Who Gets What? Drew Cleans House with Retirements

     The following is the list of people who are retiring under the package being offered by the Drew regime to essentially clean house and make way for the Government Reorganization the Mayor wishes to undertake. Mayor Drew has yet to inform the Council or the public of which positions he will fill ( with cronies hand picked by Malloy??) and which will remain unfilled to "save money." (Example: the new City attorney  may take over personnel duties as outlined in the Blue Ribbon report, he was an active Democrat  working for the the Clinton presidential campaign. Was  he also apart of getting Malloy elected?).

      The Insider previously published a series of  3 pieces discussing negative issues the the Reorganization will cause if executed in the manner the Government Task Force on Efficiency suggested. See link here  Below is an outline of what each was given in this deal of life time ( can't begrudge anyone for taking this really, we would too), mind you, City workers DO NOT receive Social Security even though they pay into it their whole career. The economic impact this will have on the pension fund, previously self maintaining is TBA.  What is so different about this golden handshake package is the cost and years added to the service of some to encourage specific individuals to leave. What do Drew & the Serracrats have up their sleeves? For some reason, they wanted these  positions open to fill with their chosen ones.
    The Insider wishes all retirees a joyous retirement and thanks them for their City service. 
Ken Jackson - last day December 30, 2013 - $40K option - BOE Director of Facilities, separate contract employee

Gary Ouellette - last day July 5, 2013, 40K option  (just an FYI that they may not have thought of in his case, but because he's on the books 7/1, and per the new personnel rules, the non-union employee directors get their - Fire Chief, non-union

vacation as a lump sum as of 7/1)

Ray Santostefano - last day December 31, 2012, 40K option, Director of Parks & Recreation, Senior Services, union
John Milardo - last day December 31, 2012, 40K option, Supervisor of Parks, union
Rick Kearney - last day October 31, 2012, 40K option, Economic Development Specialist, union

Debra Milardo - last day December 21, 2012, 5 years of credit, dental

coverage, option B health insurance of personnel rules, Director of Personnel, non-union
Sal Emanuele - last day March 31, 2013, 40k option, Supervisor of Streets, union
John Parker - last day December 22, 2012, 40K option, Building Official, union
Lisa Melaven - last day June 28, 2013, 2 additional years, Cafeteria Manager, union

Tim Lynch - last day January 31, 2013, 5 additional years, dental coverage,

option b health insurance of personnel rules, Deputy City Attorney, non-union
Deb Gill - last day December 31, 2012, 40K option, Assistant Tax Assessor, union
James Lane - last day December 31, 2012, 40K option, Supervisor of Sanitation, union
Lou DiMauro - last day June 30, 2013, 40K option, BOE Custodial Manager, union
Sandra Russo-Driska, last day June 30, 2013, 40K option, City and Town Clerk, union
Elizabeth Nocera- last day December 30, 2013, 40k option, BOE Grants Coordinator, non-union, separate contract. 
The last day indicated is the last day of physically showing up for work, their pensions will start when they have exhausted their vacation and personal time.
     Some 466 employees have been appointed as "Acting" for Jimmy Lane's position, Ray Santostefano's position, John Parker's position and John Milardo's position.
      Also, Sandra's agreement has her leaving as of June 30, 2013; however, she had told the Mayor that she wanted to leave in January instead and now he is trying to hold her to the June 30th date.  She has contacted her union rep.
      The language in the Teamster's contract, page 8, paragraph B states, known as Option B:  For those current active employees who are members of the bargaining unit as of July 1, 2006 and who, within one hundred and twenty (120) days of the ratification and implementation of the AGREEMENT, elect
to, upon retirement, be provided the same health insurance coverage as active employees, subject to the same limitations and payments as active employees, shall be provided said coverage as the said coverage, limitations, and payments may be amended from time to time.  All pensioners,age sixty-five (65) and older who are eligible for Medicare Parts A & B shall receive the same coverage as active employees, as said coverage, limitations and payments may be amended from time to time.  The City's plan shall be supplemental to Medicare,  Employees must have at least fifteen (15) years of City service to be eligible for health insurance benefits upon retirement.  The premium cost-sharing obligation for the retiree shall be based upon age on date of retirement.
  Less than Age 45      80% of cost of healthcare premium
  Ages 46 to 54            60% of cost of healthcare premium
  Ages 55 to 61            40% of cost of healthcare premium
  Ages 62 and on         Retiree pays same as actives with cap of 25% applied
  for life.
The language in the signed MOU states:
#3.  For employees' who selected Option B of the Collective Bargainig Agreement for retirement medical plans, the premium cost share at exit from employment shall be based upon their current age and the conditions set forth in the CBA.  Upon reaching age 62, the premium cost share shall be reduced to the same percentage as paid by active employees' with a maximum cap as provided under the CBA in effect as of the date this Memorandum of Understanding is executed.

Early Retirement Pay Outs Costly to Taxpayers & Other City Pensioners

Click to download & view

    The following is a draft of a memorandum of understanding proposed between the City and the Teamsters Local #571 offering certain employees an incentive to retire prior to their normal eligibility.  The following is a draft and has not been formalized or accepted by the Council and could change.  We understand that the employees have until November 7th to indicate their interest in the package and until that point the actual cost to the City has not been determined.  

     However, this is going to be an expensive package if implemented:  there are between 40 and 50 members of the union and of course it's unknown how many will take the offer so there are no numbers regarding the impact on the general fund as of now.  For those directors that are not part of the union, it is rumored that the City is offering up to 5 years of service;  so say you've 18 years of service, that could be now 23 years of service which at 2.5% would be 57.5% of the average of the highest 3 years of salary.  If the average salary is $90,000, the annual pension would be $51,750 or $4,312.50 per month.  Now they would be able to start collecting this pension 5 years earlier than they normally could have.

     Pensions from the City are capped at 70% of a set average salary, however this union's contract has adjusted that cap to 80% based on the retiree paying a higher percentage for their health insurance.  This draft offers some employees who have been with the city for 35 years or more a cap at 85%.  If their average salary were $100,000 (which is possible since overtime is included in their base salaries for the calculation), an additional 5% is $5,000.00 per year.

     However, the general rule of thumb has been that a golden handshake only saves money if you don't replace the retiring members; that doesn't seem to be the case here. If the building official retires, are you not going to replace him?  From the council agenda, it appears that the intent is to replace the Director and or Deputy Director of Personnel with Deputy City Attorneys, savings?? 

     Also, during the budget process this year, the pension funds was not funded to the extent that the actuaries had indicated and a special committe was to be formed to review the pension funding.   By giving the highest paid employees effectively a minimum of an additional 5% to their pension for their lifetime is going to be a tremendous hit to the pension fund.  These numbers of course are not available as of yet.  Remember, this union just won at the state labor board a case against the City and BOE where a union member retired and was replaced by a non-union worker, so they've a history of protecting their positions.

     Health insurance should be mentioned here also cause it's not mentioned in the offer at all; so not paying any more or less as a result of getting a higher pension.

     These seems to be an expensive way to get people to retire.  Offering 5 additional years to those employees who are not members of the union just to get them to retire is very generous!  Seems that it would be less expensive to negotiate with those employees who you wish to have leave on an individual basis rather than give away the farm to the whole management tier.

     Drew is cleaning house of directors who did not support him under the "guise" of saving money, however; the fact is that this will over in-flat city government departments and cost more.One can only speculate whom Drew and the Democratic majority/Serracrats have in mind to place in possible new director positions....
Lisa Santangelo? Another unqualified relative of Councilwoman Hope Kasper?