Unions Step Up to the Plate, Agree to Contribute to "Grand Bargain"

Amazing that 12 months in bankruptcy court could accomplish what we couldn't get done in our own in 30+ years.

http://deadlinedetroit.com/articles/...s#.U3q0NCe9KSM

Quote:

---

The Mediators are pleased to announce that a coalition of the building and construction trades and their supporters, through the Michigan Building and Construction Trades Council, will be participating in the so-called “Grand Bargain” by making material contributions toward health care costs for Detroit’s retirees. All of the funds that are contributed will be used specifically for this purpose.

---

lets try this one....

http://www.freep.com/article/2014051...-grand-bargain

Kudos to this union. Many of the pensioners are getting screwed by mismanagement of the pensions funds and the union management should be held accountable. I hope that other unions step up to the plate.

Bravo to the Michigan Trades Council. The point of unions is to be united. Supporting your brothers and sisters should be a core principle.

A swift kick to Ed McNeil and AFSCME who shows just how useless municipal unions are to society Blaming CAY? I'm speechless.

Quote:

---

“We’ve taken cut after cut, and now they’re going to come and tell us we need to donate?” said Ed McNeil, a special assistant to the president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 25. “We’re not doing it. We’ve been donating to the city all along, since 1981 under Coleman Young.”

---

Proof of why municipal unions should be eliminated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Bravo to the Michigan Trades Council. The point of unions is to be united. Supporting your brothers and sisters should be a core principle.

A swift kick to Ed McNeil and AFSCME who shows just how useless municipal unions are to society Blaming CAY? I'm speechless.

[/FONT][/COLOR]

Proof of why municipal unions should be eliminated.

---

There's actually some serious tension being reported between AFSCME local, which believes that they need to drive a harder bargain, and AFSCME national, which believes this is either a good deal -- or the best deal they're gonna see.

Other unions have already found out the hard way that holding out for a better deal may actually worsen your position. Not sure where Ed McNeil is coming from on this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

There's actually some serious tension being reported between AFSCME local, which believes that they need to drive a harder bargain, and AFSCME national, which believes this is either a good deal -- or the best deal they're gonna see.

Other unions have already found out the hard way that holding out for a better deal may actually worsen your position. Not sure where Ed McNeil is coming from on this.

---

The muni unions have been trained in the past is to make demands and then elect politicians to fulfill them. Now that the landscape has changed they are a little bit clueless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

Amazing that 12 months in bankruptcy court could accomplish what we couldn't get done in our own in 30+ years.

http://deadlinedetroit.com/articles/...s#.U3q0NCe9KSM

---

So the goal of the last 30+ years in your mind has been...what, exactly? To separate unions from their money?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antongast

So the goal of the last 30+ years in your mind has been...what, exactly? To separate unions from their money?

---

No.

I can't speak for CTY. But I see that goal as creating a responsible government that efficiently serves the citizens well -- and of course treats its workers well too.

Treating well:
-Does not mean workers get 100% of what they want
-Does not mean unions are allowed to set work rules for how government functions.
-Does not mean that member dues can be used to elect leaders who are sympathetic to the Union so they can get what they want in contract talks.
-Does not mean wages and benefits that greatly exceed the private sector.

Yes, we want to treat city workers well. But we also want to treat citizens fairly and not create an unsustainable environment where property taxes are out of control yet civic services are pathetic and the city is unsafe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

No.



Yes, we want to treat city workers well. But we also want to treat citizens fairly and not create an unsustainable environment where property taxes are out of control yet civic services are pathetic and the city is unsafe.

---

68 mills IF you homestead, of course renters just pay more property taxes to the landlord at 86 mills. Property taxes are way past being out of control in the D, more like FUBAR. At those rates it is very difficult to improve the value of property resulting in even the peeps that could afford to maintain their property to have zero incentive to do it. Owners, Landlords, speculators it doesn't matter, if the property value increases the taxes will flaten you so why improve? High property taxes are the reason unscrupulous landlords are attracted to Detroit, it's just a cash grab until they foreclose on the taxes then just abandon and move on to the next one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antongast

So the goal of the last 30+ years in your mind has been...what, exactly? To separate unions from their money?

---

Not at all. I have no problems with unions wanting to protect their employees and getting the best pay they can get and the best education to re-tool for the new economy.

My goal for the city over the last 30+ years has been to:

Prioritize resident services over employee pay.
Prioritize resident services over political loyalty and gain.
Prioritize resident services over criminal behavior.

We failed to do all of those things, and so we lost all the residents. What happened? We can't afford employees. Political power was taken away from us. Crime envelops the city.

It's amazing what 12 months in bankruptcy court can do.

I wonder where the MBCTC is going to get the $3 to $5 million to pay into the “Grand Bargain.” Two of the largest trade unions that make up the MBCTC are the Operating Engineers and the Carpenters union.

Both are in “Critical” funding status, meaning their pension funds are below 65% funded. Actually, a few years ago Moody’s published a report that they were among the 108 worst funded pension funds in the 45% to 40% funded range. This would make each of them being $1 Billion underfunded.

Maybe this is to help payback the GRS fund and the P&F fund that have a lawsuit against the Carpenters. See: http://www.freep.com/article/2013102...dillac-lawsuit

The article mentions some “secretive deal” alleged by the two Detroit pension funds that the Carpenters were able to somehow go to the head of a long line of lenders to get repaid first.

BTW, does anyone know if the Book Cadillac has made any debt service payments since it opened in 2008 – six years ago?

What will they extract from the City for being the entity that swung the vote for the rest of the money? If they delay their payment until the others have coughed up will they pay up? I'll believe it if a copy of their payment is verified by an independent source. Wonder if they are in collusion with the City to make the offer to get the Grand Bargain approved by the State? Nah nobody would stoop to that level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Packman41

BTW, does anyone know if the Book Cadillac has made any debt service payments since it opened in 2008 – six years ago?

---

The BC has been making plenty of debt service payments since 2008. Remember, there are some 35 different lenders on this deal, and each of them have recourse to foreclose if they aren't getting paid.

However, remember that the 35 of them are all in different priority stations in terms of getting paid in a liquidation situation. So, unfortunately, if any of the creditors foreclosed right now, I don't think any more than the first 10-12 lenders would be made whole.

The remainder of the lenders will eventually get paid. But they will have to wait until the property value on the hotel has increased enough to create the equity to go all the way down the payment line, otherwise, threatening a foreclosure is about as useful as suing a homeless person for the money he owes you. Sure, you'll probably win in court....but there's no money there to pay you.

If this is a complaint about the GRS pensions not getting paid on their loan, the fault is not on the BC. The fault is on the trustees for not making sure they were a higher priority in the order of payments. Though, in their defense, that loan was made in 2008. There are plenty of loans that are still underwater from then. In time, it will get paid out unless they settle for some reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

Not at all. I have no problems with unions wanting to protect their employees and getting the best pay they can get and the best education to re-tool for the new economy.

My goal for the city over the last 30+ years has been to:

Prioritize resident services over employee pay.
Prioritize resident services over political loyalty and gain.
Prioritize resident services over criminal behavior.

We failed to do all of those things, and so we lost all the residents. What happened? We can't afford employees. Political power was taken away from us. Crime envelops the city.

It's amazing what 12 months in bankruptcy court can do.

---

I guess I'm confused because the title of the thread is "Unions Step Up to the Plate, Agree to Contribute to the Grand Bargain."

As far as I understand, the idea of union organizations paying into the grand bargain [[as distinct from the money being extracted from union members in the form of pension cuts, health care cuts, and annuity clawbacks) was nothing but an eleventh-hour asshole move by Jase Bolger in an effort to torpedo the deal and/or further seal the fate of organized labor in Michigan. It has nothing in particular to do with any of the issues you mentioned in this post.

It seems odd, if your interest is genuinely in making the city work better and not just in destroying unions for the sheer hell of it, that this move would be something you would celebrate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antongast

I guess I'm confused because the title of the thread is "Unions Step Up to the Plate, Agree to Contribute to the Grand Bargain."

As far as I understand, the idea of union organizations paying into the grand bargain [[as distinct from the money being extracted from union members in the form of pension cuts, health care cuts, and annuity clawbacks) was nothing but an eleventh-hour asshole move by Jase Bolger in an effort to torpedo the deal and/or further seal the fate of organized labor in Michigan. It has nothing in particular to do with any of the issues you mentioned in this post.

It seems odd, if your interest is genuinely in making the city work better and not just in destroying unions for the sheer hell of it, that this move would be something you would celebrate.

---

AG, why are you so bitter?

Union contributions are nothing new. NYC's deal was sealed by union contributions. And it makes sense. Everyone who is involved in this should contribute. Everyone involved will benefit from a healthy city. Unions can be part of the solution. Why not?

Believe it or not, people do things -- and they aren't all union bashing. Don't be paranoid. Sometimes its not all about union bashing ... but just about pulling together during a crisis.

Maybe you're right. This guy has it out for unions. So what. As long as his idea has merit, let it go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Bravo to the Michigan Trades Council. The point of unions is to be united. Supporting your brothers and sisters should be a core principle.

A swift kick to Ed McNeil and AFSCME who shows just how useless municipal unions are to society Blaming CAY? I'm speechless.

[/FONT][/COLOR]

Proof of why municipal unions should be eliminated.

---

I don't think this is proof of anything as I don't think he was saying what you think he was saying. Look at the entire quote:

Quote:

---

"We've taken cut after cut, and now they're going to come and tell us we need to donate?" said Ed McNeil, a special assistant to the president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 25. "We're not doing it. We've been donating to the city all along, since 1981 under Coleman Young."

---

It is pretty clear he is referring to the cuts they have taken as the "donation" to the city, not some other kind of donation of which you would not approve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antongast

I guess I'm confused because the title of the thread is "Unions Step Up to the Plate, Agree to Contribute to the Grand Bargain."

As far as I understand, the idea of union organizations paying into the grand bargain [[as distinct from the money being extracted from union members in the form of pension cuts, health care cuts, and annuity clawbacks) was nothing but an eleventh-hour asshole move by Jase Bolger in an effort to torpedo the deal and/or further seal the fate of organized labor in Michigan. It has nothing in particular to do with any of the issues you mentioned in this post.

It seems odd, if your interest is genuinely in making the city work better and not just in destroying unions for the sheer hell of it, that this move would be something you would celebrate.

---

Jase Bolger has been pushing for union support for this since January. It isn't an 11th hour move. I'm conflicted enough on this issue that It would be incorrect to say that I'm in the Bolger camp on this. I do think that the precedent of cutting pensions in bankruptcy is already a giant blow to labor.

The blame for the failure of Detroit is complex and lies in multiple directions. And there are parties [[such as philanthropists and the Big 3) that are trying to do their part to fix this. Which I applaud and believe is the right thing to do.

the problem I see so far from AFSCME, in particular, is this attitude of "this isnt our fault, we didnt cause this." Of course it's ludicrous to lay this all at the feet of labor. But equally as stupid is to deny Labor's role over the last 30 years. Even today, go ask union leadership in any other city about how they can expect to get paid in full when their pensions are only 60% funded... The response is usually some version of, "well that's not our problem. We look to the elected leaders to find a way."

So I am not looking to break Labor's back over this. But I wouldnt mind seeing some symbolic gesture to say, "Look, we all got into this mess, and we are all willing to pitch in and help." Because the days of the "shoulder-shrugging", "not our problem" era ended the day Detroit filed for Chapter 9.

The UAW has already said, they won't be joining the party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cincinnati_Kid

The UAW has already said, they won't be joining the party.

---

UAW is joining the party. They said they won't be using their own funds but they've now agreed to raising funds to contribute. That sounds reasonable to me.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...-deal/9406759/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

AG, why are you so bitter?

---

This is a loaded question. I am not bitter. I'm smiling! Look at me smiling! :)

If you don't think Jase Bolger and the Michigan Republican Party are engaged in a concerted effort to destroy organized labor in Michigan, and if you don't think they're using their influence over the Detroit bankruptcy process to further this goal, then you are either not following the situation closely or you're extraordinarily inept at processing what you're seeing. However, I do not think this is the case. I think you recognize and endorse what Bolger is doing, and I think you are arguing disingenuously in order to frustrate people who try to engage with your arguments. The reason I think this is because this is what you do every single time anyone tries to debate you in good faith.

But hey, you know what? It didn't work, this time. I'm still smiling. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

So I am not looking to break Labor's back over this.

---

How much more broken can labor's back get? I mean, what do they have left? Whatever happens with current retirees, pensions are getting phased out for new hires. Pay certainly isn't going back up. City jobs are getting contracted out right and left. RTW is still on the books, and not going anywhere anytime soon. The emergency manager can unilaterally change union contracts any time he feels like it, so collective bargaining essentially doesn't exist anymore. Now Bolger is doing his best to bleed out any cash reserves these unions might have otherwise been able to direct toward electing a legislature that isn't actively trying to kill them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antongast

This is a loaded question. I am not bitter. I'm smiling! Look at me smiling! :)

If you don't think Jase Bolger and the Michigan Republican Party are engaged in a concerted effort to destroy organized labor in Michigan, and if you don't think they're using their influence over the Detroit bankruptcy process to further this goal, then you are either not following the situation closely or you're extraordinarily inept at processing what you're seeing. However, I do not think this is the case. I think you recognize and endorse what Bolger is doing, and I think you are arguing disingenuously in order to frustrate people who try to engage with your arguments. The reason I think this is because this is what you do every single time anyone tries to debate you in good faith.

But hey, you know what? It didn't work, this time. I'm still smiling. :)

---

So happy you're smilin'. You're wrong about me, you know. I am much more liberal than you realize. I just don't like big-government liberalism, creating dependency via compassion, nor union monopolies on the workplace. I believe in limited government, self-sufficiency as the path to social ills, and freedom of association.

Stay happy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

So happy you're smilin'. You're wrong about me, you know. I am much more liberal than you realize. I just don't like big-government liberalism, creating dependency via compassion, nor union monopolies on the workplace. I believe in limited government, self-sufficiency as the path to social ills, and freedom of association.

---

I'm familiar with the concept of "classical liberalism," and I'm aware that in many places this is what is meant by the term "liberal," but here in the US when we say "liberal" we typically mean "politically left of center." Your usage of the term is by no means incorrect, but if you persist in using it as such on a US-based message board without clarification you're likely to confuse people more often than not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Stay happy.

---

I will!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

... You're wrong about me, you know. I am much more liberal than you realize....

---

Your choice of that particular screen name along with your post history here suggests exactly the opposite. You appear to be unaware of the impression you have created here.

Time to switch sock puppets?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimaz

Your choice of that particular screen name along with your post history here suggests exactly the opposite. You appear to be unaware of the impression you have created here.

Time to switch sock puppets?

---

Agreed. Mouch is a closet republican, your posts don't suggest any liberalism whatsoever. It's time to come out Wesley.