They (city council) spend our ( the taxpayer ) money so easily and without second thought. Every last one of them, except Pete should go for this. It is beyond thought how they so easily agreed to this. They are all selfinterested on getting reelected. I just hope Pete continues to do the right thing by the voters.

thanks, pete, for looking out for the taxpayers of ocean city. everybody else on council seems to be asleep when it comes t0 employees' contracts.

Same comments as usual. Are any one of you going to go out and clean this city? What do any of you do for this city besides complain. If you do not like how this city is run get out that simple. All I ever read is how bad things are here in ocean city. Well why don't all you cry babys and complainers take a look at what you have compared to other citys in this state.

Well silly me. I recently stated in regard to the newly signed union contract with the fire department that the raises were modest. I now understand the way this really works.

Pete Guinosso voted “no” to the collective bargaining agreement with the communications workers union. Why? First of all, like the rest of council, he hasn’t seen the contract. Kudos to Pete for refusing to vote on something he hasn't seen.

Councilman Guinosso stated at last night’s council meeting that based upon the last agreement signed with the communications workers (which he is privy to) that compensation for the communication workers would increase something in the order of a 40 to 60% over 9 years. How can that be? According to the terms of the proposed agreement, and not unlike the fire department, there would be a 0% increase in the first year, a 1.5% increase in the second year, and a 2% increase in the third year. Sounds reasonable, right?

The answer is in the 9 steps built into the union contract. Under the terms of the existing agreement (if you do the math) those workers will receive a 4 to 6% increase in pay in each of those 9 years. In their 10th year they will reach longevity and receive a $1,000 increase. In the 15th year it will be $1,500.

Why are we then voting for any pay increase? It’s already built into the contract. That average 1.3% increase is in addition to the 4 to 6% increase they’re already getting. You are aware of projections that estimates of the growth in the GDP are little more than 1% over the next couple of years? Do you expect that your income will increase by 60% over the next 9 years? No wonder our costs are SO HIGH.

SEEMS LIKE A FAIR CONTRACT... OUR EMPLOYEES SHOULD BE TREATED FAIRLY AND WITH RESPECT... AS YOU WOULD LIKE TO BE TREATED BY YOUR EMPLOYER...PETE SHOULD VOTE THE WAY HE FEELS ON ANY SUBJECT BUT I WOULD BET HE MADE A LOT MORE THAN MOST OF OUR EMPLOYEES WHO BELONG TO THE CWA...

I am glad Pete voted no showes he likes the facts. Lets hope he does that for his entire term. Do you even understand steps. It allows the empoyer to start you at a lower rate and work towards your top pay. Longevity is a thing of the past and ia not even in the contract anymore so get your facts straight. And why would you even try to compare the cwa to fmba completely diffrent jobs. And again if your costs are so high please feel free to move to another city. You could move to vineland they have a special tax rate.

Eric, do some research first. get the facts, not just what you heard at a council meeting. Then, come back and try and make that same argument.

Eric, you can rely on their truthfulness as much as you want, I was just suggesting you get the FULL truth, not just the part a council member wishes to quote/use during a speach.

Here I am again. Trying to not laugh out loud to some of these complaints. Do you not understand that there can be NO final contract until City Council approves what administration has accepted. Do you NOT understand that the CWA has gotten exactly what the Police and Fire got, how is that NOT fair. And FYI, longevity is a thing of the past, I don't think anybody is saying you can't rely on the council members truthfullness, but the facts look like may not be accurate. This troubles me because nobody complained about police and fire who got more steps built into their contracts. The CWA didn't get any additional steps.

City Council unanimously approved a collective bargaining agreement Thursday with the Firemen's Mutual Benevolent Association, Local No. 27.

The three-year contract applies to about 60 Ocean City firefighters and closely reflects a recent contract with the Ocean City Police Department union.

The agreement includes the following provisions:

Contract runs Jan. 1, 2012, to Dec. 31, 2014.
Zero percent wage increases in 2012, 1.5 percent increases in 2013 and 2 percent increases in 2014 (a 1.2 percent average).
Employees will make contributions to health benefits that are consistent with state law.
Terminal leave payments will be capped at $7,500 for all new hires.
New firefighters will go through three additional salary steps (from seven to 10) before hitting the top.
Health benefit coverage for retirees will go to firefighters with 25 years experience, including 20 years in Ocean City.
Longevity benefits will start at 10 years, instead of seven.
An $832 CPR training stipend has been eliminated.
A minimum overtime payment has been reduced from four to two hours.

City Council unanimously approved on Thursday (April 26) a collective bargaining agreement with the Policemen's Benevolent Association, Local No. 61.

The three-year contract with the Ocean City Police Department union will be the first to be signed this year. The city is currently negotiating with six other labor unions — all current contracts expired at the end of 2011.

The agreement includes the following provisions:

Contract runs Jan. 1, 2012, to Dec. 31, 2014.
Zero percent wage increases in 2012, 1.5 percent increases in 2013 and 2 percent increases in 2014 (a 1.2 percent average).
Employees will make contributions to health benefits that are consistent with state law.
Terminal leave payments will be capped at $7,500 for all new hires.
New officers will go through three additional salary steps (from seven to 10) before hitting the top.
Health benefit coverage for retirees will go to officers with 25 years experience, including 20 years in Ocean City.
Longevity benefits will start at 10 years, instead of seven.

I suggest some of you ready the above posts and please tell me what is different between these contracts!!!!! NOTHING except police and fire have more steps now.

Eric- I've watched Pete G. speak at council meetings on channel 2 for years. He seems to rarely know what he's talking about. He whines about taxes which aren't that bad in ocean city and then goes home to his multi million dollar house on the beach.

why are important decisions always rushed through city council? the parking lot purchase was voted on the same day that the agreement was signed. the complicated bay rental was voted on 1 day after the agreement was signed. and now a new labor contract is voted on with only a working draft available. doesn't it take time to read and examine these documents? how can any council member vote intelligently without having all of the information available?

If you all pay attention don't you remember they had a closed session about these contracts a week before this came to vote in a public council meeting. How can you say they didn't know about what they were voting on. This was not rushed through. They had the expired contract to review and these were the only changes that were made.

I guess nobody cares that the same thing was done with the police and fire contracts. They didn't have final contracts before they voted on them. Please tell me and explain what the difference is between the CWA and the FMBA and PBA contract voting. NOTHING!!!!!.

I am sorry to say that you are misinformed once again. Any employee who is in the CWA for more than 25 yrs. will get a ZERO pay increase. There is nothing built in for them to get anymore than what they are getting right now. Actually they are getting less this year because the governor increase the contributions to the pension by 2 % and the increase in the health care contributions is now at 2%. Other employees who have been there since 1997 get $100 in longevity starting in the eleventh year of service, which means they are only getting $100 increase this year which again comes out to be a negative. Why don't you get the contract and read it then we can have a discussion with all the information not just what council wants you to hear. I guess the people who clean the streets, clean the beaches, plow the streets and clean up after floods are not as important as everybody else. I didn't even say you were picking on anybody I just wish everybody had all the facts before they start a discussion.

Once council approves of the negotiated nothing is up for negotiation. Once the union has a tentative agreement with the high priced attorney that the city felt they needed to hire nothing is up for negotiation. That is it, period.........

I'm learning a lot about unions here so thanks for everyone's comments (almost everyone's).

How can unions be such power brokers when union workers only make up 10-11% of the nations workforce?

Eric you can OPRA request any of the unions contracts from the city clerks office. And as far as the purpose, when you find out let me know please. I don't have an answer for you on that one.

Yet again I am trying not to laugh out loud. Eric I don't believe I contradicted myself as far as longevity is concerned. New hires will not get longevity and as for existing employees they only get $100 per year for year of service starting in the eleventh year of service. I am not ducking any issues. Most of the current workers are at the top of the steps and will not be receiving any more step increases.

Thats the smartest thing you've said in a year Eric, should have done that prior to commenting to begin with.

Eric, when you get that contract, explain why school crossing guards who make less than $5,000 (10 hours per week while school is in session only) get a full benefit package worth $20,000. Their position is less than parttime. Don't we have people in this town who would do it without the benefits?

OC4EVER (love your name) let's see if Ann knows someone else in the city who gets that same setup (that seems to make it okay) or if Mr. B has a smart** comment or tells you to leave if you don't like it (according to the last census almost 3 thousand have). If/when Eric gets it, he will have the answer for you and will present it to you in a respectful and honest way.

It is my understanding that the crossing guards fall under the Police Dept. and not the School Board.

suggesting someone have their facts together prior to assuming things makes me a "smartass" wow. I thought I was being polite and helpful. I have never suggested someone leave if they don't like it. I believe people can have an opinion but don't spread opinions around as facts.

and lets get one thing straight and stop using it as a reason, you will ALWAYS find someone to do someone elses job for less money. so I find it very unfair to state that Union members are compensated because someone else will do it for less. I believe ina fair wage for an honest days work. what do you think is a fair wage for the work being done that makes this City the Greatest Family Resort that it is???

over compensated should of read.

propertywatcher - you are right, they are supervised by the traffic safety unit of the OCPD but they are in the public employees retirement system (PERS) pension and they are still parttime employees with fulltime benefits. And they will receive a pension for life when they retire. Not bad for working 2 hours a day.

As for the amount paid out at longevity which Ann maintains is a thing of the past (but is in the contract) and is a different amount from the amount I was told, I'll reserve judgement until I at least see the old contract. I don't know how to resolve those contradicions any other way. I will say that for those union members who are beyond the steps and are not receiving an increase in compensation other than the 1.2% (average) annual increase that it is a fair cost of living increase and I wouldn't begrudge that to anyone.

For those union members still in the steps, the increase in annual compensation goes well beyond 1.2% and brings them to their maximum compensation at a rapid rate. Because of the way these contracts are structured, and in terms of the cap on the levy, the City is either paying out pay increases at an unsustainable rate (well above 2% annually) or paying the maximum in salaries to the rest of it's union workers. I can't help but think that it is this dynamic that is responsible for the (as reported) average firefighter salary of $100,000 a year (plus pensions and benefits.) And I don't subscribe to the theory that we receive superior services because we pay more for them. As I stated before I believe a fireman making $60,000 a year will do as good a job at suppressing a fire as a fireman making $100,000 a year.

Having said that I'll reserve further comment until I've had a chance tot review the old contract in its entirety.

I wonder how long any private business in OC--Gillian's, Hoy's, Manco and Manco, etc would last paying their employees these types of wages and benefits for life not to mention the seasonal people (lifeguards, etc) getting penisons and unemeployment. Do any of the businesses in OC or any other shore town allow employees to retire at 55 and then pay their health benefits until death do them part. I wonder if any of the private businesses give employees step raises and then raises on top of that and then are forced to keep bad and/or irresponsible employees. It doesn't matter what is in the contract, the point is that public salaries and benefits are out of line with the naturally occurring economic and market forces that drive the real world. It doesn't matter if Eric lives in a million dollar beach house and someone else lives in a 300,000 house, the contracts are out of touch with the new "normal;" and we are paying way too much for labor costs. I guess the publics haven't gotten the message yet. Oh yes, the public servant response if one dares to question-- become defensive and suggest that for anyone who does not agree to move out of OC. So how about it Ann, anybody you know in OC private business who gets the same deal? That's right, if the town comes up short, they just hit up the taxpayers for more :) Gotta love it!

I really thought we could have a civilized discussion. It would appear that some people on this thread feel the need to attack others. I don't feel I have attacked anybody and if I have I apologize. Eric, do you feel attacked?? I thought we were having a very mature discussion and it appears others don't feel the same. We can have our differences this is the United States of America. Please let's not resort to attacking others and all this negativity. This is just a discussion for god's sake.

How can there be one comment on the OCFD phenomenal cardiac save rate, 5 comments about the County engineer discussing projects in Ocean City yet we have 59 comments about a city labor contract which only pays the employees 1.15% per year over 3 years? The city negotiated an excellent deal for the taxpayers. The remarks on this matter should be all positive not this nonsense. Time for a reality check by the posters on Patch.

If you are referring to my question as to who in the private industry in OC gets the same deal, I was following up on Propertywatchers same question. Ann stated that city council gets a salary and same benefit package as the public "servants" which to use your phrase Ann, I have to laugh out loud at that one. Do you see any conflict of interest at all in the council receiving these perks? I thought that practice was stopped a year or so back. I see council as being in the public domain or having a spouse or family member in the public domain, hence, the consensus will almost always be more, more, more with no regard to cost other than to pass it on to the taxpayers. Do you know of anyone with a private business in OC or anywhere else who pays their employees the same salaries, sick time, health benefits, early retirements, yearly raises, vacation.sick time pay outs, step up increases? I would venture to guess that any private business large or small would be out of business if that sort of thing went on. I don't have any problem with people making a decent living but I do have a problem with unions paying well above what the market will bear and politicians promising perks and benefits that any reasonable person would conclude are unsustainable over time even in OC and then getting up in arms when anyone dares to question--not you, I appreciate your discussion but other "union" posters.

I appreciate all the positive and helpful comments and discussion.

Eric, good for you that you have a beach house. I'm happy for you. It just pi$$es me off that as soon as you brought up discussion about the contracts, one of the posters had to put that out there. So what if people live in nice homes, does that mean we have to over pay for goods and services? The other immature comments about moving out of OC if we don't like shows the lack of willingness to discuss the reality but not to worry, economics always wins. Enjoy your home!

Good Lord. Did you know (according to Ann Richardson of the Gazette) that the operating budget for our public works department is $7.6 million? We employ 50 fulltime year around employess and 60 seasonal employees. I know someone who's working for the City in the later capacity and he's making minimum wage. If you assume $10 an hour over 20 weeks we're paying those seasonal employees $480,000 a year. That means there's $7.17 mill left in the kitty for those 50 fulltime employees. I'm sure public works incurrs more than salary costs, although any major capital expenditures are done thru special appropriations and don't come out of the operating budget. In terms of salaries alone that amounts to $143,000 per employee. I'm sure they don't make that much but it is nonetheless,indicative of what we must be paying. Before anyone takes my head off I haven't seen their budget and I'll look into it. I'm just looking at it from the surface. There may well be a good explanation for it. This is largely maintenance work. I think they do a great job but at what cost?

I assume that what we pay for trash collection comes out of that budget and reduces the kitty further. If we pay $1 mill a year it would average out to $123,000 per fulltime employee.

AND THEN because three isn't enough money left in the budget for infastructure and roads and drainage it is proposed that we vote a special tax assessment to raise money to repave the streets that the builders routinely tear up? What is wrong with this picture?

What's wrong with the picture is you have no idea what you're talking about. Again. You admit you haven't seen the budget but concluded and posted that the average employee makes 123,000 ? That's very responsible of you. When you get the facts make sure you correct yourself. I won't hold my breath.

In context of what I stated earlier the comment you responded to states that in the absense of any other expenditures I don't as yet know about, paying $1 mill towards trash collection would still leave an average of $123,000 available for salaries for fulltime employees. I never concluded that the average employee MAKES $123,000. I won't know what they make until I see the budget and back out any additional expenditures I don't as yet know about. But I do plan to find out.

I don't mind you expressing an opinion, but it would be nice if you would at least read the posts you comment on so you don't go off blowing smoke and making false accusations all the time.

Alright I thought of another possible explanation. Does anyone know if capital expenditures are charged back to the department or does that money just come out of the general budget?