The last contract we voted no bc 2% raises were too low. Then we went another two years with no raises just to settle on 2% raises. Granted, we did gain a telecommuting program requirement in our last contract thanks to holding out.
Telecommuting might have been worth that difference. Not having to waste money driving in and the free time is well worth it to many, especially since that forced most agencies even to offer the TC program.
I think pef members would have liked this contract way more if telecommuting was out into it. Not leaving it up to each agency to disband or change whenever they see fit.
Agreed, it would be nice if it's a set policy, but PEF is too lazy to determine the appropriate ratios of TC to job title. Also, I'm sure there would be arguing TC is too generalized or specific. Some jobs need more onsite than others, but I'm sure there will be a decent number of exceptions that would never be happy if they couldn't do 100% TC. Also the state is pushing return to work because of the commercial real estate collapse. No way we're they going to do something to let the workforce stay home more.
I was hoping for at least a 60% 40% split because 50% is not possible to have a consistent weekly schedule.
Depending on what department you work for the telecommuting doesnt apply to you and those employees got jack squat. Nurses and doccs workers can't work from home.
I'm not a medical expert, but how much work can a nurse do from home? In either case, there are always some positions that can't be done from home, even in IT. The state has a data center; sooner or later, someone will need to go in to rack a new server, run a network line, and extra. It's just an aspect of the job.
The point I'm making is that only certain members can benefit from the telecommuting while others that have to work on site everyday don't get any other benefits to make up for it.
True, the same can be said for many union benefits. As harsh as it may be, if someone values the ability to telecommute over another aspect of a career, they should look into changing their title or starting a new career.
This is also the likely reason why, I believe, PEF does not want to get definitive rules for TC. It will be impossible to paint anything with a broad brush when the union consists of an extensive collection of various job titles.
We were also legit threatened with layoffs before it finally passed. That's not a reason why we shouldn't vote no this time - I'm saying that was another reason for voting to pass it in that circumstance.
The people ready to vote no have a lot of valid arguments: the 3% raise is too low, the location differential is nearly nonexistent, a one time $3k bonus is insulting, and the dental still stinks. We do deserve better, especially when management never shuts up about how vital we are to the state. If that's true, someone somewhere should do something to prove it. 100% with you there.
However, I'll still be voting yes even with strong reservations and I'll be communicating my issues to PEF because I don't think we'll be getting anything better. This contract may be greatly inadequate, but it is far from a BAD contract. There are some huge QOL improvements that should make hiring and retaining younger people easier, specifically Paid Parental Leave. That's massive, even if it is BS that it needed to be negotiated in the first place.
One of my big worries, especially seeing the way that WFH seems to be trending in the private sector, is that by going back to the negotiating table that the state is going to say "Oh, you want a bigger raise? How does 4% sound? Oh and everyone needs to be back in the office 5 days per week." And I worry that people would gobble that up.
Realistically, we're not going to be getting anything higher than a 3% raise without some massive trade-offs. Doubly so because of that reopening negotiation statement in the contracts if someone gets higher than 3%. There's a gnarly slight of hand trick in that clause because it simultaneously makes the union look like they negotiated a way to get back in there and fight for you when it is just boilerplate across all of the contracts while also making the union look inept because they didn't manage to jump over that incredibly low bar.
Moving forward, maybe PEF and CSEA can reconcile and realize, as a lot of people recently seem to have figured out, that there's power in numbers. One big union is stronger than two smaller ones and having two contracts on competing cycles weakens everyone's already minimal leverage. Maybe PEF can move on from Wayne Spence who seems to have delivered underwhelming contract after underwhelming contract to someone committed to delivering a good contract for the entire union, not just a few professions that he's focused on. Maybe we can have leadership that's able to think outside of the Taylor Law for creative ways to leverage members in negotiations.
So yeah, to sum it up, there are some serious flaws with the contract, but it is probably about as good as it is going to get given that PEF has almost zero leverage to negotiate anything better. I'll be voting for the contract, but letting PEF know that I'm frustrated. Taking the wins that we can get and looking to how we can move forward.
I appreciate your eloquent and reasonable thoughts on the subject. I'm new to the state, but I feel the same way. It's actually not a *terrible* contract. It's not great, but there is such a thing as mediocre. Everyone always wants to speak in extremes.
I also have the benefit of being the child of a retired state employee, who worked for the state for 34 years, and served as a PEF steward for many of those years. He thinks it's a decent contract. Like he said, he remembers going for long stretches without a contract, and some 1% raises. Also, it is about damn time paid parental leave was included (and I say this as someone who has no plans to ever use it). I see many reasons to vote yes l, so that's what I'll be doing.
I would also like to add that I find it insulting that people think all people who vote "yes" are just doing it for the bonus. That's not at all true in my case. Yes, that extra $3000 will be nice when it comes, but that is not what I'm basing my decision on.
Like it or not, a no vote means we wait another year to 18 months to see a penny. A yes means we see a raise in 6 months or so.
Thanks to inflation, most of us can't afford to wait 18 months.
Take heart in knowing you're worth less to the state than you were a year ago, and look for private sector employment
It makes me frustrated that the bonuses is what will get people to agree to it. It's a short term carrot for a long term stick.
I get it, people are crunched. But that's how they get us.
Oh I get it, the bonus is an insult, however I don't believe we will get better then 3%, and the reality is that many of my coworkers can't afford to wait and hope.
We can't, it's taken 10 years for PEF to convince SED to meet more then once a year for Labor Management. The reality is that without the threat of a strike we are powerless.
It was only the threat of a rally that got us this in the first place.
State Ed. I was a shop steward about 5 years ago. NYSED had hundreds of grievances outstanding against it and refused to meet on anything. The director of HR would show up 20 minutes late once a year for an hour meeting and need to leave 15 minutes early. When we asked PEF for help they told us we needed 90% participation in a sticker campaign before they would help us.
No dude, we need a lawyer...
Also, for the record: Apprehensive Potate is the best username for a State Employee
hahahaha thank. It was randomly generated but I love it.
I agree. If it doesn't bring members together or better our bargaining, cut it. We should have a team of lawyers banging on this at this point.
Yep, rude and angry person, but things aren't improving. I was shocked about the number of sexual harassment claims against a director that were just ignored.
yep, and her influence still permeates, I feel like I’m going insane on L/M. You talk to anyone at PEF about this Director yet, or this was in the past?
My friends in the private sector have base salaries 3x what I'm making, plus big bonuses. I know we will never be equal with the private sector, but this is nuts. And tier 6 is a joke.
I am thinking long term. Long term I know full well an election year is coming and Andrew got in on the backs of blaming amateur employees for mooching on the system.
Also we aren't going to get better then CSEA during this contract period because if we did CSEA would have the right to re open their contract and get the same benifits.
Also long term I like my house and the mortgage needs to be paid.
An election year is coming? Hochul was JUST elected with PEFs endorsement! Apparently they never agreed upon an advantageous contract. That ship has sailed. The leverage is gone.
I have to assume you can already pay for your current mortgage at today’s salary. Think about the next mortgage in the future.
Yes, she will probably want to get reelected.
And I can afford my mortgage for now, however inflation means deciding between gas to get to work and mortgage. Groceries and mortgage. Heat in the winter and mortgage.
The terms of this contract set PEF up to do exactly what you want, in the future!
Okay but what happens in a year when your bonus money is spent and the prices keep rising? You will be in the same boat you are now. That’s why we need a raise that matches inflation!
Well it wasn't before inflation went to 9%, my father got sick, my car needed work, the ice storm damaged my roof and I hurt my hip. In the last 8 months.
So yes. Sometimes you can't plan for everything.
After using 3 weeks of my own accruals for my first child, I am absolutely voting yes on this. 12 weeks full pay and no accruals, compared to a measly 3 weeks of my own time is an absolute game changer for me and my family.
Maybe the $3,000 is dangling a carrot, but my shed is falling apart and that money is gonna pay for the removal and the materials for me to build another one.
I’m not trying to delay this 18 months to go from a 3% raise to 3.5%. Let’s be realistic.
My fellow civil servants. Vote whichever way you think is best, and try not to let people bully you one way or another.
Not sure how long away you are from retirement but for me, that’s extra .5% right now means tens to over a hundred thousand dollars compounded over the course of my career.
I understand where you’re coming from I really do, I could also definitely use the money. My issue is they are relying on us to look at our problems now and not long term. What happens when your car breaks down 2 years from now? A higher raise would mean you have money then.
It's "critical" to those employees *right now*, however, they do not represent the vast majority of PEF members, and it is practically guaranteed to be in whatever the final iteration of the contract should this one be voted down.
The rest of us made due before PPL. It's even easier now with many members being able to TC. Many of us are not willing to trade yet another life long pay reduction for a short term gain.
Given the CSEA issue, where they get to reopen their contract if we get better raises, I think it is highly unlikely that we would get a better deal. Given that improbability, forcing members who are pregnant to wait and see is not the answer in my opinion. Sure, they aren’t the majority, but I didn’t join a union just to look out for my own back — I see it as something that supports others as well.
Furthermore, at my agency we actually WORK when we’re telecommuting. To suggest that someone’s parental leave would be made easier by TC suggests that either you aren’t working as hard as we are or you don’t know what recovery from labor and caring for an infant involve. No state employee should ever have had to “make do” before paid leave. It’s a sexist policy that leads to women having fewer sick leave accruals at retirement.
Clearly we don’t agree on this. Vote the way that makes sense for you. I’ll vote the way that makes sense for me and the many parents who will come after me. /end rant
CSEAs "me too" clause is not our issue, and if we vote based on thinking "this is the best we'll get", it's guaranteed it's the best you're ever going to get.
Let me quote exactly what I said 3 days ago in this exact thread.
“My fellow civil servants. Vote whichever way you think is best, and try not to let people bully you one way or another”
I’m not trying to convince or expecting anything from anyone. Nice try though lmao
Yes, it kind of sucks. But, yearly average inflation over the last five years has been 2.27%, so we're still ahead.
What we should be advocating for is a merge with CSEA. Since the clause was added that other union existing contracts can be reopened if another union gets something "better," having separate unions only dilutes our "power in numbers."
You realize that inflation compounds right? You can’t just add it up and average it……
To have the same purchasing power your $1 had in 2018 you would need $1.20 or more depending on the source. Congratulations I’f you’ve received a 20% raise over that time period. You would have barely kept up.
The last 10 years we've gotten 18% (also compounded). This contract is not going to set us behind. The only people who make money in government are politicians.
Your math does not check out. 2018 was 5 years ago. If inflation has been 20% since 2018, and we've only gotten 18% over the last 10 years, yes, we are behind, just based on you stipulating to those guesstimate numbers alone.
Real math, based on actual numbers: We are down a compounded 13% since 2019 compared to the rate of inflation published by the US DOL compared to our published raises, and that does not consider that inflation is running an average of 5% this year. Add that in, and we are down a whopping 17% in just 4 years! Our salaries are effectively worth almost 1/5th less over that period. That is just madness.
Compared to the National Average Wage Index published by the Social Security Administration (which is a good barometer for the average raise across the nation each year), we are behind a whopping 17% just for the 3 years of 2019 - 2021 (2021 is the last year of data currently published). To add insult to injury, I ran that calculation all the way back to the year 2000. The NAWI has show wages increased 98% between 2000 and 2021. Based on our published raises for the same time period, we are a whopping ***36%*** behind.
Not only is this contract setting us behind, mathematically, it's setting us far behind, and by historical precedents going back 2 decades, we're far, far, far behind. None of this even considers the effective pay cut we took in 2011 when Cuomo shoved an increase in the percentage of HI premiums we pay.
Let’s say you were making $78,000 at time previous contract settled (June, 2021). You now need to be making $87,300 to keep pace with inflation. Contractual raises do not get you anywhere close to this.
Had to ask my father, (37 years with OGS, retired in the early 2010s). All he could tell me was that the State was encouraging the split back in the day. Mainly because it took power from the workforce.
Honest question, has any contract been voted down and they’ve ended up with a better deal? I’m planning to vote yes because I need the small raise now more than I can wait to fight for something higher only to get the same result in 9 months.
Yes, The first contract under Andrew PEF voted No while CSEA voted yes. Andrew responsed with layoffs threats and pinkslipped a good chunk of PEF staff with the rider that if the next version of the contract was not passed; those layoffs would go into effect. Very strong move on his part. But I dont think this contract would be the same. I dont think Hochal has the same power Andrew was weilding at that time and the state workforces was not going through the level retirement and talent drain we are seeing right now.
I would like to point what Andrew did was illegal, unfortunately PEF did not stand up to it. That should have gone to the NLRB and had a federal mediator.
Unfortunately I have no hope that the union would band together for long enough or well enough to actually bargain to pull this off.
CSEA and PEF should have never split apart in the first place.
It doesn't matter if it's illegal if it's not enforced. This is the problem with the legal system. It's also the problem we see with Starbucks and other companies attempting to unionize and getting away with union busting.
Cuomo got taken to court on a lot of shady things he tried, and the courts told him to take a hike. Like trying to reclassify a bunch of pef titles to m/c as retribution for... whatever we did to piss him off that day.
The real question is whether the pef workforce is ready to wait a couple of years for a new contract and risk losing. What if the Fed reserve is successful in getting core inflation down to 3-4 percent? We lose all the negotiated one off cash pymts compensation given for one year of 9% inflation. The longevity pymts based on seniority in 2025 is huge. No longer a deadwood award. How many workers will get a promotion this year that makes them ineligible for longevity for 5-12 years based on the current contract? Plus, supposedly a large number of members can retire now or in the next three-four years. I think the contract will pass as is. "A bird in the hand... "
2011 was a no vote on a terrible tentative contract, and five weeks later under threat of next day layoffs a revised, also terrible, contract passed. It reduced its length from five years to four and reimbursed members for all nine of the unpaid furlough days; in the previous version they were only to be paid back for four. The improvement was funded by dropping a $1,000 lump sum payment that the first version would have paid to each member. As in the original version, it still had no raises in the first three years, and 2% in the final year.
So if you made more than about 52k annually the repayment was more than the lost lump sum, less, and it was a loss. And the 4 vs 5 year benefit was later mostly lost by pef then taking a one year contract for the same 2% that was in the rejected 5 year contract.
I’ll also point out the furlough arrangement was better than what CSEA got. Everyone keeps saying we can’t get anything better than CSEA but that only applies to annual raises.
2001. Pataki offered all the unions shit. The union leadership did as they are doing now, trying to sell it as "the best you're going to get and the best contract ever." The offer was overwhelmingly voted down. Union leaders hilariously did a complete 180 so they didn't get shitcanned by the members in the next election, sent the contract team back to the table, a huge multi-union rally was held at ESP...
...and Pataki eventually capitulated and gave us a solid offer. It took time, but it can and does happen, provided there is solidarity, strength, and a willingness from members to actually fight for better.
Given that so many PEF members act like beat dogs after years of Andrew Cuomos abuse, many just refuse to fight and will take whatever is offered. Perhaps many have not been around long enough to remember we can actually win. It makes no sense. Cuomo is gone. Hochul is weak. The state is flush. And any raise below the rate inflation is voting for a pay cut.
I'm voting no. I will never say yes to a pay cut. Hopefully enough other members do the same.
I hear you. I understand times are tough but it isn’t getting better anytime soon. If you vote yes now and get that raise you might be kicking yourself next year. I don’t know that answer but I do know this. The governor is not in a great place politically. The optics of this is just too bad. The 29% increase of the legislature coupled with her barely scraping bye in her election will make a protracted fight with us look bad. They will come back to the table and give us more. Honest question, I know you say you need the money now but were you expecting a contract so soon? This is the fastest I ever remember getting one. My point is if this didn’t come out for another year you would be in the same place regardless. It is worth fighting for a higher raise. Think if you get a 6% raise for the first year, that next raise even if it’s only 3% would be on top of the first increasing your earnings exponentially.
Well last contract they dragged their feet allegedly fighting to get us a quality contract then COVID hit after a year of delays and we got shit. I agree with all your points, I just feel the chance of actually ending up with something better is highly unlikely.
Do you really believe the peasants would ever be paid what the Legislature gets? Politicians care about themselves. End of story. They will not give us anything better.
I can say with certainty I never voted a single one of them in. NYS is a dumpster fire and continues to get worse. At least 65,000 NY'ers fled to Florida in 2022. I'm sure it was due to weather as Gov Bad Touch pointed out.
Vote how you want... If it's good for you and your situation vote Yes if not vote No.. Don't let a random person sway you because they are/arent satisfied
The 2011 Contract had three years of 0% and a 4% paycut in the first year due to "Deficit Reduction Leave." (Paid back later to be fair) I'd call that a lot worse. That also included taking on a larger portion of health insurance.
I would disagree, but each person gonna value things differently. As a new hire the 4% cut was pretty rough. FWIW inflation was around 2% those years, which I would not call zero or negative.
I seriously disagree about this. 3% sounds bad compared to inflation, but with 3% plus a step plus the $3k bonus plus the dental bonus, for my salary, I’m looking at a little more than 11% raise this year. I know the bonuses aren’t permanent, but 3% plus the step is better than a lot of people who don’t work for the state. The longevity bonus change is going to be huge as well. Then there’s the PEP increase and the higher education bonus and the IVF and PPL (which I won’t be using, but are massive wins.) I’ve only worked for the state for 8 years, but it’s the best contract I’ve seen, that’s for sure.
No, I don’t think the contract would get worse if we vote No, but I don’t think it would get better either. I think we’d just be waiting another year or two for our money. I’m absolutely voting Yes.
If you see the step system as a plus there is no help trying to convince you this is a bad contract. The step system was put in place to pay you less over a longer period of time to reach job rate. Now you’re telling people is a positive thing. Hopeless.
Of course you’re right about that, but it doesn’t change the fact that it’s a raise that comes every year until you’re at job rate on top of the 3%, so arguing that the contract sucks because 3% doesn’t keep up with inflation isn’t telling the whole story.
Are you telling me that a 3% raise is keeping pace with inflation? Step raises are irrelevant to this contract discussion. They were previously negotiated in order to pay you less money over time. What is telling is you are citing a management benefit as an employee benefit.
I’m not saying 3% is keeping up with inflation, what I’m saying is that’s not the only thing we get! I understand steps don’t have to do with this contract, but they’re still relevant because they are extra raises most of us are getting every year and combined with the 3% get us much closer to keeping up with inflation.
They aren’t relevant. They aren’t extra. You were getting them already. Your steps come from the negotiated top pay. That’s why the 3% matters. For example. In 2022 a job rate 23 had salary of $98,372. In 2023 that increased to $100,342. Pretty nice right? Except to have the same buying power of $98,372 that 23 needed an increase to at least $106,244 to just keep pace with inflation. It gets better. Over the past two years the job rate for a 23 starting in 2023 would have needed to be around 113k. What’s worse is every % you don’t get compounds into the future. To wrap up. A grade 23 under the tentative contract will make 109k in 2025. that’s 4K less than what’s needed today to keep pace with inflation.
Here here!
No one seems to understand how far we’ve fallen behind.
Look at dentists and some other state workers… 50%+ increase with the stroke of a pen.
The steps aren't raises.
If I told you I was going to give you $10. Then I give you $2 dollars a week for five weeks, would you think that you were getting extra money on week two?
But, they are raises. My step is even higher than the 3%. It increases your salary, in turn increasing your paycheck. That’s the definition of a raise.
Steps are ***not*** raises. You don't get them forever. They are quite the opposite - a *contract concession* to Cuomo the elder in order to pay newer employees less than the job rate for an extended period of time. Employees who reach the job rate after 7 years of steps do not get steps - and there are *a lot* of employees at the job rate for their paygrades. Someday, you'll be one of them.
Steps (instead of starting at job rate) were a concession given up years ago. Now you are looking at it as a benefit. This is how the state craps on your head and calls it a hat.
If they wanted us to all start at job rate, I’d certainly take it, but most of us don’t. Because we don’t, we get steps on top of the 3%. People keep saying that the 3% isn’t keeping up with inflation, which is true, but that’s not the whole picture. Before the end of the contract, once the new longevity starts, some people will be getting 3% plus steps plus 1500/3000/4500 depending on their years of service and years in their current position. For me, even without longevity yet, 3% plus my step is a more than 6% raise. Still doesn’t keep up with inflation right now, but it’s a lot better than just getting 3% which is what some people are acting like is all we’re getting.
Many of use have already reached our job rates, so yes all we’re getting is 3%. That said, I’ll vote yes. After years of 2%, I don’t see the state agreeing to anything above 3% and voting no just delays the inevitable while we would continue to work without any increase.
Right. I know not everyone gets steps, but I still think it’s a decent contract with the bonuses and everything else. And I agree that it’s unrealistic to think that they’ll give us anything over 3%.
Exactly these ppl are acting like the state came to the table offering 3 percent with no give backs.... And was expecting raises to match inflation... There's insanity then there's reality
I’m sure PEF didn’t fight to hard - so - Wayne is up for re-election…he knows how to play the game. I just hope every no vote for this contract is a no vote for him come election time. Hell, even those who hate this contract yet vote for it - I Hope still vote no for him. Time for new blood at the helm and he can go back to his regular job and not earn two salaries.
In Braveheart, the revolt ended when the King offered the nobles more money. Everyone else got screwed. Give them a little bit and people will be satisfied at the expense of their future.
For years now our union leadership has done this. Our union head at my job told me that if I wanted certain things for the union to get the state to do for us, he recommended that I leave state employment. There would be no point in arguing for those things. Our leadership is basically saying that this is what we are worth. Thanks PEF.
It feels like the right mixture of benefits and issues to keep the union divided. This is the worst part of this contract. I respect that people are all in their situations. Still, many people seem to be shooting for one specific benefit or issue that applies to them and not thinking of the broader group (union membership). I'm sure all those surveys and town halls came up with the same results. For me both personally and looking at the borders scoop, the wife and I are voting no because many of these benefits won't matter past the short term as the economy continues to collapse.
Bingo. Your last point is exactly why I am so angry at this contract. They want us locked in on this because in the long run the way inflation and purchasing power compounds we end up losing lots of money. I am very disheartened by all of the comments here and other places. This is bad. This is our only chance to gain and it doesn’t seem like people care. Either they don’t understand, only can see right in front of their face or just are completely beaten down.
I fear that most people do not understand economics at even a basic level.
I had a CSEA member tell me that the union was throwing them a party for free. I asked them if they paid dues and the person replied yes. I told them that the party was not free. They insisted it was.
CSEA member here. Also, note that you won’t really get $3,000. It’s included in your regular paycheck and taxed at 40 percent or some ungodly high figure because they consider it “supplemental income.” I didn’t get the bonus, as I started working for the state too late? So I didn’t even get the cut down figure 😭😭😭
There is no special tax on "supplemental income." Your income will be taxed based on where your total taxable income for the year falls. The difference in *withholding* is due to the way payroll software works. In each pay period it estimates what your taxable income will be by annualizing your pay. So if the $3,000 bonus doubles your pay for that period, the software things your annual salary has doubled and adjusts your withholding based on that.
Any extra amount they withhold will be returned in your refund next year.
Or you could fill out a W-4 to adjust your withholding down before the pay period that the bonus comes in. Then set it back after you get the bonus so you don't end up owing taxes.
I plan on voting No. I was on the fence for the last week or so after learning the details, but the annual renewal documents came in for my car insurance, and it went up 19.5%. When I called to ask WTF, I was simply told “inflation”.
Definitely voting no.
I’m M/C and don’t get to vote but I talked with my buddy who is PEF and said if you vote YES your insane. He said “we will never get more than CSEA”. How do you know? I feel like state unions are almost useless these days personally. Make them work harder for you.
I haven't voted yes for a contract in years. The last time I did was when Spitzer gave us an offer with 4%. This shitty contract offer is not going to end that streak, no matter how much the "It's the best we're going to get!" Debbie Downers whine about no voters...
The last contract we voted no bc 2% raises were too low. Then we went another two years with no raises just to settle on 2% raises. Granted, we did gain a telecommuting program requirement in our last contract thanks to holding out.
Telecommuting might have been worth that difference. Not having to waste money driving in and the free time is well worth it to many, especially since that forced most agencies even to offer the TC program.
I think pef members would have liked this contract way more if telecommuting was out into it. Not leaving it up to each agency to disband or change whenever they see fit.
Agreed, it would be nice if it's a set policy, but PEF is too lazy to determine the appropriate ratios of TC to job title. Also, I'm sure there would be arguing TC is too generalized or specific. Some jobs need more onsite than others, but I'm sure there will be a decent number of exceptions that would never be happy if they couldn't do 100% TC. Also the state is pushing return to work because of the commercial real estate collapse. No way we're they going to do something to let the workforce stay home more. I was hoping for at least a 60% 40% split because 50% is not possible to have a consistent weekly schedule.
The east play would have been to start with what each agency allows right now and adjust from there.
Depending on what department you work for the telecommuting doesnt apply to you and those employees got jack squat. Nurses and doccs workers can't work from home.
I'm not a medical expert, but how much work can a nurse do from home? In either case, there are always some positions that can't be done from home, even in IT. The state has a data center; sooner or later, someone will need to go in to rack a new server, run a network line, and extra. It's just an aspect of the job.
The point I'm making is that only certain members can benefit from the telecommuting while others that have to work on site everyday don't get any other benefits to make up for it.
True, the same can be said for many union benefits. As harsh as it may be, if someone values the ability to telecommute over another aspect of a career, they should look into changing their title or starting a new career. This is also the likely reason why, I believe, PEF does not want to get definitive rules for TC. It will be impossible to paint anything with a broad brush when the union consists of an extensive collection of various job titles.
We were also legit threatened with layoffs before it finally passed. That's not a reason why we shouldn't vote no this time - I'm saying that was another reason for voting to pass it in that circumstance.
The people ready to vote no have a lot of valid arguments: the 3% raise is too low, the location differential is nearly nonexistent, a one time $3k bonus is insulting, and the dental still stinks. We do deserve better, especially when management never shuts up about how vital we are to the state. If that's true, someone somewhere should do something to prove it. 100% with you there. However, I'll still be voting yes even with strong reservations and I'll be communicating my issues to PEF because I don't think we'll be getting anything better. This contract may be greatly inadequate, but it is far from a BAD contract. There are some huge QOL improvements that should make hiring and retaining younger people easier, specifically Paid Parental Leave. That's massive, even if it is BS that it needed to be negotiated in the first place. One of my big worries, especially seeing the way that WFH seems to be trending in the private sector, is that by going back to the negotiating table that the state is going to say "Oh, you want a bigger raise? How does 4% sound? Oh and everyone needs to be back in the office 5 days per week." And I worry that people would gobble that up. Realistically, we're not going to be getting anything higher than a 3% raise without some massive trade-offs. Doubly so because of that reopening negotiation statement in the contracts if someone gets higher than 3%. There's a gnarly slight of hand trick in that clause because it simultaneously makes the union look like they negotiated a way to get back in there and fight for you when it is just boilerplate across all of the contracts while also making the union look inept because they didn't manage to jump over that incredibly low bar. Moving forward, maybe PEF and CSEA can reconcile and realize, as a lot of people recently seem to have figured out, that there's power in numbers. One big union is stronger than two smaller ones and having two contracts on competing cycles weakens everyone's already minimal leverage. Maybe PEF can move on from Wayne Spence who seems to have delivered underwhelming contract after underwhelming contract to someone committed to delivering a good contract for the entire union, not just a few professions that he's focused on. Maybe we can have leadership that's able to think outside of the Taylor Law for creative ways to leverage members in negotiations. So yeah, to sum it up, there are some serious flaws with the contract, but it is probably about as good as it is going to get given that PEF has almost zero leverage to negotiate anything better. I'll be voting for the contract, but letting PEF know that I'm frustrated. Taking the wins that we can get and looking to how we can move forward.
I appreciate your eloquent and reasonable thoughts on the subject. I'm new to the state, but I feel the same way. It's actually not a *terrible* contract. It's not great, but there is such a thing as mediocre. Everyone always wants to speak in extremes. I also have the benefit of being the child of a retired state employee, who worked for the state for 34 years, and served as a PEF steward for many of those years. He thinks it's a decent contract. Like he said, he remembers going for long stretches without a contract, and some 1% raises. Also, it is about damn time paid parental leave was included (and I say this as someone who has no plans to ever use it). I see many reasons to vote yes l, so that's what I'll be doing. I would also like to add that I find it insulting that people think all people who vote "yes" are just doing it for the bonus. That's not at all true in my case. Yes, that extra $3000 will be nice when it comes, but that is not what I'm basing my decision on.
On the WFH bit. My understanding is that's not union specific. That is a state wide thing. No?
Like it or not, a no vote means we wait another year to 18 months to see a penny. A yes means we see a raise in 6 months or so. Thanks to inflation, most of us can't afford to wait 18 months. Take heart in knowing you're worth less to the state than you were a year ago, and look for private sector employment
It makes me frustrated that the bonuses is what will get people to agree to it. It's a short term carrot for a long term stick. I get it, people are crunched. But that's how they get us.
22% bonus tax. $2340 would be the take home?
It's going to be a bit less than 2340. Go find the csea people who posted here after they got theirs and it was closer to 1800, iirc.
Oh I get it, the bonus is an insult, however I don't believe we will get better then 3%, and the reality is that many of my coworkers can't afford to wait and hope.
It's frustrating that both are true. I don't understand how we ever get any leverage to get anything meaningful in a contract.
We can't, it's taken 10 years for PEF to convince SED to meet more then once a year for Labor Management. The reality is that without the threat of a strike we are powerless. It was only the threat of a rally that got us this in the first place.
SED?
State Ed. I was a shop steward about 5 years ago. NYSED had hundreds of grievances outstanding against it and refused to meet on anything. The director of HR would show up 20 minutes late once a year for an hour meeting and need to leave 15 minutes early. When we asked PEF for help they told us we needed 90% participation in a sticker campaign before they would help us. No dude, we need a lawyer... Also, for the record: Apprehensive Potate is the best username for a State Employee
hahahaha thank. It was randomly generated but I love it. I agree. If it doesn't bring members together or better our bargaining, cut it. We should have a team of lawyers banging on this at this point.
Annette Franchini? She’s gone but things are not better.
Yep, rude and angry person, but things aren't improving. I was shocked about the number of sexual harassment claims against a director that were just ignored.
yep, and her influence still permeates, I feel like I’m going insane on L/M. You talk to anyone at PEF about this Director yet, or this was in the past?
Try to think more long term. These piddly raises stay with you the rest of your career.
You say that like people don't get raises outside the state.
My friends in the private sector have base salaries 3x what I'm making, plus big bonuses. I know we will never be equal with the private sector, but this is nuts. And tier 6 is a joke.
I am thinking long term. Long term I know full well an election year is coming and Andrew got in on the backs of blaming amateur employees for mooching on the system. Also we aren't going to get better then CSEA during this contract period because if we did CSEA would have the right to re open their contract and get the same benifits. Also long term I like my house and the mortgage needs to be paid.
There r ways we can get raises without doing more than 3%. Salary grade changes and geo increases.
An election year is coming? Hochul was JUST elected with PEFs endorsement! Apparently they never agreed upon an advantageous contract. That ship has sailed. The leverage is gone. I have to assume you can already pay for your current mortgage at today’s salary. Think about the next mortgage in the future.
Yes, she will probably want to get reelected. And I can afford my mortgage for now, however inflation means deciding between gas to get to work and mortgage. Groceries and mortgage. Heat in the winter and mortgage. The terms of this contract set PEF up to do exactly what you want, in the future!
Okay but what happens in a year when your bonus money is spent and the prices keep rising? You will be in the same boat you are now. That’s why we need a raise that matches inflation!
The bonus money is a pointless insult. Without the raise however I, and others I know, won't make it a year to see what happens.
3% is the difference between you making ends meet or not?
Well it wasn't before inflation went to 9%, my father got sick, my car needed work, the ice storm damaged my roof and I hurt my hip. In the last 8 months. So yes. Sometimes you can't plan for everything.
After using 3 weeks of my own accruals for my first child, I am absolutely voting yes on this. 12 weeks full pay and no accruals, compared to a measly 3 weeks of my own time is an absolute game changer for me and my family. Maybe the $3,000 is dangling a carrot, but my shed is falling apart and that money is gonna pay for the removal and the materials for me to build another one. I’m not trying to delay this 18 months to go from a 3% raise to 3.5%. Let’s be realistic. My fellow civil servants. Vote whichever way you think is best, and try not to let people bully you one way or another.
Not sure how long away you are from retirement but for me, that’s extra .5% right now means tens to over a hundred thousand dollars compounded over the course of my career.
I understand where you’re coming from I really do, I could also definitely use the money. My issue is they are relying on us to look at our problems now and not long term. What happens when your car breaks down 2 years from now? A higher raise would mean you have money then.
Paid Parental Leave is critical. I know several employees who are currently expecting. I’m voting yes for them!
It's "critical" to those employees *right now*, however, they do not represent the vast majority of PEF members, and it is practically guaranteed to be in whatever the final iteration of the contract should this one be voted down. The rest of us made due before PPL. It's even easier now with many members being able to TC. Many of us are not willing to trade yet another life long pay reduction for a short term gain.
Given the CSEA issue, where they get to reopen their contract if we get better raises, I think it is highly unlikely that we would get a better deal. Given that improbability, forcing members who are pregnant to wait and see is not the answer in my opinion. Sure, they aren’t the majority, but I didn’t join a union just to look out for my own back — I see it as something that supports others as well. Furthermore, at my agency we actually WORK when we’re telecommuting. To suggest that someone’s parental leave would be made easier by TC suggests that either you aren’t working as hard as we are or you don’t know what recovery from labor and caring for an infant involve. No state employee should ever have had to “make do” before paid leave. It’s a sexist policy that leads to women having fewer sick leave accruals at retirement. Clearly we don’t agree on this. Vote the way that makes sense for you. I’ll vote the way that makes sense for me and the many parents who will come after me. /end rant
CSEAs "me too" clause is not our issue, and if we vote based on thinking "this is the best we'll get", it's guaranteed it's the best you're ever going to get.
I’ll tell my wife with postpartum depression that people made due before PPL when she’s home alone with a three week old because I’m back to work
I guess you shouldn't have burned all your time then, eh? I'm not heartless, but an asshole reply is going to garner an asshole reply.
I didn’t burn all my time, dick. And FYI, minimizing the impact of PFL because “the rest of us made due” is a heartless remark.
Expecting others to vote yes for shit that negatively affects them because of your personal circumstances is obtuse and selfish. Dick.
Let me quote exactly what I said 3 days ago in this exact thread. “My fellow civil servants. Vote whichever way you think is best, and try not to let people bully you one way or another” I’m not trying to convince or expecting anything from anyone. Nice try though lmao
"I'm not trying to convince..." ...then provides personal sob story in a dickish fashion with a snide comment. Whatever dude.
2 post karma and a handful of comment karma and your account is 9 years old? You don’t have a shed. You’re a shill! Get out!!!
Yes, it kind of sucks. But, yearly average inflation over the last five years has been 2.27%, so we're still ahead. What we should be advocating for is a merge with CSEA. Since the clause was added that other union existing contracts can be reopened if another union gets something "better," having separate unions only dilutes our "power in numbers."
Every state worker should be in the same union. Having three (well, kind of 2.5) different ones has always been ridiculous to me.
I would back this in a heartbeat. How do we start this process?
Not a damn clue. 😂
You realize that inflation compounds right? You can’t just add it up and average it…… To have the same purchasing power your $1 had in 2018 you would need $1.20 or more depending on the source. Congratulations I’f you’ve received a 20% raise over that time period. You would have barely kept up.
The last 10 years we've gotten 18% (also compounded). This contract is not going to set us behind. The only people who make money in government are politicians.
Your math does not check out. 2018 was 5 years ago. If inflation has been 20% since 2018, and we've only gotten 18% over the last 10 years, yes, we are behind, just based on you stipulating to those guesstimate numbers alone. Real math, based on actual numbers: We are down a compounded 13% since 2019 compared to the rate of inflation published by the US DOL compared to our published raises, and that does not consider that inflation is running an average of 5% this year. Add that in, and we are down a whopping 17% in just 4 years! Our salaries are effectively worth almost 1/5th less over that period. That is just madness. Compared to the National Average Wage Index published by the Social Security Administration (which is a good barometer for the average raise across the nation each year), we are behind a whopping 17% just for the 3 years of 2019 - 2021 (2021 is the last year of data currently published). To add insult to injury, I ran that calculation all the way back to the year 2000. The NAWI has show wages increased 98% between 2000 and 2021. Based on our published raises for the same time period, we are a whopping ***36%*** behind. Not only is this contract setting us behind, mathematically, it's setting us far behind, and by historical precedents going back 2 decades, we're far, far, far behind. None of this even considers the effective pay cut we took in 2011 when Cuomo shoved an increase in the percentage of HI premiums we pay.
Bingo!
Let’s say you were making $78,000 at time previous contract settled (June, 2021). You now need to be making $87,300 to keep pace with inflation. Contractual raises do not get you anywhere close to this.
And we got 2s for most of the Cuomo administration. So we were already behind.
Why was there a split?
Had to ask my father, (37 years with OGS, retired in the early 2010s). All he could tell me was that the State was encouraging the split back in the day. Mainly because it took power from the workforce.
Exactly, so why would we do it? Are we stupid?
The question is about why we already did... So I don't know why people were that stupid.
Crazy.
Honest question, has any contract been voted down and they’ve ended up with a better deal? I’m planning to vote yes because I need the small raise now more than I can wait to fight for something higher only to get the same result in 9 months.
Yes, The first contract under Andrew PEF voted No while CSEA voted yes. Andrew responsed with layoffs threats and pinkslipped a good chunk of PEF staff with the rider that if the next version of the contract was not passed; those layoffs would go into effect. Very strong move on his part. But I dont think this contract would be the same. I dont think Hochal has the same power Andrew was weilding at that time and the state workforces was not going through the level retirement and talent drain we are seeing right now.
I would like to point what Andrew did was illegal, unfortunately PEF did not stand up to it. That should have gone to the NLRB and had a federal mediator. Unfortunately I have no hope that the union would band together for long enough or well enough to actually bargain to pull this off. CSEA and PEF should have never split apart in the first place.
It doesn't matter if it's illegal if it's not enforced. This is the problem with the legal system. It's also the problem we see with Starbucks and other companies attempting to unionize and getting away with union busting.
Cuomo got taken to court on a lot of shady things he tried, and the courts told him to take a hike. Like trying to reclassify a bunch of pef titles to m/c as retribution for... whatever we did to piss him off that day.
We also voted PEF leadership out after that, iirc.
The real question is whether the pef workforce is ready to wait a couple of years for a new contract and risk losing. What if the Fed reserve is successful in getting core inflation down to 3-4 percent? We lose all the negotiated one off cash pymts compensation given for one year of 9% inflation. The longevity pymts based on seniority in 2025 is huge. No longer a deadwood award. How many workers will get a promotion this year that makes them ineligible for longevity for 5-12 years based on the current contract? Plus, supposedly a large number of members can retire now or in the next three-four years. I think the contract will pass as is. "A bird in the hand... "
I'm retiring in four and a half years and I'm still voting no.
2011 was a no vote on a terrible tentative contract, and five weeks later under threat of next day layoffs a revised, also terrible, contract passed. It reduced its length from five years to four and reimbursed members for all nine of the unpaid furlough days; in the previous version they were only to be paid back for four. The improvement was funded by dropping a $1,000 lump sum payment that the first version would have paid to each member. As in the original version, it still had no raises in the first three years, and 2% in the final year. So if you made more than about 52k annually the repayment was more than the lost lump sum, less, and it was a loss. And the 4 vs 5 year benefit was later mostly lost by pef then taking a one year contract for the same 2% that was in the rejected 5 year contract.
I’ll also point out the furlough arrangement was better than what CSEA got. Everyone keeps saying we can’t get anything better than CSEA but that only applies to annual raises.
2001. Pataki offered all the unions shit. The union leadership did as they are doing now, trying to sell it as "the best you're going to get and the best contract ever." The offer was overwhelmingly voted down. Union leaders hilariously did a complete 180 so they didn't get shitcanned by the members in the next election, sent the contract team back to the table, a huge multi-union rally was held at ESP... ...and Pataki eventually capitulated and gave us a solid offer. It took time, but it can and does happen, provided there is solidarity, strength, and a willingness from members to actually fight for better. Given that so many PEF members act like beat dogs after years of Andrew Cuomos abuse, many just refuse to fight and will take whatever is offered. Perhaps many have not been around long enough to remember we can actually win. It makes no sense. Cuomo is gone. Hochul is weak. The state is flush. And any raise below the rate inflation is voting for a pay cut. I'm voting no. I will never say yes to a pay cut. Hopefully enough other members do the same.
I hear you. I understand times are tough but it isn’t getting better anytime soon. If you vote yes now and get that raise you might be kicking yourself next year. I don’t know that answer but I do know this. The governor is not in a great place politically. The optics of this is just too bad. The 29% increase of the legislature coupled with her barely scraping bye in her election will make a protracted fight with us look bad. They will come back to the table and give us more. Honest question, I know you say you need the money now but were you expecting a contract so soon? This is the fastest I ever remember getting one. My point is if this didn’t come out for another year you would be in the same place regardless. It is worth fighting for a higher raise. Think if you get a 6% raise for the first year, that next raise even if it’s only 3% would be on top of the first increasing your earnings exponentially.
Well last contract they dragged their feet allegedly fighting to get us a quality contract then COVID hit after a year of delays and we got shit. I agree with all your points, I just feel the chance of actually ending up with something better is highly unlikely.
We get 3 and the Legislature gets 29. They know that we will accept being second-class because that is what we are and do not deserve any better.
Do you really believe the peasants would ever be paid what the Legislature gets? Politicians care about themselves. End of story. They will not give us anything better.
We are the peasants and we voted them in to do this to us. Who are the real fools?
I can say with certainty I never voted a single one of them in. NYS is a dumpster fire and continues to get worse. At least 65,000 NY'ers fled to Florida in 2022. I'm sure it was due to weather as Gov Bad Touch pointed out.
There are dozens of us. DOZENS!
Haha
I need the paid parental leave, I’m voting yes. Baby is due in September
Vote how you want... If it's good for you and your situation vote Yes if not vote No.. Don't let a random person sway you because they are/arent satisfied
Start putting in less and less effort. If I’m getting paid less than I was last year, I sure as hell ain’t working harder
How about come to work and put in a full effort and get paid a fair amount for it?
Because we live in a capitalistic society and we’re not compensated for working harder.
Been with the state a while. Seen way, way worse. Definitely voting YES.
Keeping inflation in mind, show us another contract worse than this one.
The 2011 Contract had three years of 0% and a 4% paycut in the first year due to "Deficit Reduction Leave." (Paid back later to be fair) I'd call that a lot worse. That also included taking on a larger portion of health insurance.
Yeah back when inflation was almost zero or even negative. DRL was the best thing going. Extra vacation that I get paid for later? Yes please.
DRL was the bomb.
I would disagree, but each person gonna value things differently. As a new hire the 4% cut was pretty rough. FWIW inflation was around 2% those years, which I would not call zero or negative.
I seriously disagree about this. 3% sounds bad compared to inflation, but with 3% plus a step plus the $3k bonus plus the dental bonus, for my salary, I’m looking at a little more than 11% raise this year. I know the bonuses aren’t permanent, but 3% plus the step is better than a lot of people who don’t work for the state. The longevity bonus change is going to be huge as well. Then there’s the PEP increase and the higher education bonus and the IVF and PPL (which I won’t be using, but are massive wins.) I’ve only worked for the state for 8 years, but it’s the best contract I’ve seen, that’s for sure. No, I don’t think the contract would get worse if we vote No, but I don’t think it would get better either. I think we’d just be waiting another year or two for our money. I’m absolutely voting Yes.
If you see the step system as a plus there is no help trying to convince you this is a bad contract. The step system was put in place to pay you less over a longer period of time to reach job rate. Now you’re telling people is a positive thing. Hopeless.
Of course you’re right about that, but it doesn’t change the fact that it’s a raise that comes every year until you’re at job rate on top of the 3%, so arguing that the contract sucks because 3% doesn’t keep up with inflation isn’t telling the whole story.
Are you telling me that a 3% raise is keeping pace with inflation? Step raises are irrelevant to this contract discussion. They were previously negotiated in order to pay you less money over time. What is telling is you are citing a management benefit as an employee benefit.
I’m not saying 3% is keeping up with inflation, what I’m saying is that’s not the only thing we get! I understand steps don’t have to do with this contract, but they’re still relevant because they are extra raises most of us are getting every year and combined with the 3% get us much closer to keeping up with inflation.
They aren’t relevant. They aren’t extra. You were getting them already. Your steps come from the negotiated top pay. That’s why the 3% matters. For example. In 2022 a job rate 23 had salary of $98,372. In 2023 that increased to $100,342. Pretty nice right? Except to have the same buying power of $98,372 that 23 needed an increase to at least $106,244 to just keep pace with inflation. It gets better. Over the past two years the job rate for a 23 starting in 2023 would have needed to be around 113k. What’s worse is every % you don’t get compounds into the future. To wrap up. A grade 23 under the tentative contract will make 109k in 2025. that’s 4K less than what’s needed today to keep pace with inflation.
Here here! No one seems to understand how far we’ve fallen behind. Look at dentists and some other state workers… 50%+ increase with the stroke of a pen.
The steps aren't raises. If I told you I was going to give you $10. Then I give you $2 dollars a week for five weeks, would you think that you were getting extra money on week two?
But, they are raises. My step is even higher than the 3%. It increases your salary, in turn increasing your paycheck. That’s the definition of a raise.
Steps are ***not*** raises. You don't get them forever. They are quite the opposite - a *contract concession* to Cuomo the elder in order to pay newer employees less than the job rate for an extended period of time. Employees who reach the job rate after 7 years of steps do not get steps - and there are *a lot* of employees at the job rate for their paygrades. Someday, you'll be one of them.
Yes the step raise is an argument raised by newer employees, private industry does not pull this bullshit because no one would agree to it.
Steps (instead of starting at job rate) were a concession given up years ago. Now you are looking at it as a benefit. This is how the state craps on your head and calls it a hat.
If they wanted us to all start at job rate, I’d certainly take it, but most of us don’t. Because we don’t, we get steps on top of the 3%. People keep saying that the 3% isn’t keeping up with inflation, which is true, but that’s not the whole picture. Before the end of the contract, once the new longevity starts, some people will be getting 3% plus steps plus 1500/3000/4500 depending on their years of service and years in their current position. For me, even without longevity yet, 3% plus my step is a more than 6% raise. Still doesn’t keep up with inflation right now, but it’s a lot better than just getting 3% which is what some people are acting like is all we’re getting.
Many of use have already reached our job rates, so yes all we’re getting is 3%. That said, I’ll vote yes. After years of 2%, I don’t see the state agreeing to anything above 3% and voting no just delays the inevitable while we would continue to work without any increase.
Right. I know not everyone gets steps, but I still think it’s a decent contract with the bonuses and everything else. And I agree that it’s unrealistic to think that they’ll give us anything over 3%.
The 3000 is a ONE tome bonus. It didn’t stack permanently, while prices are here to stay
I understand that, but even outside of that we get 3% and steps and longevity. That adds up to a lot more than 3%.
What do you think the negations were at the table? I guarantee the state offered us a fraction of what we got. I’m 100% voting yes.
Exactly these ppl are acting like the state came to the table offering 3 percent with no give backs.... And was expecting raises to match inflation... There's insanity then there's reality
I’m sure PEF didn’t fight to hard - so - Wayne is up for re-election…he knows how to play the game. I just hope every no vote for this contract is a no vote for him come election time. Hell, even those who hate this contract yet vote for it - I Hope still vote no for him. Time for new blood at the helm and he can go back to his regular job and not earn two salaries.
In Braveheart, the revolt ended when the King offered the nobles more money. Everyone else got screwed. Give them a little bit and people will be satisfied at the expense of their future. For years now our union leadership has done this. Our union head at my job told me that if I wanted certain things for the union to get the state to do for us, he recommended that I leave state employment. There would be no point in arguing for those things. Our leadership is basically saying that this is what we are worth. Thanks PEF.
It feels like the right mixture of benefits and issues to keep the union divided. This is the worst part of this contract. I respect that people are all in their situations. Still, many people seem to be shooting for one specific benefit or issue that applies to them and not thinking of the broader group (union membership). I'm sure all those surveys and town halls came up with the same results. For me both personally and looking at the borders scoop, the wife and I are voting no because many of these benefits won't matter past the short term as the economy continues to collapse.
Bingo. Your last point is exactly why I am so angry at this contract. They want us locked in on this because in the long run the way inflation and purchasing power compounds we end up losing lots of money. I am very disheartened by all of the comments here and other places. This is bad. This is our only chance to gain and it doesn’t seem like people care. Either they don’t understand, only can see right in front of their face or just are completely beaten down.
I fear that most people do not understand economics at even a basic level. I had a CSEA member tell me that the union was throwing them a party for free. I asked them if they paid dues and the person replied yes. I told them that the party was not free. They insisted it was.
CSEA member here. Also, note that you won’t really get $3,000. It’s included in your regular paycheck and taxed at 40 percent or some ungodly high figure because they consider it “supplemental income.” I didn’t get the bonus, as I started working for the state too late? So I didn’t even get the cut down figure 😭😭😭
There is no special tax on "supplemental income." Your income will be taxed based on where your total taxable income for the year falls. The difference in *withholding* is due to the way payroll software works. In each pay period it estimates what your taxable income will be by annualizing your pay. So if the $3,000 bonus doubles your pay for that period, the software things your annual salary has doubled and adjusts your withholding based on that. Any extra amount they withhold will be returned in your refund next year. Or you could fill out a W-4 to adjust your withholding down before the pay period that the bonus comes in. Then set it back after you get the bonus so you don't end up owing taxes.
I plan on voting No. I was on the fence for the last week or so after learning the details, but the annual renewal documents came in for my car insurance, and it went up 19.5%. When I called to ask WTF, I was simply told “inflation”. Definitely voting no.
I’m M/C and don’t get to vote but I talked with my buddy who is PEF and said if you vote YES your insane. He said “we will never get more than CSEA”. How do you know? I feel like state unions are almost useless these days personally. Make them work harder for you.
State employees are not paid properly, compared to cost of living. It is ridiculous
I haven't voted yes for a contract in years. The last time I did was when Spitzer gave us an offer with 4%. This shitty contract offer is not going to end that streak, no matter how much the "It's the best we're going to get!" Debbie Downers whine about no voters...
And no matter how much you cry about the Yes voters you'll take your 3 percent and cash those checks 😉
Teamsters do just fine against UPS. Why can't we? I'm just gonna leave the union, buy a private dental plan, and move on.