Listen as I say this as clearly as I can. I don't begrudge firefighters any benefits they can get. There's is a dangerous job that I don't think I'd ever want to do. I might complain about the eye strain I get from looking at a computer or the boredom I feel from going to yet another candidate forum where no one says anything interesting, but at least I don't have to run into burning buildings.
That said, I get a little more worried about the future of the city every time I read another PICA memo about the budget. This one takes the Street administration to task for not appealing a court decision to award the firefighters health benefit contribution increases equaling 45 percent over three years.
The major problem is that the administration assumed much lower increases in benefits when they presented a barely-balanced five-year plan. So now the city either has to appeal the benefits and hope that they win or change the five-year plan to bring it into balance with this new reality. Of course, the only ways to do that are cut services (more) or raise taxes.
And that's not the worst of it.
According to the PICA memo:
Additionally, with all of the other municipal unions in arbitration or negotiations over health benefits, and the next mayor facing new contracts for all of the unions by July of 2008, this award sets a potential precedent for other agreements that could cripple the new administration as it attempts to maintain or improve services while balancing the Plan.
Yep... cripple. So, once again, here's the situation facing the next mayor. Either he stays firm on bringing the skyrocketing costs of benefits in line by prying concessions out of the unions, most likely after a long, contentious negotiation and/or a strike. So now, we've got costs under control but city workers, who don't really make all that much anyway, have their health and retirement security lessened possibly creating a whole lot of sick and/or poor old people when they retire.
Or... the next mayor gives in and settles for benefits that continue to eat up more and more of the budget until just about the only thing being paid for by tax money are salaries, health benefits and the pension fund (and prison costs). Infrastructure crumbles. Potholes don't get filled. Recycling gets picked up every other week. The grass at parks and rec centers goes unmowed. Not enough cops on the streets. Actually... doesn't seem all that much different from what we have now. Ok. Imagine all of that stuff and a whole lot worse.
Option three is to grant those benefits and raise taxes to get the revenue to pay for them and maintain or, gasp, improve services. Would Nutter do that? Guess we'll know all of these answers by this time next year.
Meanwhile, everyone follow my lead. Set up separate bins in your house for each of the 7 different types of plastic, metal/glass, food waste (make sure it seals), paper, cardboard and every other type of garbage. Then figure out where you can recycle each thing. You can use this site but you're going to find that for a lot of different plastics, you'll have to drop it off on an Ambler curbside for pick up. You may also want to start a compost pile. This will prepare you for next summer's garbage strike. Either that, or buy a pick up truck and charge your neighbors a couple bucks each to haul their trash. Just watch out picketers.
Comments (5)
Why not use an insurance provider added on to the provider city employees have now?
Give employees the option of choosing to go to another country for surgery where the whole package is covered, including airfare and stay in hotel, or in having a high deductable to get the procedures here.
That way people can use local hospitals, but if they shop around the fine hospitals in Thailand, India, Mexico, etc., they can choose the price that is a tenth to a 20th of what it is here.
There've been several articles about this in national coverage.
We don't have to decimate their coverage or health. We do have to encourage city employees to shop for the best price, while getting a good value.
But co-pays are a must.
City employees and pensioners don't want co-pays of $5 per visit, and were ready to strike over that. If they strike this year over co-pays, all of us who pay co-pays per doctor/dentist visit will not stand up with them. Nutter can call their bluff, but he certainly doesn't have to allow someone with HepB/C to camp out in the hallway.
There are obvious concessions the city has to make, and obvious concessions employees have to make. Trying to deny coverage of the sick is not going to prevent strikes. But giving employees options for treatment will.
Street was just being hardheaded on the firefighter/Hep B/C issue. We treat HepB/C in the county prisons in the city. If the paramedics need HepB/C treatment, why make it a point to remind the press that they only need to steal a car to get treatment? Street likes to be bullheaded was all that was about.
Recognizing bloodborne illness as an occupational hazard is not an expensive concession.
Posted by Anonymous | October 5, 2007 2:59 PM
If garbage workers strike, which I doubt, but if they do, we just have to hire private garbage haulers, keep good records, and compare the cost of using one or the other.
City Employees have to realize that someone else is willing to do the job for less and there are no guarantees.
Contract out. Nutter should be developing a game plan now of who can be hired to allow for layoffs, downsizing, and strikes of expensive city labor.
Value for price. Then Nutter in his calm style just has to remind the city that he has an obligation to get the best deal for the city, and that city employees are only one of his constituencies that he can't favor above the other taxpayers.
Posted by Anonymous | October 5, 2007 3:06 PM
Council should vote to urge Street to appeal. Street should appeal the awarding of a 45% increase over 3 years in health benefits.
Does Street hate Nutter more than he loves the city?
Seriously, to get the industry standard of recycling forget for a city of over 100,000, try for a city of over 50,000, we have to drive our recycling to Abington.
That's why when the local pols claim to be the Democrats' Democrat, I'm like... you don't have a clue what other blue cities are doing.
Do we have to vote Republican to get normal recycling in Philly?
Posted by Anonymous | October 5, 2007 3:15 PM
They city has to be run like a business, because it is a business.
It has revenue, and debt, hopefully not for that long. It has debits and credits. It has to increase the credits, and decrease the debits.
Unlike a for-profit, we just have to break even.
Right now the city hasn't done that since Rendell. Anyone who thinks the city is not a business is a person who doesn't know anything about business and who demonizes the very thing that creates jobs.
Government can't replace the private market -- it's just too expensive.
I would like to see Nutter's play book where he has (no doubt already) outlined what must stay, what can stay, and what must get cut from city expenses.
The obvious -- PHA, RDA, OHCD, to fund health center outside contracting, reasonable benefits the pension account, and curbside recycling!
Posted by Anonymous | October 5, 2007 3:29 PM
If the paper ever published the cost and revenue of these agencies we could make informed input as citizens about whether the taxpayer was getting her money's worth!!
Posted by Anonymous | October 5, 2007 3:30 PM