CALFIRE proposed MOU changes

California & Hawaii Hotlist Questions and Discussion
#435

The simple answer to your question is this everything after 7/1/2024 is not in this TA. It is not being voted on. So the only things being voted on are those in the TA as posted by L2881 leadership.

Closing the 59% LG/CF gap
66hr, 56hr work week

None of those 2 things are in the TA.

If that is reason enough to vote no, I understand.
However the TA if ratified expires in 2024. Understanding the nuances of “Politics” is akin to being a meteorologist.

To me it is more than obvious the Governor will put up a primary challenge to POTUS Biden. He can’t do that without IAFF support.

The 6.6% GIS, $+$75/month education, longevity pay
Are all PERSable. I agree 100% about THE OPED but most of the other BU have similar language.

Personally speaking, anything beyond 6/30/2024 is smoke & mirrors, wish in one hand and @#$% In the other and tell me which one fills up sooner.

As someone who is working a 2nd career, this is far from perfect. But still having things like lifetime medical at 20 or 25yr, 14 paid holidays per year, are all pluses and things prior negotiations got us. The resetting of the OT clock to 53hr in 2020 WAS HUGE. Not seeing that language in the TA concerns me.

But at the end of the day, L2881 has in my opinion gotten what they could concerning the current political landscape. Turning this down now does not seem like the right decision.

1 Like
#436

This is the same explanation I’ve been hearing from chapter, district, and bargaining team members also…”just work the extra day of overtime and it’ll be even.”

To me, this shows a complete misunderstanding of the significance of PERSable income versus non-PERSable income.

One of the biggest “selling points” for staying with CDF back in the day was the fact that the retirement was better than most local government departments. There was no question that you’ll get paid less while you work, but the retiree benefits of paid medical and such offset that. It was all about the long game.

Since I started, our uniform allowance is no longer PERSable, the retirement formula has changed to 2.7@57, the qualifications for lifetime medical has changed from 20 to 25 years, the list goes on. We will never get those back.

This year it’s an 8% cut to my retirement in exchange for a 66. Next time it’s an additional 10% for a 56. When does it stop?

I’m not eager to give up any more PERSable income. The retirement benefits are a huge reason many people stayed with this outfit in the first place.

5 Likes
#437

Like pretty much every 2881 member, I am not interested in losing any PERSable income. And I think any talk of the 66 hour work week is just really muddying the water on this TA. From everyone I’ve talked to we are starting to come to the same consensus. I believe this will pass because for this TA we are not taking any real kind of hit. The 66 will not take effect during this TA. All this talk of the 66 hour work week and the loss of EDWC has nothing to do with this TA. That is for the next TA, and when the time comes and our Bargaining Team comes back with a 66 hour work week and a loss of EDWC without a substantial raise to offset it, that’s when NO votes I think will start rolling in. Am I missing something?

2 Likes
#438

So…I’m not understanding. Why is the 66 not part of this agreement?

For me, the 66 is by far the biggest reason to vote in favor, so long as it won’t reduce our EDWC. Other than that, the longevity increase, and the educational incentive (which are basically just small add ons and not key features), this agreement doesn’t really have much long-term substance from my perspective.

1 Like
#439

This is a 2 year deal. When have you ever seen an MOU where there is nothing on the back end? No raise on Jan 2024. While there are no take aways this is a terrible deal 2 years and no raises at the end. CalHr had to be laughing when they walked away from the table.

2 Likes
#440

I asked the union directly in the town hall about the 66 hour work week, they said it will not be a pay cut since they aren’t cutting our pay they are cutting our hours which the state will not pay hours not worked. So take 24 hours off your salary. But don’t worry it’s not a pay cut though it’s a reduction in hours worked…

3 Likes
#441

We keep hearing that this TA has no take aways. Though in reality this TA has the largest take away I have ever seen. We are giving up a fixed rate OPEB for a variable rate OPEB with no cap. So essentially we could see a .5% reduction in pay annually for the rest of our career. The change in OPEB is alone enough of a reason that this TA should not be ratified.

I doesn’t matter if it’s language that it’s other BU contracts, our contract is a lot different that most other BU as is. This is an issue we should not even entertain.

3 Likes
#442

If OPEB isn’t capped, I will not vote yes.

1 Like
#443

I think this is why it’s so confusing for me.

I don’t feel like I’m getting a real answer from anyone regarding how the EDWC and/or OPEB will play out and I’m starting to think that maybe a real answer doesn’t exist and won’t exist until well after the vote.

It just feels like we’re being asked to trade our old wrinkled up dollar bill for three shiny quarters with the promise that if everything goes our way, we’ll also get two nickels thrown in to make up for it.

I feel like I’m fairly smart and try to keep up on things, but I’m just not following the math or the logic. There has to be something I’m missing.

2 Likes
#444

FYI the $260 increases for medical is almost exactly what the medical rates increase from Blue Cross for my family nets me $3.52 in GIS after expenses.

2 Likes
#445

Huh…funny how the numbers work out. Coincidence?

1 Like
#446

Negative, nothing with CalHR is coincidence.

2 Likes
#447

image
image4032×3024 2.99 MB

1 Like
#448

When does the Membership vote on this?

#449

They haven’t said yet

#450

There are votes happening this week in some units.

4 Likes
#451

Would be nice if the union to announce that rather than an email saying “rumor control”

#452

You should check with your unit chapter. My chapter has been very up front with everyone about voting in the oncoming weeks and having meetings to discuss the facts of the TA. The things I’m hearing from our chapter are concerning to say the least, but the fact some chapters are still not discussing with their members what is going on is even more concerning to me. If your chapter officers have not been doing their jobs, it sounds like your chapter needs new officers.

4 Likes
#453

I 100% agree with you on that

#454

With the fires in SKU, RRU, BDU, and NEU and a lot of troops on the line. CDFFAE kind of answered my question where the chapters able to have meetings with their members?

1 Like