City Credibility Linked To Residency Bill; Council Delay Hurts Bargaining

On July 12, 2006, New York City's Mayor Michael Bloomberg and District Council 37's Lillian Roberts signed a contract which included changes in the residency law for municipal employees pending approval by the New York City Council. While 240,000 city workers are not mandated to live in the city, 45,000 — mostly lower-paid civil servants — are required to maintain residence in the Big Apple.

Neal Tepel is President of the Civil Service Merit Council. The agreement would have permitted all those employed by New York City to live in Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, Rockland, Putnam or Orange counties, all in New York State.

This important labor settlement containing a proviso for City Council approval didn't seem to be an issue at the time of signing. Having the Mayor's support and most of the city workforce already permitted to live outside the five boroughs, no one thought the labor-friendly Council would be an impediment to a contract. When announcing the tentative agreement, Mayor Bloomberg said that the restrictions were adopted 20 years ago when many middle-class families were leaving New York for the suburbs, and a lot has changed since then.

Needless to say, the inability to enact this agreement has been an embarrassment to both New York City and District Council 37.

The negotiation process between unions and city government is always difficult and stressful. Through the years, the trust and credibility built by New York City Labor Relations Commissioner James Hanley and his team has allowed for a harmonious relationship between labor and city officials. Even before a contract signing, the hand-shake of Commissioner Hanley with a union president has always symbolized an agreement. However, this time was different.

Intended to add employment opportunities for New Yorkers, the residency law was enacted in 1986. With costs rising rapidly and the middle class not able to afford living in most neighborhoods, it became increasingly difficult for the municipal workforce to find adequate housing in New York City. During negotiations in 2006, frustrated workers demanded that residency restriction removal be included in a settlement. City employees were ecstatic when learning the agreement included removing these restrictions. Finally, all municipal workers could realize the American dream and be permitted to purchase a home in the suburbs.

In 2006, as a follow-up to negotiations, Commissioner Hanley asked the City Council to pass a bill that would permit civilian municipal workers to live outside New York City. Some city legislators and community advocates were critical of the change, claiming removal would make it more difficult for New Yorkers to land city jobs. In response, the Council did not approve the removal of residency restriction. However, Councilman Robert Jackson and other legislators offered a compromise bill requiring newly hired municipal employees to reside in the city for only two years.

Lost on those opposing removal of the residency requirement for municipal employees is the importance for government to honor a labor settlement. The removal of residency restriction without a waiting period is the understanding between New York City and District Council 37. Good relations and credibility develop over years through mutual respect and trust. Although the Council is an independent branch of government, it has a responsibility to join with the Mayor in supporting labor agreements.