Thursday, July 16, 2009
Draw Your Own Conclusions
The North Adams Teachers Association has released the numbers regarding who pays what into the city's insurance trust fund.
The crux of the argument is that if the city had paid into the trust fund based upon Blue Cross' premium numbers, the numbers which the employees' share had been based, there would almost $2 million more in the fund. Or, conversely, it can be argued that the employees were overcharged by $600,000.
I think it looks like they have a pretty good case. I'd love to hear the city's interpretation of these numbers. ¶ 7:49 AM
The crux of the argument is that if the city had paid into the trust fund based upon Blue Cross' premium numbers, the numbers which the employees' share had been based, there would almost $2 million more in the fund. Or, conversely, it can be argued that the employees were overcharged by $600,000.I think it looks like they have a pretty good case. I'd love to hear the city's interpretation of these numbers. ¶ 7:49 AM
Comments:
<< Home
I wouldn't slip the noose around JB's neck yet, he's too slippery to let something so simply explained trip him up.
My first guess is that if the cost vs %paid over the life of the fund would show that the city has paid it's share maybe a little less some years, maybe a little more others.
My second guess is that there are some other fees that are somewhere else on the ledger.
This will be interesting.
I think the saddest part (to date) of this whole saga is the appearance of spinelessness the city council has left the voters of North Adams with. As many have said, to look into this and find nothing wrong, is ok; to not look when there is something wrong is corruption in my opinion.
My first guess is that if the cost vs %paid over the life of the fund would show that the city has paid it's share maybe a little less some years, maybe a little more others.
My second guess is that there are some other fees that are somewhere else on the ledger.
This will be interesting.
I think the saddest part (to date) of this whole saga is the appearance of spinelessness the city council has left the voters of North Adams with. As many have said, to look into this and find nothing wrong, is ok; to not look when there is something wrong is corruption in my opinion.
Let me state right up front that I don't think the Mayor has done anything illegal, per se, but it seems pretty clear that there is a pattern of simply paying the claims and not setting the employee rates correctly. This truly could come back to bite the city financially. That's why I am concerned.
These numbers are a multi-year figure and the city books its finances on a yearly basis, so, the numbers from 2001 or whatever, work in favor of the employees, it really does not matter, except to show that thing have not been calculated properly for a long time.
I've requested the raw data from the union and will listen to whomever wants to give me their side of the story (You know how to reach me). But my impression is that one side is operating transparently and the other is doing everything it can to keep this private.
That speaks volumes.
These numbers are a multi-year figure and the city books its finances on a yearly basis, so, the numbers from 2001 or whatever, work in favor of the employees, it really does not matter, except to show that thing have not been calculated properly for a long time.
I've requested the raw data from the union and will listen to whomever wants to give me their side of the story (You know how to reach me). But my impression is that one side is operating transparently and the other is doing everything it can to keep this private.
That speaks volumes.
It looks to me like 500-600 employees fall under this plan and that they feel the city owes them $600,000 according to the NATA information. I assume that those numbers are just for the NATA and not the other city unions.
My suggestion: Pay the $600,000 back to the present employees: $600000/600 employees = $1000/employee
Since it was "taken" from the employees over 4 years lets pay back the same way:
$1000/208 pay periods over 4 years= $4.81/weekly pay period back to employees.
Would everyone now be happy? You cause more financial hardship for the City and therefore the community. All over $5 a week that went to pay the union's health-care bills. I'm not saying it is "right" or "fair" but few things are.
My suggestion: Pay the $600,000 back to the present employees: $600000/600 employees = $1000/employee
Since it was "taken" from the employees over 4 years lets pay back the same way:
$1000/208 pay periods over 4 years= $4.81/weekly pay period back to employees.
Would everyone now be happy? You cause more financial hardship for the City and therefore the community. All over $5 a week that went to pay the union's health-care bills. I'm not saying it is "right" or "fair" but few things are.
# posted by 
: 2:53 PM
: 2:53 PM
"Another mess you have gotten us into Stanley" John Barrett doesn't like any sort of openness, especially if it concerns how he administrates the Town. His pat answer to any queries is usually that it is to complicated for anyone, but himself, to understand. And as for the council... they are all but useless!
Post a Comment
<< Home
