Tag Archives: SEA / SEIU 1984

Two Years And Counting: NH Community College Adjuncts Still Waiting For A Contract.

  By New Hampshire Labor News | April 25, 2013 - 7:00 am |
Comments
CCSNH SEIU1984 Adjunct Rally 4-23-13

On a damp and unseasonably chilly morning, adjunct faculty members from the Community College System of NH (CCSNH) peacefully and collectively demanded a contract Tuesday.

As previously reported, the adjunct faculty decided two years ago to form a union through the State Employees’ Association (SEA). They are still working to get their very first contract in place. A group gathered at Manchester Community College ahead of yet another mediation session between the educators and the administration.

Adjunct faculty member Heather Strine was among those who held signs, chanted and distributed informational flyers to students, fellow educators and administrators.

“We are here to call attention to our situation,” she said. “In addition to not having a contract, we are now faced with our teaching hours being cut back to two classes per semester.”

This translated to an annual salary of well under $20,000. Many of the adjuncts who participated in the event had the same complaint. They reported being told that full-timers will be given their courses; they are no longer needed. One adjunct commented, “We are merely contingent workers.”

Strine said that after making her own student loan payments and car payment each month, there is very little if any money left to clothe, feed and shelter her three children. “We will have to sleep in our car,” said Strine, who is a single mother.

Many of the adjunct faculty members spoke about their passion for teaching. They explained that they spend many hours outside the classroom prepping for class and staying current with the latest information, trends and technology in their respective disciplines.

“It is very humbling when students ask me how much I earn an hour,” Strine said. “I tell them that when you factor in the outside of classroom time, we make about $3.75 an hour, less than minimum wage.” She said that in most instances, the students earn more per year working at retail or hospitality jobs.

“We all have Master’s Degrees and PhD’s. We are professionals who are always counseling our students about the importance of an education,” said Ann Clune, another adjunct professor. “And, look at us. CCSNH is not practicing what they preach.”

Throughout the hour-long event, CCSNH President Dr. Susan D. Huard patrolled the entryway to the main building and peered out the window. At one point she had the head of campus security ask the adjunct faculty members and the SEA members to move. When asked what her concern was, she answered that her only concern was the students and their comfort level.

This doesn’t really jive with the way things are. Adjuncts provide 77 percent of teaching time to the students – their contribution to the students’ education far exceeds the full-time faculty. Yet, the college system’s president thinks the students feel threatened by them. It is far more likely the students will be “uncomfortable” when their favorite teachers are no longer employed.

If the adjunct faculty cannot garner support or respect from the administration, what does that say about the administration’s true thoughts about the students? Clearly the adjuncts are second rate educators in the administration’s eye. Yet, they appear to be perfectly good enough to educate community college students. This equation seems out of balance.

Post from SEIU 1984. Follow them on twitter @SEIU1984

 

Poor Pay And Poor Conditions For NH Community College Faculty

  By New Hampshire Labor News | April 10, 2013 - 4:00 pm | ,
Comments
SEIU Adjunct 2

By Rep. RICK WATROUS

(Published in print: Sunday, April 7, 2013)

Imagine a community college system where most of the professors earn less in a year than the maintenance staff. Imagine a community college system that responded to a state cut in funding by giving its administrators huge pay increases.

Welcome to the Community College System of New Hampshire.

The Chronicle of Higher Education reports that the teachers at New Hampshire’s community colleges are the lowest-paid faculty in New England, and among the lowest in the whole country. According to CCSNH records, 77 percent – well over 1,000 people – of the system’s faculty are adjunct professors. Most of these adjuncts barely earn a living wage.

I am an adjunct English professor at NHTI in Concord. Adjuncts are hired one semester at a time to teach specific courses. We receive no pension, no health care, no benefits and have zero job security. We often receive our teaching contracts only a few days before the semester begins. We don’t have offices, so our students have a hard time connecting with us outside of class.

Although we have advanced degrees, we can teach a full load of college courses and make less than $20,000 a year. We teach the lion’s share of the courses; without us the state’s community college system could not function.

In its recent “Information for Elected Officials” handout, the Community College System of New Hampshire states: “Our focus is on teaching, learning, and providing the support students need to achieve.” The most important people in any school – other than the students themselves – are the teachers. Yet the actions of the community college leadership show a distinct lack of focus on the people who teach their students.

Both the adjunct and the full-time faculties have become painfully aware that the system office appears to view itself as the top priority. When I started working for NHTI in the mid-1980s, the system office consisted of the commissioner and three other people. Now there are 60 people in the system office in purely administrative roles – people who never set foot in a classroom. And each college still has its own administrative staff.

In the last state budget, the Legislature reduced community college system funding. However, while outwardly proclaiming financial hardship, the system’s board of trustees quietly awarded huge raises to its “executive officers, administrative officers, and confidential personnel” – according to minutes from a non-public October 2012 meeting.

The new chancellor, Ross Gittell, received a $36,136 raise, increasing his yearly salary to $244,504. The vice chancellor received a $27,663 raise. The president of NHTI received a $24,000 raise. And so forth.

Three-quarters of the faculty at the community college system don’t even make $24,000 in a year. The people who do the actual teaching haven’t seen a raise in years.

To improve working conditions, two years ago the adjunct faculty formed their union with the State Employees’ Association. After two years of negotiations with CCSNH officials, there is still no contract.

In fact, conditions for adjunct professors are going from bad to worse. Beginning this fall, we can teach no more than nine credits a semester, which means three three-credit classes or two four-credit classes.

What does that mean in dollars? A Level 1 adjunct instructor makes $1,359 for a 3-credit, 15-week course, while a top Level 4 adjunct professor (like myself) makes $2,028 for a three-credit course. So an adjunct who is limited to a nine-credit schedule in the spring and fall can only make – depending on their level – about $8,000 to $12,000 per year.

While the system is driving its existing adjuncts into poverty, the colleges will have to hire more adjuncts to take up the slack. At the NHTI English Department, there are now seven full-time professors and about 45 adjuncts. This fall they’ll probably have 60-plus adjuncts just in the English Department because of the course load restriction.

Increasingly, there will be a revolving door of teachers who spend less and less time interacting with students before going off to other jobs. How is this beneficial to students? They are less likely to receive a quality education from professors who are demoralized, impoverished and rarely on campus.

Community college system leaders have created a top-heavy system that drains resources better spent actually educating students. Our students deserve better.

(State Rep. Rick Watrous lives in Concord.)

After Two Years NH Community College Adjunct Professors Still Have No Contract!

  By New Hampshire Labor News | March 11, 2013 - 9:00 pm |
Comments
SEIU Adjunct 2

SEIU Adjunct 2

Two Years and Still No Contract – Aren’t the Community College Students Worth It?

Earlier today a group of Adjunct (part-time) Faculty members in the NH Community College System demonstrated with signs and chants at the Manchester Community College Campus.  They were there to call attention to the fact that since the Adjunct Faculty overwhelmingly decided to form a union over two years ago; they are still without a first contract.  The administration has stalled the contract process repeatedly and is apparently not interested in negotiating.  Since the two sides have not been able to agree upon a contract, the matter 063 copy_low resis currently in mediation.  The group welcomed members of the administration’s mediation representatives as they entered the building prior to the beginning of today’s meeting.  They also delivered over 500 petitions to the administration that have been signed in support of the adjunct’s cause.

About three quarters of the teaching staff in the CCSNH system are adjunct faculty members.  Their part-time status means they earn lower wages, have no access to health benefits, do not earn vacation time and are ineligible for retirement benefits.  “This is an academic sweat shop,” said adjunct member Mary Lee Sargeant.  Sargeant taught full-time for 34 years in the Illinois community college system before teaching as an adjunct in NH. “I’ve been an adjunct here for the last ten years and it is infuriating – the treatment and lack of empathy the adjunct faculty have here.” “In Illinois, part-time faculty members are respected, they earn decent wages, benefits and support from the administration,” she said. “They are valued.”

Sargeant spoke of a colleague who had been teaching eight to ten courses per year at several of the CCSNH campuses and was earning only $20,000/year.  It is no longer possible for adjunct faculty to teach that number of courses. Immediately after the group decided to unionize, the administration issued a policy change that adjunct faculty could not teach more than nine credit hours each semester. Faculty members believe this was a retaliatory act and a function of them speaking up about the working conditions.

“I want to tell the administration, don’t squash me,” said Dave Fink, another adjunct faculty member. “I’m teaching all the students. What would you do without me?”

Ironically, at the same time NH teachers are fighting for respect and to earn a decent living, one of Governor Maggie Hassan’s priorities is education.  She is 068 copy_low resattempting to restore funding to the state’s higher education system. “How come the administration leaves its largest teaching force living in poverty and at risk? There’s an inherent hypocrisy telling students a good education is key to your future while you also treat your own employees like disposable human beings,” said Diana Lacey, President of the State Employees’ Association (SEA SEIU Local 1984).  The Adjunct Faculty is affiliated with SEA SEIU Local 1984.

To add to the irony, the CCSNH Board of Trustees approved significant salary increases for all the non-union administrators effective in January 2013. One college president received a $24,000 salary increase. (Source: CCSNH Board of Trustees October 4, 2012 minutes). That increase is more than an adjunct faculty member’s annual income from teaching.  There seems to be something terribly wrong with this picture.  Not only is this bad for the adjunct faculty, it is also bad for the consumers – the students.

Watch video from the event here.

 

Thanks to SEA/SEIU 1984 for sharing this post with us. (Original Link) We look forward to follow up stories on this.

Governor Hassan Make Call For Much Needed Road Repairs

  By New Hampshire Labor News | February 14, 2013 - 11:32 am | ,
Comments
Maggie Hassan

In Governor Hassan’s budget address just now, Governor Hassan brought attention to the need to repair out roads and bridges.  This is something I talked about earlier today.  Gov. Hassans address did not cite a specific plan to address this issue she thanked both houses for introducing legislation to fix this problem.   Now we wait an see what the legislature allocates for road repairs.

GOVERNOR Hassan’s Address (text as prepared for delivery)
We must come together and take on one of our most difficult long-standing challenges: New Hampshire’s deteriorating roads and bridges.

The American Society of Civil Engineers gives our roads a C minus, and the I-93 expansion project remains unfinished.

Hundreds of our bridges are on the “red list” of bridges in critical need of repair – risking public safety and our economy.

Just three weeks ago, we all saw the price of years of neglect and under-funding of the highway fund when the Department of Transportation was forced to abruptly close the Sarah Mildred Long Bridge. This comes on the heels of the immediate closure of the Memorial Bridge in 2011.

With the Memorial Bridge already out of service, we were left with only one way to cross the Piscataqua River into and out of Maine, snarling traffic and impeding the flow of goods that is so critical to our economy. In addition, without being able to lift the Long Bridge, oil tankers were stuck in place.

If it weren’t for the quick work of our dedicated public employees at the Department of Transportation, work that was extremely dangerous hundreds of feet above open water in bitter cold and high winds, we might have seen a significant spike in energy prices as our oil supply sat idle on the water.

Maintaining and repairing our state’s roads and bridges and funding transportation projects are crucial for our economy. Creating a solid, modern infrastructure will attract new businesses and industries, while helping our existing businesses grow, transport their goods, and create new jobs.

But as it stands, we barely have enough to do the very minimum: patching roads and bridges together, plowing our highways, and keeping state troopers on the road. Our transportation trust fund faces a $740 million shortfall over the next ten years. There are no more one-time fixes.

We must develop strategies for a long-term solution, for both operations and road construction, and we must do it together, working towards a consensus solution. There have already been proposals offered in both chambers, and I thank Senator Morse and Representative Campbell for the work they have done.

I stand ready to work with any member of either party who is willing to bring constructive, long-term ideas to the table so we can build a consensus solution that will help us begin to improve our roads and bridges and finish I-93.

 

Nashua Area Union Members Hold In-District Meeting With Legislators

  By Matt Murray | February 8, 2013 - 11:10 am | ,
Comments
NCC Legislative District Meeting 2-7b

NCC Legislative District Meeting 2-7cLast night members from the Nashua Teachers’ Union (AFT) and the State Employees’ Association (SEIU) hosted an in-district meeting with local Nashua legislators.

Around sixty union members that all work in the Nashua area came to speak directly with the legislators who represent different areas of the city. The legislators in attendance were Martin Jack, David Murotake, Jan Schmidt, Sylvia Gale, Daniel Hansbury, Susan Vale, Efstahia Booras, and Senator Bette Laskey.

The event was emceed by Deb Howes (NTU) a teacher from Nashua, and Magnus Pardoe (SEIU) from the Nashua Community College.

NCC Legislative District Meeting 2-7b“It is great to see so many people here and engaged in the legislative process. We need to keep an open line of communication with our legislators” said Deb Howes in her opening remarks.

The overall tone of the event was much calmer than a similar event held last year. With Right To Work (for less) already voted down by the Labor Committee, the teachers were still very interested in hearing what the legislators had to say on SB 37 (a bill to restrict collective bargaining rights) and HB 142 (a bill surrounding teacher evaluations). Deb Howes wanted legislators to understand that these bills would have significate impacts on the teacher evaluations in the Nashua School District.

Deb Howes said “We have worked very hard to have a say in how teacher evaluations are conducted in Nashua”

Overall all of the legislators in attendance were against SB 37 and HB 142, including David Murotake who was the only Republican to attend the event. Murotake is also a member of the Nashua School Board and does not like HB 142 for the potential impact on teacher evaluations. Murotake said “The Nashua Teacher Union’s involvement in teacher evaluations have really helped Nashua move ahead.”

NCC Legislative District Meeting 2-7aOne of the teachers in attendance wanted to make it very clear that the Department of Education officials are not ‘content experts’, they are more politicians. She said she would welcome anyone with real and practical experience into her classroom to provide feedback, however this bill does not provide for that.

The SEIU Members at the meeting also wanted to bring awareness to a couple of bills they are working on as well. The first is HB 445, a bill to allow all public entities to join in the state’s healthcare plans.

Magnus Pardoe, who is also the President of the Nashua Community College (NCC) chapter of the SEA/SEIU said, “this is a bill to help all public workers in NH. It would open up options for cities, towns and all municipal employees to have a choice in their healthcare options.”

Diana Lacey, President of the State Employees’ Association reminded the legislators that right here at the NCC, full time employees are being replaced with part time employees who have no benefit options. Lacey stated, “80% of the community college instructors are part time with no benefits.” This is a sad trend in many of the state agencies.

The other bill that sparked conversation was HB 591, a bill about ‘bullying’ of public employees. Currently there is no place for workers to report abusive behavior by their supervisors. This bill could be similar to those provided in the federal whistleblowers protections act.

As a former state employee, Rep Sylvia Gale is very much in favor of this bill. She is even a co-sponsor of the bill in the House.

Senator Laskey admitted she was unfamiliar this specific house legislation. She said this is why we need to have more events like this to ensure that legislators know what bills are really important to the people she represents. She encouraged everyone to take the time are reach out to your legislators and tell them how you feel on these bills.

Everyone was deeply interested in the soon to be released budget by Governor Hassan. All of the legislators were in favor of restoring the cuts made to education and especially the university programs.

Rep Gale was completely sincere when she said that the previous legislature “raped” our state budget with their draconian cuts. She said, “there are many people who were hurt by the last budget.”

Everyone agreed that the community college system is a great way for people gain the real world knowledge and experience to find work at a livable wage. Not everyone can afford or even want to attend a major four year university. The community college system is perfect for those people.

Senator Laskey said “NH has always been a frugal state, spend has never been our problem.”

This prompted some discussion on the current tax structure, however the conversation quickly ended when the crowd was reminded that Governor Hassan has already stated she would veto any broad base tax.

Overall the night was a success for the memberships and the legislators. Both gain an awareness and insight into what the people want, and what the legislative process truly entails.

Why Kevin Landrigan May Be Wrong About The State Employees Contract Negotiations

  By Matt Murray | February 3, 2013 - 9:43 am |
Comments
contract signatures

contract signatures

I want to start by saying, that I completely adore Kevin Landrigan.  He is knows more about State Politics in New Hampshire than many of the actual legislators.

However today Kevin and the Nashua Telegraph released this video  ”Pay raise for state employees likely to come at a price” (http://bcove.me/qdgazvi5).  In this short two minute video, Kevin talks about how the State Employees Association is currently entered in negotiations for a new contract.  In this contract negotiation, the SEA is asking for a pay raise among other things.

As always Kevin was very knowledgable about the work that the SEA and other labor unions did to help elect Governor Maggie Hassan.  This however is where I would like to correct Kevin.  The labor unions in New Hampshire who worked to elect Maggie were not doing it to get some huge pay raise.  Many of the unions in NH worked to ensure that Ovide Lamontagne did not get elected.

Yes, as Kevin said, labor and Democrats have a “symbiotic” relationship.  This is mostly because the Republicans tend to be more business friendly, while the Democrats tend to be more worker friendly.  This was completely the case in the race for NH Governor.  The election of Maggie was more about survival.   Ovide Lamontagne was a strong supporter of Right To Work, as well as against Project Labor Agreements (PLA’s).  Lamontagne’s ideas were anti-worker and very anti-union, this is why labor unions were against him.

Now back to the present negotiations with the SEA.  In the video (http://bcove.me/qdgazvi5) Kevin talks about how the SEA is looking for a pay raise.  The problem is that the Governor has a very very tight budget on her hands this term. A budget that, I am sure Kevin would agree with me, will shape her political future as Governor.

Kevin brought up one good point that the SEA is ensuring that everyone knows.  The State Employees (SEA) have gone with out a pay raise for nearly four years.   This has been the case for many employees not just state employees.   Workers pay has been stagnant for quite a while and the recession has pushed workers further down.   The collective bargaining process is one of the ways that workers are going to start making gains in the workplace again.

The process of negotiations is a very delicate balance. It is give and take.  If one side does not give, then the negotiations fall apart. So the idea that in order to get a pay raise the SEA must give something back is a given. The problem is that they have already given. They have given for two full contracts now.

Kevin suggested that if the SEA wants to get a pay raise they are going to have to make concessions on their healthcare package.  I want to make something very clear, giving up on healthcare for a pay raise is not a win.  For example if a worker gets a $1.00 per hour raise, but healthcare goes up by $50.00 per week then workers again lose! ($1.00 p/h X 40= $40 -$50.00 = -$10)

This is a common trick used in corporate business, give the workers a small pay raise and increase their cost (retirement deductions, or healthcare).  The employees are tricked to believe that they are getting something when they are actually being pushed further down.   It is a shell game and I hope that the SEA (and everyone else) does not fall for it.

In many cases labor unions have forgone a pay raise in order to keep their benefits the same.  This is still a net loss for the workers, because the cost of living is always going up.  Just to keep up with inflation workers need a pay raise and this has not happened in years.  This applies to all workers, not just the SEA.  I am sure that Diana Lacey and her team will not be falling for this type of shell game.

I would also like to applaud Kevin Landrigan for his exceptional coverage, of the State House and Government operations.  I just wish that in his next video, he would not imply that workers must give more, to get pay raises that are long overdue.

New Legislation Says NO JAIL FOR SALE Ever in NH

  By Matt Murray | February 2, 2013 - 2:02 pm | , ,
Comments
Jail For Sale, Image from NH Prison Watch

An issue that has been watched very closely by the NH Labor News as well as many other organizations is finally going to have it’s day in the ‘General Court’.

Over the last year we have been talking about prison privatization and what a horrible thing it would be for New Hampshire.  (See all posts from NHLN).  This is an issue that is much deeper than just trying to make our state budgets a few dollars less.  Private prisions are horrible places, they have a higher rate of inmate violence.  Other force inmates to work for the prison like slaves with little or no pay.  Lastly when you have a business based on the occupancy of prisoners you must keep the prison filled with inmates to make a profit.  Our goal should be to reduce the number of inmates in our prisons.

This is why it is good to see that some our New Hampshire Legislators are being very proactive on this issue.  They have submitted legislation to ban private prisons in NH.  HB 0443, “This bill prohibits the department of corrections from transferring custody of prisoners to a correctional facility operated by a private or for-profit entity.” 

This very simple bill would put an end to the investigations and committees to evaluate the idea of selling off the NH penal system.  

“VII. The commissioner may order the assignment and transfer of persons committed to his or her custody to correctional facilities of the department or correctional facilities operated by state governments in other jurisdictions, or public facilities under contract with the department. The commissioner shall not enter into a contract with a private or for-profit entity for the custody of state or county inmates.” 

This bill will also protect the thousands of State Employees Association (SEIU 1984) and AFSCME members who currently work as corrections officers in these prisons from loosing their jobs.

If you are interested in attending this hearing to ban private prisons in NH, please join the SEA, the American Friends Service Committee and others on Thursday Feb 7th at 1:30 pm in room 203 of the Legislative Office Building (LOB).

The NH Prison Watch has created a flyer to help spread the word about the hearing.  Click here for PDF. I hope to see some of you there.  If you cannot attend please send an email to the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee (HouseCriminalJusticeandPublicSafety@leg.state.nh.us) and tell them to pass this bill now to help protect the workers jobs, workers safety, and the humans who are currently living in these prisions.

Prison Consultant gets Contract Extension

  By Arnie Alpert | December 5, 2012 - 6:49 pm | ,
Comments
Jail For Sale, Image from NH Prison Watch

February 28 is New Deadline
Cross posted from InzaneTimes 

New Hampshire’s Executive Council voted today to extend the contract of a private consultant that has been evaluating proposals from four firms interested in for-profit operation of the state’s prison system.  The consultant, MGT of America, now has until February 28, 2013, to complete its work.

The original contract, approved by the Council in July, called for the firm to turn in its report by October 5 and to be available until the end of that month to explain its findings.  When that date arrived, the company was given an extra ten days.  When October 15 arrived, the Department of Administrative Services said completion of 12-5-12 003the report would be delayed until mid-November.  When mid-November arrived, Administrative Services said the report would be done in mid-December.

MGT will not get additional payment beyond the $171,000 of the original contract.

The main impact of delay is that MGT, Administrative Services, and the Department of Corrections will be reporting at the end of February to a new Governor and a changed Executive Council.

Bob Sanders of New Hampshire Business Review reported this morning:

The state received the four bids last spring after issuing a relatively vague request for proposal last spring to build and perhaps run a prison to handle all of the state’s inmates. Thus far, no other state has turned its entire prison population over to a private company.

That RFP was the result of even vaguer legislation – never debated by lawmakers but instead tucked into a large budget bill — that appeared to be more interested in looking at shipping inmates out of state to private facilities elsewhere. However, the wording morphed into an RFP for a private prison company to set up a facility so large that it would have the capacity to import prisoners in from other states, an idea favored by outgoing Gov. John Lynch.

Asked by outgoing Councilor Dan St. Hilaire if it is still worth it to finish this project, Commissioner Linda Hodgdon of Administrative Services told the Governor and Council the report would put a “whole comprehensive report in front of you” for consideration as they look into whether and how to replace the women’s prison in Goffstown and the men’s prison in Concord.

When retiring Councilor Ray Wieczorek said the information would help the new Governor and Council decide whether to pursue privatization, Governor Lynch said there are many forms of privatization.   “We need a new women’s prison and at some point we’re going to need a new prison in Concord,” he said.

12-5-12 008 Lynch has been promoting an approach in which the state would contract with a private firm to finance, build, and own a major prison that would then be leased to the state.  The ostensible advantage is that the state would not have to worry about financing a major construction project.  The political advantage would be that the expensive enterprise would be handled as a contract by the Governor and Council, thereby evading the Legislature’s always thrifty capital budget process.  But once the contract is signed, the Legislature would have little choice but to include payments in the biennial state budget.

Such an approach would also give a for-profit prison company a position from which it could make the case for full-scale privatization.

When Chris Sununu, the Council’s most vocal privatization supporter, asked why the process had been delayed, Hodgdon said the analysis was “more complicated than any of us thought.”

Each of the four firms responded to a complex Request for Proposals that asked for details on plans to build and operate a men’s prison and a prison that would house both men and women.   Each proposal presumably also includes the build/lease option for both types of facilities.  That means there are 16 proposals to analyze, not four, and that they all need to be compared to status quo arrangements and to construction and operation of new facilities fully in the hands of the state.

Privatization opponents hope to talk soon with newly elected Councilors.

Today was also Organization Day for the newly elected Legislature.  The House bears little resemblance to the pro-privatization gang that ran the joint for the previous two years.   Legislation to prohibit privatization may meet a warm reception.

A Special Retirement Update From AFT-NH President Laura Hainey

  By New Hampshire Labor News | December 2, 2012 - 3:22 pm | ,
Comments
aft sqaure

Defending the New Hampshire Retirement System benefits for our members remains a top priority for AFT-NH. An important aspect of this work is being done through litigation. Our first pension lawsuit was filed in August 2009 and is still working its way through the court system.

A summary of the status of each of the cases is provided below. There are three lawsuits that have been filed in continuing efforts to defend our pension.

Thank you!

In Solidarity,
Laura Hainey
AFT-NH President

1.   AFT case (Merrimack County, Judge Smukler)
NEXT ACTION – filing updated briefs by Dec. 14, 2012.

This is the first case we filed back in Aug. 2009 (amended in May 2010) challenging the pension changes effected by HB1645 (2008) and HB653 (2007).  This case focuses on changes to the definition of ‘earnable compensation’ (specifically the removal of “other compensation” as a pensionable benefit – the big items here being clothing allowances and payments in lieu of taking health insurance) and the changes to the language regarding COLA’s (as well as the funding mechanism for the ‘Special Account’).

After getting bogged down in the trial court over class certification issues, we attempted to move the case directly to the NH Supreme Court on an interlocutory basis (without ruling, prior to final judgment) in order to get the matter resolved more quickly.  However, in September (this year) the Supreme Court denied our request and sent the case back the Judge Smukler.

We had a status conference with Judge Smukler on November 19th and all agreed to submit updated briefs to the Court on or before December 14th for final ruling with expected appeals to follow.  We expect that Judge Smukler will substantially follow the ruling of Judge McNamara (see below) and find that there is indeed a contract in RSA 100-A between the State and public employees and that the Legislature may not constitutionally alter the terms of that deal.  Still ahead, however, is the fight over who is vested – 10 year folks or those who have attained permanent employment status.  Stay tuned.

2. NH3 (Merrimack County, Judge McNamara)  
NEXT ACTION – status conference scheduled Jan. 17, 2013

This is the challenge we filed in June 2011 after the passage of HB2 (2011) involving the increase in employee NHRS rates and the artificial lowering of the employer rates.  In Feb. 2012, Judge McNamara ruled in our favor and held that the increase in employee rate for vested NHRS members is unconstitutional. The Judge also ruled that vesting occurs after ten years of service, a ruling we strongly disagree with (settled NH case law holds that vesting occurs after permanent employment status) and we will appeal this ruling to the NH Supreme Court.

The coalition agreed with counsel’s suggestion that we move this case by ‘parking’ the issue of employer rates (for now) and appealing the case on an interlocutory basis to the NH Supreme Court (especially in light of the very favorable ruling by the Supreme Court in the Cloutier case ).  However, like the AFT case, the NH Supreme Court, in Sept. 2012, declined to accept the appeal on the suggested expedited basis and sent the case back to Judge McNamara who scheduled a conference in January.  We will urge the Court to issue a final ruling (there are issues to resolve involving the injunction / attorney fees etc) so as to get the case to the NH Supreme Court as soon as possible.

3.  NH4 (Hillsborough County, Judge Abramson)  
NEXT ACTION – November 26th  filing proposed interlocutory appeal statement

This case was filed in Feb. 2012 following the effective date of the HB2 (2011) changes to NHRS pension benefits.  Here we challenge the changes in earnable compensation (including the averaging of extra and special duty pay), the Group II changes in age and service requirements,  the change from 3 to 5 years for calculating the “Average Final Compensation”, the new ‘maximum benefit’ level, and the repeal of the gainful occupation exemption (Group II).  This case was fully briefed and argued before Judge Abramson on August 27th 2012.  The Judge issued a ruling on September 25th opting to seek to have the issues resolved by the NH Supreme Court on an interlocutory appeal basis (like the other two other cases).  After this ruling, of course, the NH Supreme Court declined the interlocutory appeals in the AFT and NH3 cases, thus we filed a motion to reconsider with Judge Abramson noting that any further interlocutory request is likely doomed as well.

However, on October 29th the Judge denied the motion to reconsider.  Thereafter, we have circulated yet another interlocutory appeal statement with the State and NHRS and filed those pleadings today.

Prison Privatization Opponents Optimistic But Vigilant

  By Arnie Alpert | November 29, 2012 - 7:00 am | ,
Comments
manchester 8-8-12 003

By Arnie Alpert

With Governor John Lynch leaving office and a significant turnover in the membership of New Hampshire’s Executive Council, the danger that the state would turn over management of its prisons to a private firm has diminished.  However, privatization foes remain vigilant until the proposal is not just really dead but really most sincerely dead.

The possibility of privatization was raised in a Request for Proposals (RFP) issued by the state a year ago.  The RFP explicitly invited private firms to offer plans to build and operate a prison for women, a prison for men, or a “hybrid” facility for both men and women.   Private firms were also invited to submit plans to build such facilities and lease them to the state, or renovate existing facilities for the same purpose.  Four firms responded to the detailed RFP, reportedly with enough paper to fill a room in the State House Annex.  None of the bids proposed to build or renovate a facility just for women, despite the fact that the existing women’s prison in Goffstown is badly over-crowded and inadequately designed.

“The consultants helping the State review the bids have deep ties to the private prison industry.  CCA, GEO, and MTC also contracted with local lobbyists to help them make their cases.”  

Corrections Corporation of America, the industry leader, revealed it would consider sites in Lancaster, Northumberland, and Hinsdale.  Management and Training Corporation cast its sights on land on Hackett Hill Road in Manchester.  The Hunt Group (now known as CGL) proposed to build on land already controlled by the state prison in Concord.  The fourth, the GEO Group, did not reveal the location of its proposed facilities.

CCA, GEO, and MTC also contracted with local lobbyists to help them make their cases.

Due to the complexity of the request and the responses, the Departments of Administrative Services and Corrections determined they were not able to evaluate and compare the proposals by themselves.  With a vote from the Executive Council, the State signed a $171,000 contract with MGT of America to help analyze the documents.  MGT’s report was due October 5 and their contract was to expire October 31.  Those dates have come and gone with no report yet.  “It’s unlikely it’s going to be resolved this year,” Gov. Lynch said at the October 17 Executive Council breakfast.

While we wait for the consultants (who happen to have deep ties to the private prison industry) to complete their report, Gov. Lynch has not stopped talking up the possibility that the state would contract with a private firm to finance and build a prison, which it would then lease to the state.   Lynch appears to be convinced that the men’s prison needs to be replaced and that the Legislature would never approve funding through the capital budget process.  From his perspective, contracting out prison ownership is a way to get around the normal budgeting process.  That there has been no public discussion of the need for a new men’s prison does not seem to factor into his position.  Moreover, such a proposal would give a private firm a foot in the door to promise cost savings down the line if they were given full control.

The experience from other states shows clearly that privatization is not a path to cost savings.  Despite anti-union policies and reduced expenses of wages, benefits, and training, private firms in other states have been unable to save money for the states.  What they have accomplished is a pattern of increased violence within the walls leading to a less safe, less secure environment for prisoners and staff alike.  This in turn has led to high levels of staff turnover, feeding less security.  And it means prisoners — most of whom will return to the free world — will be less likely to get the support they need to live productive lives outside the prison walls.

Incoming Governor Maggie Hassan has been explicit that she has no interest in turning over the prison keys to private firms.  Whether she agrees with her predecessor that the men’s prison needs to be replaced is not yet clear.  What is clear is that the state does need to do something about the women’s prison, which is already the subject of a civil rights lawsuit the state is likely to lose.

What is also clear is that approaches to crime and corrections that emphasize alternatives to incarceration, provide counseling and education to those who need it, and that interrupt the school-to-prison pipeline can be more effective and save money for taxpayers.  The most active anti-privatization groups — including the State Employees Association,  the NH League of Women Voters, Citizens for Criminal Justice Reform, the NH Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the NH Civil Liberties Union, and the American Friends Service Committee — are optimistic they can claim victory soon.  They are already turning attention to development of a more humane approach to corrections, one that would preserve good jobs and save the state money.

For more information, visit www.nhprisonwatch.org.

Arnie Alpert is New Hampshire Program Coordinator for the American Friends Service Committee and a member of UNITE HERE Local 66-L.