LOCAL 207 ORGANIZER

OFFICIAL NEWSLETTER OF AFSCME LOCAL 207

313-965-1601, or 313-796-3376 Issue # 40, February 24, 2003 www.afscme207.com

Date and time of ratification votes to be announced by each local

Vote NO to Kilpatrick’s B.S. Contract!

Kilpatrick and Michigan AFSCME Council 25 have finally pressured the majority of the AFSCME Negotiations Team to call a vote on this 5-year chump-change contract. It’s time now for the members to send an unmistakable message – we will not accept this BS!

We Need Lower Health Insurance Deductions and Protection from Privatization

The members need three issued to be addressed: decent wages, lower health insurance deductions and privatization/contracting out. Of these issues, this contract only deals with wages, and does so by insulting us. We must use a massive NO vote to force our main concerns onto the table.

Negotiations Team Divided

Historically AFSCME local presidents back contracts pushed by Council 25. This time the presidents of two Water and Public Lighting Department locals, #207 and #2920, voted not to support this sellout contract. Other local presidents also voted against bringing it to us. Even some presidents who are going along with it have misgivings, and most members do not want this contract.

AFSCME members from all locals must unite and force Kilpatrick to pay us some respect and some real money. We must encourage our local presidents to take a stand against this contract. Council 25 President Al Garrett may have twisted their arms into bringing it to us, but he doesn’t vote in their local elections. And that’s when people will remember who stood up, and who didn’t.

We Must Draw the Line Now

If we give Kilpatrick this contract, he will not leave us alone. He will consider us incapable of overcoming the weakness of our top leadership. He will feel free use city workers for a punching bag whenever the news media, corporations or racist suburban politicians are looking for a scapegoat; or when they’re looking for another source of privatized profits.

Kilpatrick has money for big business projects, but has not yet been forced to seriously address our needs. We deserve better, and we can win it. The community will support us if we fight, as they have in the past, especially as we emphasize that improved city services requires an investment in city workers.

Here’s the main reasons why we must reject this contract. Another is that this proposal would require workers at 24-hour operations to call in sick 2 hours before their shift, rather than the current 2 hours after. All the proposed changes are detailed elsewhere in this leaflet so that members can make an informed decision.

Totally Unacceptable Wages

• 0% for the first two years (no raises, no retro) (July 2001- July 2003).

• 2% for each of the next three years (July 2003 – July 2006). That’s 6% over 5 years! We got 8% in each of the last two 3-year contracts! These raises get eaten up by health insurance deduction increases.

• $400 one-time cash bonus, before taxes!

• Some job titles would get 50 cents per hour wage adjustments in July 2003, a lousy 10 cents year.

Five-Year Contract is Too Long

• The way the last few contract negotiations have gone, the 2004 contract negotiations could still be going on in 2005. That would be our chance to squeeze a decent contract out of the mayor, who will want to avoid strife with the unions in an election year. If we ratify this contract, we will miss that chance.

• It makes no sense to ratify a historically-long contract during economic and political crises. A normal three-year contract would allow us to negotiate a better offer in 2004, when the economy is better.