pages: CityCouncil/2009-10-06.pdf, 6
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2009-10-06 | 6 | MOU's, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Tam inquired what would happen if a mutually agreeable option does not occur, to which the City Attorney responded it is possible that it could reach an impasse. Councilmember Tam inquired whether new hires are represented through a bargaining unit. The City Attorney responded existing employees are represented by the MOU; people who have not been hired have no rights under the MOU; amending the ordinance is important so that confer rights are not placed upon people who have not yet been hired. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether an individual hired in December 2009 would take the position knowing that they are not entitled to any retiree healthcare benefits, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether a new hire would not be entitled to healthcare benefits for five years, to which the City Attorney responded it depends on the bargaining group. Mayor Johnson stated that she does know of any other city that has the same retiree medical benefits; hopefully, the committee can work together to agree on a proposal to the Council that works for the City long term; the current healthcare benefits provided to public safety retirees and spouses is much too generous; other employees' retirement benefits are much lower. The Human Resources Director stated newly hired public safety employees would be entitled to the same retirement healthcare benefits as other [non public safety] employees, which is the minimum employer contribution of approximately $101 per month toward the premium. Mayor Johnson stated amending the ordinance would wipe the slate clean to work out a new agreement. Councilmember Gilmore stated the City cannot sustain the current benefits provided to public safety; inquired whether the bargaining units would need to ratify whatever the committee comes up with for Council approval. The Human Resources Director responded the process would be very similar to any meet and confer issue; stated the matter would go to the bargaining unit for a ratification vote and would then come to Council for a vote before being implemented. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council October 6, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-10-06.pdf |