Laura Glesby photos
Top row, in favor of the contract: Philip Modeen, Raymond Jackson, Robert Mignosa; Middle row, in favor of the contract: Justin Augustine Sr., Charles Blango, Thomas White; Bottom row, against the contract: Helen Rosenberg, Michael Mahon.
An overdue labor agreement for one of the city’s largest unions was hailed by proponents for awarding substantial raises to most — and decried by some municipal employees who won’t get as much of a salary bump.
AFSCME Local 3144, a 400-member union of management and professional workers employed by the city, has reached a tentative agreement with the Elicker administration after three years without a contract.
City Director of Labor Relations Wendella Ault Battey and Acting Controller Michael Gormany presented the terms of that agreement to the Board of Alders Finance Committee on Wednesday evening during the committee’s latest meeting in the Aldermanic Chamber on the second floor of City Hall.
The committee did not vote on the agreement, instead choosing to expedite the process so that the full Board of Alders can vote the labor accord it at its next meeting in June.
If approved by alders, the six-year contract would apply retroactively from July 1, 2020 and extend through June 30, 2026.
The agreement would advance current employees’ positions on a ten-step salary scale for the first time in decades, raising salaries by about 30 percent for most members of the union.
Employees would move up a total of two steps over the contract’s six years within their designated salary ranges — with the exception of about 38 employees currently classified in step 9 (who would move just one step) and step 10 (who would remain in the top step.) Those 38 employees would receive a one-time $1,000 bonus upon the contract’s ratification.
On top of the step increases, all union members would receive retroactive and future cost-of-living increases cumulatively amounting to an 18 percent raise.
Labor Relations Director Wendella Ault Battey: “The negotiating team worked hard.”
The union covers employees from a wide range of departments. Here’s how the contract would affect salaries for a sample few jobs, on top of retroactive raises:
• An elderly services specialist currently making $47,122 would earn $61,798 by the end of the contract.
• A librarian currently making $51,648 would earn $67,944.
• An accountant currently making $70,996 would make $84,395; this top-step employee would not move up on the salary scale.
• An epidemiologist currently making $76,502 would earn $100,119.
• A chief structural engineer currently making $112,200 would earn $147,933.
The retroactive and general wage increases would cost the city about $18.4 million in total.
Other changes reached in the temporary agreement would restructure employees’ health insurance options to two offerings including a high-deductible plan; give the city the right to subcontract labor; and update library work hours to allow for library services on Sundays.
Regarding healthcare savings for the city, Gormany told alders, “We estimated the total cost savings will be between $50,000 and $150,000.”
Alder Evette Hamilton: How will subcontracting work?
The new contract would also remove the deputy chief administrative officer, deputy community services administrator, and deputy economic development administrator positions from the bargaining unit.
After the meeting, Battey explained that the deputies frequently fill in as supervisors of many city employees — which can complicate negotiations with a union that simultaneously represents them. For instance, when Chief Administrative Officer Regina Rush-Kittle filled in as an acting police chief for a handful of months, Battey said she was unable to consult with Deputy CAO Rebecca Bombero on reaching a contract, since Bombero is herself a union member.
The deputy of Public Safety Communications will also be removed from the union after the current occupant of that role leaves or retires. Battey explained to alders that the employee does not currently live in New Haven, and if removed from the union, he would have to move in order to meet a residency requirement. “We felt it was a little unfair to make an employee move” after working for the city for decades, Battey told alders.
Edgewood Alder Evette Hamilton asked Battey to elaborate on the agreement’s subcontracting provisions.
“Subcontracting generally occurs if we don’t have the labor force,” said Battey.
“Have you identified any positions that could go in that direction?” asked Hamilton.
Battey responded that Information/Technology (IT) work is likely to be subcontracted due to vacancies in the city’s IT department.
“Do [subcontracted positions] come with pay and benefits?” Hamilton asked.
“It depends on who you subcontract to,” Battey responded.
East Rock Alder Anna Festa asked about the margin by which union members ratified the temporary agreement.
“It was an overwhelming majority,” Battey said.
The contract was ratified by a vote of 196 to 40.
"A Job Posting Comes Up, The Application Goes In"
Seth Flynn and Patricia Solomon are among the 38 members to get lower raises, but took opposite sides.
Seth Flynn, a building plan examiner, was among three testifiers in person on Thursday to argue that the contract would be unfair to the 38 union members currently at steps 9 or 10 of their salary scales. Those members would see a raise of about 18 percent, as opposed to other members whose salaries would increase by about double that percentage.
In a separate interview with the Independent, Flynn — a step 10 employee — said he is actively applying to other positions that will pay him a higher salary. “Every single day, a job posting comes up, the application goes in,” he said. “Our position as building officials in the state of Connecticut right now is a sought after commodity, there are enough of us, a lot of towns are hiring, we have a lot of options.”
The current job market also means that in the building department, as with many other parts of city government, “we’re having trouble hiring qualified people because the salaries are so low,” Flynn said. Meanwhile, the need for building inspectors has increased; “New Haven is absolutely insane with the amount of construction going on.”
Dean Criscio, an auditor classified as Range 4 Step 10, submitted similar testimony against the contract to alders by email. He wrote that he was unable to attend Wednesday’s meeting because he is “an elderly caregiver to my mother who is widowed and I am the only one who cares for her. My current salary makes it difficult for me to hire a private duty aide.”
Criscio currently earns $59,465. By Fiscal Year 2024 – 2025 (FY25), if the contract is ratified, he will make $70,644.
In an interview, Battey pushed back against concerns that those in steps 9 and 10 would not get the same raises as other union members. “When you’re placed at the top step, you’re making more than everyone else” in your salary scale, Battey said. “You can’t do individual bargaining.”
Battey added, “the negotiating team worked hard,” sometimes logging 15-hour days, to reach the contract.
"The Best Contract I Have Ever Seen."
Seven union members, meanwhile, testified in favor of the proposed contract on Thursday.
Patricia Solomon, a contract analyst with the city, noted, “I am one of the 38” who are unable to move up two steps. She urged the alders to approve the contract anyway.
“This is the best contract I have ever seen,” she said. “This is the first time” in over 30 years “that we have been given a step increase.” Solomon argued that the contract is “for the greater good,” even if not everyone receives the same pay raise.
Philip Modeen, a children’s librarian at the Stetson library branch, said the raise “allows us to stay in the city” and “affords us to take care of ourselves.”
The committee alders decided to take no action on the contract so that it could be discharged to the full Board of Alders, accelerating the approval process to the alders’ June meeting.
Read a summary of changes in the tentative agreement here.
Most of NHV's workforce is private market and experienced profoundly negative affects during Covid (workforce and income reduction, overburdens on stressed professions namely medical). To my knowledge the city neither reduced it's workforce nor reduced compensation so it would be interesting for readers to be informed about why these salary increases are in the best interests of taxpayers, and what the impact will be upon future budgets? In other words, can we afford this?