spits out of his "copy machine" he shows he's not smart enough to understand things like bargaining in good faith, quid pro quo, or giving up wages in lieu of benefits. No wonder he can't find a decent job or if he's a federal employee, one with as good a benefits pkg as others have. Jealousy is an ugly thing.

By Anonymous, at September 29, 2007 12:15 AM
9/28/07, 12:38 P.M.

Great post re. the O.P.D. agenda; they're just planning to go back in time. I wanted to point out something on this and wonder if anyone has an answer. The Northwestern published to story on team policing on 9/27/07, on web site. This article included a map and the names and e-mail addresses of the officers assigned to each section. The Northwestern removed this article by the next day wheras they usually keep things on a week. One e-mail to an officer was unanswered and 2 to the Northwestern for an explanation have gone unanswered. So far I've seen nothing different so I'm assumming (bad) that this T.P. is in the planning stages. In my immediate area we have no obvious police patrol whatsoever. Now I'm beginning to wonder if it will ever surface due to unresponsiveness. Any clues? Thanks.

By Anonymous, at September 29, 2007 9:30 AM
During the last election when the garbage topic was in the spotlight, we also had a question brought forward from Bill Castle to raise taxes.

Both those questions resulted in taxpayers/voters making their voice heard that they didn't support paying more for services. They also didn't want to contribute taxes over the levy limit to provide even more wages and benefits to city employees.

The result of that election was a message to the city employees.

When our council chose to take this last group of offers to arbitration; that was another message to the city employees.

Although the public unions are shielded by archaic entitlement laws, this group of council members and the vast majority of voters want to send the message that things like taxpayers funding 95% of city worker healthcare needs a more fair and balanced solution.

By Anonymous, at September 29, 2007 9:51 AM
The council never made a decision to take anything to arbitration. It never even got that far. The city and the union could not reach agreement. The council had nothing to do with it (and most of the public doesn't care about it the way cut and pasters like you do). Just goes to show you don't know what you're talking about. If you believe you're right, please provide a link to the minutes where the council took this action. And don't count your chickens before they'er hatched. You have no idea what's going to happen at arbitration.

By Anonymous, at September 29, 2007 3:55 PM
3:55
You said:
"And don't count your chickens before they'er hatched. You have no idea what's going to happen at arbitration."

The correct spelling is - they're.

Although the public unions are shielded by archaic entitlement laws (arbitration), this group of council members and the vast majority of voters want to send the message that things like taxpayers funding 95% of city worker healthcare needs a more fair and balanced solution.

By Anonymous, at September 29, 2007 10:03 PM
Sorry, but I mind a little innocent typo much less than the drivel of a sicko who knows no other talent or skill than copy and paste. No wonder YOU'RE envious of those who have better jobs than you. There's not much call for copy and pasters.

By Anonymous, at September 29, 2007 11:28 PM
"Open records law causes a problem,"

"I am reading the story that appears on the front page of today's paper by Jeff Bollier and thinking, "What can I possibly say about a city attorney who recommended concealing records of a $2.2 million public development grant from public inspection? Who shows complete and utter disregard for open government? Who has abject arrogance toward the publics' right to know?"

Who has abject arrogance toward the publics' right to know

This statement was made about our City Attorney, but could also apply to the union guy who wants to stifle information about union wages and benefits appearing on city interest blog sites.

The publics right to know.

Seems that those in City Hall, and Oshkosh's leading legal council seem we as the taxpayers who pay their salaries should be sheltered from that information.

Furthermore, our City Attorney gives legal advise to a city employee Oshkosh Planning Services Director Darryn Burich:

"Open records law causes a problem," Kraft responded. "Anything you collect as part of your supervisory role is generally subject to public inspection. All we need to have are costs related to TIF expenses."

These are the problems that face Oshkosh Taxpayers. It appears we need to continue our 215 Church Ave house cleaning.

On so many levels, the abject arrogance shown by city employees to we taxpayers who provide them their income is totally unexceptable.

As Mr Rieckman put it in his column:

"I'm speechless, so Oshkosh, you tell me. How much longer are you prepared to tolerate insolence from the city attorney's office? How much longer do you want to be shut out and put down by a city attorney who is accountable to no one?

How much longer can you stomach a city attorney whose advice is so suspect that one council member routinely checks with a private attorney for a second opinion?

I am outraged. I am speechless. Oshkosh, you tell me."

By Anonymous, at September 30, 2007 7:51 PM
If only you were speechless, cut and paste dude. Here's a thought. Start your own blog and inundate to you heart's content anyone stupid enough to listen to your incessant blather.

By Anonymous, at September 30, 2007 11:28 PM
"On so many levels, the abject arrogance shown by city employees to we taxpayers who provide them their income is totally unexceptable."

This applies to high ranking city employees as well as blue collar union members, especially the union hack that wants to keep information about union wages and benefits hushed up...same story as whats happening in our city legal department.

Major house cleaning needed in so many city positions. These people have forgotten who they work for.

By Anonymous, at October 01, 2007 6:49 AM
"This applies to high ranking city employees as well as blue collar union members, especially the union hack that wants to keep information about union wages and benefits hushed up...same story as whats happening in our city legal department."

There is post after post about this supposed person who wants to keep information 'hushed up.' There hasn't been any indication that any person posting on here is trying to keep things secret.

What we have here is a person who has resorted to LYING to try to make city employees look bad. We have Mr. Cut and Paste who posts the same thing over and over about the 95/5 split and the wages from a large union in the city. Where was that ever refuted, or hidden?

The answer is, IT HASN'T. The anti-city employee faction has now stooped so low that they post LIES on blogs to drum up some hatred. How do you look at yourself in the mirror in the morning?

QUID PRO QUO

By Anonymous, at October 01, 2007 7:52 AM
7:52, great to hear you don't mind factual information being posted!

Oshkosh City Employee Union
Local 796 - AFSCME, AFL-CIO

Rates Effective Pay Period 1, 2006

Vacations:
1 year of service = 2 weeks vacation
7 years of service = 3 weeks vacation
12 years of service = 4 weeks vacation
20 years of service = 5 weeks vacation
25 years of service = 5 weeks + 1 day vacation

Sick Leave:
1 day of sick leave for each month of service.

Holidays:
12 paid days per year.

Medical Benefits:
Employee contributions for PPO

Effective January 1, 2006 employees will contribute 5% up to a maximum of $30 per month toward single; $45 per month towards dual and $55 per month towards a family premium equivalent.

Employee contributions for EPO

Effective January 1, 2006 employees will contribute 4% up to a maximum of $20 per month toward single; $40 per month towards dual and $50 per month towards a family premium equivalent.

Retirement Fund:
The Employer shall pay the employees mandatory contribution to the fund, up to 6.5% of the employee’s gross wage.

Longevity Plan:
The following longevity plan is in effect-

$2.77 bi weekly after 5 years of service
$5.54 bi weekly after 10 years of service
$9.23 bi weekly after 15 years of service
$12.92 bi weekly after 20 years of service

WAGES…………………

Clerk Dispatcher - $15.79 - $16.66 per hour
Shop Laborer - $18.05 - $18.67 per hour
Transit Operator - $18.05 - $18.67 per hour
Service Technician - $18.05 - $18.67 per hour
Sanitation Operator - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Groundskeeper - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Zoo Specialist - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Traffic Painter - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Maint. Shop Worker - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Sewage Plant Maint Worker - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Street Maint Worker - $18.48 - $19.49 per hour
Parks Maint Worker - $18.48 - $19.49 per hour
Utility Operator - $18.99 - $19.65 per hour
Park Trades Tech - $18.99 - $19.65 per hour
Arborist - $18.99 - $19.65 per hour
Water Maint Worker II - $18.81 - $19.79 per hour
Park Maint Leadperson - $18.81 - $19.79 per hour
Traffic Painter II - $19.06 - $20.05 per hour
Water Meter Reader Service - $19.06 - $20.05 per hour
Equip Oper III - $19.06 - $20.05 per hour
Solids Plant Oper - $19.06 - $20.27 per hour
Parks Maint Tech - $19.06 - $20.27 per hour
Solids Plant Oper - $19.06 - $20.27 per hour
Sewerage Plant Oper - $19.48 - $20.66 per hour
Filtration Plant Oper - $19.48 - $20.66 per hour
Equip Mechanic - $19.48 - $20.91 per hour
Transit Mechanic - $19.48 - $20.91 per hour
Welder - $19.48 - $20.91 per hour
Lead Mechanic - $19.79 - $21.32 per hour
Mechanic III - $19.48 - $20.91 per hour
Electrician Ii - $21.10 - $23.03 per hour

On top of these benefits, we property taxpayers and rent payers fund 95% of healthcare costs for city workers.

By Anonymous, at October 01, 2007 12:17 PM
More blahblahblah from cut and paste man. This guy is like a fly that needs to be swatted or sprayed with a huge can of Raid.
So cut and paste man, now you've printed your junk for the umpteeth time and you can't complain you're being silenced. Nobody wants to keep hearing it though. Even your brain-twin Kent Monte won't post your junk anymore. Seems you're wearing out your welcome and becoming irrelevant in the blogosphere. But you're not smart enough to get it.

By Anonymous, at October 01, 2007 12:35 PM
12:17, aka Cut and Paste Master, you're an idiot. No one minds factual information. But how many times do you have to post it?

Take note- most people in this city DON'T CARE about the wage and benefit package of city employees. They're satisfied with the services provided and don't complain. You, on the other hand, have to post ad nauseum on a topic. You think it makes your message stronger. In reality it makes you look like an idiot.

It's interesting how your drivel doesn't show up on Monte's blog anymore. Might be time to go over there. Kent finally got smart and stopped with your crap.

Keep cutting and pasting. At least you will get to read the things you post over and over again.

By Anonymous, at October 01, 2007 2:14 PM
Mr. Union, I will not lower myself to your level by name-calling. Name-calling shows a high degree of uneducated desperation and lack of debate skills.

The more you protest, the more I'm inclined to believe, as Paul Esslinger does, that the entire city staff, needs scrutinizing, for the very top, to the very bottom.

If you as a city employee want information stifled, then I feel as a property taxpayer there is even more reason to keep talking about it and questioning your motives.

Public unions are shielded from reality by archaic entitlement laws which are distinctly counter to taxpayers best interests.

We taxpayers fund 95% of city worker healthcare. That needs to change. We need a more fair and balanced healthcare solution for our city employees.

We may, as a community, come to the conclusion we are not able to afford the services our hired workers perform for us. Some positions may need to be eliminated to make the overall wage and benefit cost to taxpayers more affordable.

By Anonymous, at October 01, 2007 5:22 PM
I have been telling you about the position and service cutting for months. And I maintain, you are an idiot.

QUID PRO QUO

By Anonymous, at October 01, 2007 8:08 PM
Don't even waste your time with Mr. Cut and Paste. he is an idiot. He doesn't understand the basic concept of bargaining in good faith. He says if information tries to be quieted he'll continue preaching from everyone else's pulpit and yet even when he's being ignored he continues his sermon. So he's a liar in addition to being an idiot. He's uneducated and just plain mad that more people aren't outraged like he is. It's the sign of the classic poor sport. Someday maybe he'll figure out what he wants to be when he grows up.

By Anonymous, at October 01, 2007 8:12 PM
He makes all these statements that simply aren't true. The bit about someone trying to cover up wages and benefits of city employees. It's never happened! Not once has anyone tried to hide anything. But he wants people to believe they have. So he makes up stories.

By Anonymous, at October 01, 2007 8:41 PM
Cut and Paste said:

"Mr. Union, I will not lower myself to your level by name-calling. Name-calling shows a high degree of uneducated desperation and lack of debate skills. "

If name calling shows uneducated desperation, what does cutting and pasting show?

By Anonymous, at October 01, 2007 10:01 PM
It appears it is not uncommon for unions to toss some of their members “under the bus” to save benefits for others.

Reported on Fox News:
“The tentative contract between General Motors Corp. (GM) and the United Auto Workers would allow GM to close a plant each in Michigan and Indiana and possibly shut down several other facilities, according to a detailed copy of the agreement.”

I guess that concept is often referred to as “Quid Pro Quo”. (Sacrifice your working partner to save your skin)

“The agreement would let GM sell or close a stamping plant in Indianapolis and close an engine plant in Livonia, in suburban Detroit. According to the detailed document, called the "white book," work at the Indianapolis stamping operation will continue or be reallocated to another GM plant until such time as the plant can be sold to an outside buyer. The moves are the downside of job security pledges that the UAW won in the negotiations, including commitments for new products at 16 plants."

What caused all this turmoil?

Healthcare costs!

“The deal was endorsed Friday by local union leaders. It also requires GM to pay out at least $35 billion to the union to set up a trust to handle retiree health care and establishes lower wages for thousands of new employees.”

Healthcare costs are a huge concern for a city the size of Oshkosh, all the way to the huge manufacturing giant GM.

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 8:19 AM
It appears logic, common sense, laws directed at bargaining in good faith, and the nonchalent attitude of thousands of voters is not enough to get cut and paste moron to see that PEOPLE DON'T CARE.

Cut and paster, you said some time ago you were going to contact those who go make a difference. Instead of pasting your same old crap, why not elighten us with the letters you've sent to our Madison leaders? Or are you inundating them 10 times a day with your junk and they've written you off too? Most people with even average intelligence would write you off as a nut job.

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 9:45 AM
Cut & Paste Guy,
I am going to do you the favor of suggesting AGAIN that you get a job. I'm sending you the position description for city Patrol Officer. You can decide if Oshkosh should be protected by people with adequate pay and benefits or the types we would get by low-balling potential applicants. You seem to know the price of city employment but the value of nothing. How much public safety are local tax payers willing to do without?

Patrol Officer

GENERAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The Patrol Officer is a member of the Patrol Services Bureau (PSB) under supervision of the
PSB Commander, the Shift Commander and Sergeant. The duties of a Patrol Officer are to
protect, regulate and serve the citizens of the community as they go about their daily activities.
The Patrol Officer must be able to perform these duties without benefit of immediate
supervision, as well as working as a team with other employees. The Patrol Officer is required
to garner a complete knowledge of Department policies, procedures, and job methods relating to
work assignments. The Patrol Officer must have a working knowledge of Federal laws, State
statutes, and City ordinances and must exhibit a great amount of discretion when dealing with the
citizens of the community. The Patrol Officer must be physically fit to perform his/her duties
and responsibilities.
ESSENTIAL JOB FUNCTIONS
Duties performed on a frequent basis include, but are not limited to the following:
• Arrest persons with and without warrants and assist in prosecutions as required.
• Investigate any complaint assigned and take appropriate actions.
• Conduct follow-up investigations whenever necessary during the normal course of an
investigation or upon special request, and utilize Departmental records.
• Identify and investigate suspicious vehicles, persons or situations.
• Be prepared for court and testify in court in an honest, impartial and convincing manner,
while keeping in mind he/she is a witness relating facts so that the court may pass judgment.
• Address all persons in a firm, courteous manner to develop trust, respect and confidence in
the officer and the Department.

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 10:05 AM
Our limited tax funds should be spent wisely. Maintaining our core protective services in the fire and police is very important and reductions to those areas should be on the table, but only as a last resort.

Focus for labor reductions should occur in other areas such as parks and forestry. The central garage and vehicle maintenance are also potential areas for labor reduction and savings; or perhaps consolidation and total outsourcing of all vehicle maintenance.

With a $60,000,000.00 budget and 680 employees, I’m certain that there is fat to be cut somewhere. I think a new Mayor or Manager will be effective in finding and rooting out those areas.

I think an 80/20 healthcare cost sharing plan would certainly be more fair than to implement staff reductions. Labor reductions are never ideal, but it appears at least one union member thinks that labor reduction is preferable to a global city wide adjustment in healthcare benefits, and truth is there may be jobs that could be consolidated, eliminated or changed for the better of the city. He calls that Quid Pro Quo.

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 11:51 AM
What part of attrition do you no understand, Mr. Cut and Paste? Everytime you post something you come off as more and more ignorant.

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 11:54 AM
It appears I've "got your goat" Mr. Union, so some parts of my message must ring true or you would not protest so much.

Oh and by the way, just which department in the city do you work in? It appears your allowed far too much free time on the internet, may be we could start the "thining of the herd" in your department.

Have a wonderful day!

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 12:11 PM
Mr. Cut and Paste is soooooo lost, one almost has to feel sorry for him. He's deaf, dumb, blind, and stupid all at once. No wonder he's jealous of those who have.

BTW, Mr. Cut and Paste, I guess our message must ring true too or YOU wouldn't keep protesting so much. Funny how your own words are used against you. HEE HEE.

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 2:42 PM
My message is to continue to inform the voters about how our tax dollars are spent.

Such as:

Vacations...
1 year of service = 2 weeks vacation
7 years of service = 3 weeks vacation
12 years of service = 4 weeks vacation
20 years of service = 5 weeks vacation
25 years of service = 5 weeks + 1 day vacation

Longevity Plan...
The following longevity plan is in effect.
$2.77 bi weekly after 5 years of service
$5.54 bi weekly after 10 years of service
$9.23 bi weekly after 15 years of service
$12.92 bi weekly after 20 years of service

WAGES…
Shop Laborer - $18.05 - $18.67 per hour
Groundskeeper - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Traffic Painter - $18.42 - $19.15 per hour
Parks Maint Tech - $19.06 - $20.27 per hour

And on top of these benefits, we property taxpayers and rent payers fund 95% of healthcare costs for city workers.

You message is to bash me and attempt to stop me from posting.

Good luck with that.

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 4:48 PM
You're defeating your own cause. We've recently seen one more blog that won't post your crap, so congratulations are in order. You're your own worst enemy. I say keep copying and pasting and before you know it, you'll have NOWHERE to paste. What a glorious day that will be.

Have a successful evening!

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 5:11 PM
Here's an interesting fact to think about.

In most every private sector organization, hourly workers are the members of unions. Salaried staff and supervisors are not able to be part of organized labor, they are a part of management.

In Oshkosh, in our public sector unions, the battalion chiefs in the fire department and division captains in the police department belong to their own union.

As supervisors, how effective are this top union/management people?

Union managers and union employees both funded by the property taxpayer. Very unusual when compared to the private sector.

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 6:20 PM
Mr. Cut and Paste is soooooo lost, one almost has to feel sorry for him. He's deaf, dumb, blind, and stupid all at once. No wonder he's jealous of those who have.

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 7:05 PM
Yup and he doesn't understand the private sector can't be compared to the public sector. But what else can you expect other than foolishness when dealing with fools such as Copy & Paste Man?

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 7:07 PM
I thought I would highlight the important differences between unions in the public sector versus unions the private sector.

In the private sector consumers have choices, and they can avoid high prices or poor service by patronizing other businesses. This competition forces private labor unions to be reasonable in their demands or face the risk of losing employment for their members by bankrupting the business.

However, unlike in the private sector, citizens cannot easily choose a better provider of government services. With government services there isn't competition, versus the private sector where the consumer has other options.

If a government negotiates costly and inefficient union contracts with its employees; citizens and taxpayers have no alternatives.

Citizens are forced to either continue to pay higher taxes or else spend their time, energy, and money lobbying their elected officials for change.

Unlike in the private sector, citizens cannot easily choose a better provider of government services. That is the central reason why public sector unions experience little external pressure to moderate their demands. The near monopoly over services is the reason why salaries and benefits for government employees are routinely higher than salaries and benefits for private-sector employees. And don't forget, it is not only the salary component; it is also the extraordinary benefits, such as fewer hours of work, generous vacations, flexible work weeks, and other benefits that quite frankly most private sector employees could only dream of.

Considering the near monopoly of services the government provides, I wonder if collective bargaining continues to be an appropriate method for setting wages and benefits in the public sector?

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 7:21 PM
Citizens always have choices. Moving to another city is one of their options. Some might want to try it.

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 7:57 PM
When government watchdogs ask reasonable questions about the wisdom of promising high pay and lavish pensions that are far above what is available to most private sector workers, union leaders accuse critics of being "anti-union." In this manner, they hope to protect their efforts under the umbrella of America's labor union movement. After all, the implication of calling someone "anti-union" is that the person favors sweatshops and employer tactics that use coercion to deny workers a fair wage in return for their labor.

However, government worker (Public) unions have little in common with the private sector unions that have spearheaded the American labor movement -- aside from the "union label."

Taxpayer advocates have no fundamental problem with private worker labor unions. There we see the proper balance between labor and management, between employees and owners. While some may disagree with an individual union's policies and tactics -- just as they may disagree with a company's conduct -- most understand that these unions are a part of a productive private sector...

But public employee labor unions are another matter. In essence, particularly on the local level, they select the "owners," or at least the management. They expend manpower and money to see that "their" candidates are elected to office. This way, when it is time to sit down at the bargaining table to discuss wages and benefits, the union has representatives on both sides of the table. There is no balance -- quite the opposite. The fox is guarding the henhouse. And the taxpaying citizens are on the menu.

A major difference between private and public entities is that the private firms have to earn their money through voluntary transactions. For all their rhetoric, private employee union leaders usually understand that it's best that the companies they negotiate with be competitive enough to stay in business and thrive -- and businesses can do that only if they provide a desirable good or service at a price the customers are willing to voluntarily pay.

On the other hand, public employee unions rely on the coercive power of government to tax anyone and anything within their jurisdiction...

Does this make the government union members "bad guys?" No, they are simply acting in their own, and their members', self-interest. But they are playing a zero sum game, thanks to the involuntary nature of taxation. Every dollar that goes to a government worker has to be taken from someone else by the threat of force.

And remember, public employees have something that private employees do not -- a civil service system. Indeed, there is good argument that collective bargaining for public employees is unnecessary because of all the employment protections they already receive. (Ever tried to fire a public employee?)

We need balance to protect the real owners of the public sector -- the vast majority of citizens and taxpayers who do not work for a city, county or state government! In the case of Oshkosh, 95% taxpayer funded healthcare for public sector employees is outrageous and unfair to the taxpayer.

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 8:04 PM
You're defeating your own cause. We've recently seen one more blog that won't post your crap, so congratulations are in order. You're your own worst enemy. I say keep copying and pasting and before you know it, you'll have NOWHERE to paste. What a glorious day that will be.

Have a successful evening!

By Anonymous, at October 02, 2007 10:35 PM
Government worker (Public) unions have little in common with the private sector unions.

In essence, Public employee labor unions, particularly on the local level, select the "owners," or at least the management. They expend manpower and money to see that "their" candidates are elected to office. This way, when it is time to sit down at the bargaining table to discuss wages and benefits, the union has representatives on both sides of the table. There is no balance -- quite the opposite.

The fox is guarding the henhouse. And the taxpaying citizens are on the menu!

Public employee unions rely on the coercive power of government to tax anyone and anything within their jurisdiction.

Every dollar that goes to a government worker has to be taken from someone else (a property tax payer or rent payer) by the threat of force or reduction in "service"... but always a threat.

We need BALANCE to protect the real owners of the public sector --the vast majority of citizens and taxpayers who do not work for a city, county or state government!

In the case of Oshkosh, 95% taxpayer funded healthcare for public sector employees is outrageous and unfair to the taxpayer.

We as Oshkosh taxpayers may have come to the point where we can not afford the services our city employees offer.

The union suggests we eliminate services to easy the taxpayer burden. I'm willing to attempt that option as a potential solution.

I suggest we begin to target specific non-public safety areas in our 680 employee work-force that may be eliminated.

Lets start in the Parks Department. Lets also look at the city garage and how we conduct vehicle maintenance throughout the city. Lets see if we can consolodate some of these functions or perhaps outsource them as an option.

In a labor group of 680 employees, I have to believe we can find a 2-5% staff reduction. A 2-5% would be a reduction of 20-30+ staff positions which would provide some tax relief.

Although I believe a better solution would be an overall cost sharing adjustment, where all 680 employees would pay a more reasonable 20% for healthcare coverage (no jobs eliminated), the union members seem to believe job elimination is a more favorable route in their mind.

By Anonymous, at October 03, 2007 7:10 AM
\What does QUID PRO QUO mean? Wuid pro quo is part of a state law that says when bargaining with governmental employees, if you take something away from them, you must provide something equal in return. If you want to require employees to pay more for their health insurance, they must receive something of equal value in return--wages, more time off, improved pension benefits, or the like.

Why is quid pro quo important? If people like Mr. Cut and Paste were running the city, he would have it so that all employees would take cut after cut after cut and end up with substandard wages and benefits.

Quid pro quo works both ways. Years ago, city employees maintained their benefit package in lieu of a pay increase. Now Cut and Paste thinks the healthcare benefits afforded to city employees is too generous, but he's not interested in the fact that city employees GAVE SOMETHING UP to keep what they had. What will he offer in return for changing the benefit plan? Nothing!

Public sector unions are in place to guard against people like Cut and Paste. The laws are archaic or unfair, they are there to protect governmental employees and the services they provide.

You can put any type of spin you want on it, Cut and Paste, but the fact remains that the laws are there to protect the people who provide services for you. If you don't like the taxes you have to pay, you can either tell your elected officials some services should be cut, or move to the Town of Algoma.

By Anonymous, at October 03, 2007 8:47 AM
Cut and Paste, you make your arguments that city taxpayers can't afford the city employees anymore. Let's look at it this way.

The State will impose a levy limit sometime in the near future. It will probably be in the area of about 2%, meaning the city can raise its taxes about 2% over last year. It doesn't matter how much the city pays for health insurance for its employees, what the wages are, the number of people it hires or fires, or anything else in the operating budget. The bottom line is, the city is going to raise you taxes the amount allowed by the levy limit.

So your argument is moot. All the complaining about city employees, your charge that employees' demands are outrageous and unfair, your statement that public unions are coercive, and on and on, really is not pertinent.

It doesn't matter how contracts are settled, whether or not they go to arbitration, or even if the city would decide to pay 100% of benefits of city employees. THE TAX LEVY IS GOING TO INCREASE ABOUT 2%.

Which really paints a fair picture of you. You're not concerned about the fiscal implications on city taxpayers. The fact is, there aren't any. You're jeasous, or mad, or frustrated, that hard working city employees have a benefits package better than yours, and you complain about it.

That's what this is all really about.

By Anonymous, at October 03, 2007 8:54 AM
Your suggestion about Cut and Paste moving to the Town of Algoma (or anywhere away from here) is a good one but he/she would find the town's taxes to be higher yet than Oshkosh's and the services not nearly as good. Most people would be appreciative of that fact but Cut and Paste is never happy and as you said already, wants to cut, cut, cut until city workers are in the same boat as him/her. Cut and Paste is negative, mean-spirited, spiteful, and jealous. He's/She's even selfish, thinking of no one but himself/herself while claiming to protest in the name of thousands. Gimme a break.

By Anonymous, at October 03, 2007 9:33 AM
Excellent article. Spells out the issue very clearly.

When government watchdogs ask reasonable questions about the wisdom of promising high pay and lavish pensions that are far above what is available to most private sector workers, union leaders accuse critics of being "anti-union." In this manner, they hope to protect their efforts under the umbrella of America's labor union movement. After all, the implication of calling someone "anti-union" is that the person favors sweatshops and employer tactics that use coercion to deny workers a fair wage in return for their labor.

However, government worker (Public) unions have little in common with the private sector unions that have spearheaded the American labor movement -- aside from the "union label."

Taxpayer advocates have no fundamental problem with private worker labor unions. There we see the proper balance between labor and management, between employees and owners. While some may disagree with an individual union's policies and tactics -- just as they may disagree with a company's conduct -- most understand that these unions are a part of a productive private sector...

But public employee labor unions are another matter. In essence, particularly on the local level, they select the "owners," or at least the management. They expend manpower and money to see that "their" candidates are elected to office. This way, when it is time to sit down at the bargaining table to discuss wages and benefits, the union has representatives on both sides of the table. There is no balance -- quite the opposite. The fox is guarding the henhouse. And the taxpaying citizens are on the menu.

A major difference between private and public entities is that the private firms have to earn their money through voluntary transactions. For all their rhetoric, private employee union leaders usually understand that it's best that the companies they negotiate with be competitive enough to stay in business and thrive -- and businesses can do that only if they provide a desirable good or service at a price the customers are willing to voluntarily pay.

On the other hand, public employee unions rely on the coercive power of government to tax anyone and anything within their jurisdiction...

Does this make the government union members "bad guys?" No, they are simply acting in their own, and their members', self-interest. But they are playing a zero sum game, thanks to the involuntary nature of taxation. Every dollar that goes to a government worker has to be taken from someone else by the threat of force.

And remember, public employees have something that private employees do not -- a civil service system. Indeed, there is good argument that collective bargaining for public employees is unnecessary because of all the employment protections they already receive. (Ever tried to fire a public employee?)

We need balance to protect the real owners of the public sector -- the vast majority of citizens and taxpayers who do not work for a city, county or state government! In the case of Oshkosh, 95% taxpayer funded healthcare for public sector employees is outrageous and unfair to the taxpayer.

By Anonymous, at October 03, 2007 3:11 PM
What does QUID PRO QUO mean? Quid pro quo is part of a state law that says when bargaining with governmental employees, if you take something away from them, you must provide something equal in return. If you want to require employees to pay more for their health insurance, they must receive something of equal value in return--wages, more time off, improved pension benefits, or the like.

Why is quid pro quo important? If people like Mr. Cut and Paste were running the city, he would have it so that all employees would take cut after cut after cut and end up with substandard wages and benefits.

Quid pro quo works both ways. Years ago, city employees maintained their benefit package in lieu of a pay increase. Now Cut and Paste thinks the healthcare benefits afforded to city employees is too generous, but he's not interested in the fact that city employees GAVE SOMETHING UP to keep what they had. What will he offer in return for changing the benefit plan? Nothing!

Public sector unions are in place to guard against people like Cut and Paste. The laws are archaic or unfair, they are there to protect governmental employees and the services they provide.

You can put any type of spin you want on it, Cut and Paste, but the fact remains that the laws are there to protect the people who provide services for you.

Cut and Paste, you make your arguments that city taxpayers can't afford the city employees anymore. Let's look at it this way.

The State will impose a levy limit sometime in the near future. It will probably be in the area of about 2%, meaning the city can raise its taxes about 2% over last year. It doesn't matter how much the city pays for health insurance for its employees, what the wages are, the number of people it hires or fires, or anything else in the operating budget. The bottom line is, the city is going to raise you taxes the amount allowed by the levy limit.

So your argument is moot. All the complaining about city employees, your charge that employees' demands are outrageous and unfair, your statement that public unions are coercive, and on and on, really is not pertinent.

It doesn't matter how contracts are settled, whether or not they go to arbitration, or even if the city would decide to pay 100% of benefits of city employees. THE TAX LEVY IS GOING TO INCREASE ABOUT 2%.

Which really paints a fair picture of you. You're not concerned about the fiscal implications on city taxpayers. The fact is, there aren't any. You're jeasous, or mad, or frustrated, that hard working city employees have a benefits package better than yours, and you complain about it.

That's what this is all really about. If you don't like the taxes you have to pay, you can either tell your elected officials some services should be cut, or move to the Town of Algoma.

By Anonymous, at October 03, 2007 6:01 PM
Cheryl Hentz writes an interesting article in the latest edition of Marketplace Magazine.

Survey says…Regional employers trend towards consumer-directed health plans.

“ For the last 10 years or so, employers in the United States have been wrestling with huge increases in their portion of health care costs – double digit increases in some cases. Recent figures show health care costs increasing at 3 to 4 times the Consumer Price Index, depending on one’s business. The biggest challenge for most businesses is finding a way not just to maintain insurance costs, but to find ways to level off the increases.

“Employers have reached a breaking point…”

“They have also begun shifting more of the burden of cost to the employees. This is being done directly through higher premiums and indirectly through changes in plan designs that raise deductibles or out-of-pocket costs”

“David Wegge, president of Intellectual Marketing LLC of Green Bay, says according to research his firm has done for Nicolet Bank – which conducts quarterly surveys with businesses in Northeast Wisconsin – about 50 percent of the employers surveyed felt that employees should be paying more than what they are, a number that some may think would have been higher”

“But they’ve shifted a lot to employees already and many may feel there’s only so much they can shift to them,” Wegge says.

In Oshkosh city government, we need to begin shifting some of this rising healthcare cost to our employees. Currently our employees only absorb 5% of healthcare costs. We property tax payers fund 95%.

In the private sector, as you’ve read, employers are shifting that rising cost to employees and are managing costs by a reasonable cost sharing percentage. Many larger employers in the Valley share healthcare costs with their employees at a 80/20 ratio.

The 95/5 ratio of Oshkosh city government and city employees is a huge burden to the taxpayers and is totally out of line with what is occurring with other employers in the Valley.

By Anonymous, at October 03, 2007 6:34 PM
How many times do you have to be told that you CAN NOT compare public sector to private sector. So consider this:

What does QUID PRO QUO mean? Quid pro quo is part of a state law that says when bargaining with governmental employees, if you take something away from them, you must provide something equal in return. If you want to require employees to pay more for their health insurance, they must receive something of equal value in return--wages, more time off, improved pension benefits, or the like.

Why is quid pro quo important? If people like Mr. Cut and Paste were running the city, he would have it so that all employees would take cut after cut after cut and end up with substandard wages and benefits.

Quid pro quo works both ways. Years ago, city employees maintained their benefit package in lieu of a pay increase. Now Cut and Paste thinks the healthcare benefits afforded to city employees is too generous, but he's not interested in the fact that city employees GAVE SOMETHING UP to keep what they had. What will he offer in return for changing the benefit plan? Nothing!

Public sector unions are in place to guard against people like Cut and Paste. The laws are archaic or unfair, they are there to protect governmental employees and the services they provide.

You can put any type of spin you want on it, Cut and Paste, but the fact remains that the laws are there to protect the people who provide services for you.

Cut and Paste, you make your arguments that city taxpayers can't afford the city employees anymore. Let's look at it this way.

The State will impose a levy limit sometime in the near future. It will probably be in the area of about 2%, meaning the city can raise its taxes about 2% over last year. It doesn't matter how much the city pays for health insurance for its employees, what the wages are, the number of people it hires or fires, or anything else in the operating budget. The bottom line is, the city is going to raise you taxes the amount allowed by the levy limit.

So your argument is moot. All the complaining about city employees, your charge that employees' demands are outrageous and unfair, your statement that public unions are coercive, and on and on, really is not pertinent.

It doesn't matter how contracts are settled, whether or not they go to arbitration, or even if the city would decide to pay 100% of benefits of city employees. THE TAX LEVY IS GOING TO INCREASE ABOUT 2%.

Which really paints a fair picture of you. You're not concerned about the fiscal implications on city taxpayers. The fact is, there aren't any. You're jeasous, or mad, or frustrated, that hard working city employees have a benefits package better than yours, and you complain about it.

That's what this is all really about. If you don't like the taxes you have to pay, you can either tell your elected officials some services should be cut, or move to the Town of Algoma.

By Anonymous, at October 03, 2007 7:27 PM
The arrogance of our public sector union representatives.

One union rep states:
"How many times do you have to be told that you CAN NOT compare public sector to private sector."

The entitlement mentality of this group is outrageous. They feel they should be entitled to special privileges that set them apart from the rest of the working world.

Change will not come quickly to any government agency or public sector union, but it appears we have a council who is much more attune to the wishes of taxpayers. A good example of this is a comment from our Mayor -

“The city is in the service business, so labor will always be a majority of the operating budget. Because of this all city employees (represented or otherwise) need to understand the realities of the private sector and what's happening with increasing costs (especially health care). We cannot afford to keep increasing taxes”

Frank gets it.

The city is a business that employs 680 workers. City taxpayers are the customers. The customers will only pay so much for the service the business provides. Customers will not continue to pay 95% of healthcare costs for the employees.

“… city employees (represented or otherwise) need to understand the realities of the private sector and what's happening with increasing costs (especially health care). We cannot afford to keep increasing taxes”

Those in Oshkosh City government organized labor that live in a sheltered bubble need to look no further than the UAW and GM. Changes come slowly, but they do happen.

Thanks to the city for taking this latest series of offers to arbitration. That move alone sends the message the city will not cave to the unrealistic demands placed upon it by the union.

Taxpayers can only afford so much. Paying 95% of city worker healthcare is too much!

By Anonymous, at October 04, 2007 7:27 AM
Not arrogance - it's the law and you are ust too freaking ignorant to understand. Or you are intentionally choosing to mislead people. Either one is highly possible. But since you want to keep shouting inaccuracies from the rooftop, we'll continue putting the facts into perspective.

If you want to present a completely accurate picture, you CAN NOT compare public sector to private sector. So consider this:

What does QUID PRO QUO mean? Quid pro quo is part of a state law that says when bargaining with governmental employees, if you take something away from them, you must provide something equal in return. If you want to require employees to pay more for their health insurance, they must receive something of equal value in return--wages, more time off, improved pension benefits, or the like.

Why is quid pro quo important? If people like Mr. Cut and Paste were running the city, he would have it so that all employees would take cut after cut after cut and end up with substandard wages and benefits.

Quid pro quo works both ways. Years ago, city employees maintained their benefit package in lieu of a pay increase. Now Cut and Paste thinks the healthcare benefits afforded to city employees is too generous, but he's not interested in the fact that city employees GAVE SOMETHING UP to keep what they had. What will he offer in return for changing the benefit plan? Nothing!

Public sector unions are in place to guard against people like Cut and Paste. The laws are archaic or unfair, they are there to protect governmental employees and the services they provide.

You can put any type of spin you want on it, Cut and Paste, but the fact remains that the laws are there to protect the people who provide services for you.

Cut and Paste, you make your arguments that city taxpayers can't afford the city employees anymore. Let's look at it this way.

The State will impose a levy limit sometime in the near future. It will probably be in the area of about 2%, meaning the city can raise its taxes about 2% over last year. It doesn't matter how much the city pays for health insurance for its employees, what the wages are, the number of people it hires or fires, or anything else in the operating budget. The bottom line is, the city is going to raise you taxes the amount allowed by the levy limit.

So your argument is moot. All the complaining about city employees, your charge that employees' demands are outrageous and unfair, your statement that public unions are coercive, and on and on, really is not pertinent.

It doesn't matter how contracts are settled, whether or not they go to arbitration, or even if the city would decide to pay 100% of benefits of city employees. THE TAX LEVY IS GOING TO INCREASE ABOUT 2%.

Which really paints a fair picture of you. You're not concerned about the fiscal implications on city taxpayers. The fact is, there aren't any. You're jeasous, or mad, or frustrated, that hard working city employees have a benefits package better than yours, and you complain about it.

That's what this is all really about. If you don't like the taxes you have to pay, you can either tell your elected officials some services should be cut, or move to the Town of Algoma or another area code.

By Anonymous, at October 04, 2007 9:23 AM
It is clear the “union guy” that posts does not want to compromise on the healthcare benefit. He feels having us taxpayers fund 95% of his healthcare is fair and equitable, even though some of the taxpayers that pay for his insurance, can’t afford their own.

If I were in his shoes, I’d be reluctant to negotiate any benefit away also. But it if meant more cost sharing on healthcare costs or eliminating some of my fellow workers, I personally would choose the compromise route and keep all my friends and co-workers employed.

The other factor is “union guy” doesn’t speak for all the 680 employees in Oshkosh, just as I don’t speak for every taxpayer. After all, some union members are also taxpayers so when they vote for more taxes, they also vote for a benefit increase for themselves. The real issue is that there are some unions in Oshkosh that ratified their offers, there are others that didn’t. That fact alone indicates there is a clear difference in the bargaining approach the different locals use.

As was said, when it comes to changing the state statute that oversee the union bargaining entitlement programs, changes come slowly. All we can hope to do is keep the pressure on our elected officials, and continue to tell them loudly that as a taxpayer, funding 95% of union labor healthcare is totally unacceptable.

By Anonymous, at October 04, 2007 10:21 AM
Cut & Paste Guy,
Still unemployed or working at a dead-end job and unable to pay your fair share of city taxes? I really want to help! You don't seem to have any writting and oral ability or any other visible skills but the city does have some low-end jobs you might just be cut out for. Here is one of them:

SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD CITY OF OSHKOSH
The City of Oshkosh has a need for Regular and Substitute Crossing Guards. Must be available mornings and afternoons. $12.19 per hour with uniform provided. Apply to Personnel Office, Room 401, City Hall, 215 Church Avenue,
Oshkosh WI 54901. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER M/F/H

Don't bother to thank me. Just go away to another area code.

By Anonymous, at October 04, 2007 10:51 AM
So sad that our city employees aren't monitored for excessive internet use. Union guy is on the public dole and all he does is spend time on the internet. When you can't debate facts, you need to start name calling like 5th grade children.

Back to the purpose of this debate:

As was said, when it comes to changing the state statute that oversee the union bargaining entitlement programs, changes come slowly. All we can hope to do is keep the pressure on our elected officials, and continue to tell them loudly that as a taxpayer, funding 95% of union labor healthcare is totally unacceptable.

Based on his comment, our Mayor Frank Tower agrees:

“The city is in the service business, so labor will always be a majority of the operating budget. Because of this all city employees (represented or otherwise) need to understand the realities of the private sector and what's happening with increasing costs (especially health care). We cannot afford to keep increasing taxes”

By Anonymous, at October 04, 2007 12:13 PM
10:21, you don't seem to speak for *any* taxpayers, much less *all.* You're the only one talking and no one but us is listening to you. And those of us listening are not moved by your speech. We're amused by it. You are the highlight of our day.

Why not answer this question for us. If you are accomplishing so much by your blog presence and people are so outraged by the benefits paid for people providing a service most people wouldn't want to do, why are there more people not showing up at city council meetings (that includes you) to complain about this, writing to their reps in Madison, writing letters to the editor, or appearing on these blogs? How come it's just you over and over again with the same worn out mantra? Common sense should tell you there is strength is numbers. You have no numbers behind you and no strength in your message. You're not the self-proclaimed savior of taxes you think you are. Do yourself a favor and avoid further humiliation. Put your energies into something worthwhile. The payback might be better than what you're finding here.

By Anonymous, at October 04, 2007 12:29 PM
So sad that 12:13 is such an ignoramus that he believes someone who disagrees with him to be a city worker abusing the city's internet policy. 12:13 has never heard of shift workers, nor days off, nor someone who's not a city worker but believes they've bargained in good faith and deserve what they have. Tsk, tsk, he is a sorry human being indeed.

By Anonymous, at October 04, 2007 12:32 PM
I don't know what a "public dole" is 12:13 PM, but I know Dole makes a terrific can of pineapples. Hmm, hmm, good (just like Campbell's Soups).

By Anonymous, at October 04, 2007 12:46 PM
Not to be too picky, but....
10:51 said:
"I really want to help! You don't seem to have any writting and oral ability or any other visible skills but the city does have some low-end jobs you might just be cut out for."

OK, anyone see the humor here?

He accuses me of poor writing skills and notice how HE spells writing!

LOL- funny guy this union guy.

Sorry, I couldn't let that one slip past...I'm still laughing!!

By Anonymous, at October 04, 2007 2:17 PM
union guy if it’s just you and your pals sitting around wasting tax payer money on the internet, and nobody else is reading or concerned about this, why are you so concerned?

My guess is that you are in fact a bit concerned; or you wouldn’t be so aggressive in your nasty replies. After all, you’re protected and nothing can touch your benefits…right?

But the truth is, I guess I would be concerned too if I were you. When our Mayor acknowledges that taxes can’t continue to be raised to fund even more healthcare or other benefits for city employees, when most every private sector job is requiring employees to share more healthcare costs, even the UAW and GM two huge organizations change the entire method of compensation of healthcare…it shows a definite trend.

And let’s not forget the referenda questions that were voted on last year.

Question #1)
I will not accept a fee for a standard city service such as garbage pick-up.
If you agree with this, then vote YES on referendum question 1.
Overwhelming YES votes. Taxpayers do not want to pay user fees.

Question #2)
I will not accept additional property tax fees to fund city services beyond the current levy limits.
If you agree with this, then vote NO on referendum question 2.
Overwhelming NO votes. Taxpayers do not want to pay more taxes.

All these examples are certainly a cause for concern for you union guy.

By Anonymous, at October 04, 2007 3:09 PM
For 12:13 you are funny yourself. You accuse union folks of living on public doles. By your comment you have no clue what a dole is. FYI, it is a small handout for the needy. And here we thought all this time you thought the city workers were overpaid and had "gold-plated" benefits. Thank you for clearing up your true thoughts about them.

Is anyone worried about your message in a vacuum? Hell no. You are singing to an audience that has long since left the building. You must be the one frightened or you wouldn't keep clogging up the blogs with your inane redundancy. Clearly you have no skills and no job that you are grateful for and appreciate. You do have one thing right and that is that the union benefits are protected. It's called bargaining in good faith, something you obviously know nothing about. We'll see how smart you are when arbitration is completed. While waiting for that decision, either stock up on Kleenex for your 24 hours a day of suffering and anxiety or try learning a real skill, something marketable so you don't have to be so resentful of those that have.

P.S. There's always the next obvious choice of moving to another area code. I hear Sheboygan is a nice place to live.

By Anonymous, at October 04, 2007 3:49 PM
Lets recap:

Our Mayor states that taxes can’t continue to be raised to fund even more healthcare or other benefits for city employees.

Nicolet Bank conducted a survey with businesses in Northeast Wisconsin and about 50 percent of the employers surveyed felt that employees should be paying more than what they are, a number that some may think would have been higher”

The UAW and GM two huge organizations changed the entire method of compensation of healthcare.

The two referenda questions that were voted on last year.

NO fees for services

NO taxes beyond the levy

It would appear to any clear thinking person that the 95/5 ratio that puts the major burden of healthcare costs on the Oshkosh taxpayer is an outrageous expense for the taxpayer.

union guy keeps posting his comments because he and others like him are truly concerned. If they weren’t, they wouldn’t give my postings a single thought or spend any time and effort posting replies. The reason they are so quick to react is they do feel threatened, rightfully so.

The unnatural structure of Oshkosh’s employee healthcare plan is bound to be a regular topic of discussion. Changes to the public sectors entitlement laws act as a shield, and will be difficult to change, but our Mayor and other council members highly sensitive to taxpayers and concerned about how the city government has operated in the past. Nothing is off the radar screen any longer, including every level of city employee.

We’ve already shown some strength by taking several of the unions to arbitration. This has rarely occured in the past.

In the future, we are likely to have a much stronger Manager who will be more sensitive to the taxpayer than the city employee. All these point towards good change in the future.

By Anonymous, at October 04, 2007 6:47 PM
Mr. Cut & Paste, you are too stupid to admit you're wrong. Either that or you just don't understand the difference beetween apples and oranges.

Neither a city manager nor a mayor can do anything to change state arbitration laws, even if you had a mayor with the strength Paul Esslinger wants. It's not gonna happen.

If you want to present a completely accurate picture, you CAN NOT compare public sector to private sector. So consider this:

What does QUID PRO QUO mean? Quid pro quo is part of a state law that says when bargaining with governmental employees, if you take something away from them, you must provide something equal in return. If you want to require employees to pay more for their health insurance, they must receive something of equal value in return--wages, more time off, improved pension benefits, or the like.

Why is quid pro quo important? If people like Mr. Cut and Paste were running the city, he would have it so that all employees would take cut after cut after cut and end up with substandard wages and benefits.

Quid pro quo works both ways. Years ago, city employees maintained their benefit package in lieu of a pay increase. Now Cut and Paste thinks the healthcare benefits afforded to city employees is too generous, but he's not interested in the fact that city employees GAVE SOMETHING UP to keep what they had. What will he offer in return for changing the benefit plan? Nothing!

Public sector unions are in place to guard against people like Cut and Paste. The laws are archaic or unfair, they are there to protect governmental employees and the services they provide.

You can put any type of spin you want on it, Cut and Paste, but the fact remains that the laws are there to protect the people who provide services for you.

Cut and Paste, you make your arguments that city taxpayers can't afford the city employees anymore. Let's look at it this way.

The State will impose a levy limit sometime in the near future. It will probably be in the area of about 2%, meaning the city can raise its taxes about 2% over last year. It doesn't matter how much the city pays for health insurance for its employees, what the wages are, the number of people it hires or fires, or anything else in the operating budget. The bottom line is, the city is going to raise you taxes the amount allowed by the levy limit.

So your argument is moot. All the complaining about city employees, your charge that employees' demands are outrageous and unfair, your statement that public unions are coercive, and on and on, really is not pertinent.

It doesn't matter how contracts are settled, whether or not they go to arbitration, or even if the city would decide to pay 100% of benefits of city employees. THE TAX LEVY IS GOING TO INCREASE ABOUT 2%.

Which really paints a fair picture of you. You're not concerned about the fiscal implications on city taxpayers. The fact is, there aren't any. You're jeasous, or mad, or frustrated, that hard working city employees have a benefits package better than yours, and you complain about it.

That's what this is all really about. If you don't like the taxes you have to pay, you can either tell your elected officials some services should be cut, or move to the Town of Algoma or another area code.

By Anonymous, at October 04, 2007 9:45 PM
Bryan - It appears as though your blog has been hijacked. What does Oshkosh city employee bashing have to do with a new area code?

By Anonymous, at October 05, 2007 1:45 AM
A few excellent commentaries in the paper today apply to both the way our city administration has run Oshkosh, which may also apply to the way that city labor approaches the taxpayers as an endless source of funding.

-Allegations of cronyism between city departments
-Need for an active Mayor who would have direct power to control department heads.
-The current power establishment in our city fervently is opposed to any system which would topple their authority.
-What we need is a thorough house cleaning and a visionary leader.
-Our current form of government seems to be the less people know the better off they are.
-Deals are made under the table and behind closed doors.
-It’s time of an Oshkosh Extreme Make Over.

People in Oshkosh are upset. The most recent news of questionable activities of our City Attorney have done nothing but strengthen the opinion that we need a very thorough and complete evaluation of all city employees. We’ve started in the right direction by “retiring” our City Manager, now we need to move to various department heads. The end result should be a leaner, more responsive and controlled employee base.

Our new City Manager must act as a leader and advocate of those he serves, the taxpayers. His first priority is not to be “best buddies” with the city employees he supervises. A professional skilled Manager will know the difference between business and friendship.

By Anonymous, at October 05, 2007 6:57 AM
"Union Guy" here...

There are several references regarding city employees being afraid, that citizens are angry, and so on. If not, Cut and Paste contends, why would some continue to refute the arguments he pastes from blog sites a year old?

This is why. City employees bargained contracts over the years in good faith. It's not that they're scared things are going to be taken away. They are angry that a misinformed, angry, jealous person like Cut and Paste spreads lies about their employment and their contracts. He tries to paint the picture that they do nothing other than rape the city for inflated wages and improper benefits.

What he refuses to acknowledge (he really can't be so stupid not to understand this) is that the contracts were bargained in good faith. Wage increases were passed up to maintain current benefits some years ago. Too bad, he says. He doesn't like the econimic climate now, and so what happened in the past doesn't matter anymore. Your insurance is too good. It doesn't matter what happened at the bargaining table in years past. Give it up, for the betterment of the taxpayers.

I don't buy it. Ned J Kline had a great line in his Letter to the Editor today:

"I have long believed that Oshkosh is more concerned with protecting low-paying status quo jobs than promoting and retaining skilled, new higher-paying positions."

Why should city of Oshkosh employees suffer because people like Cut and Paste don't have the educational background, job experience or job responsibility to earn what city employees earn? He suggests because he provides substandard labor that city employees should be paid less. He can do nothing more than flip burgers, and because he refuses to better himself, he can't afford to pay the taxes required to maintain city services.

If you don't like it, Cut and Paste, cut my job. If you're not willing to cut positions and services in the city, find something else to complain about.

QUID PRO QUO

By Anonymous, at October 05, 2007 7:23 AM
Cut and Paste said (again):

"Our new City Manager must act as a leader and advocate of those he serves, the taxpayers. His first priority is not to be “best buddies” with the city employees he supervises. A professional skilled Manager will know the difference between business and friendship."

The city manager has little to do when bargaining contracts with city employees. The personnel dept uses direction from the city council to bargain different aspects of contracts for city workers. And if either side feels the other is not offering a fair package, either can file for arbitration. A 'hard line' by the city manager Cut and Paste wants to put up on a pedestal really doesn't mean anything. The city or the unions can bypass that hard line with arbitration if they feel the city manager is being impractical.

But Cut and Paste doesn't want you to know that.

Cut and Paste...one question for you. How come, as there are 8 different bargaining units within the city, do you ONLY cut and paste wage and benefits from one union over and over? We don't hear anything from the other bargaining units. Why not?

By Anonymous, at October 05, 2007 7:39 AM
Good question union guy; how come some bargaining units accepted the cities offer and others didn’t?

Doesn’t seem like a “united front”?

Looks like the cops are happy and others want more.

Funny because I'd say the cops are the LAST area I'd want jobs cut and they're happy with the offer. Other areas that are prime for job cuts want even more.

By Anonymous, at October 05, 2007 10:30 AM
LOL,
I'm happy to see that you own a dictionary and have endless time to find typos in e-mails. I'm still wondering why you don't use you free time to find a decent job rather than wasting it on whining and laughing. I'll give you some help with your search. Oshkosh is always near the bottom in municipal tax rates among all Wisconsin's 190 cities. Your job search for an ideal taxing community will take you to "Another Area Code" like Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana or some rural area in this state. Don't let the door hit you in the but when you leave.

By Anonymous, at October 05, 2007 11:06 AM
7:23 said-

“If you don’t like it, Cut and Paste, cut my job. If you’re not willing to cut positions and services in the city, find something else to complain about”.

Thanks for that offer union guy!

Seems you may not be needed as you are on the blog sites when you’re likely at work and likely on the city payroll. So what department do you work in? Looks like some “Lean” concepts could be applied in your area!

I think there are several areas where service could be cut and adjusted. We have 680 employees in our city. I find it hard to believe we couldn’t make a 2% overall job reduction and not feel any influence at all from a service standpoint. 2% overall would be 14 jobs. 14 jobs at an average of $50,000.00 per year wages and benefits is $700,000.00. That is no small change!

If you take an average city employee making $19.00 per hour x 2,080 hours each years = $39,520.00 + about $10,000.00 in healthcare benefits = $49,520.00. There are more than just healthcare benefits, but I haven’t even listed those.
I’d say a 2% job reduction goal is certainly achievable.

Now where do we get the 14 jobs?

Let’s look at the Parks Department, Forestry, Central Garage, City Hall, Sanitation,Street Department. We could take a hard look at the Inspections Department as they have been under fire anyway due to poor customer service. Then there’s the Transit Department, perhaps alter and consolidate bus routes.
Public Works is also a place to investigate.

Any good Manager could reduce a 680 employee staff by 2%.

By Anonymous, at October 05, 2007 11:41 AM
Cut & Paste Guy,
Thanks for the compliment but I don't work for the city and I'm not a union member. I wouldn't want to do most of the work that the city requires or take a cut in my pay and benefits either. However, I do pay taxes and want city employees who are rewarded fairly for the value they deliver. I don't even mind helping a whining, slow-eyed slacker like you. So here is another prospective city job you might qualify for in this "Area Code."

PART-TIME RECEPTIONIST

Department: Community Development
Location: Oshkosh Seniors Center
Reports to: Senior Center Supervisor
Date: April 2007
POSITION SUMMARY
Responsible for the Information Desk at the Oshkosh Seniors Center.
ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The following duties are normal for this position. These are not to be construed as
exclusive or all-inclusive. Work decisions are made in accordance with established
precedents and departmental policies.
• Greet all visitors and provide customer service to Seniors Center participants.
• Answer all incoming calls, transfer staff calls as necessary, provide information on
Center’s services and programs, and take phone messages in phone message book
and deliver to staff mailboxes. Take complaints and refer to appropriate staff
members.
• Hand out class lists and keep receptionist's communication book updated.
• Sign-up participants for classes and activities, verify participant’s passes and collect
fees accordingly
• Register Fox Fitness Center participants and keep attendance form updated and
current.
• Enter monies collected on the Daily Revenue log, reconcile Daily Revenue log and
return with money to Main Facility following shift.
• Provide mail delivery between two buildings
• Make photocopies upon request
• Assist staff with phone calling lists for various activities and/or projects.
• Assist staff with clerical duties.
• Give tours of the Seniors Center.
• Keep office supplies in stock at the Seniors Center.
• Complete and compile visitor attendance form
• Oversee the Sawmill Café, Fox Fitness Center, Dorothy Newcomer Office Suite, and
Annex Hall, which include keeping cups, towels, and supplies available for
participant’s usage, and maintaining a clean and inviting atmosphere.
• Other duties may be required and assigned.

By Anonymous, at October 05, 2007 1:01 PM
I thought I would highlight the important differences between unions in the public sector versus unions the private sector.

In the private sector consumers have choices, and they can avoid high prices or poor service by patronizing other businesses.

This competition forces private labor unions to be reasonable in their demands or face the risk of losing employment for their members by bankrupting the business.

However, unlike in the private sector, citizens cannot easily choose a better provider of government services.

With government services there isn't competition, versus the private sector where the consumer has other options.

If a government negotiates costly and inefficient union contracts with its employees; citizens and taxpayers have no alternatives.

Citizens are forced to either continue to pay higher taxes or else spend their time, energy, and money lobbying their elected officials for change.

Unlike in the private sector, citizens cannot easily choose a better provider of government services. That is the central reason why public sector unions experience little external pressure to moderate their demands.

The near monopoly over services is the reason why salaries and benefits for government employees are routinely higher than salaries and benefits for private-sector employees. And don't forget, it is not only the salary component; it is also the extraordinary benefits, such as fewer hours of work, generous vacations, flexible work weeks, and other benefits that quite frankly most private sector employees could only dream of.

Considering the near monopoly of services the government provides, I wonder if collective bargaining continues to be an appropriate method for setting wages and benefits in the public sector?

By Anonymous, at October 05, 2007 4:41 PM
I see Cut and Paste Dude is still singing the same old tune. How boring, and what a loser he must feel like to keep shouting from rootops and have no one listening other than his opponents. No one he's angry and feels like a loser. At least he finally concedes there is a difference between public and private sector.

By Anonymous, at October 05, 2007 6:08 PM
Ned, why don't you just post under your real name? Your style of writing is the same in the Northwestern as it is here. When you write a letter to the Northwestern you tone it down quite a bit though. Come on, just use your name here as well.

By Anonymous, at October 05, 2007 6:08 PM
Last December, Frank Tower said...

"The city is in the service business, so labor will always be a majority of the operating budget. Because of this all city employees (represented or otherwise) need to understand the realities of the private sector and what's happening with increasing costs (especially health care). We cannot afford to keep increasing taxes.

The recently approved contract with the police union is a step in the right direction (a step, not the end). I'm anxious to see how the other contracts come out."

Key phrases in Frank’s comments:
1)"...all city employees (represented or otherwise) need to understand the realities of the private sector and what's happening with increasing costs (especially health care)."

Healthcare costs as a component of the entire labor compensation package is a concern for our elected officials. These costs need to be controlled better than they have been in the past.

2)"the recently approved contract with the police union is a step in the right direction (a step, not the end)."

A step, not an end. More needs to be done to share costs. Taxpayers are unwilling and unable to absorb more costs. The approved contract is a consensus, but more compromise will need to occur in future negotiations.

Frank has turned out to be an outstanding Mayor. He along with several others on the council truly represents the average Oshkosh resident and fights for the taxpayer.

By Anonymous, at October 05, 2007 9:39 PM
You can demand compromise, Cut and Paste, and we can demand arbitration.

QUID PRO QUO

By Anonymous, at October 05, 2007 10:26 PM

Bain-Blog

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Another Area Code

126 Comments:

About

About Me

Previous

Links