Nix School Agent 75% Pension;

In Disability Cases
Nix School Agent 75% Pension


Governor Spitzer has vetoed a bill that would have granted thousands of School Safety Agents and peace officers increased disability pensions if they were injured in the line of duty, as well as a measure that would have reformed the Taylor Law.

GREGORY FLOYD: Disappointed by veto. The disability bill would have granted injured public safety officers a 75-percent retirement benefit, giving them parity with police, fire and other emergency personnel. The other measure vetoed by the Governor would have shortened the period of time in which incumbent unions could be challenged for exclusive bargaining rights for their employees.

'Deserve Equal Rights'

"Whether you serve as a school safety officer or a police officer, those whose duty it is to safeguard others deserve to have the same disability benefits afforded them when injured on the job," Teamster Local 237 President Gregory Floyd stated in an e-mail. "Although the cost impact of the legislation would have been minimal, since the rates for injuries on the job are not occurring in record numbers, the aid provided to those who do need it would have been significant."

Union officials had hoped the new Democratic Governor would sign the bills, which were similar to measures vetoed several times by former Governor Pataki.

State Sen. Frank Padavan (D-Queens), who sponsored the disability bill, estimated that the cost would have been $200,000 next year. The bill would also have covered campus peace officers, housing and hospital police, taxi and limousine inspectors and parking control specialists, and was retroactive to Sept. 11, 2001. Most public-sector workers are eligible for disability payments equal to 33 percent of their salaries.

Spitzer: They're Not Cops

In vetoing the bill, Mr. Spitzer laid out several objections. "They simply do not face the same daily risks as police officers and firefighters," he wrote in the veto memo, "who are entitled to enhanced benefits based upon the enhanced risks that they face every day."

The Governor also asserted that granting the benefit would open the door to other employees who face physical risks, and he argued that any increase in disability benefits should be negotiated at the bargaining table. He cited the 2002 Sanitation workers' contract, which granted them the 75-percent disability benefit.

Finally, Mr. Spitzer pointed to the retroactive aspect of the bill, which he said was a "significant flaw" and "would greatly magnify the fiscal impact of the bill, and set a bad precedent for future legislation."

The second labor-backed bill vetoed by Mr. Spitzer came out of the State AFL-CIO's Taylor Law reform task force. Currently, incumbent unions can be challenged during the period seven months after the expiration of a contract, or seven months prior to the conclusion of the agreement's third year, whichever comes first. The bill would have closed that seven-month period, and opened a 30-day window for challenge prior to the expiration of the contract. It would have granted another 30-day window if no contract was signed a year later.

Tool for Management

Union leaders argued that management has used the current provision to delay signing contracts, exploiting the period in which a union is vulnerable to a challenge and putting pressure on the union to settle for an inferior deal. "We are extremely disappointed," said Civil Service Employees Association spokesman Steven Madarasz. "We don't think he fully understands that this is about trying to level the playing field. By vetoing, he continues a practice that gives management more of an upper hand."

In vetoing the measure, Mr. Spitzer had the backing of the Public Employment Relations Board, which argued that challenges to incumbents were few and far between. "The sponsors provide no evidence to show that this is actually occurring," the veto memo stated, "much less that the appropriate means of addressing such a problem would be to largely close off opportunities for challenging unions." Mr. Madarasz noted that CSEA negotiates more than 1,100 contract statewide, and that their local chapters have repeatedly faced the problem.

Mr. Spitzer also noted that a union could file an improper-practice charge if it believed an employer was delaying negotiations in bad faith. Union officials said this would just add more delays to the central goal of trying to get a contract. "That's kind of a technical lawyer's argument," said Mr. Madarasz. "It's not easy to actually prove they aren't bargaining in good faith when they delay."

'A Sitting Duck'

Union leaders also asserted that forcing a union to both fight off a decertification challenge and negotiate a contract only benefited the employer. "It means that all the time, as a union is getting ready to negotiate a contract," said Public Employees Federation spokeswoman Sherry Halbrook, "it's also a sitting duck for challenges by other unions."

Union officials said that their bill would have still given employees who wanted different representation the opportunity to petition for it, but the Governor invoked the issue of union democracy in his objection. "It would make it exceedingly difficult for employees to mount a decertification campaign," he stated in his veto, "when they have a legitimate basis for believing the union is not representing them effectively."