Mark Snyder points out... > Before this strike/lockout started, Peter Bell chose to give Metro Transit > managers 5% raises.
[MH] First, as has been pointed out, this is no lockout. Second, I believe the union got 7 percent over two years in a comparable time frame. What percentage increase have most workers (public and private) seen over the past 2-3 years? And, this is all history-- we need to look ahead to solve these problems. Perhaps the City has some ideas? They seem to have recently resolved their 'cost-of-healthcare' issues amicably and innovatively. It can be done. But, I have some questions, and I'm sure they are shared by many others. We'd like to know. 1. How do family health care benefits for state employees (largest unions) compare with those of the transit workers (under current and proposed contracts), in terms of monthly premiums, deductibles and co-pays? 2. What would it cost those state employees to pick up that coverage under COBRA, should they leave the state workforce? The cost for transit workers to pick up their current family health care coverage under COBRA is over $1100 per month (not including dental). 3. Do state workers have state-paid health care in their retirement as the transit workers currently do? If so, how long must they work under the contract for such coverage? And, if available, how does such coverage compare-- state vs. transit? 4. How does this 'public' coverage compare with coverage in the private sector (and not just for the biggest companies, but for smaller enterprises as well)? What is the avg. employee cost (and total cost- employee plus employer component would be interesting) for comparable coverage through companies with fewer than 100 employees? [And, I'm interested in sample data for a population of employers, not just a case here and a case there.] Let's compare similar apples in a bigger basket. Perhaps the Metro Council or a state agency has such data available, or someone else knowledgeable in the health insurance industry? Inquisitive minds would sure like to see/understand the bigger picture. And last, a few folks have previously pointed out onlist, that the 'cost-of-health care' issue is much larger than any single contract negotiation can address. Let's deal with the broader 'cost-of-healthcare' issue-- for both public and private sector workers, retirees, etc. This one contract at-a-time approach does nothing to address the broader cost/coverage/eligibility issues. Michael Hohmann Linden Hills > ________________________________ > > Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn > E-Democracy > Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
