4.5 raise is already gone!

I am voting no and I will explain why.

Have you seen the new insurance package?

I figured it out last night. I will be making less money now. PERIOD!

After my insurance premium goes up $24 a paycheck and the medication copayments go up to $50 (which I have to purchase 3 a month) and the visit copays go up $10 you are looking at almost $110 a month more in cost to me. Therefore my raise is already gone.

Secondly, I can only assume most of you HAVE NOT READ the contract. I have not seen anyone comment on the clause about promotions. It says if you get promoted you cant take the test until a year. That means the guys gettting promoted next week can not take the next test (LT or Sgt) until 2009!!!!!!!!!! Did anyone see this on the "survey"? Chief Castor enfatically states this was put in the contract 100% at the request of the PBA. Why would the PBA want to limit our promotion opportunities?

Lastly, there are snakes on our PBA board. PERIOD. They are there for their own benefits and agendas. There are members on the board that use their "Detective" skills to try to help themselves.

I leave you with this. It was stated that the NUMBER 1 comment on the survey was post retirement health care. I ask you.....do you see anything about it in the contract? NO....only an increase in our health care costs.

I have read Rich Oconners proposal. It has been "Lynched" by the Pension Board with no explanation about what would be wrong with it. There has been no effort by them to study it or determine its feasability.

Sounds to me like we need to start voting people out of office.

I agree. Which one of these items where in the survey that they said they were going to use:

Gun at retirement?
No promotions test until after a year in grade?
Motor pay?
FTO pay increase?
More time for grievances?

ect?????

This guy makes a good point....whats wrong with Rick Oconnors health insurance suggestion?

The pension board summarily dismissed it and can not provide any intelligent answer why. And yes I have asked 3 people on the board.

I dont like this contract because we look at that 4.5% and think we are getting raises. If you count the extra cost in our health insurance in just the last 15 months......the raise is GONE and we are behind. That means we are taking home less than we did 15 months ago!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



THINK.....INFORM youself and vote INTELLIGENTLY!!!!!!!!!!

[Pat Lynch]

To the sadly misinformed individuals that think the Tampa Fire & Police Pension Board has declined to look at retirement health insurance, please give the names of the 3 trustees who told you that. I won't go so far as to ask for your name because obviously you were too worried to post it in the first place.

The Tampa Fire & Police Pension Board guides and steers the "ship" which is our pension fund. The unions and the City have the duty to "build" this "ship", which includes benefit enhancements such as retirement insurance. The Tampa Fire & Police Pension Board does NOT have the authority to enact benefits.

By the way, I submitted a retirement health insurance idea to the PBA and it suffered the same fate as Rich O'Connor's. But remember, negotiations are a two way street. We can't get what the City won't give, period. CORRECTION: I'm not trying to say that the PBA didn't want to do anything with retirement health care, I was only pointing out that the proposal didn't make it to the final contract (as did many other good ideas from myself and others). Rome wasn't built in a day and we don't get everything we want (neither does the City). Rich O'Connor's proposal, my proposal and loads of others were considered in great detail. I can assure you that in the future it will be addressed. Remember that we have a pension that is connected with the Fire Department so we have to work with their people too. And also remember, it is in the contract that pension issues are open to negotiation at any time.

One final thought, beware of anonymous posts that claim to have factual information, register for and check the PBA website for up to date information from valid sources.

PS- I can't believe I forgot to put in my original post that if you don't have the intestinal fortitude to put your name, feel free to keep you comments to yourself as they will not be responded to by me.

\.

The Tampa Fire & Police Pension Board guides and steers the "ship" which is our pension fund. The unions and the City have the duty to "build" this "ship", .


Well matey, since we be using ship analogies.....

I say this ship needs a mutiny ( aka a NO vote)!!! Arrrrrr!! Let's make the scally-wags who drew up this contract walk the plank!! They've shivered me timbers for the last time. AHOY! Vote no so we get more LOOT and BOOTY!!!!ARRRR!!!

Ok, I will answer your question. I asked the following 3 members.

1. YOU....your answer, it is not feasible. when asked to explain, you said you did not have time to get with you later.

2. Cpl Hamlin, said it would cost way to much. However, could not explain specifically why.

3. Sgt Meier, siad it was not going to happen. WHen asked why basically he said we (me and the 3 others) would not understand it.

Basically you guys think we are not smart enough.

I have to tell you Pat, you gave us a survey and we answer it. TELL US WHAT THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEY WERE!

I can not see where the PBA asked for ANY of the items we voted on in the survey other than the pay raise.

At no time did you or ANY other member of teh PBA tell us ANYTHING about what the he11 was going on.

Neither you or ANY member of the PBA board ever mentioned where WE asked for post retirement health care. If we didn't ask for it....no freeking wonder we dont have it!

Now if you tell us that the health care was killed before we met at the "negotiation table", then I would ask you if there were "pre-meetings" ?

Who was there, what where the topics, WHO killed the post retirment health care idea?

What is the mayors position on this?

Lastly Pat, do you think your seat on the Pension Board has any conflict with your seat on the PBA executive board? Which master has preference?

Bottom line is the PBA did not use our survey. They only gave it to us to make us think they cared what we wanted. PERIOD!

I challenge you to prove me wrong by publishing the results of the survey and show me how many of the top 8 items were negotiated or received.

Dear Anonymous,

If the Pension Fund was to provide health insurance to the retiree group, in my opinion (I am not an insurance professional and I could very well be wrong about this) it would be much more expensive than the city insurance.

The reasons, which I base my opinion, are the following: The city is able to provide group insurance cheaper because they have more members and they have a younger average age. All of the police and fire retirees would be at either at retirement age, or have a disability; (pre existing conditon possibly) therefore, there would be no young group members to offset the costs, which are commonly generated by older and/or disabled members typically.

I have explained this thinking (once again only my opinion) to many people over the past few years, so there would be no reason why I can think of that I would have not explained it to you.

If you would like to talk to me more, please feel free to call me in D3 at 274-3704. You can still remain anonymous, if you wish.

Sincerely,
Marc Hamlin

Sorry. The number to D3 is 276-3704.

Anytime, Everytime, Whenever
I have asked Lynch, Meier or Hamlin any questions about Pension issues
I HAVE ALWAYS RECEIVED A PROMPT, COURTEOUS & INFORMATIVE ANSWER. If they felt my question was beyond their expertise, out of their purview or outside the scope of their lawful responsibility, they have told me.

You may have a right to gripe about many things within our agency and how the Pension and PBA entities have room for improvement, however, I disagree with your premise that any of the above three persons as a matter of habit rebuff or discourage members by not answering.

I don't break bread with any of those three guys - yet they have ALWAYS given me appropriate, reasoned, sound and timely guidance on Pension issues when I had concerns or questions.

[Pat Lynch]

CORRECTION: I'm not trying to say that the PBA didn't want to do anything with retirement health care, I was only pointing out that the proposal didn't make it to the final contract (as did many other good ideas from myself and others). Rome wasn't built in a day and we don't get everything we want (neither does the City). Rich O'Connor's proposal, my proposal and loads of others were considered in great detail. I can assure you that in the future it will be addressed. Remember that we have a pension that is connected with the Fire Department so we have to work with their people too. And also remember, it is in the contract that pension issues are open to negotiation at any time.

One final thought, beware of anonymous posts that claim to have factual information, register for and check the PBA website for up to date information from valid sources.

PS- I can't believe I forgot to put in my original post that if you don't have the intestinal fortitude to put your name, feel free to keep you comments to yourself as they will not be responded to by me.

The above has been added to my original post, sorry for anyone that perceived the post as negative. That was not the intent.

[quote="Marc Hamlin"]Dear Anonymous,

If the Pension Fund was to provide health insurance to the retiree group, in my opinion (I am not an insurance professional and I could very well be wrong about this) it would be much more expensive than the city insurance.

The reasons, which I base my opinion, are the following: The city is able to provide group insurance cheaper because they have more members and they have a younger average age. All of the police and fire retirees would be at either at retirement age, or have a disability; (pre existing conditon possibly) therefore, there would be no young group members to offset the costs, which are commonly generated by older and/or disabled members typically.]

HUH??? Sounds like uneducated double speak. In case you're unaware, you are allowed to maintain the city's health insurance when you retire. You just have to pay the entire premium. Which just happens to be going up to $948 per month for the HMO. I'm not sure what the 'no young members to offset this costs' is all about. You just have to find a way to pay to stay on the city's plan. Maybe you should contact an insurance professional so you can get the facts. And you run the pension board? :cry:

Dear Anonymous,

I thought the other post was referring to an alternative to the already offered city insurance after retirement. People are constantly asking me if the pension board can offer an alternative to the city insurance upon retirement.

So, you are correct. Imagine how much that premium would be, if not for the younger city employees offsetting the cost. That is why I believe it would be too expensive for the pension board to offer their own and separate group insurance to retirees. Maybe I did not explain myself properly, or I misunderstood the other anonymous post. Do not know if you are a different person, or not.

Therefore, I am aware that you are allowed to maintain the city insurance upon retirement as the pension office facilitates the open enrollment every year as part of their function.

As always, you can reach me in D3 at 276-3704 and you can continue remain anonymous if you wish.