A quick negotiation

1. Boss and union meet up. Boss says “here’s what I’m giving you” and mentions a dollar amount. Union says ok. Negotiation is done.

2. In the real world things are more complicated. Boss and union meet up. Boss says “here’s what I’m giving you” and mentions a dollar amount. Union says ok. “And also,” Union asks, “is it ok if we work on how to cut up this figure? Some for raises. Some for upfront money (signing bonuses) which help secure a bigger yes vote. And then a little for these side projects of ours? Boss says “OK, take some time, but not too much. And I have to approve of your plan – wink, wink.” Negotiation is done.

3. In NYC it’s even a little more complicated. Boss and union meet up. Boss says “here’s what I’m giving you” and mentions a dollar amount. Union says ok. Boss says, “And, we are going to reduce how much we pay for your members’ health care.” Union says “ok, but we need a little time” and the boss says “fine, as long as we can pay less for your members’ health, you can have time to sell it.” “And also,” Union asks, “is it ok if we work on how to cut up this figure? Some for raises. Some for upfront money (signing bonuses) which help secure a bigger yes vote. And then a little for these side projects of ours? Boss says “OK, take some time, but not too much. And I have to approve of your plan – wink, wink.” Negotiation is done.

Is that an outrageous misrepresentation? Sadly, no. Let’s focus today just on the opening shot.

Does the City offer a specific amount of money, and the union just says yes?

Yes

I know this is what we have done in the past. “The package is the package” a retired Unity leader told me. And that is how they have been handling negotiations. Most of “negotiations” has been deciding where the money in the package should go – raises for new teachers, raises for veterans, signing bonuses, pet projects, special programs. The City says “here’s the pie” and Mulgrew, and before him Weingarten, accept the pie as is. They do not ask for more. No Oliver Twist on the steps of 52 Chambers. The rest of negotiations, for them, and because the leaders are in charge and decide, for us, is an exercise in dividing that pie in a fair or unfair way.

That’s in the past. This time? Yup. Here’s what Unity says about DC-37s deal:

See that bit? “We will be closely analyzing the tentative agreement to determine its full value and see how we can maximize that financial package to get the most for our members in our own negotiations”

For those of you saying – “The DC 37 deal was way way below inflation. We should get more” – you need to read our leaders’ words: “see how we can maximize that financial package.” They are accepting the City’s offer without asking for more. Mulgrew does not intend to ask for more. This is #2 (above and below). Union takes what’s offered, and asks for permission to decide how to dole it out.

Here’s a link to that UFT tweet.

But of course this is NYC. And the municipal unions through the MLC, including centrally the United Federation of Teachers and Michael Mulgrew, have been working hand in hand with the City to reduce how much money the City pays for our members’ and retirees’ health care. The big public fight is over using Medicare Advantage to limit how much health care retirees receive. And there is an agreement that they will try NOT to put in front of the members, but it will be understood as they finalize a UFT contract, that the UFT will allow the City to pay less for our healthcare. And that’s version 3.

Is there a way out?

It is tough. The leadership, whether we like what they do or not, speaks for the union, and members who do not pay a lot of attention tend to accept their word. And they WILL decide how to carve up the package and they WILL load up a hefty signing bonus. “Sucker money” I call it – but I know the lure – when things are a little tight, and someone offers you a thousand… or two…. or three… or five… today, without explaining what you are giving up in the long run. Pay day loans are the same sort of raw deal.

But there is an argument.

• The package is way way below inflation. We should reject the package.
• And health care should not be on the table. No cuts (which Mulgrew calls “saving”).

I wonder if the negotiating committee discusses such things. And if it doesn’t, then we will probably face a highly problematic contract proposal.

Let me ask you

The way I see it, after decades of UFT leaders saying “the package is the package” the City has learned that it can lowball the package, and that the union will just say “ok.”

Do you see it differently?

And they’ve learned they can lowball us with no consequences. Isn’t accepting the “package” just reinforcing the bad-faith bargaining?

Is there a reason NOT to break this cycle?

Will there be enough of a concern about way sub inflationary raises, when we are feeling inflation all around us, to get members to want to break this cycle this time?