Again Pat what are you willing to give up to prevent the layoffs. Amen
(Response) I will allow the FEDS to investigate the corruption in the Department of Water Management. I will again lead them by the hand and show them all the contracts that are clouted and waste millions in taxpayer money. I will also take the Commissioner on a private tour if he desires. I can be more specific if you leave your name.
Mr. Pat, May the Lord touch your heart, the very soul that is yours, and Brother Archie, may the Lord have a very special place for you Brother, I mean that as a compliment. You have been messed over by the Daley family, and yet you have some Prayers for him, that is such a good thing to do. And to my fellow bretherens (city workers)I hope God looks out for all of the city workers, The Mayor is an evil being, I believe he has so much hatered in his life, God has healed his wife (Maggie)and he has so much hatred, I can not understand why he is so angry, He goes to church, and yet he continues this hatred against the city workers. This Mayor wants to hurt human beings, I believe God will intervien in the Mayors life, I truely believe God has a reason for Mayor Daleys decisions to lay-off city workers. These workers will lose everything they have, their homes, there lives, their childrens lives, even the parents of these city workers because where are these workers going to live at? they have to move back in with their Parents, and if no parents where do they live on the streets? The Mayor does care? there is going to be 1504 lay-off’s that means 1504 employees are going to file for unemployment. and out of 1504 how many are going to have a place to live, so where do they send the checks to? So please pray for the Mayor to get the holy ghost sent to him, and to talk to him as why he has so much hatred in him.
I pray for this Mayor to get the Lord in him and to reconsider this massive Lay-off, as I ask this in the Lords name, AMEN!
That was a very nice prayer..but the lord helps those who help themselves. Why arnt those 1500 families who are being laid off( because of the citys mismanagement) picketing city hall like the police did ?
(Response) Cowards and a couple of bad unions.
Originally posted: June 15, 2009
Daley meets with union leaders over layoff threats
After meeting today with Mayor Richard Daley, Chicago Federation of Labor President Dennis Gannon said he was confident the unions and administration could reach an agreement to minimize the proposed layoffs of 1,500 city workers.
Gannon declined to discuss details but said labor leaders were discussing possible concessions on their city contracts that would reduce or even eliminate the need for job cuts.
“We may take a tough hit, and we probably are at the end of the day, but we want to get our arms around this as best we possibly can to make sure we minimize the amount of layoffs,” Gannon said.
Daley officials did not immediately return calls for comment.
Mayor Richard Daley is meeting with union leaders today at City Hall over the city’s threats to lay off 1,500 employees to ease a budget deficit.
Chicago Federation of Labor President Dennis Gannon and other labor leaders declined to comment to reporters as they entered the mayor’s 5th floor office. Gannon said he may have a short comment following the meeting and would only say there was no deal in their ongoing negotiations.
The mayor arrived just minutes before their arrival after greeting President Barack Obama at O’Hare International Airport.
On Friday, the city increased pressure on the unions when layoff notices began going out across a number of departments warning cuts would go into effect on July 15, if no deal is reached.
So far, the unions have balked at Daley’s alternative cost-cutting suggestions, including forcing unionized workers to take furlough days before the end of the year and cutting back on their vacation time.
Again, no one has been laid off yet! (this go ’round)
And the last lay offs were only about 1% of the city workforce (excluding police, etc.). In this economy, my dept. is down 20% since last year, and we’ll soon lose more to attrition leaving us down close to 30%. And no raises for those of us who stay. Why would city employees be immune to the effects of the economy?
(Response) So you are saying 1. The workers were not needed before? 2. Government shifts with the economy? Please think a little bit.
June 15, 2009 (CHICAGO) (WLS) — After missing a meeting last week, union leaders met with Mayor Daley at City Hall on Monday. They’re working on a deal to avert 1,500 city layoffs.
Notices have already gone to those city workers.
In the so-called city that works, they are the people who keep do much of the work. But they are also expensive. Personnel costs make up more than 80 percent of the city’s budget. That’s why labor leaders met for an hour with Mayor Daley on Monday. They are trying to save jobs even if it means mandatory furloughs and pay cuts.
“You’re talking about folks taking an 8 percent cut in salary. That’s a very difficult thing to ask people. But it’s also unconscionable for us as labor leaders to see 1,500 people being laid off at a time when there’s no jobs,” said Dennis Gannon, president, Chicago Federation of Labor.
Story continues belowAdvertisement
The city has already sent more than 1,500 layoff notices. Among the proposed cuts, there are more than 300 Streets and Sanitation workers, nearly 300 police support staff, and nearly 300 more at Water Management.
But union and city leaders say at this point they are optimistic they can work out a deal this week to keep those people working. Several aldermen say they are supporting the city workers.
“This is the worst time to lose your job in over 75 years. So if we can reduce spending collectively as a whole, and we are able to save those layoff that will be a huge sigh of relief,” said Ald. Ricardo Munoz, 22nd Ward.
“I think any city worker would tell you they would prefer the furlough days as opposed to seeing fellow workers out on the street,” said Ald. Toni Preckwinkle, 4th Ward.
The budget, according to the mayor, is tens of millions of dollars in the red. But some alderman are questioning the city’s projections. They say it should never have come to this.
“People know that there’s enough money here to make sure our employees are paid well and have a decent wage and they should not have any layoffs at this point. We’ve got the money out there,” said Ald. Bob Fioretti, 2nd Ward.
Mayor Daley will be gone the next couple days for an Olympic presentation in Switzerland. But union leaders say the mayor presented a good enough framework for a deal during their meeting on Monday that they may be able to come to an agreement by working with the mayor’s chief of staff.
The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday.
Daley, Labor Union Eye Deal To Avoid Layoffs CHICAGO
Mayor Richard M. Daley
Chicago Federation of Labor President Dennis Gannon emerged from an hour-long meeting with Mayor Daley Monday predicting that a painful package of union concessions in the works would eliminate the need for 1,504 employee layoffs.
“We’re working to the ends that there will be no layoffs. … We may take a tough hit here — and we probably are at the end of the day. … [But], we’re under the impression that, if we do this package, they’ll rescind the 1,500 layoffs … and do none,” Gannon said.
“This is a time for organized labor to be principled, but [to] also have the ability to be flexible. … We need to do this as quickly as possible. The clock is ticking. Every day, the city is more and more in debt. … We want to do what we can do to save jobs, save families and save communities.”
Sources said union leaders have been asked to consider a painful menu that includes: reduced work-weeks or schedules; furlough days; unpaid holidays; pay cuts; delayed prevailing wage increases; comp time for overtime; increased health care contributions and reduced sick-time accrual.
Gannon refused to say which concessions the final package would include. Another bargaining session with the mayor’s staff is scheduled for Wednesday, with a coalition of 40 labor leaders scheduled to meet Thursday.
But, Gannon made it clear that organized labor is no longer holding out for a two-year, no-layoff guarantee that Daley has insisted he cannot give with city revenues continuing to plummet. Instead, a guarantee could take other forms.
“There’s got to be some assurances on pensions. There’s got to be some assurances on health care. There’s got to be some assurances [on] how long this deal is gonna take place. There’s got to be assurances that there will be less privatization, and we’ll be able to do this work in-house,” Gannon said.
“There’s got to be assurances that, ten years from now, these jobs that our members have are still gonna be there for ’em.”
Even if those guarantees can be hammered out, Gannon acknowledged that the concessions would be a tough sell.
It comes less than two years after Daley agreed to an unprecedented, ten-year agreement with 8,000 members of the building trades that guaranteed labor peace through the 2016 Summer Olympic Games and locked in the prevailing wage paid to their counterparts in private industry.
“This is a tough ask. This is a very difficult plan. You’re asking for folks to [swallow] an eight percent-to-ten percent reduction in their salaries. That’s a very difficult thing to do,” he said.
The meeting between Daley and organized labor was originally scheduled for last week, but union leaders boycotted the meeting, in part, to get past union elections that secured the future of Lou Phillips, secretary-treasurer of Laborers Local 1001.
Daley then went ahead and sent out pink slips to 1,504 city employees, 400 more than anticipated.
“It was higher than we expected,” Gannon said.
With sworn police officers and firefighters once again exempted from the July 15 cuts, the axe would fall most heavily on two departments — Streets and San and Water Management.
Streets and San would shrink 100 more garbage-collection crews from two-laborers-on-a-truck to one.
Treasured aldermanic menu programs would be delayed significantly.
Why don’t union members get a say in what concessions we are to give up? Why do we have to eat furlough days and nixed holidays because the union says we are lucky to have our jobs? I’m a laborer in local 1092 and pay about $95 a check in union “fair share” dues. That’s roughly $190 a month give or take. If the unions want to give in to these seemingly never ending demands thrown at us by our beloved mayor, then I think the fair share dues being extorted from my pay check should stop. The unions should stop taking money from us as long as we have to take ANY days off! If money is coming out of my pocket, then it should come out of theirs as well. It started with us taking 3 days off to save jobs, that didn’t work. People were STILL LAID OFF. Now it’s another outrageous amount of days with no pay mixed with other concessions NONE of us agreed to. This has to stop. Call your union and tell them what you think of their horse shit representation, if anyone even answers the phone. They are probably out shopping for more eco friendly Tahoe suv’s for each one of them to drive around in. The unions are a joke,we know this already but how much more crap do we have to take shoved down our throats? Lucky to have my job? Let me tell you something, I’m embarrassed to say I work for the city now and even more embarrassed to tell people I’m from the state of Illinois !!
I’ve given it some thought. I’m “saying” what I wrote, not what you wrote.
And, yes, govt. too must deal with the impacts of a downturn in the economy. (Dramatically) less revenue in = less money to operate with, pay salaries, etc. I can think of many inefficiencies in Chicago govt. that can stand to lose a few dead weights.
CHICAGO – Chicago officials and union leaders have failed to come up with an agreement on cost-cutting concessions that could avert the layoffs of about 1,500 employees.
Chicago Federation of Labor President Dennis Gannon admitted to being discouraged Wednesday after the various unions failed to reach a consensus on a mix of worker givebacks in return for city guarantees.
Mayoral press secretary Jacquelyn Heard said there’s “still time” to hammer out specifics.
The city has proposed that union workers agree to unpaid furlough days and that compensatory time be taken for overtime instead of cash. Layoffs would become effective July 15 and save $34 million this year.
Gannon had initially hoped to have a final agreement hammered out in time to get it ratified by a 40-member labor coalition on Thursday. He says now, no vote is planned.
Faced with losing the 2016 Summer Games to competing cities offering full government guarantees, Mayor Richard Daley made an about-face Wednesday and said the City of Chicago would sign a contract agreeing to take full financial responsibility for the Games.
So far, the Chicago City Council has approved only a $500 million guarantee against operating losses, while the state has pledged an additional $250 million. These were augmented by a previous pledge to obtain a $500 million insurance policy. The only guarantees in place against construction costs are the insurance policies required of contractors who would build the facilities.
The bid team’s confidence in the plan is partly predicated on its estimated costs rising only modestly because of inflation. But Olympic plans often don’t play out as expected. London’s plan for the 2012 Summer Games has run into serious financial problems, with the original estimate of $4.9 billion ballooning to $13.5 billion, and much of the corporate sponsorship money pledged has evaporated amid the global economic crisis.
Chicago’s guarantee figures — which would rise to as much as $2.5 billion — are a far cry from the full tab projected for hosting the Games. The $4.8 billion projected operating budget for the Games includes a projected surplus of $500 million.
* Time for Daley to come clean on 2016 tab
Three years ago, Mr. Daley said taxpayers wouldn’t spend a dime on luring and running the Olympics, that the private sector would pay for it all, with a big profit likely to boot.
Then, a while later, he said the city would have to guarantee $500 million and the state $250 million — but the money never, ever would be needed because of hordes of Olympic sponsors and an undisclosed insurer that would make up any shortfall.
Wednesday, the ante went up — way up, into the billions.
That means the city — we the taxpayers — will be on the hook for the finances of an event with a projected $3.3-billion operations budget. And on the hook for financing an Olympic Village that will cost another $1 billion or so to build.
City Council to take another vote on Olympic contract
June 18, 2009
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter/[email protected]
The Daley administration agreed Thursday to seek City Council authorization before signing an Olympic host-city contract that amounts to an open-ended guarantee from local taxpayers.
After the host committee lined up an additional layer of private insurance, mayoral press secretary Jacquelyn Heard insisted that Chicago taxpayers would be no more at risk than they were when the City Council agreed to a $500 million Olympic guarantee in March, 2007.
But, she acknowledged that political reality dictates that aldermen take another vote.
“If there are questions or concerns raised by the City Council, of course the mayor would be comfortable with them taking another look,” Heard said.
“But, he’s not agreeing to that because he believes we’ve extended a liability for taxpayers. He’s doing it because this is a big decision. And it stands to reason that, if there’s even the perception there’s been a change, the Council would want to take another look.”
Earlier this week, Daley touched off a political firestorm back home when he told International Olympic Committee members meeting in Switzerland that Chicago would match the full government guarantees offered by rival cities by signing the standard host-city contract.
That means Chicago taxpayers would be the final back-stop for Olympic losses if Chicago 2016 burns through $2.5 billion worth of public and private guarantees.
The City Council has already voted twice on a $500 million Olympic guarantee — first in 2007 and again a few months ago when Chicago 2016 lowered its projected surplus by $225 million because of the moribund real estate market and the decision to scrap Olympic stadium skyboxes.
This time, the questions will be more pointed and the outcome could be different.
Aldermen have been under fire for giving quickie approval to the 75-year, $1.15 billion parking meter lease that turned into a nightmare for Chicago motorists. They don’t intend to get burned again.
“It sounds lofty to say the corporate world is gonna pick up the citizens of Chicago and carry them on their shoulders into the Olympics. But, what happens if they go bust?” said Ald. Tom Allen (38th).
“I don’t really trust what I’m hearing because what I’m hearing is this group can look into a crystal ball and see the future. How do we know if these private enterprises we’re relying on for contributions are gonna exist? Look how many have been wiped off the map in the last five years or the last five months.”
Ald. Manny Flores (1st) said he would introduce an ordinance at the next City Council meeting freezing the city’s Olympic commitment at $500 million.
“If this [host city contract] means there’s an open-ended liability and it means we’re putting taxpayers on the hook for it, then we should reconsider whether or not the Olympics is the right thing for the city [or whether] it’s too precarious a proposition,” Flores said.
Obviously referring to the parking meter fiasco, Ald. Ed Smith (28th) said, “We have just gone through some concerns about some issues that didn’t really get extrapolated to the fullest. We shouldn’t go through that again.”
Even Ald. Pat O’Connor (40th), the mayor’s unofficial City Council floor leader, said he hasn’t made up his mind.
“I want to know how much money they’ve lined up and how real it is. Then, you make a judgement as to whether the guarantees are adequate. If it is, you move forward. If not, you don’t,” he said.
Earlier this week, Heard said Daley intended to sign the host-city contract without returning to the Council because, “We are not exceeding the authority granted by the City Council. … We remain within the financial boundaries they set” when they approved the $500 million guarantee.
But, that was before an outcry from aldermen, who accused the mayor of exceeding his authority.
Daley to hold public meeting with aldermen on Olympics contract controversy
Posted by Hal Dardick at 6:10 p.m.
After initially questioning the need, Mayor Richard Daley has decided to discuss the controversy over Chicago’s Olympic bid contract with aldermen in a public forum, his spokeswoman said today.
“The mayor understands the City Council is a critical partner in this endeavor,” Daley spokeswoman Jacquelyn Heard said. “They’ve raised concerns. They have questions. So we will put the matter before council again.”
Whether the session is informational or involves another vote “would be a determination that the City Council members would have to make.”
A day earlier, Heard had said the mayor did not have to take the issue before the council again. That changed today.
“We were trying to understand the need to bring [it] before them again, because we have no intention of further burdening the taxpayers beyond what the City Council has endorsed,” she said today.
She added: “This is obviously a complicated matter. It’s a complicated issue. And the aldermen have questions, they have concerns, and for that reason alone there seems to a need to bring this matter before them again, and the mayor has no qualms about that.”
Comments are closed.