minhhs 02-22-21 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mark Tiberia Wilbert Rd,Ward 3 Argument for Rejecting Health & Human Services Ordinance HHS 01/19/21 To: John Litten (Chair), and Members of the Health and Human Services Committee, City of Lakewood, OH After reading John Benson's article in the 01/28/21 Sun News "Mayor urges council to approve paid parental leave", I sent e-mails to John Litten,Thomas O'Malley, and Finance Committee Members Bullock and Neff on 01/29/21 expressing my deep concerns about the article and more importantly disapproval of Ordinance HHS 01/19/21 for paid parental leave, primarily on the grounds that it appears to be circumventing public sector collective bargaining, and Lakewood's budgeting process. Following a response from Mr. Bullock, I copied all 7 members of City Council with further notes, once again declaring my objection to The Mayor's "political theatrics" and questioning WHY a municipality would openly put forth an ordinance for health care benefits for union employees outside the normal collective bargaining process, which occurs during the contract renewal timeframe. Subsequent e-mail responses were received from both Council Members Neff and Kepple, with Ms. Neff stating that City Administration would have to weigh in how they plan to implement and fund. She further stated ," ...and your point about incentives should be addressed at the bargaining table is well taken, and I acknowledge this is the typical order of business which should be seriously taken into account". My recommendation to this Committee is at a minimum, a full evaluation and analysis into the four major points that I've outlined below: - Timing/Affected Parties - Pitfalls of Collective Bargaining in the Public Sector - Total Cost Impact and Budgeting Process - "Equity and Inclusion" Timing/Affected Parties As of 11/20/21 the City of Lakewood employed 401 full-time employees, with a 2021 budgeted level projected to increase to 410 full time employees. (Lakewood 2021 Budget pg.13 "Organization and Staffing Summary"). Furthermore, on pg.21 of the budget, according to the "City of Lakewood Financial Policies and Guidelines", "Expenditures are projected based on the following, but not limited to,the following factors:" • the terms of the City's eight collective bargaining unit contracts." This is further delineated on pg. 176 "Collective Bargaining Contractual Obligations" dimensioning,the 354 union members across the 8 bargaining units (representing 88%of the city's full-time employees),with police and fire unions representing 196 employees, and AFSCME's union representing 158 full-time employees. Of significant note is not only the number of full-time employees, but also that the contractual obligations as stated (Annual Wage Increases) run into the 2022 Calendar Year, which begs the overall question, and one of my main reasons for rejection of this ordinance-WHY is the Mayor publicly bringing this up NOW, and in this forum, when clearly the current union contracts exist into 2022? 1 do realize that approximately 47 full-time employees are currently NOT represented by unions, but my assumption is that health care benefits for non-union employees generally follow suit after union negotiated benefits and are