Right. I think what's reflected here is a combination of a couple of things. One is that we reduced the expenditures that 152 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. we're going to spend in that class, and the other reflects a transfer of about $55,000 of a contract that the IG has with an investigative arm that was transferred to what is going to be that budget. So I think that's the reflection of those monies.
Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Mr. Armbrister.
You're welcome. It is now of 1:00. I 15 suggest we stand in recess until 1:30. 16 Thank you. 17 (Luncheon recess.) 18
The 19 Committee of the Whole is now back in 20 session. We'll continue where we left off. The Chair recognizes Councilman Green.
Thank you, Madam Chair. 153 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. If you would come back to me, just give me two minutes to collect my papers, I'd appreciate it.
Madam President, I will yield my time. I've got the answer that I wanted.
Councilwoman Miller is not here. Councilman Green, there's no 14 one else to be recognized, if you're ready.
Thank you, Madam Chair. First of all, I would like to say to Ms. Kurland that my father would want me to extend his hello to you, and he has great affection for your family and your father, and I want you to understand that I'm just asking questions about the budget and the Kurlands have been great public servants in 154 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. Pennsylvania, and we thank you for that, and I'm glad that you are continuing in service.
So with that said, I just have one -- I think the final question I had was about the 55,000 in Class 200 in the OIG's Office which was done, and I'll just sum up where I am on this testimony today by saying -- and I've said this many times -- governing is about choosing between competing ideas for good, and all dollars that come out of the General Fund are fungible. If we don't use them for one thing, we use them for another. We have identified $500,000 within the Mayor's Office budget that the Administration has stated that they have no specific purpose for that money and they don't know how that money will be spent, and I'd just like to give the Chief of Staff an opportunity to correct that if that expenditure has been 155 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. identified.
The first thing I'd like to correct, Councilman, I think the number, at least that showed on my budget sheets, is 420,000, not the 500,000.
That's just Class 100. There's also Class 200 dollars there.
The second thing is, we are looking at the potential use of those resources, and whether or not we ultimately use those resources will be determined between now and the end of the budget process.
So you won't ask us to appropriate them without having identified their use then; is that what you're saying?
Okay. Thank you. So as questioned this morning 156 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. from Councilmembers Miller, Clarke and others indicated, a significant portion of the supposed spending reductions in FY10 within the Mayor's Office budget has to do with shifting funding within the broader Mayor's group and other City departments. It appears that the Mayor's budget was reduced by far less than $2 million. As the Council President noted, our questions about these reductions go back to the questions asked of the Administration almost two weeks ago about the Five-Year Plan. I believe those questions started with Mr. McPherson. Council requested a detailed step-by-step review of funding by department and class, moving from the FY09 appropriations through the November 2008 rebalancing plan, through any further interim adjustments and to the proposed FY10 budget. In order to make responsible, informed decisions about the proposed 157 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. budget, we need to understand what changes actually have been made since the last year, what departments have in fact been cut and what the impacts have been of these changes. Thank you, Madam President.
Yes. The Council will be receiving those documents that Mr. Green certainly alluded to. And I want to just make it clear with respect to the Mayor's Office when we talked earlier, that from the FY09 adopted budget to the FY10 proposed budget, even taking into account the reductions that we identified through the reorganization for the Inspector General's Office as well as the Office of the Chief Cultural Officer, that that budget has been 158 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. reduced by about percent, and we'll be in a position to reflect that to the Council and to the membership when we send you our responses to the FY Five-Year Plan.
Thank 8 you. Thank you. 9 Are there any other questions 10 from members of the Committee? 11 (No response.) 12
Our 16 next department? MR. McPHERSON: The next department is the Mayor's Labor Relations Unit. (Witness approached witness table.)
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. 159 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.
Good afternoon, President Verna and members of City Council. My name is Joseph Tolan and I am the Director of the Office of Labor Relations. I am here to present the Office's request for our Fiscal Year 2010 Operating Budget. The mission of the Office of Labor Relations is to coordinate relations citywide between management and labor organizations representing City employees to create an effective partnership to better serve the public. Our objectives include facilitating dispute resolution and labor-management cooperation, educating managers and supervisors about labor law and the contracts, supporting collective bargaining efforts and providing strategic advice and contract interpretation to department heads and upper management. Among the areas that we focus in are collective bargaining. All four 160 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. of our contracts expired last year on June 30th. We entered into one-year contracts or one-year arbitration awards with the four major unions. Because of that, we are now currently back into the bargaining cycle, and we anticipate that through the remainder of this fiscal year and the first half of the next fiscal year, we'll focus much of our efforts and resources on contract negotiation and interest arbitration. We continue to work in the area of training. We provide regularly scheduled training to department supervisors and managers. We also work in the area of contract administration, where we provide advice and guidance to departments as they implement different changes in the work process. We help them understand the contract and understand how to manage change. We support dispute resolution. We serve as the final in-house step of grievances filed by both AFSCME District 161 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. Councils. We receive approximately 100 grievances each year at our level. Typically we dispose of that amount. There was a smaller drop-off last year due to the intensity of the collective bargaining process. We also work in the area of labor-management cooperation, where we facilitate efforts by departments and their union representatives to change their work environment. We've worked in the Fire Communication Center to develop a new schedule, which has reduced some of our overtime costs and eliminated some absenteeism issues, while promoting productivity. We are requesting $485,415 in the FY10 General Fund budget, which represents a decrease of $58,935 from our FY09 estimated obligations. We are accomplishing that decrease by the mid-year elimination of one of our Deputy Director positions. The remainder of our budget 162 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. breaks down into the following categories: $457,501 in Class 100 to support the six filled positions for the entire year; $11,414 in Class 200; $16,500 in Classes 300 and 400 for materials, supplies and equipment. Although it's not specified in the written testimony that was submitted, for the sake of clarity, I wanted to say on the record that we have let no 12 contracts in FY09. We don't anticipate letting any contracts in FY10. So we're not in a position to report on any minority participation, because we simply haven't let any contracts. With that, I'm available to answer any questions you might have.
Mr. Tolan, it is my understanding that the Mayor has requested various work rule changes and that the unions have not been responsive. Is that correct?
I think it's premature to say that they haven't been 163 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. responsive. We're only at the beginning of the process of exchanging collective bargaining agreements with them. Traditionally with the police and fire unions we have very cursory kinds of discussions and then we move into the interest arbitration cycle, and we're doing that now. We've selected arbitration panels. We're arranging dates. We're doing the things that we have to do to get that process started. We will be meeting with the civilian units in the next couple of weeks and opening formal negotiations and having a formal discussion about the kinds of things that we think need to happen to help us reduce our costs.
Thank you. Can you tell us what it costs the City to negotiate its contract with the various unions? Just give us on an average, if you can.
My problem is that 164 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. so much of the cost is split up among other departments. The Finance Department kind of pays directly the bills of an interest arbitrator. Under Act 111, the City is responsible for paying the cost and the expenses of that process. It's not unusual to have that be $37,000 to $40,000 for the arbitrators' fees. In terms of what the Law Department supplies as support, contracts with outside experts, it's really difficult. I mean, in the last year, our budget is about $450,000, and we spent much of our time on that in the course of a year when we're doing contract negotiation.
So actually I guess in the City's budget, there is nowhere that you could refer us to that would give us what the amount would be?
No, I couldn't. (Witness approached witness 165 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. table.)
Not now, but we will put that together. I mean, it's in a few places, so we'll put it together and get back to you.
Mr. Tolan, if the Administration does not receive the concessions from the unions as assumed in the Five-Year Plan, do you know what the alternatives are?
Based on the Mayor's address and what I have heard here at these proceedings, there's an intention then to have to reduce the size of the workforce.
In the event that happens or should it happen, can you tell us when the Administration decides to implement the 166 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. layoffs of the City employees what is the process they must follow?
Under the collective bargaining agreements, there's a requirement that we give the unions about 30 days of notice. We meet with the unions. We talk to them about --
Mr. Tolan, can you pull the microphone closer? Thank you.
We're required under our contracts to give the unions 30 days of notice. We meet with them during that time and we explore alternatives, as well as discussing with them issues about possible out-placing of employees. We've gone through this process in the fall when we had our initial reduction in force. And while that's going on, operating departments are constructing layoff registers. They're being checked by the Office of Human Resources. Notice is being given to individual employees. The entire process for that first step 167 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. can take about six weeks. Employees are given an opportunity to elect to bump down, to demote to lower-level positions, if that's possible. That can start a second round of the process where we again give them notice, do scores, bump individuals down. I think we accomplished the layoffs in the fall within about a three-month period.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Krajewski.
Your testimony refers to the establishment and staffing of the 3-1-1 call center. How many City employees were transferred to the call center from other departments and agencies?
I don't have that 168 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. number. Our role in doing that was to support the department in dealing with the labor unions when we transferred individuals from other work locations in. District Council 33 is organized into ten locals by City departments. When we do a consolidation like that, some individuals move from one local to another. There are different work rules, different work schedules. We try to help work out those differences. I'm certain that we can get you the specifics on who was transferred, but our role there was more to facilitate working with the labor organizations.
Do you know the total number of employees working in the 3-1-1 call center?
No, I don't. I mean, we're not actively managing that. 169 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. We were helping during the transition process. But I'm sure that the Administration can get that number for you.
Well, I guess I'll have to get the answers from them.
Is there someone here that could answer that, Madam President?
Councilwoman Krajewski, we'll have that answer for you tomorrow when the Managing Director --
To the 170 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. Chair.
Yes. But the Managing Director will be here in person, I think, tomorrow and can address those issues. I think it's even reflected in some of her testimony as well.
Yes; how many people work in the 3-1-1 call center and how many were transferred.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Jones. 171 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.
Thank you, Madam President. Director Tolan, as we start to look at how we achieve some of our cuts and dealing with efficiencies in government, one of the things I would like to know, is your office involved in management efficiencies? And one that came to mind was the fact that one of our large expenses, according to Risk Management, is sanitation workers who actually because of work-related injuries go out on disability, and one of the things that was considered was a different mechanism of collecting trash. Are you involved in those kinds of negotiations per department? This efficiency is something that was done in California with a single-lever truck. Those kinds of issues, would that come before you?
It's possible that they could. Usually when there's a change like that, we already have 172 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. departmentally based safety committees, and an issue like that might first be raised there as a safety issue. If it was felt that it was something that was going to ultimately end up, let's say, with different work configurations, work size, different work hours, then we would be called in to talk about the contract to talk to the union officials and to see if we could work out any disagreements that might arise over implementing it.
So the genesis of that would come first from the department maybe and then wind up in your department?
Okay. So as we start to look at other efficiencies that involve the use of technology and how we used to use paper-laden kind of operation and we go to, for example, scanners that might electronically transmit data as opposed to using a workforce, part of that negotiation is 173 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. the redeployment of staff that might be displaced based on that contract?
That's correct. I mean, what you're talking about is usually referred to as something that's decisional bargaining, a place where we have the right to make the decision to make the change to implement the technology. Then we work with the unions talking about the effects on individual workers, where it may be a case where employees would have to be out-placed to other departments or agencies where these other parts of the contract that would come into play.
Finally, if management makes a decision to privatize something, are you involved in that negotiation?
Again, under our contracts, we have some specific language about privatization. We're permitted to do certain kinds of privatization, but we can't actually lay off employees. So to 174 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. the extent that we work with the union again on an out-placement issue to try to find a new work assignment for individuals that are going to be displaced, yes, we would work with the union.
And, finally, would you be -- under the premise that in the contract does it say at all if we attempt to privatize something and we find out that it doesn't save the municipality money, is there a provision within the contract often that says it reverts back to?
In our last agreements with both of the AFSCME District Councils, at the direction of the Managing Director, we pursued an idea of competitive contracting, where what we want to do is both for new contracts and for contracts that are already let that we would periodically reexamine, try to have an opportunity for the workforce to, in effect, bid on the work. So we're 175 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. working out those kinds of procedures and standards for how that could operate.
I would be interested -- and I don't know if the rest of Council would. A lot of times we are under the belief that the private sector always does it better, and I would suggest to you maybe that might be true at first, but eventually they get to a place where, based on profit motive, costs incrementally increase to a point where they're made very whole, and I wanted to know if we are safeguarding ourselves as a municipality to be able to take those privatized processes back if in fact they don't achieve the savings that they are claiming in the beginning of the privatization.
Well, I think that that is, again, one of the reasons why the Managing Director was interested in periodically reexamining items, not just the first time that they're contracted out, but on a cycle, so that there could 176 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. be an opportunity to review them and to make sure that the savings were still there.
Is there a list of such services and/or departments that have been over time outsourced and privatized that you can provide us?
I think I would have to work with the Budget Bureau to see if they could identify contracts. It's not really kept centrally in our office.
So do you know where they may be kept? I mean, if we're selling off chunks of government and we're not keeping track of whether the cost to government is increasing or decreasing, it just seems to me that we would want to keep an eye on that.
Well, I think, again, as they go through the budget process, the different departments identify items under that category heading of Class 200. 177 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. (Bell rung.)
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Sanchez.
Thank you, Madam President. You talk about the grievances. Can you speak to what -- is there a theme in the types of grievances that your office is dealing with?
We deal with a wide range of things. I mean, there's always a certain number of cases that deal with discipline where individuals -- anything from a written reprimand up to a discharge. They might choose to challenge it and instead of going through the civil service process, they may choose to take the grievance in arbitration process. There are circumstances where 178 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. employees believe that they're not paid properly, that they are, in effect, working out of class in a higher level classification. We look at issues like that as well. Certainly when there are decisions made about transferring employees or changing their work hours, different -- almost any item which is under the contract can feed into the system even if it ultimately doesn't rise to the level of being a contract violation.
Along the lines of Councilman Jones, how much oversight or how much intervention do you provide with services that we're outsourcing when there are labor disputes with people that departments are contracting with?
Again, we deal with the City workforce. So if it's already been contracted out, it's not within our purview.
So if 179 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. we're contracting with folks who are not following our labor laws, whether it's living wage or others, you will not get involved in those disputes?
It would depend on the particular area that's being disputed. For example, if it was a question of contracting out on a construction project and there was an issue of paying prevailing wage, that would be referred to the Bureau of Labor Standards Unit, which would go out and do an investigation in that case. In other cases, it would depend on who was identified as the enforcement body.
That's on the construction side, but operationally in terms of the departments, that wouldn't come to you?
No. Our focus is on our own City employees who are 180 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. represented by the four major unions.
Okay. So who in the City monitors our outsourced activities to make sure that they're abiding by living wage or other standards that we require?
Well, I think that each department that lets out a contract is responsible for monitoring the performance of the contractors. So, I mean, we don't do that on a centralized basis. It would be the particular agency that ultimately let the contract and is responsible for seeing that the work is done properly in accordance with the contract terms.
So we don't have a mechanism in the City to do that?
Are there different departments who may or may not be up to labor -- know of our 181 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. labor laws to monitor outside contractors?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I believe it's actually Office of Labor Standards, which used to be in the Mayor's Office, which is now under the Managing Director's Office. So I don't know if the Mayor's Office wants to comment or whether the Managing Director's Office can comment tomorrow, but I believe the Office of Labor Standards is responsible for --
That's why I am trying to get clarity, because that's my understanding from the charge of Labor Standards, but --
It's definitely not Labor Relations. It would be Labor Standards before Labor 182 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. Relations.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Could you please -- I only have one question. Can you please describe the difference between negotiating a contract that is not associated with binding arbitration, the difference in how you do that?
Well, the difference is, in the binding arbitration process, we form a tribunal. It's three arbitrators. One is selected by the City, one is selected by the union and then one is jointly selected from a limited list of names provided, for the most part, by the American Arbitration Association. We present evidence. We present expert witnesses, testimony. A 183 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. record is made. The three panel members then go off and in executive session work out the actual terms of the contract. So ultimately the control over the terms are given to this panel, and the deciding vote is a neutral who is from outside either the City's control or the union's control. In negotiation, we have the obligation to bargain in good faith and to try to come to agreement, to come to consensus on the different issues. So we try to educate each other. We try to find out if there are solutions that both sides can live with, but ultimately both sides have to say yes.
Is the entire contract negotiated in that environment or are there certain things that come forward that don't need to get to the arbitration point, like things that are agreed upon in advance of the arbitration?
Well, the 184 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. arbitration really applies to special units that are identified as being eligible for it. Police officers and firefighters are covered under Act 111, and the way that we resolve their contract is through interest arbitration, if there's a dispute. I mean, we could always negotiate to agreement, but our history has been that it's very difficult to do that with the availability of the arbitration process. So normally you either negotiate a contract or you go to interest arbitration.
Are there things that have been -- which I assume is a regular process. Are there things that have been agreed in binding arbitration that can be taken away or can they be negotiated away?
Well, I think that every time that our contract is up, there's an opportunity for the union and the City to agree to changes, and those changes may involve removing an item that 185 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. ended up in a past agreement or changing it in a significant way. If we can't agree, there's also the possibility that the arbitration panel, with the vote of the neutral, would direct us to reduce a benefit or to take something away. In the last round of interest arbitrations, the City's contribution for health insurance was rolled back significantly for both police and fire.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. Good morning -- good afternoon it is. You mention early in your testimony that you have not let any contracts yet. So is there a reason for 186 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. that?
It's just that in our work there's very little contracting out that we do. Normally if experts are hired, they're hired by the Finance Department or the Law Department.
Following the Councilwoman's futuristic perspective on contracting, do you intend to hire legal counsel on behalf of the City to assist you in the negotiations going forward?
Well, we don't do that hiring, but the Law Department has already in fact hired the party from -- the same party as last year.
Shannon Farmer from 187 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. Ballard Spahr is working as our chief labor counsel.
You're welcome. How many employees are in your department?
At the present time there are seven. We anticipate a reduction in force midway through the next fiscal year to bring us down to six.
There's a mixture. We have two civil service employees presently, five exempt employees.
So you have women and men and people of color, of all stripes? 188 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.
Well, we interface very closely with the Law Department during the collective bargaining process and dispute resolution. We interface closely with the Finance Department and the Managing Director on broader citywide issues. We interface with all of the operating departments, because at any time we can be asked for advice or guidance about anything from a problem employee to a request to change a work schedule. So we pretty much go everywhere that there are unionized employees in the government.
Okay. Any connect with, sit-down with, talk with OEO, Office of Equal Opportunity?
I have not had any occasion to talk directly with them, no. 24
So with that should one assume from that then 189 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. that you have not received a copy of the recent report to see what role your office might play with the recommendations stipulated in that report?
I don't recall having seen that report. You know, I just don't recall having seen that. But normally our interfaces with them are when they come to us with a problem about what they do.
So that if they have an employee who they feel they need to discipline, we would become involved.
How will the discontinuation of the Deputy Director of Labor Relations, how would that affect your department, if at all?
It will affect our department. We have tried to time the 190 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. reduction in force to hopefully have concluded our collective bargaining process so that we would hope it would have a minimal effect on that. It will have an effect when we receive requests to assist departments when they're going through different problems and changes. We're going to have to be a little bit more selective about how much support we can give to the department when they're engaged in those kinds of changes. It could have an effect on our grievance handling and dispute resolution 15 process as we sort of shift duties around and people take on other responsibilities. And it could have an impact on our training. I believe we can continue to meet our scheduled formal training obligations, but when we're asked to come in and provide a special session to a department on some issues about discipline or working with the union, we're going to have to take a look at what we can do there. 191 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.
The Law Department determines what law firm handles the business of your department?
Has there ever been -- how long have you been in your position?
I've been in the Office of Labor Relations since it was formed in January of 1997.
Has there ever been any opportunity, to your knowledge, where a law firm of color or female-owned law firm has done business with the Office of Labor Relations?
Yes. During the 2000 negotiations, there were a number of law firms, including some which were minority firms.
Well, because we're in a bargaining cycle, we don't do that every year. So it was 2000 was our -- I'm being reminded that we've also gotten some advice from John Nixon from Wolf Block on pension issues. John is a minority. I mean, there are other firms that assist, depending on the pieces that are in front of us, but the selection of the firms is left to the Law Department.
Thank you for your testimony. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Green.
Thank you, 193 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. Madam Chair. Just to follow up on questions, I can't remember who asked them, but when you provide data about the total cost of labor negotiations in FY09 and the anticipated cost in FY10, please just provide the City employees who are working on it by department, their role in that department, et cetera, salary, percent of time spent on it and also please provide a list of all outside contractors, including the name of the contractor, the scope of the work, term of the contract, when it was last renewed and the contract cost for FY09 and anticipated expenditures for FY10, identifying where the money is for the anticipated expenditures, if you got that. Okay. So the budget detail notes that OLR serves as the coordinating office for the Redesigning Government Initiative.
What work 194 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. was done on that in this year, FY09?
We haven't had any projects that have fallen under that term in the contract. The Redesigning Government Initiative is a special kind of labor-management cooperation effort, but it involves a commitment that there will really be no reduction in force as a result of it, and because of the different kinds of rebalancing efforts, we didn't feel like any of the projects that we worked on with the unions quite fit into that category where we could make that commitment.
So what kinds of things have been subjects of Redesigning Government Initiative in the past?
In the past, one example would be the Police Forensic Laboratory when they were building a new facility where the workers, along with management, helped to design a system to better handle evidence and to increase 195 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. the processing capability of the laboratory. In the past, the Revenue Department was considering contracting out its travel audits, audits that took place outside of the Philadelphia region to find out whether or not firms doing business here in fact owed us more taxes. We worked out a system with the union to facilitate the travel of our employees to these sites. They also assisted in developing new pre-audit work techniques to make it more efficient so that we would have to spend less time out of the office. Those are two projects that just come to mind easily.
Have you done anything in the area of implementation of technology in the Redesigning Government Initiative or are there any proposals or projects before you along those lines?
Well, right now we 196 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. don't really have any proposals before us. There's been work in different agencies, which were looking at different types of computer information systems. In the Health Department there was a desire to develop kind of a comprehensive database for accessing information to be used in the mental health field. There was some assistance at one time, although some of the technology problems had proved to be a little bit more difficult to accomplish only in this model.
So are you in the loop as people are talking about those changes?
The structure that's in the contract is that there's a citywide committee and that if either the union or some element of management wants to pursue an RGI, they need to apply and present it to the committee, which is a joint labor-management committee, which then decides whether or not it's suitable. 197 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.
Will you please provide to the Chair all such requests for FY09?
None? You were just mentioning one in the Health Department which --
Oh, no, no. I thought you were asking for examples of places where we've worked in the past. We have no request for FY09.
So there are no initiatives to redesign government or make it more efficient that have been proposed?
Okay. Do you think that you have the resources to really deal with Redesigning Government Initiatives?
Again, it's going to be a challenge because that's not 198 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. traditionally one of our core areas and especially when we're in the middle of our contract negotiation cycle. I mean, our resources are going to be focused at the bargaining table and through the interest arbitration process. So our resources are limited.
Do you think that that's reflected in this sort of binary choice of service cuts or tax increases?
The sort of binary choice that we have in the budget this year is service cuts or tax increases as opposed to implementing technology or doing other things that would increase efficiency in government; for example, $13 million or the efficiencies identified in our $3.84 billion budget. So do you think that the lack of resources and focus on efficiencies is because you don't have the resources or 199 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. should the work be done elsewhere or is it being done elsewhere in government that you're not aware of?
Well, I think the Redesigning Government Initiative that we talk about is something that's contained in our collective bargaining agreements and it's very specific as to how it's to operate. Ultimately it guarantees that there will be no economic harm suffered by an individual who participates in it. Given the problems that we have, it's difficult to see us entering into a project where we wouldn't at the end of the day want to see fewer people doing a certain process. So it just doesn't seem to fit at this time with that contract language.
So are we prevented from efficiencies or can we unilaterally put them in place?
No. I think that we're not limited. I think that as well the City has solicited, both from the 200 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. unions through the Managing Director's meetings with them, has solicited ideas for efficiencies and is reviewing those. We have opportunities to talk to the union, both at the department level and citywide, about ideas that individuals have. We have opportunities to work together. It's just that the Redesigning Government Initiative is something that's very specific in how it's conducted.
Right, but my question is, when we make changes that cause efficiencies, does that have to be negotiated every time?
No, it doesn't have to be. Again, it's an issue where many of them are ultimately our decision to do if we have a bargaining obligation that follows after that based on the impact on individuals.
Based on the impact on individuals, but not based on the fact that we're creating efficiencies? 201 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.
Thank you. Last year you trained -- or I guess in FY07, you trained 183 City employees and aimed to train 180 employees in FY08 and FY09. Did you meet your goals?
No, we didn't. We weren't able to meet our goals in terms of the training, because, again, with the collective bargaining cycle, there were times when we had our training sessions scheduled but had to cancel them in favor of the interest arbitration process. (Bell rung.)
The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell. 202 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.
Thank you, Madam President. I refer to the documentation we received regarding alternative plans. In each one, in each plan, one, two or three, there is listed $125 million. For the Five-Year Plan, it says "employee benefit savings," and we want to know how you -- what your plans are to achieve these savings to the tune of million a 12 year. 13