PAX Centurion - January / February 2013

www.bppa.org PAX CENTURION • January/February 2013 • Page 5 Vice President’s Message: Ronald McGillivary, BPPA Vice President Bargaining update A rbitration dates have been secured; one each in January and February, 4 in March and 5 inApril. Preparation for presentation of the case is ongoing with responsibilities of the various phases taking shape. Settlement trends in our local labor market should have a marked influence on our compensation as compared to outside costing. An “inability to pay” argument was not made in recent negotiations with other City unions. Approved budgets for the past three fiscal years have ended with positive fund balances and assumptions for revenue projections in the upcoming fiscal year(s) show a healthy economic climate. Retirement “Option D” T here have been many questions recently regarding a lesser rec- ognized retirement option that is provided while officers are still employed as opposed to retired. It is almost identical to “Option C” for retired members. A quick explanation and answers to frequently asked questions as provided by PERAC (Public Employment Retire- ment Administration Commission) concerning survivor benefits and this option (see pages 42 & 43 for FAQ about Option D). Option D provides for a designated beneficiary for life. Officers opting for the lifetime allowance may designate only one Option D beneficiary and are limited to the officer’s spouse, former spouse (provided not remarried at time of designation), officer’s child, parent or sibling. If the officer does not designate an Option D beneficiary and if his or her spouse does not elect to receive a lifetime allowance, the officers’ lifetime deductions will be paid in a lump sum to the beneficiary or beneficiaries he/she has designated to receive, reflect- ing the amounts in the officer’s annuity account, and no lifetime allowance will be paid. An officer may change his or her beneficiary by giving written notice to the retirement board especially when major life events occur such as death or divorce. A beneficiary may also provide “make up payments” to establish a more complete record of credible service if earlier in an officers public employment life, retirement money was taken out but not paid back. When an officer passes before his/her 55 th birthday the beneficiary is entitled to receive the Option C allowance as if the officer had attained age 55 and retired on the date he or she died. The number of years of service that the officer had earned upon death plus any service for which the beneficiary increases the “years of service” with a “make-up” payment will be used in the calculation. When an officer dies before age 55 the beneficiary’s age factor is also increased, by the number of years necessary to bring the officer’s age up to 55. For example, Mitch Rapp dies at age 49, and his wife Mary is 45. The age factor used for Mitch will be 55, an increase of 6 years. Mary’s age factor will also be increased by 6 years, in this case resulting in an age factor of 51. The designated beneficiary is entitled to receive the Option C allowance the officer would have received if the officer had retired on the date he died. There are many additional scenarios that can be followed up by contacting PERAC with your questions regarding spouse and children or inquiring at the Boston Retirement Board at 617-635-4311. Retirement Board Notices A couple of months ago the Trustees of the Boston Retirement Board sent approximately 24,000 letters out to members stating that the Board will no longer waive monies owed to the retirement system due to incorrect contribution rates. Calls poured in. The letter was overly personalized (Dear entire name as opposed to member) and sent most everyone to the phones. Words such as “In your last statement…we put you on notice that…substantial amount of money owed…shall be recouped by the Retirement Board.” Letters from collection agencies produce less reaction. A subsequent letter further explaining that unless there was a break in service or money was removed from an individual’s retirement account and not replaced, should an individual feel that they were an intended target. Members who have had a break in service or taken money from their retirement account without repayment should contact the board. Past Practice T his is a phrase that is quite often used when a contract is silent to an issue at hand or when a normal everyday course of action is different than the stated language in the CBA (collective bargain- ing agreement) such as our timetable for the grievance procedure. A recent article in Labor News stated that arbitrators are fractured as to whether a past practice can change the terms of a contract and also gives guidance in helping to identify fundamentals needed to have a past practice. The BPPA is finishing up an arbitration in which the contract is silent and both parties have argued strongly as to what the practice has been. A decision is expected in the near future. The grievance involves night personnel attending court while “in- jured on duty” and receiving compensation for their appearance. The Department currently compensates injured night officers when they are on a scheduled day off for their attendance in court. The Depart- ment has argued that once an officer is assigned to MIS, the “Medical Incapacitated Section”, the officer is carried on a day shift and not entitled to compensation for attendance in court. The Union argued that the assignment to MIS is for administrative convenience only and does not affect any substantive benefits. In addition a Request for Information seeking night personnel out injured and attending court was furnished showing approximately 40 instances of officers receiv- ing compensation for attending court. According to Labor News, the most often cited reference works on past practice are from an article byArbitrator Richard Mittenthal identifying elements to a binding past practice comprising: Clarity and consistency: A course of conduct that is vague and ambiguous that has been contradicted as often as it has been followed can hardly qualify as a practice. Longevity and repetition: A consistent pattern of behavior must emerge…accordingly just how long a period something must be done before it can be characterized as a practice is a matter of good judg- ment. Acceptability: both parties must have knowledge of the particular conduct and must regard it as the correct and customary means of handling a situation. Such acceptability may frequently be implied from long acquiescence in a known course of conduct. Mutuality: Some practices are the product, either in their inception or in their application, of a joint understanding. “A majority of arbitrators believe a past practice can fill in the See Vice President on page 11