|Bruce Hansen took a 20k/yr pay cut while Trimet execs hid raises to their 6 figure salaries|
Contact Bruce Hansen
ATU President Asks the Public to Judge
Late Friday afternoon, July 19th, the Oregon Employment Relations Board issued its decision in the hotly contested case between TriMet and the transit union over last year’s interest arbitration decision. By Saturday, TriMet’s highly paid public relations department was churning out claims of victory. “In our opinion,” says Union president Bruce Hansen, “this is a good example of TriMet management’s belief that people will believe an untruth if it is shouted loud and long enough.” Hansen said that by any measure, the Union clearly won the case. You be the judge. Below are the wins and losses:
Original post is at TRANSIT WORKERS VOICE
∙ ERB agreed with the Union that TriMet violated the law and bargained in bad faith.
∙ ERB agreed with the Union that TriMet could not make its employees pay $6.8 million in retroactive health premiums.
∙ ERB agreed with the Union that TriMet had to immediately reimburse the Union $136,000 and thereafter pay the Union that amount plus an increase of $4000 each year thereafter into designated funds.
∙ ERB agreed with the Union that TriMet had to be ordered to cease and desist from bargaining in bad faith. (This is the third such order in the last two years)
∙ ERB agreed with the Union that the Union did not violate the law or engage in wrongdoing.
∙ ERB agreed with the Union that the Union did not violate the law when it refused to order its members to pay $6.8 million in retroactive health premiums.5
∙ ERB agreed with the Union that the Union did not have to be ordered to cease and desist from failing to bargain in good faith.
∙ Finally, ERB’s agreement with the Union that health insurance costs could not be collected retroactively means that TriMet must now pay union members over $3.1 million because of TriMet’s prior wrong doing. (TriMet has appealed that decision so payments are still pending the outcome of that appeal)
∙ ERB agreed with TriMet that people hired after August 1, 2012 would go into a different pension plan. Impact: TriMet will pay 6% of their wages into that plan. Those employed before that date had no change to their pensions.
∙ ERB found TriMet made a mistake and didn’t realize there were negative consequences to some retirees when TriMet changed pension raise dates. It decided not to find TriMet in violation for this mistake. Impact: This change impacted just those people who retired in the two years between January 2010 and January 2012. Additionally, some of those retirees actually benefitted financially from the date change.
∙ ERB agreed with TriMet that it could charge employees 5% more for health insurance in addition to the 5% the Union had already offered to pay. Impact: None. Employees are already paying more than 10%.
∙ ERB agreed with TriMet that it did not violate the law when it lowered the floor on the raises pensioners would receive in the future. Impact: Retirees will still get raises keyed to the cost of living, with increases up to 7% per year.
So, you be the judge. Who really won the ERB decision?