Village neg. team Mayor Lewis and Joe Steflick as lead negotiator
Local 921 E-Board with President Meaney as lead negotiator
First meeting was held on April 19, 2006. The local had advised the Village that we were prepared to exchange proposals at this meeting. The Village did not come prepared with proposals. Advised the Village that we were tape recording the meeting so that we would have an accurate record of the meetings. The Village did not have any objection at this time. Subsequent meetings were scheduled at this time.
Second meeting was held on April 26, 2006. Proposals were exchanged and reviewed. Advised Joe Steflick that certain demands presented by the Village were non mandatory and that the Local was not willing to discuss them further.
Third meeting was held on May 11, 2006. Questions about certain proposals were asked and other proposals were explained in detail. Some proposals were changed and some were withdrawn at this time. Non mandatory subject were again brought up by the Village. Joe Steflick suggests mediation might be the way to go at this time. The local did not feel that after only three meeting mediation was warranted.
Fourth meeting was held on May 31, 2006. The term of the contract was discussed. Joe Steflick acknowledges that both proposals contain a lot of fluff and that if we get to the real issues i.e. salary and health benefits negotiations would progress easier. The Local agreed with Joe Steflick and presented the Village with a pared down list of demands. These demands were a four year contract with a five percent pay increase in each year of the contract, health insurance co-pay of ten percent of the premium, a step stipend for cfrs/emts of five hundred dollars per year so that the total stipend would be two thousand dollars at the end of the contract, a leveling step raise of five hundred dollars per year for Captains so that the total leveling raise would be two thousand dollars at the end of the contract, increasing the personal leave days from four to five , and accepting the Villages proposal of a twenty four hour schedule. Joe Steflick stated that were very close to having an agreement and that he wanted to take it back to the board for discussion. Next meeting dates were scheduled at this time however the dates had to coincide with Joe Steflick’s golf schedule to avoid any conflicts.
Fifth meeting was held on June 8, 2006. Joe Steflick said that he had taken our May 31, 2006 proposal along with our original proposals to the board. We asked him why he took the original proposal to the board along with our latest proposals and he said that he wanted the board to see how far our original demands had changed. The Local asked if he and the Mayor advocated the latest list of demands from the Local and Joe Steflick said that they did not. Joe Steflick then went on to say that he had each member the Village Board give him a list of what they thought should be present as a list of proposals. He and the Mayor then took this list and averaged it out and then proposed that list to the Local. This list of demands did not contain any non mandatory subjects of negotiations. The Local questioned Joe Steflick as to who has the authority to negotiate. He stated he did. We then asked then if he had the authority to negotiate then why was the Village board surveyed for their input as to what proposals were to be presented; furthermore we asked if the Villages original list of proposals came with authority of the board and if the board had any knowledge of what the original proposals were. Joe Steflick answered the he and the Mayor had the authority to negotiate and that the board did not have any knowledge of what the original proposals were. Again the Local asked that if the Mayor and Joe Steflick had the authority to negotiate then why they asked the board for a list of demands to submit to the Local. He did not have an answer other than that was the way that he wanted to handle negotiations. The Local suggested that if the Village board has that much impact on negotiations that maybe the board should be present during our meetings. The Local then requested a recess so that we could come up with a counter proposal to the Villages offer. At that time Joe Steflick stated the Local was committing an illegal practice of tape recording the meeting. The Local disagreed with Joe Steflick’s opinion of the tape recording and that his objection was noted. He then refused to negotiate any further if we were going to continue the taping of the meeting. The Local stopped taping the rest of that meeting so that negotiations could continue. The Local submitted a counter proposal to the Villages latest offer. Joe Steflick again suggested mediation and the Local was not in favor of doing this after only five meetings. Another meeting was scheduled.
Sixth meeting was held on June 21, 2006. Proposals and counter proposals were exchanged and discussed. There were no non mandatory subjects proposed by the Village. The Local tape recorded the meeting. Another meeting date was scheduled.
Seventh meeting was held on July 24, 2006. Proposals and counter proposals were exchanged and discussed. The Village latest proposal contained a non mandatory subject of negotiation. The Local again stated that we are not going to discuss any non mandatory subjects. Joe Steflick argued that all provisions in the CBA are mandatory subjects. After much discussion it was agreed that the Local and the Village were very close to having an agreement and that the Village needed to run some numbers. The next meeting was scheduled.
Eighth meeting was held on July 27, 2006. The Village came in and presented their latest proposal. The Local object again to the non mandatory subject, Joe Steflick stated that there would be no agreement made with out the Local accepting a change to a non mandatory subject of negotiations. The Local asked Joe Steflick if a mediator came in and asked what the main problem was with getting the contract done and that we told the mediator it was a non mandatory subject and that if the mediator said loose the non mandatory subject and try to get this contract done would Joe Steflick accept his recommendation. Joe Steflick said that he would not and request arbitration. After lengthy discussion it was decided that a mediator would be the best course of action at this time. Joe Steflick was to contact the Locals attorney to pick a mediator and to schedule a date for mediation.
As of September 12, 2006 Joe Steflick has not contacted the Locals attorney. On August 24, 2006 the Locals President spoke with the Mayor as to why Joe Steflick has not contacted the Locals attorney and the Mayor did not know why and that he would contact Joe Steflick and get back to the president. On September 8, 2006 the mayor asked the Locals President why the Locals attorney is not responding to Joe Steflick’s calls. The Locals attorney was asked this question and he stated that Joe Steflick has not contacted him at all. The time gaps between some meetings are greater than others because the Village cancelled two meeting at the last minute without reason, and the Local was out of town at their state association annual convention. Throughout negotiations the Local presented numerous proposals and counter proposals that varied in the length of the term and benefit options. The Village proposals and counter proposals almost mirrored the Locals with the exception of the non mandatory subject that would appear disappear and the reappear. We believe that Joe Steflick is holding up the entire negotiating process with his belief that all provisions with in a contract are mandatory and that this has been a problem since our third meeting.