Go on strike and save the city some cash…?

Slinky, just some food for thought, and I know the answers but perhaps you might want to find this out for yourself.

1.) This lawyer the city hired, how much does she cost the taxpayers?

What is her retainer, how much has been spent for the Mayor to have her at the table?

How often do negotiations begin with one side hiring a lawyer?

Was this a necessary expense or could this have been solved without her?

2.) What was basically the first thing that the Mayor and Council did when Shari was elected? (Hint: it has to do with raises and money).

How large was this increase?

3.) IF (and that is a big IF in my opinion) CUPE workers strike, (or more likely get locked out) what is the cost to taxpayers. What loss of services will we see?

Will we be receiving discounts on our city taxes or utility bills to offset the loss of services? (Hint: I doubt it).

How long could this disruption last?

What other aspects of our lives will be impacted?

Perhaps Ben could detail here some of the more juicier parts of the outside workers existing contract…ie. no layoffs, rules about contracting out etc….things that make it so expensive for the taxpayer and create such nice paychecks. Plus, when cupe settles, what is the effect on managements pay packets? At cnc, management gets what the union gets for example…

Again I have a pretty clear idea on the answers but…

Explain to me how contracting out saves money?

I have rarely seen any scenario where any city is better off with contractors over having its own workforce.

The owners of companies that contract? Yes, certainly they are way better off in those situations, but the taxpayers?

City workers might get more hourly than some contractor workers, but after the dust settles the company contracting the work usually bills more for the same job, and usually will cut corners and rush things to maximize profits.

What is CUPE asking for, what is the city asking for? How big is the divide?

Speaking of management, what has been the average % increase year to year for them? (and what of council, and the mayor)?

What has the % increase been for city workers over the same span?

What is the actual dollar value of what Cupe wants, what is the actual dollar value of what the city wants?

Perfect time to get rid of 20% of the work force. Time to derail the gravy train before it bankrupts us all.

Informed: “Explain to me how contracting out saves money?”

Public sector wages are generally much higher taking into account benefits and pensions. The private sector is much more flexible with respect to modifying staffing levels as needed. As axman said, we are on an unsustainable path with respect to our municipal work force.

The lawyer will charge out at 350.00 hour $1,400.00 per day plus research costs, accommodations and travel also add in any time spent on conference calls and out side meetings over the 8 hours pre-day plus e-mails sent to update City bargaining committee ruff cost per-day $2,200.00 x 40 days spent on bargaining issues. The total bill most likely around $90,000 to $100,000.00 so far.

steph: “The total bill most likely around $90,000 to $100,000.00 so far. “

Assuming your numbers are right, this will be a minor cost if targets are achieved.

Besides that, another thing we need to do is get a little more aggresive in terms of the core review (rather than pandering to all the special interest groups), and we will get back on track.

Both the City Workers, and City Management do not need anymore increases in wages or benefits.

How long do they think that they can continue to get yearly increases?? At what point do they come to the conclusion that the **Bank** is broke. Take a hint from Detroit, and some California Cities that are going into bankruptcy.

We need a five year moratorium on any increases to Management and Union, in addition we need to reduce the number of people who work at the City through attrition etc; to get the number’s down.

We the taxpayer are entitled to some regard for the expenditure of our tax dollars. Neither the City or Union are entitled to increases just because a contract has expired and a new one needs to be negotiated. Lets look at value for dollars spent.

0% increases to wages and benefits over the next five years would not be a hardship on City Management or Unions. They are in fact well paid for what they do, and a five year moratorium would at the very minimum let the private sector get a little closer to what the City and Unions get paid. In addition this would mean significant savings that could be channeled into other services, such as water, sewer, roads, etc;

This moratorium should also be extended to the Police, Firemen, etc; as they to are well paid for the services they provide.

Now the big problem.****THE CITY MANAGEMENT AND CITY WORKERS ARE ALL PAID FOR BY THE TAXPAYERS OF PRINCE GEORGE****. So when they sit down to negotiate, there is no representation from taxpayers. The Councilors are supposedly our representatives, however they are not at the table, nor do they have the expertise to negotiate. Problem is, if Management gets raises in relation to the settlements that Unions receive, then the taxpayer is guaranteed to lose.

We need to look at City Management, Staff, salaries and benefits, and Union Contracts, being negotiated by and independent body, who is not in conflict. This body should have representation from the taxpayers of the City.

Whats the chances???

Do not see a lot of previous posts by”Informed” Union shill perhaps? Would not even be surprised if her initials were Janet Bigelow ;)

That being said I agree with some of the above statements that it is time to hit the pause button on all increases in this round of negotiations. Municipal workers were about the only ones to get increased wages and benefits through the economic downturn. The private sector took a step back or at best held on to what they had and even other public sector unions settled for net zero.

One other question….if it comes to job action do they make picket signs with integral chin rests?

It’s funny lots of you obviously don’t remember that council voted in a 30 percent raise for themselves. Kinda wish I could vote myself a raise when I felt like it. Seems to me that the core review cost us a lot of money and almost every recommendation was turned down. Maybe we should ask for our money back!!!!! Another question is how many managers are there in the city as most of them make over 100 grand a year. Everywhere you look there is another department manager or supervisor manager. Do we really need a manager for a manager for a manager??? Save some money less managers more workers I don’t want to see the service levels cut they are already really low

Show me a contractor that does not charge more for their workers time than they pay the worker and I will be amazed.

Show me one who does not charge cost ++ for materials, cost +++ for vehicles, and so forth.

Yes the hourly wage of a city worker may be somewhat higher than that of a contractor’s worker. But the total cost of a city worker is less than the total cost of a contractor’s worker.

Have you ever had a plumbing problem at home? Done any reno’s? Had electrical issues? Because frankly tradesmen are expensive. Look at hiring someone to come in and do a quick simple job at your house, then imagine that contractor charging the city.

Axeman – I highly doubt the city of PG is going to go bankrupt because of the CUPE workers. Afterall, how many millions this year have been spent on the roads (and yes some of them sorely needed a facelift). How much was spent on the core review, etc… If they are comfortable throwing that kind of money around, we are a long way off bankrupt.

Steph – You are forgetting her retainer… and I don’t recall exactly when she was brought in but lets say February which gives us 6 months at 7 days a week retainer on top… We have to pay to keep her even if she isn’t doing anything.

John – The core review is in my opinion, nothing but a huge waste of taxpayer dollars. It accomplished nothing, informed us of nothing that was not already well known, and has few feasible suggestions on savings.

Sell the four seasons? Who would want it, its old. Very old. Have you ever heard of a private pool making money? Have you ever owned even a hot tub? They are expensive. So how long until the company that buys it starts cutting corners? How long until someone has something terrible happen as a result? How long until they come to the city begging for money to keep open? It has happened in other BC cities that have sold their pools to contractors, and then ended up paying way more money to them to keep the pool open.

Sell the civic center? How much money do we have invested into that building already? What could we reasonably expect to get out of it? Why would we be spending another 500,000 dollars on the fountain plaza outside of it only to sell the facility?

Sell out city parks? Who would buy them, why should we sell our assets for short term gain? Why should we lose our parks?

Lets see Management has gotten 8% a year in increases, council gave themselves 30% right off the bat and I’m sure the increase year to year has been *competitive*, the increases for management are by no means tied to that of the union, because I can assure you that we have not been giving city CUPE workers 8% a year raises ever.

Cost of living is what 2%+ a year now? So the CUPE workers should take 0% and lose money, while management and council continue to see increases?

Seems to me you cannot see the forest for the trees. The city should be saving money but I hardly think that at most around 500,000 a year (based roughly on the ~500 workers the article reports, at 40 hours x 52 weeks x 25 dollars on city wages at 1.02%) (and not all of those workers are yearly, or full time) is going to be the number that bankrupts the city.

After all the core review cost that, the lawyer alone is a good chunk of that. Council’s 30% is probably more than that (and I don’t want to go look up their numbers, but its public record, so someone please go ahead and check this for me, because I am curious).

Lonesome – Do you really think, for even a second that anyone involved with contract bargaining on either side would comment on anything? Like even for a second think this? Really?

Yes, I have friends who work for the city, and they have good jobs, that pay a good wage, and they do us a good service in return. They do get passionate about the city, and I’ve heard a lot of the going on’s through them.

I also have friends who work for contractors, who make a decent wage, who work for guys who make an incredible profit. Who get told to cut corners and save where ever possible.

And I have some who work for contractors who make way more money hourly than city workers. And the contractor they work for makes even more still.

My biggest issue with the idea of contracting out, is that we contract out to the lowest bidder, who (if history is any judge) will lie, mislead, and falsify their offer to get the contract. Then end up charging way more for the “finished” job than was ever agreed upon.

See, I have no problems with the city outside workers, There are 148 of them. But seriously 364 pencil pushers. Don’t need that many, The more you have of them the bigger the empire.

364 inside workers, what do they do in this age of electronics. For every two person working outside does it mean that 5 people are working in the ivory tower. Serious problem.

The rule of thumb in my industry is 5 to 8 blue collar workers for every white collar worker.

Informed, you are so misinformed. Every single extra’s to the contract has to be approved by the city representative.

I say, we need a mayor that is willing to reduce city hall staffing. Offer less services and deal with only the essentials.

What do we want,

Contracting out save us money. Hahaha give your head a shake. They are for profit where the city is supposed to be not for profit.

What a diatribe. So you have friends who are contractors that rip-off their customers? Get a better class of friends.

The lowest bid doesn’t win the contract. Thanks for coming-out, though.

We can terminate the contract if terms are not met, or at worst ride it out and then go a different direction.

A community has to be able to be flexible with their budget and cannot be held hostage to pension and benefit concessions won in previous years, by politicians without a conscience…or in organized labour’s pocket.

City hall is not an industry. If it were, it would be industrious. …. ;-)

Informed on, finally a voice of reason.

Those that propose contracting out must be owners who generally make out like bandits on the backs of their worker bees. I witness that time and time again.

He spoke the more contracting out the more staffers needed for overwatch. I Have direct experience in this.

He spoke – Right, because once they run out of money to spend the contractor will continue working their guys… No historically they say oh well this is what is done, if your happy with it good, if not and you want what was originally promised we need more money for it…

It happens, a lot.

Alex – we can cancel contracts, if we want to lose out on what we have already put in… its not like the money is ever recouped…

Then we have the legal headaches with either having the contractor claim breech of contract, or trying to get money back from them (and I’m not aware of anytime that the city has cancelled contracts where they seek to recoup costs).

And I know contractors for the city that have ripped off the tax payer.

My friends who work for contractors, who tell them to cut corners, and the guys who don’t cut enough corners get laid off, until just the ones who play ball well enough are left. My friends were the ones who get laid off…

But yeah for those who do bend a knee to the requests… I’m sorry some people supporting their family get pressured into doing sub standard work by their employeer under the guise of being cost efficient.

The fact is anyone who is a contractor is looking to make money, and man their is money to be made. Anyone working for a contractor is doing so for the pay check. Well frankly, almost anyone working is doing so for the pay check.

But it comes down to, do you want a handful of people to get a TON of money, or do you want that money to be better distributed?

I assure you, if contracting out becomes common place, taxes WILL go up, services WILL go down, headaches (fines, towing, extra fees, wait times, etc) WILL go up.

To be fair the indoor and outdoor workers, here are some questions for you?

How many are seasonal? (summer or winter only positions? I know a lot of jobs fall into this for the outdoor workers)

How many are job share positions? (where 2 or more workers do one full time job, working 20 or less hours a week, I know that city hall used to have a few of these).

How many are part time workers? (for instance I have had a friend at the pool, most of their staff were part time at 4-8 hours a week at the very best).

How many are full time workers?

I would venture a guess that less than half of those numbers are full time year round staff. But if anyone does know the actual man hours spent in a year please do inform me (because I’m sure some overtime does also happen).

Also sea – good point on that, you still need to hire people to watch the people that you contract out jobs to.

The fact is if you think contracting out is going to save you money, or benefit you, you are either a contractor or you have some pretty rose tinted glasses.

Currently taxes are going up and services are being cut so it is clear that something has to change. That could mean more contracted work where the people will go away when there is no work or concessions by the union to make them more productive.

If the contract work is not up to standard then the invoice should sit until the job is completed as laid out in the contract.

==================================================================
“Have you ever had a plumbing problem at home? Done any reno’s? Had electrical issues? Because frankly tradesmen are expensive.”

Now imagine that you have to bring in a plumber for a two day job but have to pay him for the whole week because he has a no lay off clause….I know I would gladly pay an extra 10 bucks an hour for the time he actually spent working if the meter stopped as soon as he was finished.

====================================================================

Will say it again….taxes are going up and services being cut already… so pointing at the big bad boogie man contractor is nothing more than union scare tactics.

Lets not get carried away with all the hogwash about the City, City Workers, etc;

Fact of the matter is, we need to look at how many people we have working, what they do, and if they give any value for the dollars paid. This includes Managers as well as Union workers. They are both paid with tax dollars, and if they are not making a valued contribution then their jobs should be eliminated.

Arguing about what Management gets versus what Unions get, is nothing more than a red herring. The issue is value for money spent, and the high cost of running this City.

The talk about the Councilors getting a 30% raise sounds good, however I note that people forget to mention that Councilors were getting paid approx. $23000.00 per year, and the increase 30% brought them up to $30,000.00 per year. In order to make a fair comparison you would have to know how many hours Councilors spent at meetings, getting ready for meetings, travel, dealing with the public etc; At the end of the day you would probably find that they get paid much less per hour than he lowest paid Union job. So scrub that idea.

Its the Unions job to get what it can for its members, however that does not mean that what they want is deserved, or fair. Management on the other hand is out of control when it comes to staffing and pay. Council does not seem to have a handle on the Cities costs, so we have a serious problem.

To give everyone a raise over 3 years and then sit back and contemplate their navels, seems to be the easiest way out for Management and Council.

Lets see if this time around anything is done differently.

Axeman – I highly doubt the city of PG is going to go bankrupt because of the CUPE workers. Afterall, how many millions this year have been spent on the roads (and yes some of them sorely needed a facelift). How much was spent on the core review, etc… If they are comfortable throwing that kind of money around, we are a long way off bankrupt.

———————-

The city spends almost 50 million dollars per year in wages and benefits and you don’t think that’s an issue? It’s not sustainable. Our population is aging and people on fixed incomes aren’t going to be able to pay the ever increasing property taxes needed to keep the civil service gravy train running. Young people are going to look at 3-4 thousand dollar yearly tax bill and say to heck with Prince George.

We have too many people sucking on the taxpayer’s teat. It has to stop.

(I’m not just talking front line workers either; management is also out of control).

Informed is not so informed, the raise was voted for before the election and they did not vote for raises and money as a first thing right after the election

In 2009 our city staff over 75,000 was 209 employees out of 924, in 2011 that number increased 220 of 903 employees, 2012 with 229 over 75,000 and a total of 890 employees…

Too look at the big picture, in 2011 labour was expensed in the annual report at 52.7 million – 2012 labour expenses were 53.1 million or an increase of 426,000 WITH 13 less full time employees.

If you bring in a good negotiator who saves you say 500 dollars a year per contract, on 512 employees that is over 250,000 you save in one year alone COMPOUNDED FOREVER. City Hall does some stupid things but this may be one of the prudent ones ASSUMING they negotiate some savings.

Clarification: it is not 500 dollars less a year the 512 employees will make a year – I am not saying they will get a pay cut – but rather the negotiator saving you 500 bucks per contract over what the city could have negotiated without the extra cost of a professional from down south

Our mayor makes more than comparable cities. I’m sure if you were to look at what council makes they are extremely well compensated. And don’t forget they have support staff that does a lot of their leg work.

3 or 4 thousand dollar tax bill? I have a 250k house in a nice neighbourhood and I pay 2,500 on my tax. Actually after the home owners grand I pay 1,500. So that 3 or 4 thousand dollar tax bill means they are buying a 500-million dollar house.

I don’t know what kind of house you have good sir to be paying so much in taxes, but it must be very nice indeed.

Or are you suggesting that taxes will increase by two or three fold?

They brought in a lawyer, from the get go.

When has this ever happened in our city before? When has this ever happened in any city? It is considered an act of extreme bad faith.

Certainly the city started negotiations in bad faith, certainly the lawyer won’t end up saving us any money.

Also I’ve heard anecdotal evidence suggesting that the lawyer was hostile, rude, and cussing in her first encounter with CUPE.

I suggest that their union will settle at something like 1%, 1%, 2% a year for a three year contract. Frankly they have the 2015 games as leverage.

I doubt that without the lawyer that it would have been any different, I suggest that the terms would be similar and we would have another half million tax dollars in our coffers.

3 or 4 thousand dollar tax bill? I have a 250k house in a nice neighbourhood and I pay 2,500 on my tax. Actually after the home owners grand I pay 1,500. So that 3 or 4 thousand dollar tax bill means they are buying a 500-million dollar house.
—————–

Based on the 2013 tax rates a residential property assessed at 250K should be taxed at $3051.23 in the city of Prince George.

About councillors pay. I am sure there are a lot of volunteers in this city who put in as many or more hours for nothing, well maybe some expense coverage now and again.

Informed, Axeman is correct, you should be paying more in taxes if your assessment is right. Most of the newer houses in PG have taxes in the $4000-$5000 range.

“And don’t forget they have support staff that does a lot of their leg work.”

The thinking should go like this:

1. The Council sets direction. It is a distinct function from what staff does.

2. Staff provides backgrounder information so that Council can make informed direction setting decisions.

3. Staff also implements the processes and activities which are required to steer the City in the direction that the taxpayers want Council to go.

The problem comes in when on more and more occasions neither staff nor Council quite understand their respective roles.

In other words, Council and Staff do not work well together.

Staff makes it difficult for Council to get full disclosure in a timely and uncomplicated manner and Council on too many occasions wants to meddle with staff functions. They micro manage far too often.

THAT is ineffective and inefficient and can cost considerable money.

When finding out about how much people pay for their taxes, please remember that the tax bill has municipal, school, hospital and rdffg taxes combined. So, everyone could be right. ;-)

Just got an email from Administration. Over the 3-year term, Administration is offering CUPE workers 0%, 0%, and 2%. I will be voting “YES” when the strike vote happens.

sure – then go on strike for a few weeks, cause a big flap, settle for 0%, 1% and 2% and never recoup back the wages you lost while on strike. Good thinking. At least the union heads will all have something to hi-five about with their strike bonus ;)

You can’t go on strike! Think about all those poor shovels. Who’s going to breast feed them? :)

CUPE Contract Talks Heat Up

Informed states; :I highly doubt the city of PG is going to go bankrupt because of CUPE workers.”

I have to agree with you Informed!

Axeman responds to Informed stating; “The city spends almost 50 million dollars per year in wages and benefits and you don’t think its and issue?”

Then Stinky states; ” Too (sic) look at the big picture, in 2011 labour expenses in the annual report at 52.7 million – 2012 labour expenses were 53.1 million… “If you bring in a good negotiator who save you money..”

Axeman and Stinky need to realize CUPE does not represent an entire city labour force consisting of more than 50 million dollars in wages and benefit costs… hardly… CUPE represents only a fraction of that!

Lets go with 50 million minus protective services, because they are considered “essential services” (police and fire protection) they do not strike and are not represented by CUPE. Their salary and benefits are approx. 20.4 million so now we are looking at only 29.6 million that may be attributed to CUPE.

Not so fast… there are 27 officers and officials employed at City Hall who are designated and Director and Managers who represent the employer and not workers, their wages and benefits add up to approximately 5 million dollars… so minus 5 million from 29.6 million and we are down to 24.6 million.

There is a governance portion to salary and benefits at approximately 1 million dollars… now we are down to 23.6 million dollars in wages and benefits, there are a number of supervisors in each department that are not CUPE and when a strike happens must still work, their wages and benefits come in at approximately 5 million dollars. So 24.6 million minus 5 million dollars and we are down to 19.6 million.

When all is said and done I guarantee you all that CUPE positions at City Hall represent one third of the total 50 million in wage and benefit costs!

I give a passing grade to Informed and a failing grade to Axeman and Stinky. Too much rhetoric from “right field” now countered by too many FACTS from left field!!!

“I give a passing grade to Informed and a failing grade to Axeman and Stinky. Too much rhetoric from “right field” now countered by too many FACTS from left field!!!”

—————

Comprehension’s not your strong suit is it? I never said that CUPE accounted for the entire 50 mill. In fact, I even stated that both management and front line workers need serious cuts to their numbers.

Taxpayers are getting sick and tired of civil servants with their hands out demanding more, more, more while doing less, less and less.

I really have to get myself a job that allows me to chit and snivel the day away on 250 News. I totally envy you people.

? Wages and benfits for 27 managers is 5 million? That is over 185,000 each…yet we only have 5 over 130,000

Like I said before, if the labour lawyer saves $500 per year per contract with CUPE that has 512 members that is $256,000 the city saves in Labour costs compounded annually. So 2014 they save 256,000, 2015 they save another 256,000 plus whatever percentage the increase is, say 1% over the annum going forward. So year 2 they have saved 258,560 plus the 256,000 or 514,560. Year 3 they have saved 261,145 plus the other 2 years or 775,705. That is what we are talking about, the city needs to get these numbers in control. Managerial staff need to also take the same deal and we will save a bundle, enough to cover any increase in taxes for next year now that we will be paying for snow removal as a separate line.

That brings up another point, 2012 bylaw was passed to collect 83 million in property taxes but they actually collected 86 million. Do we all get a refund?

Seamutt. Are you suggesting that our Councilors should be volunteers?? Lots of luck with that.

People#1 is notoriously wrong with figures but let us say that People#1 is right, CUPE is 19.6 million in labour costs, divide by 512 and the labour lawyer has to only save 0.6% per year to achieve $500 per contract or 3/4 of a million dollars in savings over 3 years.

“I really have to get myself a job that allows me to chit and snivel the day away on 250 News. I totally envy you people.”

Don’t worry, your day will come when you can retire and live off your savings and the money someone in government invested at 2% for you.

Face palm @ Stinky;

Why are you only stating officials and officers salaries, add 30% MERCs (mandatory employment related costs) and you will probably get more than 5 million.

Both you and axman were so focused on the entire 50 million labour and benefits not even knowing what portion of that amount is really CUPE position labour and benefits related expenses… you both are a constant source of amusement!

Until the next time I can correct you… because there will so obviously be a next time… LOL :-D

Hopefully the municipal auditor general will be able to provide some valuable comparative statistics one of these days so that people do not have to do their own work to figure out efficiencies in cities such as PG.

Here is a report from the US which looks at the per resident cost of the municipal workforce.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/exography-19-u.s.-cities-have-proportionately-bigger-workforces-than-bankrupted-detroit/article/2533338#list3802600300

San Francisco

Residents per employee 28
Population: 805,235
Employees: 28,660
Annual payroll: $2,564,000,376
Average salary: $89,462

————————–
Based on the above, with a population just under the tenth of San Francisco’s we should have something like 2,500 city employees making an average of say $85,000 per person.

Multiply that out and it would come to a payroll of $212.5million per year.
—————————

Here is the info on Phoenix which has about the number of employees per population that we have.

http://phoenix.gov/news/110410employees.html

One word of caution, some of these cities are not comparable because some will have responsibilities beyond ours, such as operating schools, hospitals, social housing, etc.

Some of those we may see in the future as senior governments will trickle down more responsibilities to municipalities.

from the Phoenix link:
“It is important for the city to continue focusing on better use of human resources to lower costs and provide more efficient government,” said Diane Scherer, CEO of Phoenix Association of Realtors and member of the city’s Innovation and Efficiency Task Force.”

A city with an “Innovation and Efficiency Task Force”?? WOW!!!! and private citizens on that???? Double wow!!!

Let us carry on a conversation.

Oops, MERCs would be 12% then add the costs of the benefits package @ 18% of salary amount which would equal the 30%. My apologies.

People#1 has such a dense one track mind that it has to resort to name calling.
As said before…who cares what the percentage of the 53 million it is, savings are savings, all 53 million in labour costs needs to be looked at – but 512 CUPE members are at the trough right now. Haven’t seen you bring up the child poverty argument on this article like the last one

“Why are you only stating officials and officers salaries”

Because it stuck out like a sore thumb, you want another number then People#1? Ok how about you state protective services is at 20.4 million or 50 million when in fact it is 18.99 million of 53.1 million (which includes wages and benefits) in the annual report to council for 2012.
I give People#1 a failing grade in reading financial statements but a passing grade on pulling numbers out of the air.

For those who wish the City to let union employees go and contract out, there are a few complications around that.

The collective agreement states the following:

20.01 The Employer shall utilize City-owned equipment and operators to the fullest extent possible. Private equipment will not be hired when the regular qualified employees and City equipment are available to perform the work required by the Employer.
A copy of the Capital Acquisitions section of the Provisional Budget which details proposed fleet acquisitions and deletions shall be given to the Union immediately after presentation to City Council, and management will explain the intent to the Union. Any equipment changes outside the yearly adopted budget shall be communicated to the Union prior to the change.

20.02 In order to provide job security for the members of the Bargaining Unit, the Employer agrees that no employees shall lose their job as a result of contracting out.
With written consent of both parties, a service performed by the municipality may be tendered, and if as a result of award of such contract working employees are displaced, the provisions of Article 20.03, Technological Change, shall apply.
—————————-

Those clauses are very sacred union clauses. They are not insurmountable, but they will cost a lot of money to alter to the benefit of the taxpayers in the community who are, in fact, the indirect employers or at least funders of the agreement.

So, we have elected a City Council to look after our interests in this matter. However, we seem to have had a failed attempt at holding a conversation of any significance on such matters during the Core Review process.