By Abbe Smith
New Haven Register
WEST HAVEN, Conn. — The City Council wants more information before deciding whether to act on the recent police arbitration award.
The arbitration decision gives police a 4.5 percent raise spread over four years, and switches new hires to a 401(k) plan instead of the existing defined pension plan. The union believes the pension switch is a major flaw in the award.
Police union officials and Deputy Chief Joseph Perno waited more than two hours in the hallway Monday night while the council met with city attorneys in executive session to discuss the terms of the award. In the end, the council reconvened in public and allowed public comment before deciding to postpone the vote until 6 p.m. Thursday in City Hall.
“It looks nice on paper,” said Sgt. Robert Urrata, vice president of the union, “but it’s going to cost the city more money to give less benefits to employees. That just doesn’t make sense fiscally or morally.”
At the center of the council’s hesitation over approving the award is an actuarial study that shows the difference in cost between the defined pension plan and the proposed 401(k) plan. The study says the city would save $10 million in the long-run by switching new hires to a 401(k) plan.
However, the study did not take into consideration the cost of Social Security payments and disability insurance. The union maintains that the arbitration panel was not given accurate numbers on which to base its decision.
The union also warns that the switch to a 401(k) will put the Police Department at a disadvantage in recruiting new officers.
Lt. Burton Gifford Jr., president of the police union, said West Haven already has hired three officers from other departments who left 401(k) plans for the more secure pension plan. He argued that police officers put their lives on the line every day and want to have the security of a pension plan.
“They know if something happens to them in the line of duty, that their family is taken care of,” he said.
The city maintains that the existing pension plan is not financially sustainable. The arbitration award itself cites financial woes as the reason for siding with the city’s request for a 401(k), and notes that the city had to borrow $66 million to fund the police pension in 2002.
The arbitration award is considered “final and binding” unless the City Council rejects the award by a two-thirds majority. If the award is rejected, the council has 10 days to explain in writing the reason for the rejection and submit that statement to the state Board of Mediation and Arbitration and the police union. The union can submit a written response. Ultimately, the arbitration board can select a new review panel or name a single arbitrator to review the briefs and render a final, binding decision.
Copyright 2010 ProQuest Information and Learning