A New Week, A New Contract Post
Open post for Contract debate.
Labels: contract stuff
posted by SCC at 12:01 AM
Sunday, September 21, 2014
Contributors
Previous Posts
- Airport Again?
- Another Great Reason to Shoot Someone
- We Got Nothing
- Justice of a Sort
- Nice to be Connected
- You Have a Funny Story?
- Second Arrest in Retiree Slaying
- Open Post for Contract Stuff
- Traveling Bank Robber
- Most Dangerous
223 Comments:
Vote no. Take a stand against Rahm.
I got my ballot already. Voted yes
I'm voting yes in this contract. I like the part about the $$$$. I stopped reading it after i found out we re getting retro. I'm rich now.
MG
Yes is my vote
A lot has been said from us members in the past few weeks. Any word from Dean, McDonagh or Casino on where they will go back to the table? Or is more money going to be spent on sending ballots and possibly arbitration? Probably not, they are pushing so hard for this to get done. As if Rahm said, "Get it done, or else!"
The worst part about this contract is giving up the duty availability for the new guys. Not only does it screw them but it further erodes our PENSION. Duty availability is pensionable income and the city is gonna save millions from that. For what a piddly retro check. Think longterm for once FOP. Dean u really screwed this one up.
19 yr veteran. I have worked in good and bad neighborhoods all over the west and north sides of the city.Listen carefully. We got a 2% raise when the economy was at the worst time since the great depression. We will get a better raise through arbitration and not have to give up things we have fought hard for throughout the years. Economy is better then last contract and neighboring police departments in the burbs and major cities are settling contracts for more and do not have to live in those cities. Vote NO! Have a voice and let Rahm here it. Vote NO!!
In the previous thread someone wrote about the elected guys in FOP sleep with city hall to get this contract. Last i checked, Harvey, Carter and McDounagh weren't elected but they are negotiation our future.
Speaking of Carter, anyone in 018 know the status of settlements he took upon himself to sign off on...by mistake?
Lastly, Aguilar and Shields and attorney Joe Burns refused to give anything up to the city, that is why it went so long without a product. They said this at the unit rep meeting and at the unit rep Christmas party.
Still no. I just don't trust these guys. This was too fast and furious for my liking. And I thought Tom Mcdonagh ran for FOP president and lost. How is he working as a field rep full time? These guys are slicker than Chicago aldermen!
The tiered medical has really got me spooked. Can someone break that down for me? Pretend I'm 5 years old when you do it too...
Rahm is not a "giver" folks... It's not what he be about... So why is he giving us that first year retro? Why isn't he saving the city all that money for people who "need" it... If everyone hates the police out there, why would he do us a solid and anger all those haters? He's pushing something through and misdirecting us with the retro... Heads up!
p.s. You get your finger cut off for stealing, not giving!
So can someone enlighten me, because everyone I have spoken too had no idea about this. It turns out some PPO's have been given years (7+ years) of seniority based on them being police explorers/cadets. Are you telling me these people will collect on our pension after paying into it at the police cadet pay scale? (Whatever that is). That's not the only issue. Turns out only SOME cadets were given seniority. (I.e. Sons of supervisors). Look for yourself, there are plenty. The one I know for sure is a PPO with a starting date of 01 APR 13 and look at his seniority date. Also coincidence that this same PPO is working in the same district as his clouted supervisor father? Something stinks around here.
So let me ask a question regarding the vague language the FOP and city want in the contract regarding time due.
Here's the scenario:
I put in a request to use time due and am denied three days before the actual date to allow me the opportunity to use the duty exchange program. After searching around, I come to the realization that nobody wants to give up their Saturday night in July for the weekday I can offer them.
Now that the city and union have agreed on whatever arbitrary number of people that can be given off, what is my recourse after being denied and unable to find a duty exchange partner? Has the union agreed to language that has made grieving denied time due impossible, or can we still grieve the denial?
I get a real bad feeling that they're selling us down the river on this issue.
We originally told by our unit rep that ballots were to be mailed last Friday. So are they just trying to ride out this storm of discontent and hope that by delaying the vote coppers will just end up annoyed with the entire process and either not vote, or vote yes to get the process over with? Anyone know when they're going to be mailed?
Furlough by watch is crazy.
Only 7% per segment.
Do the math.
VOTE NO!!
Crime is down-best stats in 50 fucking years, Chgo unemployment is doing better, TIFF districts are awesome they have $$billions$$, DePaul gets a 55 million stadium.
New maggie park, 50 million.
Free lunch for all school kids.
And WE FUCKING GET 11%...!!! Over 5 years!!
What the FUCK!
VOTE THIS SHIT DOWN!!!!!!!!!!!
Crime is down by 1000% per rahm and mcShits.
New PArks and Stadiums.
Businesses get tax breaks and TIFFS...MILLIONS$$$$$$
CPD, oh yeah, we get 11% over 5 years.
-tuition.
-Duty availability.
-new cars, patrol won't see them.
-picks on hospitals.
-one year retro on O.T.
<<<<<<<<<< VOTE NO >>>>>>>>>>>>
<<<<<<<<<< VOTE NO >>>>>>>>>>>>
<<<<<<<<<< VOTE NO >>>>>>>>>>>>
The contract is not bad, or great. The contract is fair. The FOP gave, and it got. The concept is called, "Getting to Yes." While the contract is not great, the proposed collective bargaining agreement (cba) gives members benefits which they did not have previously. The FOP entered negotiations during the present administration behind a table of 8 balls. The current administration was able to clear the table.
Among the issues the FOP was able to resolve are: retro for 2012 - 2013, no wellness plan, health care for potential retirees 55 - 60 for them and their eligible dependents for free til 2017. The tuition issue only impacts officers, who enter graduate programs post Sept. 1, 2016. Officers who enter graduate programs before Sept. 1, 2016 are grandfathered into the current program. These are just of a few examples, where the CBA proposal appears balanced.
Please vote on the CBA proposal based on what is best for you, your family and the FOP as a whole. Thanks. Please stay well!!!
I am saying YES to my $5,000 retro check
This Two Tier Health insurance is no good. It will cost us way more each year in health insurance costs. Keep the retro for that first year, don't give my health insurance away. Voting No!
Crime is down. Before you give me another bulls**t ribbon give me a decent contract. Vote NO!
Send Rahm a political message and VOTE NO on this contract proposal. Let's face it: most of us will not vote for his reelection. Perhaps a stinging defeat on his contract will convince more people that he is inept, vindictive and needs to be replaced in February. Don't do this little weasel any favors, because he won't do one for you. VOTE NO. Let him come back to the bargaining table and restore our benefits. He is in deep trouble with the voters and the longer this lingers, the worse it makes him look.
For those of you that have decided that retro pay is the cat's meow..... and will vote yes to the contract, at least spend it in the burbs so the city does not benefit in taxes for your purchases.
The worst part about this contract is giving up the duty availability for the new guys. Not only does it screw them but it further erodes our PENSION. Duty availability is pensionable income and the city is gonna save millions from that. For what a piddly retro check. Think longterm for once FOP. Dean u really screwed this one up.
9/21/2014 12:25:00 AM
If we were hiring 10's of thousands...yes, but 4 grand for 300 guys for a few years will not hurt our pension...if you believe that I have a bridge to sell you
This Two Tier Health insurance is no good. It will cost us way more each year in health insurance costs. Keep the retro for that first year, don't give my health insurance away. Voting No!
False
I don't like the contract. We are getting a slightly better contract than the firemen and SGTS. If it goes to arbitration we will lose more. The aribatrator is not our friend.
22 year vet
"Anonymous" at 12:02, 12:08 and 12:09 AM
Within a mere 7 minutes, it's rather obvious that you are but one poster who has his tongue deeply lodged in Emanuel's colon.
VOTE "NO"!
For openers, new squad cars are the City's problem and has absolutely no leverage in FOP's "negotiations". If they want us to use bicycles or walk in response to assignments, so be it.
Also if politicians and enriched clout babies live near the Loop, they may use four excellent hospitals--Northwestern Memorial,
Rush, University of Chicago and Illinois Masonic.
Not us though. No! We'd have to pay the maximum monthly premium or go to St. Roger or Mt. Sinai just like ObamaCare parasites.
No one ever went broke underestimating the stupidity of the American people (including gullible CPD "serfs").
re-posted as still no solid answer given.
Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
Pensions are protected by Illinois constitution UNLESS you make changes via collective bargaining. Why would we ever put anything regarding pensions into collective bargaining??? Do you realize ANY pension changes are designed to save the city money, and where the hell do you think that savings comes from? Your family's pocket!
9/19/2014 10:51:00 PM
Can someone articulately and in a non-insulting manner explain how the proposed pension language in the contract would change this? From what I gather, it only gives us the right to renegotiate another raise from the city if our contributions go up (which we would most likely lose in arbitration anyway). It doesn’t change the pension at all so how does that open up the door? If they were talking about changing the actual pension then it definitely opens that door, but it doesn’t. Not knowing a lot about contract law, I am very hesitant about this. Would a court later down the line view this as a change because any salary increase negotiated because of this would in fact be pensionable? And if so, would this be the only contestable part since it is the only clause mentioning a pension in the contract or can they start picking apart other parts? Too many unknowns and a lot of speculation being given. Solid clarification is definitely needed as this could be a huge mistake.
(Maybe even worthy of its own thread)..
9/20/2014 01:49:00 PM
vote YES.
Learn how compounding interest works:
http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/my-money/2010/07/21/how-compound-interest-really-works
I am voting NO. The tier heath care is very bad. If you watch the FOP video on the subject they are giving the Obamacare speech. If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor. Sure you can al long you don't mind paying 75%/25% and higher deductibles!
Regarding pension question. It's the same deal as bosses. You could be Mike Cronin. Spent his entire career as a Gang specialist, most of which was not D2a pay, but patrolman pay. Then his last 4 years are deputy chief and he retires at that salary. Yet the majority of his 30 plus year career he only paid into the pension.
Nothing changes. Except you pay you co-insurance based off of the WHOLESALE PRICE of the procedure, currently your pay your co--insurance based on the RETAIL price of the procedure.
NOW:
COST: $1000 RETAIL /CO pay 10% or $100
NEW: MRI $1000 Retail Less reduction $400.00 25% of reduced price Co/Pay 100.00
Nothing changes, The most that you can pay is $3000.00 out of pocket, Thats what you pay now..
According to a unit rep, the city is trying to add doctors and hospitals to the tier one program. They expect to have a lot more in the plan by 2017. I will believe it when I see it.
I am still undecided but will probably vote yes to stay away from the wellness plan. Real pain in the ass. If you don't comply they will tag you. More $$$ back to the city.
I cant believe the naivety of some cops. Benn told us last time that the economy was bad and we don't deserve a better raise was pure BS. Benn was ordered by Daley to stick it to us. Benn had to come up with some BS to sell it. Don't expect to use the reverse of their past corrupted logic to justify a bigger raise today.
Vote HELL NO!
**** Pension Legislation Reopener: If, during the term of the Agreement, Illinois law requires officers to increase their contributions to the Policemen’s Annuity and Benefit Fund, then the Lodge can reopen the Agreement and renegotiate base salary, percentage increases, and duty availability pay. If the parties cannot reach an agreement within 90 days, then the dispute goes to interest arbitration.
This is directly from section 2d of our tentative agreement. I mentioned this wording to some fellow coworkers and they looked surprise saying, "where does the contract say anything about our pension."
****Please look past the retro money!!!*** I don't think think we should allow the city to start having a say regarding our pension. When we give them the power to demand an increase in our contributions which will start at 2%, then 4%, 6% and so on we will have only ourselves to thank. Take the pension wording out of this contract!!!!!
Voting yes we will not get better!
I am saying YES to my $5,000 retro check
And how much will you see after taxes you loser. Vote NO.
Furlough by watch is crazy.
Only 7% per segment.
Do the math.
VOTE NO!!
****************
Where have you been? It's been that way since my great grand father was on the job in the 50's. You City-Wide guys are really sounding foolish now.
To you goofs who are positioning yourselves already for the next election - would you really want to screw over everyone to defeat this contract? Oh that's right you already did in order to remove Shields by not sending in the letter yourselves.
To all of the fence sitters out there vote YES.
Do you want to lose little or lose big?
Voting no because it's insulting
The two tiered healthcare will cost most officers a 25% premium for services. The cheaper tiered hospitals and doctors will be at crappy hospitals.
Why are we stealing 42 months of Duty Availability from the new guy and redistributing it as a 2% retro check for 2012. We are devouring our young.. "I got mines attitude"
Then we are inviting Pension Language into our contract! Really. Knowing the Mayor is going to try and pull an end around, do we really need to help him. totally stupid.
11% is the minimum an arbitrator would give us. No ifs, ands, or buts.
Furlo by watch is a sell out on seniority rights. Don't think about today...think about your future. The smoke and mirrors of this is that you will somehow get a better furlo...90% will NOT!
Car talk in the contract is window dressing. All nonsense. Amateurish.
Why is their no provision for healthcare for those PO's that are fully maxed yet are not 55 years old?
Why no concise language regarding fair promotions?
Why no sell back hours like the Sgts?
Why no language regarding staffing levels?
Just trinkets and boogeyman scenarios.
Stop being a pussy, get your balls out of Rahm's purse, and vote NO...because that is the right thing to do.
Vote No!
Anonymous Anonymous said...
This Two Tier Health insurance is no good. It will cost us way more each year in health insurance costs. Keep the retro for that first year, don't give my health insurance away. Voting No!
9/21/2014 05:02:00 AM
Can you explain how it will cost more if my maximum out of pocket is the same? Obviously you know something I don't because I'm still paying the same
So can someone enlighten me, because everyone I have spoken too had no idea about this. It turns out some PPO's have been given years (7+ years) of seniority based on them being police explorers/cadets. Are you telling me these people will collect on our pension after paying into it at the police cadet pay scale? (Whatever that is). That's not the only issue. Turns out only SOME cadets were given seniority. (I.e. Sons of supervisors). Look for yourself, there are plenty. The one I know for sure is a PPO with a starting date of 01 APR 13 and look at his seniority date. Also coincidence that this same PPO is working in the same district as his clouted supervisor father? Something stinks around here.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Let me guess, ZN from 010? What else would you expect. Such a nerd too. His merit father was never the police. Just real clouted. I'm sure that lil geek (and I say that because he's the size of a petit school girl) will be on a tact team soon. Watching them walk around the station like they are the "cool guys" makes me ill.
Anonymous said...
This Two Tier Health insurance is no good. It will cost us way more each year in health insurance costs. Keep the retro for that first year, don't give my health insurance away. Voting No!
9/21/2014 05:02:00 AM
Please tell me how "It will cost us way more each year in health insurance costs" as you claim. You made a claim, explain and prove your claim.
Truth is, individual yearly out of pocket and family yearly out of pocket amount STAYS THE SAME!
Es verdad. Doesn't change. How does that translate to "increased costs" as you claim?
Read the summary and educate yourself at least.
Click below:
Click for Summary of tentative agreement
Why so fast? Why are we holding Mayor Child Safety Seat's hand as we run to the agreement finish line. Holding 4.5 fingers freakz me out.....can't get a grip...and for good reason, he is trying to slip his hand out once past the line. I do not believe that an arbitrator can force us into the wellness program,..too many attached issues. Another thing Dean did was brag about reviewing other major city's police contracts ......, well what about Boston.... you brought their contract about ten times and never mentioned that they just received a twenty -five percent raise over five years Deano.....WTF..25%...WTF who did their negotiating.........it wasn't Deano and and the lost boys. Keep your B.S. little retro and negotiate for more money than. teachers......we are the first responders and we deserve it. All financial measure are up and crime is down. Dean is running to the press to print ballots before we can digest all of the information....why are we voting to accept health costs that NO ONE CAN EXPLAIN. Data from other hospitals and plans are nowhere in writing for any of us to review and compare and Dean says trust us.....this contract is so good that the sgts, lts and capts are so pissed because our contract is way
....................better than theirs. B .S. they........ have.......... the me too. ..... ..... claus and we don't.
Vote no and we are definitely going into the wellness program. Not a great contract, but not horrible.
Your an idiot to vote no because Rahm likes it. Who cares about Rahm. It's business.
Vote no. For us turning down the contract is the symbolic equivalent of a strike. Are you happy the way things are? Do you think this contract addresses our real problems?
The FOP leadership ought to be embarrassed for endorsing anything that has language in it about vehicles. Setting a terrible precedent.
If you don't have rocks in your head, you'd know tuition reimbursement is far more valuable than the retro pay.
11% over 5 years will not even come close to covering the 15-18% inflation during that period. The mayor and city council are raising minimum wage for this reason by their own claims.
Don't be a domestic violence victim. Know your worth.
FOP gained nothing in this contracf and gave up concessions everywhere. This offer is garbage, you will get the same the sergeants got in arbitration without giving up anything. You are fools if this passes.
Rahm and The City doesn't do charity and goodwill work for the taxpayer. Understand his socialist ideas. In the long run the Medical benefit proposed in the Contract is going to be more costly, due for the most part of the Affordable Healthcare Act. As millions drop this mandated coverage, the government has to collect (its really not a tax, trust me) from the people who can afford to pay the high premiums.
ObamaCare® is a disaster and Rahms loyalty to the self anointed messiah, insurance costs must rise and essentially wipe middle class out.
How in the frig can you not vote these tyrant idiots out.
I'm voting NO to the Contract and NO Rahm 2015.
Anonymous said...
Furlough by watch is crazy.
Only 7% per segment.
Do the math.
VOTE NO!!
---
7% per segment is exactly the same percentage per segment that we have now and have had for a long time. Some segments in the winter are greater, nothing changes there. Do the math.
Voting No!
Why so quick Dean? Why cant you take more time to negotiate this. You are helping him in his campaign ......your screwing us with this. Stop. Read. Investigate the info. Check what you are agreeing to. Dean is trying to get the yes vote by a certain date for Rhammy. Postpone the vote to learn all the facts. This contract negotiating is like a bullet.....speed kills. Stop ask questions....compare to other contracts. Teachers..... Boston P.D.. N.Y.P.D......LAPD... The economy is in a much better place then we were four years ago. Dean is about making his bones with Rham not protecting us as Provence by printing ballots before addressing the body of this non union barganng unit. Why? What was he promised if he returned a yes vote by a specified date? Slow your roll. Ask questions about this two tier health program. Why so small of a raise. Lewis has just bragged she got more of a raise than the po.po...she is right. Dean is slighting us for politics.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
The tiered medical has really got me spooked. Can someone break that down for me? Pretend I'm 5 years old when you do it too...
9/21/2014 12:43:00 AM
The top tiered hospitals will cost a bit more per visit but overall will cost no more in yearly out of pocket. You really only notice this increase if you don't get near the yearly max out of pocket. Then you will see an increase PER VISIT. It goes from 10% your cost now to 25% cost per visit in the future. Until the yearly out of pocket max is reached. Then nothing, like now.
There is another thing in there which will take much of the sting out of that one. The charges on your medical bill will be taking advantage of the discount the City receives for volume billing. Presently the City gets the discount on the bill. The City pays 90% of a discounted amount. You pay 10% of a non-discounted amount. This has been going on since approx. 1993 when the City went to the PPO plan.
The change is that ALL members will now get that discount along with the City. This is called "Subscriber Share."
Here is the wordage from the summary:
"* “Subscriber share” means that discounts that Blue Cross Blue Shield obtains from its
contracted providers are shared between the plan sponsor and the covered member (the Subscriber). When claims are adjusted, the amount of any estimated discount is subtracted from the allowable amount before the plan of benefits is applied."
Another slight change pertains to complex procedures such as transplants. The City wants you to have those complex procedures at hospitals and medical centers that do a lot of them, hence the chance of a successful outcome is higher. These hospitals and medical centers are called “Center of Distinction.”
Anonymous said...
The worst part about this contract is giving up the duty availability for the new guys. Not only does it screw them but it further erodes our PENSION. Duty availability is pensionable income and the city is gonna save millions from that. For what a piddly retro check. Think longterm for once FOP. Dean u really screwed this one up.
9/21/2014 12:25:00 AM
Since this pertains to new people the cost to your pension will be nill. The pension is calculated on the highest 4 consecutive years out of your last 10 on the job. What you got in duty availability in year 3 through 5 never factors in the pension calculation.
Can someone, with knowledge who is willing to identify themselves, explain the tier health care part more extensively. Just to get the facts straight. No need to state if voting yes/no so the masses don't crucify you, just to get info out there.
when will I receive the mail to vote NO? I have yet to receive anything...
CFD gave up their Duty pay equivalent. The Arbitrator will consider that. Duty for new guys is gone. don't drown trying to save a dead man....
The tiered medical has really got me spooked. Can someone break that down for me? Pretend I'm 5 years old when you do it too...
-------------------
If you like your doctor and he is not in a tier 1 program you have to pay more to see him.
The majority of the teaching hospitals and Lutheran General are not tier 1.
Vote NO.
America
I am voting YES!
I wonder what you guys who are voting no would have been willing to GIVE UP to the city, and in exchange for what? That's what negotiation is all about, isn't it? I'm just curious. I am sure there are a number of ideas out there, good ones, from the membership, that should be heard. What is reasonable in your mind for us to give up?
I absolutely know, having been through this process many times since 1986, that the arbitrator is going to rely very largely on the agreements already ratified by the other bargaining entities, Captains, Lts, Sgts, CFD. If it is true, and I believe it is, he will not be able to do anything with July 1, 2012 though June 30, 2013. That is a 4% raise right of the top that will never be compounded and I am sure we were all taught the power of compounding in grammar school. Those of you who think for one minute that the arbitrator will entertain raises above the levels already established in the most recent contracts just don't get it. The best possible outcome from voting no on this proposal is getting the arbitrator to give us the exact same thing , minus the 4% for July 2012 through June 2013.
VOTE YES !
VOTE YES !
Anonymous said...
So can someone enlighten me, because everyone I have spoken too had no idea about this. It turns out some PPO's have been given years (7+ years) of seniority based on them being police explorers/cadets. Are you telling me these people will collect on our pension after paying into it at the police cadet pay scale? (Whatever that is). That's not the only issue. Turns out only SOME cadets were given seniority. (I.e. Sons of supervisors). Look for yourself, there are plenty. The one I know for sure is a PPO with a starting date of 01 APR 13 and look at his seniority date. Also coincidence that this same PPO is working in the same district as his clouted supervisor father? Something stinks around here.
9/21/2014 01:00:00 AM
Who? Post the name and dates. Not much anyone can do with the scant information you allude to. You didn't even provide a district. Do as much of your own detective work as possible please. Go to FOP, go to pension board, give it to our pension board rep. Don't simply post some anonymous crap on the blog and go away. That is like that guy who was posting about a PO who supposedly stole a bicycle in 019. He/she wouldn't do any more except post anonymous snippets of information. Useless.
We most likely won't do any better at arbitration. I'm going to vote yes for this contract. Anyone hoping an arbitrator will give us more than the 11% already offered is insane. It's just not going to happen that way. Negotiations are a give and take. We win some things, and we lose some things. Its a fair contract. The new hires lost duty availability. So what. Let them earn that back after the 42 months. Its not like they won't get it at all. Besides, if they aren't getting duty availability they can simply not be relied upon to be available for the city if the city needs them. Their uniforms are brand new, so its not like they need the allowance early on in their career anyway. Eventually they will get it, which will be good for them. Health care is a big issue. The retirees will still get their free insurance which is a good thing. They deserve that, and then some for protecting the city all these years. We can't always expect to receive everything we ask for. It balances itself out. An arbitrator will balance it out, and give us the same offer just like he did last time.
To clarify if the contract is voted down it goes to an arbitrator not back to the negotiation table. This is where the problems lies. The arbitrator is going to have to look at the Sgt', Lt's and CFD.
I just don't believe we can do better with those contracts already out there.
If we were first it would be a different story.
We discussed the tier medical plan at the FOP meeting. It may cost some members more it may cost some members less but from what I understood it can ultimately only cost the $3,000 out of pocket max either way. Plus the paycheck contributions. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I believe an arbitrator would s give us 11% and it would start 7/1/2013. Thereby excluding 2% 1/7/2012 and 2% 1/1/2013 compounded. That's a big deal. That's money in my pocket now and not in two or three years. And yes I'll take the retro for 2012 as well. Rham is offering this contract so we do vote yes before elections. I hate to give it to him but I'm voting yes for myself and my family. Those who want to vote no just to stick it to Rahm don't have there own best interest at heart. Everyone needs to make their own decision. That's why we vote.
I am wondering why they didn't try to get new helmets for the football team. It would matter as much to me as the chopper pay, new cars and "use" of time due they got for us in the contract.
19 yr veteran. I have worked in good and bad neighborhoods all over the west and north sides of the city.Listen carefully. We got a 2% raise when the economy was at the worst time since the great depression. We will get a better raise through arbitration and not have to give up things we have fought hard for throughout the years. Economy is better then last contract and neighboring police departments in the burbs and major cities are settling contracts for more and do not have to live in those cities. Vote NO! Have a voice and let Rahm here it. Vote NO!!
9/21/2014 12:28:00 AM
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$))))))$$$$$$$$
So wait... You're an expert on arbitration and contracts because you have worked in the worst of the west and north side neighborhoods?? One has nothing to do with the other.. Typical coppers, think they know it all because they work in the ghetto and just for the simple fact we are cops. Trust me super hero. We will lose money and MORE in arbitration. Rahm deep down wants us to vote no. If we vote yes he is the good guy who worked with public unions to give them a good and fair contract because he values the police even though we were not entitled to retro. If we vote no he gets to play the poor rahm card. He gave the greedy police officers a raise they were not entitled too because rahm thought they deserve it. The greedy police wated more money. He will bring up the numerous drops in the city credit rating etc. we will NOT get more money, the duty avail will still be cut for new hires but maybe only to 24 or 36 months and we will be put into the wellness program. We will once again be the greedy cops and rahm will get his Daley I told you so moment after arbitration... Too many know it alls on this job. I also love the majority of people on Facebook or I'm rollcall who say thing about how hard cops work or how dangerous our job is and how hard we work yada yada yada are some of the laziest dogs out there.. Some of them have not justified their existence to even be employed as a police officer in years.. They live playing the "cop card" to impress their friends and family about how they deserve the world and poor them. Please they get checks for doing zero all day! Rant off
I read the contract. I spoke with people who went to the meeting at Biaggios. I looked at he videos at he FOP website. My INFORMED decision is that under these circumstances this is the best contract we could get. I am voting YES!
Most of the "no" reasons on this blog are based on emotion: hate Ramn, hate the city, hate Dean etc. Dumb, asinine reasons to vote no. The rest are based on misunderstanding and misinformation.
Educate yourself!
An arbitrator will give us 95%+ of this contract. We will still get 11% raise but it will be back loaded. That means that everybody who retires before the back loaded raise (4%) will loose, it will not be part of their pension. The rest of us will loose the compounded 4% raise until 2017.
The tier hospitals. The out of pocket is getting lowered. The bills will be the lower negotiated rates that the city used to get refunds on. At the end it's probably a wash.
The pension language is mostly irrelevant. Our contact, any contract does not trump the il. pension laws. Period. However, if the state decides that they will raise our contribution to lets say 11% then we will have the opportunity to negotiate and add the 2% to our pay to compensate. It's a smart move.
The language about the new cars. Smart move that will benefit us in the future (years). It benefited CFD already.
The language about the helicopter pilots and the honor guard. Are they not police officers? Are they not union members? Are they not us? Does it matter if there are only 4 or 25 of them. How many before they matter? 30-40-100?
What's your number? Mine is 1.
Just vote already. Sick and tired of hearing about it.
The medical changes scare me. You can see the progression toward Obamacare. Not a fan.
What was gained in this contract?
A small raise.
What was lost?
A lot!
i enjoyed duty availability when i completed 12 months on the job-tradition! Don't sell me something after 42 months when new hires receive this duty availability-don't take away!
we give them the world and they want to take money away while we give them the world! No! money is what greases the machinery and makes our world go around!
Just vote NO!
For everyone who thinks we'll get more money going to an arbitrator we won't. The arbitrator will look at key points. The Lt.,Sgt., and are union negotiators agreed to the money. Every other contract where the union negotiators and the city agreed to the raise thats what the arbitrator gave us. The arbitrator is going to look at the money proposal and say it was good enough for the Lt.,Sgt. and FOP negotiators. Then that what were going to receive.
Tiny dancer is shady as they come,he says no retro then yes,maybe costing $65 million? I agree he's not a giver,something stinks here,yes I want retro but at what cost?
The duty availability issue stinks. It's unfair AND it hurts the pension fund. Rahm is trying to drive the fund into bankruptcy. Vote No!
I thought Mcdonagh was a SGT now?
Why is he still being mentioned in FOP lodge 7 business?
Sounds like the cash is so great at the hall that when people are promoted they don't want to pass up all the FOP goodies.
21sept14@0100. Cry me a river you rat beefer.
So can someone enlighten me, because everyone I have spoken too had no idea about this. It turns out some PPO's have been given years (7+ years) of seniority based on them being police explorers/cadets. Are you telling me these people will collect on our pension after paying into it at the police cadet pay scale? (Whatever that is). That's not the only issue. Turns out only SOME cadets were given seniority. (I.e. Sons of supervisors). Look for yourself, there are plenty. The one I know for sure is a PPO with a starting date of 01 APR 13 and look at his seniority date. Also coincidence that this same PPO is working in the same district as his clouted supervisor father? Something stinks around here.
Not sure about the 7 years. How could someone be a cadet for 7 years? Years ago they allowed the cadets to pay into the pension,but they could only by a few years,not 7.
One thing for sure,those that bought in were only allowed to do it for pension purposes,not for seniority on the job. Their seniority date never changed,nor should it have.
This 'proposal' doesn't address things that would be a positive for us. Fair and regular testing for promotions! Fair and regular transfer to districts (dare I say units)! A fair pay increase! Fair living options. That's right the mandatory residency is an obsolete model! Fair time due option! etc... It only proposes a crappier health plan, possibly mess with our pension contributions, cars, and less duty availability. It is a major step backwards and we would be suffering the results for many years to come! Vote a big unified NO!!!
Anonymous Anonymous said...
I am saying YES to my $5,000 retro check
9/21/2014 04:59:00 AM
...and screwing yourself and everyone else out by giving away existing benefits.
Vote No.
Do not help Rahm.
Rahm thinks your a pooch who will accept crappy healthcare.
He laughs at you every day.
Yes to the contract or they will put us in that wellness shit
Think long term young ones. Pension should never be in the contract or cars. Medical is going up that you pay monthly it a percentage of what you earn. I know you all think you'll not get retro for first year. SO WHAT Arbitrator may give you a better percentage the following years. The first year doesn't amount to squat. Think long and hard before you vote yes. If you need that check so bad you better rethink your finances.
Voting Yes. Whenever I read on this blog, someone suggesting vote no, they add some reason based on how much they hate the city, rahm, and the Supdt.
I have yet to hear a cogent reason to vote no.
I dont care about your college diploma, PPO's getting DAV,(we took care of them with the new hiring wages), or your opinion the the FOP is screwing you. "You...voted these people in!
Vote yes and truly become Rams bitch!
Don't whore yourself for the retro. Think big picture. Think long term. Don't give away seniority rights. Don't sacrifice new guys. Don't let the city divide and conquer. Don't let the fop intimidate you into voting for a bad deal. Do vote NO!
Yeah keep telling yourself Crime is down a whooping 10,000% (Sure I believe the mayor) as you are fighting a domestic offender or waiting for back-up.
As you're doing the above day dream as to how you are going to save and spend the whole 11% TOTAL 5 YEAR raise.
WAKE UP and VOTE NO!!
VOTE NO // VOTE NO // VOTE NO//
Next Contract prediction: Duty Availablity will be taken away from all of us. Opened the door by taking it away from the young Police Officers. Dean's Shit Contract has opened the door to a lot of bad things occurring from now on. Face the facts,boys & girls you've been betrayed by Dean Angelo and his crew at FOP.Vote No!
boston awarded 25.4% ARBITRATION AWARD BY ARBITRATOR!we need that arbitrator!
Why are people focused on the stupid retro check? We are going to pay way more down the road than that measly check people!!! Vote no!!! Don't be greedy!
The final word is this. This is Chicago do you really think you vote will matter? The mayor did not even have to live here and he was elected! Do you think anything will be legit? If you do I have a deal for you on ocean front property in Arizona.
deduct cost of tips to bourbon street waitresses and haave the city pay them directly
Rahm says, "vote YES chumps"!
YES YES YES, all the way to the bank.
I'm voting no. this contract needs more cowbell.
Dear SCC,
For all of my fellow Cpd colleagues I have been made aware of some unsettling news. There are currently PPO's being assigned to districts that are being granted seniority dates dating back to when they were in the Cadet program. This means that though they may have only 1 year on the streets the have upwards to 7+ years seniority. That means they'll jump ahead of approximately 80+ Officers per district for furlough picks, watch bids, time due, etc. This also means that they have move seniority than you when placing units bids. I've been informed that during their Cadet time they also were paying into our pension, meaning that time will allow them to retire earlier than you & I with less street time while collecting more money. All of this happened while they were part time employees, making a fraction of the hourly salary (approximately $9-10 an hr) of a new PO, had no arrest powers, no star, & didn't pass or take the state certification exam. Many PO's are unaware of this at the district as well as at the Academy. Remember that this program was obsolete for 30+ years until 2005 when Cline started it back up. Many of us would've liked to have participated in this program but couldn't and are now being passed up by those who did. Please call the FOP and make your voice heard.
If the only issue for you is retro then by all means vote yes, but this contract on a whole is terrible. Way to much was given away to get that first year of retro.
The List: Two tier health insurance. The amount that you pay if you want to go to Northwestern, Christ, Lutheran General or Palos will be 2 1/2 times what you pay now. If you went to the general meeting you would have heard Dean say we don't know what hospitals will be in the Tier one in 2017. How do you negotiate a contract not knowing that.
Furlough by watch- Total loss of seniority. Even if it benefits you now it won't in the future.
Opened the door for duty availability changes and tuition reimbursement changes for all of us in the future.
More IOD's will be denied because of the IME's. City has wanted this for years.
Not good to have pension language in our contract in any way, shape, or form.
We gave up way to much to get that first year of retro pay and Dean has continuously lied to us regarding the wellness benefit. He is telling everyone that if we go to arbitration we will be put in this wellness. This issue has been settled already and the arbitrator said the Fop could not be forced into City Health Plan (LMCC?)
Be informed!!!
Fyi....Tier 1 is cook county hospital tier 2 is the advicate hospitals
I was all set to vote yes...after going to the meeting I am voting no. Dean was not truthful with answers to questions and would not answer if by adding the pension subject to the contract would be a mediation or acceptance of a pension reduction. He also wouldn't answer why the cars where even mentioned. He said that's what the members wanted. Was asked if they can just put a n there the city intends biy take home care for everyone. He ignored that and refused comment. But that wording in there would hold the same weight as what he had put in there. Asked why he wanted to split the members from the new guys. Said he don't represnt them yet.
The worst part about this contract is giving up the duty availability for the new guys. Not only does it screw them but it further erodes our PENSION. Duty availability is pensionable income and the city is gonna save millions from that. For what a piddly retro check. Think longterm for once FOP. Dean u really screwed this one up.
I can't figure out how some coppers could be so misinformed. The loss of duty pay early in your time on the job has nothing to do with how much you collect in pension.
Your pension is based on the last 48 months of pay. The first 48 months of your pay have no effect whatsoever on how much your monthly pension check will be. Get informed.
I dont care if the retro is 50k. NO!
Crime is down by 1000% per rahm and mcShits.
New PArks and Stadiums.
Businesses get tax breaks and TIFFS...MILLIONS$$$$$$
CPD, oh yeah, we get 11% over 5 years.
-tuition.
-Duty availability.
-new cars, patrol won't see them.
-picks on hospitals.
-one year retro on O.T.
<<<<<<<<<< VOTE NO >>>>>>>>>>>>
<<<<<<<<<< VOTE NO >>>>>>>>>>>>
<<<<<<<<<< VOTE NO >>>>>>>>>>>>
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Wow... You could be one of the most clueless people I have ever heard from. You're saying no just to say you're voting no. Just so you can be the guy at roll call who argues everything. Let me guess, every roll call and everyday in the car your poor partner has to hear from you about how the city sucks, they are gonna screw you, rahm sucks, GMAC sucks, the schools sucks, residency sucks, the cars suck, the pdts suck, your lunch sucks, the contract sucks, you're gonna get jammed up for anything, and the most important is how u don't do nothin!!! Yeah, ok. Attend a meeting and learn about things before you speak just so u can hear yourself complain. Just FYI, I'm voting yes and so are slot of people. It will get approved and the yes vote will win
The pensionability of duty availability for Officers under 42 months is not an issue for us and does not erode our pension plan further because for the last 2 years all new recruits are only provided with the 457(k) Deferred Comp plan and not a pension.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
So can someone enlighten me, because everyone I have spoken too had no idea about this. It turns out some PPO's have been given years (7+ years) of seniority based on them being police explorers/cadets. Are you telling me these people will collect on our pension after paying into it at the police cadet pay scale? (Whatever that is). That's not the only issue. Turns out only SOME cadets were given seniority. (I.e. Sons of supervisors). Look for yourself, there are plenty. The one I know for sure is a PPO with a starting date of 01 APR 13 and look at his seniority date. Also coincidence that this same PPO is working in the same district as his clouted supervisor father? Something stinks around here.
9/21/2014 01:00:00 AM
It don't matter on the pension if this contract passes. The pension will be gone by the time he retires.
Voting NO.
Forget the retro for a minute - didn't have it, shouldn't have spent it. Did you notice how it's back loaded, too, to entice you? Would you feel so strongly about retro if it was .5 or 1% for previous years and your check would be say, $750?
Furlo by watch: guess what? our district, my watch - 2 PO's per segment maximum - someone gets a full, that leaves 1 per segment. YES, 1(ONE) per segment, no bullshit there!
Screw the new guys out of duty availability? No thanks - we were
there once too. Screwing them out of duty availability might be ok, provided you never called them for anything like if another 9/11 happened here.
Contributing 2% for health care over 55...Just wait till you retire - it'll be 16.5% - they'll be sure to jack that up every year.
Doctor co-pay going up 25% for Dr. office, and 50% for E. room visits on the HMO. We're getting what? 1-2%? At the end of our contract we should be paying $22.20 for a Dr. visit and $111 for E. Room - that would be about the 11% WE'RE getting over the contract life. If 25 & 50 percent raises are good for them, why not us?
Dont know much about the wellness program, but we've got a Sgt that still tips the scales at about 400 -- Wellness? Hmmmmm.
9/21/2014 09:13:00 AM =hello kitty....now go anov someone in 012.
Anonymous said...
Furlough by watch is crazy.
Only 7% per segment.
Do the math.
VOTE NO!!
---
"7% per segment is exactly the same percentage per segment that we have now and have had for a long time. Some segments in the winter are greater, nothing changes there. Do the math."
No shit but it only affects the P.O.'s on the watch. So you automatically get a worse furlough. Do the math.
Anonymous said...
CFD gave up their Duty pay equivalent. The Arbitrator will consider that. Duty for new guys is gone. don't drown trying to save a dead man....
9/21/2014 09:53:00 AM
CFD never had duty availability. It was given only to the CPD about four contracts ago to make up for a benefit that the CFD received and the CP didn't. Originally it wasn't pensionable, but that changed.
It couldn't be given as a pay raise because the CFD would then also receive it because they have the me too clause.
just received a hugh hospital bill I owe more than $6,ooo. Contacted bc/bs as to how i can owe more than $4,ooo out of pocket.informed many of the bills were for routine service and do not count towards out of pocket. can anyone explain what is and what is not out of pocket. if the money comes out of my pocket why isn't out of pocket. Can anyone please explain I am at my wits ends with the new insurance you people be be stuck with tens of thousands in bills just an old senile retired guy.probable won't see any responses as everyone is trying to figure as to how to spend their retro.
This contract is sex without lubricant, and Rahm's mounting us. VOTE NO
Not sure about the 7 years. How could someone be a cadet for 7 years? Years ago they allowed the cadets to pay into the pension,but they could only by a few years,not 7.
One thing for sure,those that bought in were only allowed to do it for pension purposes,not for seniority on the job. Their seniority date never changed,nor should it have.
9/21/2014 11:21:00 AM
This poster speaks the truth. Cadets as far back as the original group in 1963 were allowed to buy cadet time towards the pension. But their seniority never changed. It remained the date they were hired as a po. It could never be used for transfers,furloughs, etc
Since this pertains to new people the cost to your pension will be nill. The pension is calculated on the highest 4 consecutive years out of your last 10 on the job. What you got in duty availability in year 3 through 5 never factors in the pension calculation.
9/21/2014 09:43:00 AM
It does however effect the funding of the pension. The point being that if you remove millions of pensionable benefits in the future, that is millions less going in to our pensions to help fund it. Every little bit helps and any further shorting of it is another step closer to the city making changes because they use that shortage against us even though they created the shortage in the first place.
Furloughs are picked between let's say 300 P.O. 's in a district. Seniority is spread between 300 people.
Now furlough picks by watch the seniority gets spread between less people. You will get worse furlough picks.
Why doesn't the FOP tell us that we will get better picks??
Because we won't.
Why is it being offered??
If something is being offered to you that is Better, then the entity making the offer will tout it as being better. i. e. A car, t. V. , a grill on and on and so on.
Hmmm. ..............
Anonymous said...
The two tiered healthcare will cost most officers a 25% premium for services. The cheaper tiered hospitals and doctors will be at crappy hospitals.
Why are we stealing 42 months of Duty Availability from the new guy and redistributing it as a 2% retro check for 2012. We are devouring our young.. "I got mines attitude"
Then we are inviting Pension Language into our contract! Really. Knowing the Mayor is going to try and pull an end around, do we really need to help him. totally stupid.
11% is the minimum an arbitrator would give us. No ifs, ands, or buts.
Furlo by watch is a sell out on seniority rights. Don't think about today...think about your future. The smoke and mirrors of this is that you will somehow get a better furlo...90% will NOT!
Car talk in the contract is window dressing. All nonsense. Amateurish.
Why is their no provision for healthcare for those PO's that are fully maxed yet are not 55 years old?
Why no concise language regarding fair promotions?
Why no sell back hours like the Sgts?
Why no language regarding staffing levels?
Just trinkets and boogeyman scenarios.
Stop being a pussy, get your balls out of Rahm's purse, and vote NO...because that is the right thing to do.
Vote No!
9/21/2014 09:00:00 AM
Wow. I was going to go through your post item by item but there is really no use. It is so wrong, so totally wrong in everything that there is just no use refuting it point by point.
It is WRONG, you are wrong. I can't really begin anywhere, it is all wrong.
And I will place my balls where I damn well want to place them; they go where it feels best.
"Wow... You could be one of the most clueless people I have ever heard from. You're saying no just to say you're voting no. Just so you can be the guy at roll call who argues everything. Let me guess, every roll call and everyday in the car your poor partner has to hear from you about how the city sucks, they are gonna screw you, rahm sucks, GMAC sucks, the schools sucks, residency sucks, the cars suck, the pdts suck, your lunch sucks, the contract sucks, you're gonna get jammed up for anything, and the most important is how u don't do nothin!!! Yeah, ok. Attend a meeting and learn about things before you speak just so u can hear yourself complain. Just FYI, I'm voting yes and so are slot of people. It will get approved and the yes vote will win"
Go ahead Sheep, vote for your measly 11% 5 Year raise. Put that in the bank for your kids college.
"The dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter"
Anonymous said...
Yes to the contract or they will put us in that wellness shit
9/21/2014 12:05:00 PM
Yeah, that alone is worth is worth voting yes.
You're not too swift.
I can't figure out how some coppers could be so misinformed. The loss of duty pay early in your time on the job has nothing to do with how much you collect in pension.
Your pension is based on the last 48 months of pay. The first 48 months of your pay have no effect whatsoever on how much your monthly pension check will be. Get informed.
9/21/2014 03:12:00 PM
Well then there's a LOT of things you obviously can't figure out.
What this means is that LESS money is put INTO the pension funds for the first 4 years of every new hire. It has nothing to do with a final pension amount and EVERYTHING to do with shorting the money put INTO the pension funds every year genius.
Never ceases to amaze.
This means that though they may have only 1 year on the streets the have upwards to 7+ years seniority. That means they'll jump ahead of approximately 80+ Officers per district for furlough picks, watch bids, time due, etc. This also means that they have move seniority than you when placing units bids.
***
keep going pal.... what it ALSO means is that they have 7 years more seniority when it comes to TAKING A PENSION.
If we don't fuck ourselves out of a pension first by letting the FOP and Emanuel steal away our ability to protect our pensions, these kids are gonna tell the city to fuck off and hit the pension as fast as they can while you sit there having to work for 7 more years and possibly 2 more contracts to get fucked by.
Anonymous said...
Voting Yes. Whenever I read on this blog, someone suggesting vote no, they add some reason based on how much they hate the city, rahm, and the Supdt.
I have yet to hear a cogent reason to vote no.
I dont care about your college diploma, PPO's getting DAV,(we took care of them with the new hiring wages), or your opinion the the FOP is screwing you. "You...voted these people in!
9/21/2014 12:22:00 PM
Then you aren't reading much are you pal?
Yet another fool who can't see beyond a fucking pissant little retro check while he gets fucked on the following:
The beginning of the end for duty availability.
The beginning of the end for shit healthcare
The beginning of the end for protecting your pension
Everything else in this contract is for the stupid to look at and marvel while they get long term permanently fucked in the ass.
Grow up.... think beyond a fucking bonus check to sell yourselves out.
The worst part about this contract is giving up the duty availability for the new guys. Not only does it screw them but it further erodes our PENSION. Duty availability is pensionable income and the city is gonna save millions from that. For what a piddly retro check. Think longterm for once FOP. Dean u really screwed this one up.
I can't figure out how some coppers could be so misinformed. The loss of duty pay early in your time on the job has nothing to do with how much you collect in pension.
Your pension is based on the last 48 months of pay. The first 48 months of your pay have no effect whatsoever on how much your monthly pension check will be. Get informed.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
If you lose 4 percent now then you lose 4 percent on your whole career. So let's say that in 20 years you're making 110000... Way back when you voted no on your contract you lost 4 percent. So let's say you could go back in time and vote yes... Flash foreword now back to retirement.. Now that you voted yes your pay is 114,500.. So now your pension when you retire is based off 114,500 not 110,000. So yes, in the future you will cost yourself money, especially when you will need it most. Don't forget, when you retire you don't need duty availability or furloughs by watch.. What u do need it money to survive. Think
You people don't understand the concept of bargaining do you?
For decades the membership actually believed that the sole purpose of negotiating contracts was to get more and more for themselves while never giving up anything in return.
It doesn't work that way.
What you think you give up today can be bargained back again in future contracts.
This is the point of bargaining.
It's not called: "open your wallet and gimme everything I want".
Duty Availability does hurt the pension fund. Example- there is a hiring of 300 new officers. For the first 42 months these officers do not get their duty availability. Because that money is pensionable, it does not go into the pension fund. So from this point forward, every new officer will not put into the pension fund any money from duty availability for his/her first 42 months. Once again, taking away from revenue needed for the pension fund. Just another reason to cut the benefits and people obviously fell for it.
The pension language is mostly irrelevant. Our contact, any contract does not trump the il. pension laws. Period. However, if the state decides that they will raise our contribution to lets say 11% then we will have the opportunity to negotiate and add the 2% to our pay to compensate. It's a smart move.
******
Well you don't understand shit do you?
While you think a contract doesn't trump Il law, you need to actually check your facts and research case law before spouting such genius ideas.
Where a contract WILL trump the law is that the city will claim the members AGREED in this contract to bargain for pension issues SHOULD THE LEGISLATURE ILLEGALLY RAISE YOUR SHARE. EVEN WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT.
What that means Einstein is that WHEN the legislature illegally increases your share, YOU AGREED YOU WOULD NOT SUE BECAUSE YOU GAVE UP THAT RIGHT WHEN YOU PUT INTO YOUR CONTRACT THAT YOU WILL SEEK BARGAINING OR ARBITRATION TO DEAL WITH THAT ISSUE.
In voting yes, you're legally binding yourself to bargaining for a protected benefit and agreeing to accept whatever the arbiter says when you get fucked.
Since it's tough for you to figure out look at it this way because the CITY certainly is:
You are putting IN WRITING that you will ALLOW the legislature to illegally raise your contribution and SEEK ALTERNATIVE MEANS OUTLINED IN THE CONTRACT.
If you're so stupid as to think the FOP is going to sue the state and city WHEN they raise your share to 11 percent then you're a fool.
And if you think the FOP is going to try bargaining for the 3 percent back and when they don't get it file a successful lawsuit then you're a fool twice over.
Any judge will laugh us out of court if we try to sue to protect our pension contribution.
And once that door is opened,you've acknowledged and agreed to illegal changes in your pensions.
Down the road, this contract will be used against us all whenever we attempt to sue for illegal changes to protected benefits.
The majority of us are just too stupid to understand the ramifications of this contract and why it's being worded as it is.
It WILL come back to destroy your pensions in the future, regardless of what they attempt to do because the door to illegal changes has been opened which is what this contract is all about.
Pension fucking.... everything else is bullshit.
Emanuel want's the door opened to give him the legal ability to kill our pensions.... you just don't understand that.
At its worst, this contract will lay the groundwork for all future pension litigation when the SCOIL rules that pension issues have now been deemed to be subjects of bargaining, and all protections in the constitution will disappear and we will ALL begin losing pensions because they're no longer protected by law because we fucked that up by allowing it into a bargaining instance.
NO public pension will be safe if this goes through.
Can you explain how it will cost more if my maximum out of pocket is the same? Obviously you know something I don't because I'm still paying the same
9/21/2014 09:04:00 AM
If you always reach your maximum each year then it doesn't, this time. This could be the set up for the uppercut later. Who knows what changes they will bring to the next contract. If they raise your maximum next time (and its very likely they will try), then it definitely will cost you more money out of pocket. Currently, you will just reach your maximum quicker if you continue to use the hospitals not on the list if this passes. No big deal now, until they raise your maximum the next time. The city goes after pieces here and there that might appear very minimal at the time. But they are setting up for changes in the future that when looked at together are pretty major.. This assures that they don’t appear to be taking away too much in case it goes to arbitration and it helps to sell it to shortsighted coppers. They always think ahead and are looking at the bigger picture and hope we cant look past a retro check.
I do not have the percentages, perhaps some clever 35th street comrade can come up with that for a more accurate comparison. But just from talking to fellow coppers it seems that a lot do not reach their maximum. If this passes and you use the hospitals the city deems undesirable (the nicer ones you probably use now) those that do not reach the maximum most likely will come close to it if not reach it. That could translate to a large % of those who currently have ppo (those that currently don’t reach their maximum) paying that difference. And it isn't a trivial amount, that could be an increase of over $500+ a year out of pocket. Individually that is already a lot, but collectively that is a major cost to the members.
Vote Yes...... Vote no..... But make an educated vote. Above all else, do not make your decision based on what some guys writes on a blog (including the above post). Who knows what kind of lunatic is sitting behind that keyboard? Look into it yourself and do a little research. This is far too important to leave it up to other people to decide your vote. If you attend any meetings, keep in mind that they are selling this to you. Keep an open and objective mind. That way, whichever way you vote, it’s the right way.
what a bunch of of shit !!!! See $$$$ and fuck the rest of the contract . What an ass
For all of you who are voting yes because of retro, you all need to do the math. Not just for the retro check but long term. This will impact everyone, what you receive now everyone will be paying 3x's if not more until they retire. Your retro will be paid back to the city through other means. Just wait until everything starts to go up because it will it always does when the contract settles. Then guess what there goes our raise and more. The more you make the more you pay...
Don't sell yourself and other CPD officers short. Police departments that actually touch or are near city boarders are getting more money for less of a headache and full retro pay. Oak Park PD 2.75% a year,Skokie 2.60%,Worth PD 3% a year and Evanston PD 2.80% a year. None of those departments deal with what the city deals with and has a fraction of our tax base. Vote NO. We do deserve more especially for what we would also be giving up! Vote NO! These departments have all settled in the last 3 months.
Another slight change pertains to complex procedures such as transplants. The City wants you to have those complex procedures at hospitals and medical centers that do a lot of them, hence the chance of a successful outcome is higher. These hospitals and medical centers are called “Center of Distinction.”
9/21/2014 09:40:00 AM
Here is the desired outcome that the city would like in regards to your "complex procedure" or transplant:
P.O. goes to his dr. at a tier 1 facility who is located at the beautiful st. bernards hospital.
Dr. discovers a need for a "complex procedure" or transplant.
P.O. steps out of the examining room, collapses and dies or makes it out to the parking lot where he is robbed and killed as your new tier 1 hospital is not in the best of areas.
City pays the death benefits that they are locked into paying anyway whether you live 1 day after being hired or 100 years. And they actually prefer to pay it now before it goes up in the future.
Problem solved, no expensive "complex procedure" or transplant.
You are sadly mistaken if you think health care management is really aimed at providing the best possible care for you. It always has and always will be about minimizing the cost for the provider even at the expense of the health of those that are covered.
Why is furlough by watch something that needs to be negotiated with the city? Shouldn't that just be something if we all decide to do it or not then we go it?
Also, why didn't we have something about residency already for gods sake? This city is a shithole for the vanishing middle class, so why can't we just live where we want? It's 2014, time we decide to do what we want. The public doesn't really like us anyway so they won't care if we leave.
Vote YES , if you are management 20% assigned to second watch , a commander secretary , caps officer , helicopter. Pilot .
If you work first ,third watch with cars down , ten job backlog , no time due on weekends , no real shift differential , vote No .
Easy decision .
The pensionability of duty availability for Officers under 42 months is not an issue for us and does not erode our pension plan further because for the last 2 years all new recruits are only provided with the 457(k) Deferred Comp plan and not a pension.
9/21/2014 04:09:00 PM
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
The pensionability of duty availability for Officers under 42 months is not an issue for us and does not erode our pension plan further because for the last 2 years all new recruits are only provided with the 457(k) Deferred Comp plan and not a pension.
9/21/2014 04:09:00 PM
A complete lie but a good rumor to stir up the masses.
I received two ballots in the mail yesterday. Now I can vote yes & no.
To Edgar Cayce who predicts they will do away with duty availability. Let them. Put it into my regular check. Duty availability is pensionable. Cutting it is a diminishment in wages toward the pension and a loss in pay. Not gonna happen. Clothing allowance is another story.
I had a chance to talk with alderman mike Zalewski over the weekend while playing some video poker. He related that the CPD needs to put more skin in the game. Whatever!
The worst part about this contract is giving up the duty availability for the new guys. Not only does it screw them but it further erodes our PENSION. Duty availability is pensionable income and the city is gonna save millions from that. For what a piddly retro check. Think longterm for once FOP. Dean u really screwed this one up.
I can't figure out how some coppers could be so misinformed. The loss of duty pay early in your time on the job has nothing to do with how much you collect in pension.
Your pension is based on the last 48 months of pay. The first 48 months of your pay have no effect whatsoever on how much your monthly pension check will be. Get informed.
He's talking about the fact that for 42 months multiplied by the number of new hires, FOREVER, that money will not be placed in the pension fund. Inform thyself.
The worst part about this contract is giving up the duty availability for the new guys. Not only does it screw them but it further erodes our PENSION. Duty availability is pensionable income and the city is gonna save millions from that. For what a piddly retro check. Think longterm for once FOP. Dean u really screwed this one up.
I can't figure out how some coppers could be so misinformed. The loss of duty pay early in your time on the job has nothing to do with how much you collect in pension.
Your pension is based on the last 48 months of pay. The first 48 months of your pay have no effect whatsoever on how much your monthly pension check will be. Get informed.
It erodes your pension because for four years those officers will not be contributing that portion of their pay into the pension fund.
21sept14@0100. Cry me a river you rat beefer.
9/21/2014 11:14:00 AM
You're genuinely retarded
Wow... Let me guess, every roll call and everyday in the car your poor partner has to hear from you about how the city sucks, they are gonna screw you, rahm sucks, GMAC sucks, the schools sucks, residency sucks, the cars suck, the pdts suck, your lunch sucks, the contract sucks, you're gonna get jammed up for anything...
9/21/2014 04:05:00 PM
Any City run by liberal pols and gangs sucks- check.
Everyone looking to screw cops - media, libs, Demorats, Alvarez, Black revs, Phleger, porch supervisors, gangs - check.
Rahm hates police - check.
GMAC a lousy Supe - check.
Schools are terrible. You kidding? - check.
City telling me where I can or can't live sucks - check. (But I love my block and my neighbors and I wouldn't move anyway.)
The cars suck - That thing I drove last night was called a car? - check.
PDTS? Can't say whether they suck or not. Never had a working one - check.
Lunch sucks? - I work in a district where no living human could buy anything worth eating, so I bring my own everyday. It's actually good! - No check.
Contract sucks - check.
Jammed up? Wouldn't know, unless you call surviving enough lawsuits to be called a real, working copper. - check.
I agree with all you said. VOTE NO!
Oh, BTW, my partner ain't poor. He got his Masters four years ago (paid for by CPD) and co-owns a business that's made him a "one-percenter." Prick.
Big AL says vote NO !!!
9/21/2014 10:22:00 AM
Dude, don't drink and post. Call someone who has a brain to do your thinking for you.
VOTE NO.... SAVE YOUR RETIREE HEALTH CARE AND PENSION.... my God people, look ahead farther than where you can blow your retro for once!!!
"The worst part about this contract is giving up the duty availability for the new guys. Not only does it screw them but it further erodes our PENSION. Duty availability is pensionable income and the city is gonna save millions from that. For what a piddly retro check. Think longterm for once FOP. Dean u really screwed this one up."
"I can't figure out how some coppers could be so misinformed. The loss of duty pay early in your time on the job has nothing to do with how much you collect in pension.
Your pension is based on the last 48 months of pay. The first 48 months of your pay have no effect whatsoever on how much your monthly pension check will be. Get informed."
He or she IS informed. It is you who are ignorant of the facts. Duty Availability income is pensionable, which means the officer pays 9% of his Duty Availability INTO the Pension Fund, and subsequently the City must make it's contribution based on the officer's 9% contribution. Taking away duty availability until an officer has attained 42 months of service means neither the officer or city CONTRIBUTE their portion of Duty Availability to the Pension Fund until AFTER 42 months. As the department ages and more new hires come on, the amount that is lost (9% of Duty Availability per year per PO and City's contribution based on that 9%), adds up to alot of money that WOULD currently go into the Pension that will not.
That is how the Pension is eroded, and the original poster is way more informed than you appear to be. YOU get informed, then pop off!
For this reason alone I am voting NO!
Doherty, shields, and all the other losers are posting full steam on this blog to fuck us into arbitration
I read the contract. I spoke with people who went to the meeting at Biaggios. I looked at he videos at he FOP website. My INFORMED decision is that under these circumstances this is the best contract we could get. I am voting YES!
Most of the "no" reasons on this blog are based on emotion: hate Ramn, hate the city, hate Dean etc. Dumb, asinine reasons to vote no. The rest are based on misunderstanding and misinformation.
Educate yourself!
An arbitrator will give us 95%+ of this contract. We will still get 11% raise but it will be back loaded. That means that everybody who retires before the back loaded raise (4%) will loose, it will not be part of their pension. The rest of us will loose the compounded 4% raise until 2017.
The tier hospitals. The out of pocket is getting lowered. The bills will be the lower negotiated rates that the city used to get refunds on. At the end it's probably a wash.
-----------------
So basically you say that everyone that has decided to vote no, does so because of their emotions, or because they are misinformed and we need to educate ourselves? So says the guy that doesn't know the difference between loose and lose. I'll tell you what; why don't you enroll in a college program before you give back tuition reimbursement to the city. Just because people have different priorities they'd like to gain or prevent from losing, doesn't make them misinformed or uneducated. Fuck you and the horse you rode in on.
We are getting 11% regardless if we go to arbitration or not.....we will not get retro but still get 11%. The other things we are giving up are too much. Im a no vote.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
The worst part about this contract is giving up the duty availability for the new guys. Not only does it screw them but it further erodes our PENSION. Duty availability is pensionable income and the city is gonna save millions from that. For what a piddly retro check. Think longterm for once FOP. Dean u really screwed this one up.
I can't figure out how some coppers could be so misinformed. The loss of duty pay early in your time on the job has nothing to do with how much you collect in pension.
Your pension is based on the last 48 months of pay. The first 48 months of your pay have no effect whatsoever on how much your monthly pension check will be. Get informed.
9/21/2014 03:12:00 PM
The average of the highest consecutive 4 years out of the last 10 years on the job. For most people this is the last 4 years averaged together.
Would you trust a banker who changes interest rates and lies to your face?
Yet everyone thinks RAHM and his cabal are giving us fair numbers. Do we really not notice that crime stats are rigged?
Ask yourself is the 1st offer really the best or would you be fooled by a fake retro carrot dangled out.
And all this talk about compounded interest is funny think about when you retire and the city tells you that your rates are going up 30-40%.
Has RAHM in good faith put any of that pension money back or is he stalling for a bailout to screw us on that too?
Next contract would have the elimination of duty availability?
Only deal with dates that our contract covers never give up anything out of the contract date range.
VOTE NO
oh by the way switch to HMO the ppo system is going to bankrupt a few of us.
And all the talk about free college sign up quick we sound like the mutts when they cry for welfare.
An example of how the city thinks ahead and tries to slip things by us.
from the contract proposal:
17. Holidays
A. CAPS Day. Effective upon ratification, Community/Police Partnership Day will
be referred to as Police Memorial Day and will be the Last Saturday in April
(changed from April 29th).
Now most of us would look at that and say "who cares?". But this could be the reason behind it....
Most of the department is on a rotating day off schedule. When a holiday falls during the week, most take that into consideration when thinking about taking the day off. Unless you reaaaly need that Tuesday or Wednesday off, why wouldn't you stay and earn the 8 hours and take the extra 4. Hell, people even come of the medical to work the minor holidays. If you look at the time due books in the districts, the weekends are always full. By fixing this holiday to a Saturday, it ensures that more people will opt to take the day off as "day off holiday" to have a weekend off and give up the 8 hours comp time if they worked as well as lose out on the extra 4 hours. One or two people in a district losing that 12 hours doesn't seem to bad, or hardly even worth it. But when you factor in all the districts, units, detectives etc. it could add up. Still a small victory for the city, but still a win. A bunch of little things here and there make a big difference down the road. And the only price they paid for that was to change the name to Police Memorial Day. Why it even sounds like they are doing it for us.. Arent they just the sweetest.
Steve Austin says... Hell No to the contract! Gonna open up a can of whoop ass!
03:12...you missed the point...
Once the city pays these kids their duty availability check a percentage %%% gets paid into our pension $$$ (duh) hence, we get more funding so ALL COPPERS benefits. It's the big picture, now VOTE NO and go back to coloring with your new Crayola's
I didn't vote for Angelo but he won so I accept that fact.we will never get what we want, remember when 16% wasn't good enough. Then we got our asses handed to us. If you test the waters you will lose your retro and be put in the wellness program. You can talk about the economy all you want but the fact is, Illinois is busted. Terrible economy worst unemployment rate ( by design ). The mayor will cry poor and he will be right! I for one am voting yes not bc I think it's a good contract but because it's the best that we will get.
boston awarded 25.4% ARBITRATION AWARD BY ARBITRATOR!we need that arbitrator!
We are not getting that arbitrator
Here is something to think about as to the contract.
We got a them same raises as Local 2 (CFD) but stayed out of wellness (they didn't), we stayed out of the LMCC (they didn't), and delayed our 55& out retirement to 6/2017 (they didn't, they start paying on 1/2015) & their contract passed w/an 80% approval & we better an all around better deal.
The new medical tier 1 hospitals cut an extra deal w/city of costs, we get those deals if u want to go there. If you don't, I use tier 2 (advocates, northwesterns, rushes) that are still in network and still accept city emotes (no one will turn u away). The family Max stays the same for both tiers. Both tiers also will be paying less of a bill because of the "subscriber share" change, which gives us ( for the 1st time ever) the ability to pay the city discount rates no matter what tier we use.
The union has been trying to get "subscriber share" for years. You were at the general meeting on 9/16 and heard Dougherty say the "subscriber share" was a "very good thing that we were trying to get for a while".
From town hall meeting. Maybe instead of discussing here you should attend one or make a call to the union and ask your questions. Just because the guy on the watch that every district has who acts like hes a contract lawyer doesn't nessacerily make him one. I'm voting yes to the contract.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
"The worst part about this contract is giving up the duty availability for the new guys. Not only does it screw them but it further erodes our PENSION. Duty availability is pensionable income and the city is gonna save millions from that. For what a piddly retro check. Think longterm for once FOP. Dean u really screwed this one up."
"I can't figure out how some coppers could be so misinformed. The loss of duty pay early in your time on the job has nothing to do with how much you collect in pension.
Your pension is based on the last 48 months of pay. The first 48 months of your pay have no effect whatsoever on how much your monthly pension check will be. Get informed."
He or she IS informed. It is you who are ignorant of the facts. Duty Availability income is pensionable, which means the officer pays 9% of his Duty Availability INTO the Pension Fund, and subsequently the City must make it's contribution based on the officer's 9% contribution. Taking away duty availability until an officer has attained 42 months of service means neither the officer or city CONTRIBUTE their portion of Duty Availability to the Pension Fund until AFTER 42 months. As the department ages and more new hires come on, the amount that is lost (9% of Duty Availability per year per PO and City's contribution based on that 9%), adds up to alot of money that WOULD currently go into the Pension that will not.
That is how the Pension is eroded, and the original poster is way more informed than you appear to be. YOU get informed, then pop off!
For this reason alone I am voting NO!
9/21/2014 08:35:00 PM
Thank you 8:35pm. I was trying to think of a simple way to say exactly this. You said it better than I would have.
Low information coppers concerned with today will vote yes. Coppers looking down the road towards benefits and retirement will vote NO!
Why give the City the inch it needs to take a yard? Vote NO!
The officers bitching about furlough by seniority are the same ones working days on management. I guess seniority dont matter in that situation. I'm gonna enjoy my retro check. Yes
11% over 5 yrs, yeah right. vote NO!!!
Come on guys. Vote no and let Rahm keep millions on us. Millions we earned by working our asses off. No thanks. I'm voting yes.
No no No no NO NO NO!!!!!!
Take out anything to do with pension, then we can talk about it
Vote yes folks. Rahm is done anyway. He will lose the election big time. Lewis will run and win.
SCC I realize you want to give everybody a say, but what about all these IPO coming from the FLOP offices
We are getting 11% regardless if we go to arbitration or not.....we will not get retro but still get 11%. The other things we are giving up are too much. Im a no vote
Very well said. I was a NO from day 1. Dean I am so disappointed. But then again, not really.
The tier hospitals. The out of pocket is getting lowered. The bills will be the lower negotiated rates that the city used to get refunds on. At the end it's probably a wash.
Probably Dean??? Nothing is a wash with the goofs that run this city. It's a NO for me!! Or as they say in Shark Tank... IM OUT!
Doherty, shields, and all the other losers are posting full steam on this blog to fuck us into arbitration
My Goodness Dean, do you ever quit?
NO public pension will be safe if this goes through.
9/21/2014 06:35:00 PM
OUTSTANDING!!! Vote NO!
Just FYI, I'm voting yes and so are slot of people. It will get approved and the yes vote will win
Go to hell FOP.
Fyi....Tier 1 is cook county hospital tier 2 is the advicate hospitals??
So I have to drive into tshit areas with sick kids and babies wwhen I have Lutheran general 5 minutes maybe 10 in traffic. NOooooooooooooooooooo!
Voting NO!!
So basically you say that everyone that has decided to vote no, does so because of their emotions, or because they are misinformed and we need to educate ourselves? So says the guy that doesn't know the difference between loose and lose. I'll tell you what; why don't you enroll in a college program before you give back tuition reimbursement to the city. Just because people have different priorities they'd like to gain or prevent from losing, doesn't make them misinformed or uneducated. Fuck you and the horse you rode in on.9/21/2014 09:01:00 PM
Actually, people I know that are voting no didn't even bother to attend a meeting and the reasons they give when they explain their no vote proves they don't understand it and are confused because they're spewing out falsehoods about the contract. Rather than call the union and ask questions, they'd rather believe the rumors.
Also, you should know the difference between loose and lose and their,there and they're as well as too, to and two.
Dean and his videos and internet and meetings are forcing this down our throats we must vote YES. He is so obsessed with his members doing exactly what he tells them. Sorry Dean, we are not robots, we bust our asses in a beat car for 10,20,30 years. We refuse to be rushed into this vote just so you can say you accomplished such a great goal during your presidency. We are already suspicious after Shields messed up, you have to earn the memberships trust, not just assume we will, and this isn't the sensible way. I may have voted Yes, but when I see Dean force feeding us to vote yes, something is extremely suspicious about this, and now i simply don't trust him. Someone from the city must have gotten to him. In a way, it makes me wonder what side he's really on with this force feeding the membership to vote Yes, or if we don't, we are basing our No Vote on "rumors". Sorry Dean, nice try! Cops might play into rumors sometimes, but theres a lot of experienced, intelligent people I work with the districts that I respect, who are also voting no. From Day #1, the City has never been our friend with the exception of Mayor Jane, so anything the City wants with this contract, I vote No.
Why is there not a widley published list of tier 1 and tier 2 hospitals available to us by fop. What are they hiding
Please tell me how "It will cost us way more each year in health insurance costs" as you claim. You made a claim, explain and prove your claim.
Most of us will reach our $3000 out of pocket when in the past we didn't. There that's how!
Anonymous said...
Doherty, shields, and all the other losers are posting full steam on this blog to fuck us into arbitration
9/21/2014 08:39:00 PM
Yup, that's it.
Anonymous said...
Furlough by watch is crazy.
Only 7% per segment.
Do the math.
VOTE NO!!
---
"7% per segment is exactly the same percentage per segment that we have now and have had for a long time. Some segments in the winter are greater, nothing changes there. Do the math."
No shit but it only affects the P.O.'s on the watch. So you automatically get a worse furlough. Do the math.
9/21/2014 05:24:00 PM
I get first choice no matter what watch I am on. do the math.
All the other ranks pick by watch. This finally gets po's in line with everyone else. This was voted down years ago when the City foolishly let us decide. This will effect the bottom of the seniority list on a particular watch, like the lowest on days, they will be forced into taking leftovers. They will have to decide what is most important, watch or furlough or district.
I put in my time in shit districts and shit watches and shit furloughs. I get 8 full no matter what district or watch. Seniority, get some. Do the math.
Anonymous said...
Still no. I just don't trust these guys. This was too fast and furious for my liking. And I thought Tom Mcdonagh ran for FOP president and lost. How is he working as a field rep full time? These guys are slicker than Chicago aldermen!
9/21/2014 12:39:00 AM
I like how you got fast and furious in there. You could have ended it with 'My fellow Americans" or something.
Most of the people writing on the blog have never been through any contract, this is the first. I been through 5. And always have from past experiences that we have never ever done better with the arbitrator. We've gotten the same if not a little less. Vote with your heat and not the pocket. Are we gonna get fucked, absolutely. But who is gonna fuck us harder. Forget the first year of the retro. It's gone. Think about what giving up seniority, and I'm not just talking second watch, I'm talking about taking it away from senior guys now and the next contract will want to take it from all watches. There should be no new pension language in the contract at all. It should mirror the last contract if there are no changes, its a constitutional amendment. No reopening of the contract for anything. What does all this mean, It's means the union has not done it's job. The wages, we're never gonna get anything close to the teachers. Contracts have been worst and worst year after year. And this one falls right in place.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
The worst part about this contract is giving up the duty availability for the new guys. Not only does it screw them but it further erodes our PENSION. Duty availability is pensionable income and the city is gonna save millions from that. For what a piddly retro check. Think longterm for once FOP. Dean u really screwed this one up.
I can't figure out how some coppers could be so misinformed. The loss of duty pay early in your time on the job has nothing to do with how much you collect in pension.
Your pension is based on the last 48 months of pay. The first 48 months of your pay have no effect whatsoever on how much your monthly pension check will be. Get informed.
9/21/2014 03:12:00 PM
The average of the highest consecutive 4 years out of the last 10 years on the job. For most people this is the last 4 years averaged together.
9/21/2014 09:08:00 PM
what we are saying is that its less money the city is contributing to the pension fund. get it?
Rahm is not a "giver" folks... It's not what he be about... So why is he giving us that first year retro? Why isn't he saving the city all that money for people who "need" it... If everyone hates the police out there, why would he do us a solid and anger all those haters? He's pushing something through and misdirecting us with the retro... Heads up!
God, we are fucked and we only have ourselves to blame. I can remember just a short time ago when Shields was in charge and the out cry from the rank and file when we first heard that we would get NO RETRO at all because he failed to send the letter.
Then it was NO RETRO for the first year. Now we have an offer for retro from day one and people are saying reject it?
Then all this talk about how we would do so much better in arbitration. That will be a crap shoot at best. There are absolutely no guarantees that we would do any better. In fact, if you go according to the past few contracts that ended up in arbitration, we stand to lose more than we gain.
Remember the last contract under Daley? The city offered us a 16% increase in pay. That offer sat on the table for a year and they pulled it. When the dust settled, we ended up with a 12% raise.
The worst part about this contract is giving up the duty availability for the new guys. Not only does it screw them but it further erodes our PENSION. Duty availability is pensionable income and the city is gonna save millions from that. For what a piddly retro check. Think longterm for once FOP. Dean u really screwed this one up.
9/21/2014 12:25:00 AM
Pension is based on last 4 years
19 yr veteran. I have worked in good and bad neighborhoods all over the west and north sides of the city.Listen carefully. We got a 2% raise when the economy was at the worst time since the great depression. We will get a better raise through arbitration and not have to give up things we have fought hard for throughout the years. Economy is better then last contract and neighboring police departments in the burbs and major cities are settling contracts for more and do not have to live in those cities. Vote NO! Have a voice and let Rahm here it. Vote NO!!
9/21/2014 12:28:00 AM
How can you have 19 years on and still be so ignorant of the arbitration process? If are negotiating team had elected to go to arbitration rather than accepting the city's offer, than yes we might have gotten a bigger pay raise. However, at this point the arbitrator is not going to give us what we didn't ask for.
This Two Tier Health insurance is no good. It will cost us way more each year in health insurance costs. Keep the retro for that first year, don't give my health insurance away. Voting No!
9/21/2014 05:02:00 AM
We do not have a two tier health system. Get your facts straight.
I'm now retired and yes I was young once on the job like you. Just like you I too was not too concerned about pension issues when contract time came up.It was all about what I could get now. Retiring was a million miles away. for me. Then one morning I got up and it was time to retire. Where did the time go? your pension is what your going to have to live on for the rest of your life. Make wise decisions.
The tiered medical has really got me spooked. Can someone break that down for me? Pretend I'm 5 years old when you do it too...
-------------------
If you like your doctor and he is not in a tier 1 program you have to pay more to see him.
The majority of the teaching hospitals and Lutheran General are not tier 1.
Vote NO.
America
----------------------------------------------------------
You have no idea what the fuck your talking about. Stop spouting ill imformed opinions as though they were facts.
Furlo by watch is a sell out on seniority rights. Don't think about today...think about your future. The smoke and mirrors of this is that you will somehow get a better furlo...90% will NOT!
Mmmmm.....let's see. Vote NO over an issue that only affects the average patrolman 4 weeks out of the year? Ya, ok.
All this talk about seniority. Well, now seniority will really come into play. The more senior guys (and gals) will get what they want. The rest will get what they can. That sounds like seniority at work to me. How is that a sell out?
Like I see posted here all the time, "Get more time on the job kid and you'll get what you want."
So, until then, shut up and put your time in.
I wonder how many of the hundreds of posters (since SCC started the discussion), that are saying to vote "no", have actually attended a meeting to ask questions and hear answers. It seems the best explainations (about tiers, retro, arbitration, etc) have come from people who have gone (or claimed to have gone) to the meetings.
RH
Anonymous Anonymous said...
An example of how the city thinks ahead and tries to slip things by us.
from the contract proposal:
17. Holidays
A. CAPS Day. Effective upon ratification, Community/Police Partnership Day will
be referred to as Police Memorial Day and will be the Last Saturday in April
(changed from April 29th).
Now most of us would look at that and say "who cares?". But this could be the reason behind it....
Most of the department is on a rotating day off schedule. When a holiday falls during the week, most take that into consideration when thinking about taking the day off. Unless you reaaaly need that Tuesday or Wednesday off, why wouldn't you stay and earn the 8 hours and take the extra 4. Hell, people even come of the medical to work the minor holidays. If you look at the time due books in the districts, the weekends are always full. By fixing this holiday to a Saturday, it ensures that more people will opt to take the day off as "day off holiday" to have a weekend off and give up the 8 hours comp time if they worked as well as lose out on the extra 4 hours. One or two people in a district losing that 12 hours doesn't seem to bad, or hardly even worth it. But when you factor in all the districts, units, detectives etc. it could add up. Still a small victory for the city, but still a win. A bunch of little things here and there make a big difference down the road. And the only price they paid for that was to change the name to Police Memorial Day. Why it even sounds like they are doing it for us.. Arent they just the sweetest.
9/21/2014 09:21:00 PM
Wasn't this the trade-off for Good Friday?
9/21/2014 09:08:00 PM
what we are saying is that its less money the city is contributing to the pension fund. get it?
9/22/2014 07:17:00 AM
Right. The fund overall, not an individual officer. The city is supposed to make that $600 million yearly payment soon. Who trusts that they will? Racoon-eyes will try to weasel out of it somehow.
Anonymous said...
I am saying YES to my $5,000 retro check
9/21/2014 04:59:00 AM
That's all you care about?
Moron.
The worst part about this contract is giving up the duty availability for the new guys. Not only does it screw them but it further erodes our PENSION. Duty availability is pensionable income and the city is gonna save millions from that. For what a piddly retro check. Think longterm for once FOP. Dean u really screwed this one up.
I can't figure out how some coppers could be so misinformed. The loss of duty pay early in your time on the job has nothing to do with how much you collect in pension.
Your pension is based on the last 48 months of pay. The first 48 months of your pay have no effect whatsoever on how much your monthly pension check will be. Get informed.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
If you lose 4 percent now then you lose 4 percent on your whole career. So let's say that in 20 years you're making 110000... Way back when you voted no on your contract you lost 4 percent. So let's say you could go back in time and vote yes... Flash foreword now back to retirement.. Now that you voted yes your pay is 114,500.. So now your pension when you retire is based off 114,500 not 110,000. So yes, in the future you will cost yourself money, especially when you will need it most. Don't forget, when you retire you don't need duty availability or furloughs by watch.. What u do need it money to survive. Think
Now you think.... From this day forward the next 20yrs everyone who gets hired wont be paying into our pension. The fund isn't getting any bigger and this will only have a negative impact. The fund needs all the money it can for those PO's who came before us and for all those who come after us. If you can't invest and make 4000, In the next twenty years you have a different problem and it's not with us who are voting NO! I would do the math for you but you still wouldnt understand.
This is the weakest and most insulting contract proposal in decades! An absolute no!
I finally made a call and had it explained to me...
I don't like it one bit. I don't think it's fair. I surely don't like maybe and probably??
I am on the fence. But I don't think we will do any better?
Anonymous said...
Please tell me how "It will cost us way more each year in health insurance costs" as you claim. You made a claim, explain and prove your claim.
Most of us will reach our $3000 out of pocket when in the past we didn't. There that's how!
9/22/2014 05:04:00 AM
I see. I always reach the limit. Older folks do that. I have medical issues. As I see it, much more important than a NO vote on this contract is a NO vote on Rahm Emanuel.
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2015 // MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION FOR MAYOR
Yeah, ok. Attend a meeting and learn about things before you speak just so u can hear yourself complain. Just FYI, I'm voting yes and so are slot of people. It will get approved and the yes vote will win
9/21/2014 04:05:00 PM
No really, a slot more people are going to vote NO. Because they can READ and understand. Not the goodie, goodie S4!t the FLOP wants you to understand. When the FLOP can truly explain to me in writing why they included ANY pension language in this contract, then I might start listening to THEIR line.
Arbitration = Getting the true bill of what fop and the city proposed.
The last thing THEY want is to go to arbitration.
Didn't Boston PD do damn good with an arbitration award?
Weren't they shit on in similar fashion like CPD has been?
Didn't the "improving economy" figure prominently
in that decision?
Or is Chicago a special case where a lot of political capital is being burned to keep Policemen from regaining any ground because the progressives are using this city as a blue print on how to destroy a police department, destroy a police pension plan and destroy collective bargaining for first responders?
VOTE YES !
VOTE YES !
9/21/2014 10:07:00 AM
And what part of the pension did the fire, sgt, lt, capt. and all those others give up. WHAT PART! NONE
Also, you should know the difference between loose and lose and their,there and they're as well as too, to and two.
9/22/2014 04:18:00 AM
So you think I'm not informed because I didn't go to the meeting. I simply can not read a contract as put out by the FOP and figure out what is good or bad. People like yourself who go to the meeting and don't ask, "Why was this included, i.e. pension, Tier 1 and 2 hospital, pensionable Duty Available for new guys, . . ."
We have a saying for people like this, they're called "sheeple", and I can tell you are one of these people.
PS Look in a dictionary yourself, their,there is not a word. However (comma), their, there is in the dictionary.
Dear "Hello Kitty" quit posting nonsense about the people you work with. I hope I never get to work with you because you are the type of person that has no backbone and will be quick to throw a fellow officer under the bus for personal gain. Your lack of loyalty to your fellow co-workers sickens me and the fact that you're a veteran of the armed services makes me ill. Officers like you is a big issue in this department. I hope your brown nosing gets you no-where in your career.
SO you know if we go to arbitration they can not stick wellness back on the table and other things don't believe these guys from the union they lie that's why I'm voting "NO".The union stays away from the arbitration question all they say we have a lot to loss B.S. let it go.
Section 20.1 - Work Day and Work Week:
All time in excess of the hours worked in officer's normal work day and the normal work week is not considered 8 hours (day) and 40 hours (week) anymore...
Does this mean they can deny over time? The new change in the contract refers it back to Section 20.2
I am assuming this is another lost for us? It is weird because Dean Sr. never addressed anything about this change unless I missed it.
All the change did was make the section vague.
Lurie Children's hospial and lutheran children hospitsl are both tier 2
Anyone catch the mistake made on the pay raise in the new contract booklet? It shows 2% each year and adds up to 14%.
If it wasnt for a dear friend spending about an hour with me explaining the contract crap, I would of voted no.
I am in no way supportive of this contract or fop. However here is where I will make my point. This is what we get for not staying touch with whats goingm on...
This is what we get for not voting.
This is what we get for not sticking together.
So you want blame someone? Blame those who didnt vote in the past.
Not by choice, but by best situation I voted yes.
9/22/2014 03:31:00 PM
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Anyone catch the mistake made on the pay raise in the new contract booklet? It shows 2% each year and adds up to 14%.
9/22/2014 03:36:00 PM
Is this a 7 year deal, mush?
I voted No….. You scared sheeple go ahead and vote yes. Screw yourselves out of thousands down the road for a few dollars now. Bunch of scared bitches….
Post a Comment
<< Home