The precedent for non-pensionable compensation was already established with the retention bonus that came with the current MOA.
But more broadly, our members should reflexively doubt any contract that comes with bonuses of any kind (ratification, retention, or otherwise). Bonuses are to contracts what a chaser is to a cheap shot — they’re meant to cover up the bad taste of whatever you’re being asked to swallow. Fact is people don’t need to be incentivized to vote yes when they’re getting a good deal.
Yes, they've been doing that for a while. It actually hurts lower paid employees more than us, but it's always been a bad idea. Usually, though, it's been used as a bribe for us to accept a sub-inflationary contract. This is beyond the pale.
I support paraprofessionals getting the extra 10K ASAP because it is so long overdue, the money is so well-deserved (even though paras deserve a lot more than an extra 10K), and the need is great. We must continue to point out that Mulgrew and Unity are messing with our healthcare (especially the healthcare of retirees), and now Mulgrew and Unity are messing with our pensions. This May, vote for A Better Contract.
I'm in agreement. What's really outrageous here is that this is a campaign stunt at the expense of paraprofessionals. When he had the chance to actually do something, Mulgrew ignored them. This is a Hail Mary and he has the audacity to not only present it as a done deal, but also to use official UFT communications to echo that portrayal.
It’s a Trojan Horse. It’s like hanging fruit. He’s done that with signing bonuses for contracts. The money looks good. But in the end it doesn’t help support you because it’s not pensionable.
Well, there are several ways this could be a Trojan Horse. The likeliest, by far, is it looks like ten thousand bucks but contains nothing. In the highly unlikely even this passes, we'd need to see the fine print. As it's not even written, it could contain clauses well worse than simply not being pensionable. No one imagined the MA thing buried in Appendix B, and Mulgrew presented it to the DA as a big nothing.
More of your fine work. One suggestion though - have the mention of the 55 years of neglect and then Unity doing this just before an election timing in the first paragraph.
Thanks. This was a pretty long piece and it was tough deciding what was most important. I changed it a lot to stress more the unlikelihood of this ever happening, but that's a strong point.
The precedent for non-pensionable compensation was already established with the retention bonus that came with the current MOA.
But more broadly, our members should reflexively doubt any contract that comes with bonuses of any kind (ratification, retention, or otherwise). Bonuses are to contracts what a chaser is to a cheap shot — they’re meant to cover up the bad taste of whatever you’re being asked to swallow. Fact is people don’t need to be incentivized to vote yes when they’re getting a good deal.
Yes, they've been doing that for a while. It actually hurts lower paid employees more than us, but it's always been a bad idea. Usually, though, it's been used as a bribe for us to accept a sub-inflationary contract. This is beyond the pale.
I support paraprofessionals getting the extra 10K ASAP because it is so long overdue, the money is so well-deserved (even though paras deserve a lot more than an extra 10K), and the need is great. We must continue to point out that Mulgrew and Unity are messing with our healthcare (especially the healthcare of retirees), and now Mulgrew and Unity are messing with our pensions. This May, vote for A Better Contract.
I'm in agreement. What's really outrageous here is that this is a campaign stunt at the expense of paraprofessionals. When he had the chance to actually do something, Mulgrew ignored them. This is a Hail Mary and he has the audacity to not only present it as a done deal, but also to use official UFT communications to echo that portrayal.
Ooop
Beware Mulgrew bearing gifts…
Absolutely. Disgraceful that he'd present this as a done deal.
It’s a Trojan Horse. It’s like hanging fruit. He’s done that with signing bonuses for contracts. The money looks good. But in the end it doesn’t help support you because it’s not pensionable.
Well, there are several ways this could be a Trojan Horse. The likeliest, by far, is it looks like ten thousand bucks but contains nothing. In the highly unlikely even this passes, we'd need to see the fine print. As it's not even written, it could contain clauses well worse than simply not being pensionable. No one imagined the MA thing buried in Appendix B, and Mulgrew presented it to the DA as a big nothing.
More of your fine work. One suggestion though - have the mention of the 55 years of neglect and then Unity doing this just before an election timing in the first paragraph.
Thanks. This was a pretty long piece and it was tough deciding what was most important. I changed it a lot to stress more the unlikelihood of this ever happening, but that's a strong point.
Wearer Mulgrew bearing gifts…