RISING STAR ! The ultimate source to ace your NYPD Sergeant, Lieutenant, and Captain Exam Visit www.RisingStarPromotion.com to subscribe to our mailing list and get info on the next Sgt, Lt. or Captain Exam!
VOTE NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, step one will be 73,745 , step two 73,950, step three 74,100, step 4 75,190 step 5 90,673 , we were lied to when they told us we would start at step 3 and hit top pay in two years , as a sgt you get little ot, no night diff ???????????? and 1500 less in longevity then a po as of 7/1/09. the new proposal gives you 200 more than a cop at each step but does not adress the 1500 less in longevity vs a po.
-- Edited by t-bone on Tuesday 7th of April 2009 03:55:43 AM
To be honest the steps suck I'm voting no because of the steps...I think the gap between top pay cops and junior sergeants should be wider than $400 bucks.
However, my vote won't count because the majority of the union wants the cops sick policy.
Yes, the steps suck, but they are still better then they were. Considering the city wanted to give us very little and wanted more in give backs this isn't so bad. Unless people are taking to the streets, I don't think we're getting a better offer.
As for the longevity increases, from what the PBA literature says those increases take place over the course of the contract and are filled on 7/31/10, we already have a longevity increases on 7/1/08 and 9/1/10 in our current contract.
To me, this is a terrible proposal, there is just about no pay raise and we arent skipping any steps! Not having the home confinement is nice, but i dont know how the new sgts are really benefitting from this contract!
An increase of $745 is peanuts...I'm sure everyone won't miss it if they said no.
I won't consider it better besides it cost approx $79.00 annually to get these benefits.
Either way you look at it first year sergeant going into step two and all rookie/future seageant get screwed... This vicious trend needs to stop but this has been a tradition within the Department for years.
THIS OFFER IS A SLAP IN THE FACE!!!!!!!!!!!!, WE PAY MORE IN UNION DUES , I HAVE KIDS AND NOW THE DENTAL COVERAGE IS NOT AS GOOD EX 150 BUCKS FOR ROOT CANAL VS FREE UNDER PBA , NO OT FOR ROOKIE SGT , WORSE COMMUTE AND LESS IN LONGEVITY . I WILL TAKE MY CHANCES WITH VOTING NO . IF THE CITY INCREASED THE LONGEVITY TO MATCH THE PBA I WOULD BE MORE LIKLEY TO VOTE YES
Where were you guys when the sba settled b4 the pba, you guys were so quick to vote yes and were mezmorized with the top pay #'s. All you had to do was wait for the pba and we would off had this a year ago.
Ok....just trying to make this sound a little better for you guys...this is how im looking at it: Just to walk in the door....i do 4X12s so night diff 6580 and longevity 4230, holiday and uniform..no O.T. (since your not getting any anyway) this year I will earn approximately 87,000 dollars...newly promoted...with a little bit of O.T. you're over 90G in your first year as a Sgt. Not bad. Now if we could just get that longevity boost that the cops are getting and our range day back I'd say we would have nothing to complain about.
What happened to knocking off a year to top pay. This wouldn't be a bad contract if it was only 3 years to top pay. I'm def voting no on this contract. Its crap. Who gives a frack about the sick restriction. Its only a matter of time before some retarded cop messes that up and the city takes it away. A good thing on this job never lasts.
Assuming the new sick policy is the same as the cops, its still in the pilot phase. The new sick procedure is monitored and anytime the sick rate goes over 10% for a previous year to date, it raises a flag. I believe after a year if the city can show that the sick rate increased after the new sick policy was installed it can retract the home confinement amendment. It could be the same for Sgts. ??
VOTE NO !!!!!!! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THERE IS NO WAY ANY ONE CAN BE HAPPY WITH THIS NEW PROPOSAL, YOU ARE BEING ASKED TO BE A SUPERVISOR, BUT WHERE IS THE COMPENSATION,
ITS NOT EVEN THAT THE MONEY ISNT GREAT, IS THAT THEY EXPECT US TO CARE WHEN A COP CAN JUST SRHUG HIS SHOULDER AND SAY "I WAS NEVER TRAINED ON THAT" OR "IM NOT QUALIFIED" AND THEY GET TO SIGN OUT AND GO HOME
WE DONT HAVE THAT LUXURY, WE HAVE TO STAY ON TIME AND GET OUR WORK DONE. GOD FORBID YOU TRY AND PUT IN FOR CASH,
THE RANK OF POLICE OFFICER GETS TO GO HOME AND IF THEY DO HAVE TO STAY LATE ITS FOR CASH, THIS JOB EXPECTS NOTHING FROM THEM,BUT THE WORLD FROM US
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
-- Edited by DOC on Wednesday 8th of April 2009 05:25:46 PM
-- Edited by DOC on Wednesday 8th of April 2009 05:43:44 PM
Ive been a cop for a while now and I don't recall ever getting away with murder. Well, actually, there was this one time, but I don't feel like getting into it.
All sgt promoted from 1/1/08 should all vote NO!!!!!
even if we all voted no it wouldnt matter b/c the senior sgts would vote yes and they make up the majority of the SBA. the contract is not bad for them so i really dont see them tryin to do the right thing for us "junior" guys. the proposal sux but sadly it will get approved!
Steps need to be realigned properly. A cop who decides to get promoted shouldn't be punished in salary for the next 4 years... A major reason cops who took the promotional exam wanted to increase their salary both short and long term. Many of which have families who rely on one income.
Proposed adjustment.
1. The gap bewteen top pay cop and sergeants should at least be 3g for the first step, 2,3,4 should be minimum (200-500), and final step remains the same!
2. Keep retro and sick policy proposal.
Don't fvck sergeant hired from 1/1/08 till present/future. This same pattern will carry over to the LT. A vicious pattern which began in the 90's with the PO's and has continued ever since....Stop the bleeding!!!!!!!!!!!!
Stop thinking with this simple minded logic and look at this for what it is..
The city threw us a bone. Our contract (one that we voted on) was already settled. They didn't have to restructure the steps or give us an enhanced sick policy. This is not a contract that we are voting on. If you vote no there is no second offer or binding arbitration. A "no" vote takes the deal off the table. It's almost like you had no jellybeans and you wanted five. You got two but you refused them because you wanted more....but now you're back to zero. Dopey logic. The choices are clear...
Vote no.....you, we, them...everyone in this union gets ****.
Vote yes...1)the steps get restructured (not as good as any of us wanted but still a slight improvement is better than no improvement) 2)100s of sgts promoted after april of 2006 will get large retro checks 3)The sick policy is enhanced dramatically for the entire union.
Use your head, This is an obvious "yes" vote.
By the way....when I got promoted 3 years ago the salary structure was the same. I got promoted and got virtually no raise. The way the steps were set up I wouldn't see a raise for 4 years. But you know what....I made the decision to take the test and get promoted despite whatever salary structure was in place.....AS DID YOU! Now take your pacifiers out of your mouths rookie sgts and vote yes.
I find it funny how a "senior" sgt talks about the rookie sgts whining but can't see the overall picture. Because you had to endure this piss poor pay structure, it gives you every right to piss on everyone underneath you. The point of the "NO" is for every cop who wants to become a sergeant, doesn't have to endure crap the first 4years. Unfortunately, it's something you had to endure yourself but didn't have to. The sgts before you didn't have to screw the newer generations. But unfortunately by getting **** on yourself, you feel it necessary to pass the baton to the newer guys. All for what? 7K.... This tradition continues and needs to stop somewhere.
The sick policy is a pilot program which in my opinion is going to eliminate Administrative sick. Key word it "pilot". This is a no-brainer for the rest of the congregation because of their time on the job, but for the new guys, it really doesn't have that much value.
And trust me, no one becomes a sgt because it's the noble thing to do. People take the exam, to give themselves a salary, become a supervisor and/or have a stepping stone to take other exams. In the end, everyone wants to be compensated for their hard efforts and added responsibilities. Of course, being compensated immediately is a dream. However, the first step should be at least 2-3k, something that I believe psychologically will improve new sgt moral. 2,3,4 of course should be minimal. And finally the holy grail of top pay, a final reward for your years of hard work.
Unfortunately, the majority of the SBA congregation will vote yes. You'll get your money, and all future sgts will get pissed on.
I'm sure you're the same type of guy who's doesn't relieve the desk because you're the "condition SGT" and you did your "time" behind the desk....
I spoke to a director myself, and since he's a messenger he doesn't know what will happen if we vote 'NO'...I would have to speak personally to Mullins or Ganley myself... So if anyone else reads this...Do what you want...At least I know I'll sleep better if I vote "NO" even if it's a bonehead thing to do.
-- Edited by NYPD74 on Sunday 12th of April 2009 07:55:48 PM
First off junior, with my measely three years in rank I would never refer to myself as a "senior sgt." However, I appreciate the title so thank you. The fact that the majority of this raise is backended and has been for several years is bull****. It's bull**** that as a cop you make dick until you hit top pay. But unfortuanately at both ranks this is how the pay scale is set up. You're missing the point though squirt. I'm not saying the current setup is right....but a vote of no just keeps the status quo. At least a "yes" vote offers some change in the right direction. You are giving some people the false sense that if they vote no the SBA and the city are going back to the drawing board to come up with a better deal, and that is just not the case. If this plan gets voted down, that's it. No one gets a raise, no one gets retro, we have the same sick policy, and a top pay cop continues to make more than a rookie sgt. What point did you prove? And as far as the "conditions sgt" and "getting the desk" thing, I never did conditions, not much for scooping bums up off the floor or grabbing skells for smokin a joint. But even to make an immature dopey statement like that just degrades this conversation and makes things completely juvenile. If you want to have an adult conversation and break down the facts, that's fine. If you want to act like a whiney brat making retarded putdowns, I have nothing left to say to you sport.
"But even to make an immature dopey statement like that just degrades this conversation"
Well stop pretending to be older than you are with the words "Junior" ,"squirt"and "sport".
Let's dissect this:
The city doesn't throw a bone to anyone, especially during their claim of poverty. Apparently, SBA must of threaten the city with a lawsuit or something, and rather spend money through ligation they came to terms with the SBA. The city had to adjust the pay structure between the 06-07 group, because if they didn't, and if a newspaper article appeared showing this discrepancy it would show the city in a negative manner...City has an image to upheld. I'm not saying this would make them look really bad, but it's easier to fix this matter by throwing money to your group then to fight it.
The SBA has the power to either keep it "in house" or give it to its members to vote. It happened with the last adjustment involving top pay sgt. If the deal was "take it or leave it", then the SBA didn't have to turn it over to its members, it could have just decided right there and then. What would be the point to have us vote on it.
Listen, people can do whatever they want. All the above can be all bull****. But we weren't on both ends of the table, who knows what really happened.
-- Edited by NYPD74 on Monday 13th of April 2009 12:38:25 AM
I would have to say the vote should be "No". Who is to say if we turn this down we could not renegotiate? Or a lawsuit? Where else have you ever heard of supervision making less on base pay than their subordinates in American labor unions? Only in the City of New York!!!
Also I am hearing the DEA reopener is knocking off steps. Not only do we not have steps taken away, but we still have the range date issue. Despite what everyone says, that will be strictly enforced one day if we allow it to stand for the next 4 years.
What many don't realize is that if we settle on this insult of a reopener, its done until after 2010. I would even waive retro if they knocked down a step, but this reopener is a whole lot of nothing. The only good thing is the home confinement and going sick three times a year is not worth the thousands of dollars many of us are losing by getting promoted and taking this insulting reopener...
I whole heartedly agree...And what funny about it all it that the retro given to 06-07 sgt was something that is owed to them anyway. The retro is owed because '06-'07 sgt fell behind '06-'07 cops. It wasn't until '08 that sgt came close to '08 cops salaries.
Prior to the 4/1/06 no sgt had to endure what sgt had to endure after 4/1/06 in terms of salary. Yes older sgt had to wait 3 years to get to top pay However, newly promoted sgt made about 6k more than a top pay cop.
Sure our raise is back ended but technically so was the contract prior to 4/1/06. There is absolutely no reason why a sgt has to be paid basically a PO's salary for 4 complete years. That's absurd... If the city wants to prolong sgt's top pay...Fine...I have no problem with that..I understand the financial aspect based on the city's point of view. However, that first initial step should be more than a few hundred dollars and it basically doesn't change until we hit the holy grail of "top pay"
Cops make in 2008-2009 - $73,320 no longevity included Rookie Sgt make prior to this possible agreement -$73,000 no longevity included. (diff, -$320) Rookie sgt after agreement- $73,745 (diff +$425 or $16.35 more per paycheck) Step 2 Sgt prior -$73,500 (diff +180) Step 2 Sgt after -$73,950 (diff +630) Step 3 Sgt prior -$74,000 (diff +680) Step 3 Sgt after -$74,100 (diff +780) Step 4 Sgt prior -$75,190 (diff +1870) Steo 4 Sgt after -$75,190 (diff +1870)
Cops make in 2009-2010 -$76,252 no longevity included Rookie Sgt coming on prior to this possible agreement -$75,920 no long included (diff -$332) Rookie Sgt after agreement - $76,695 (diff +$443) Step 2 Sgt prior -$76,440 (diff +188) Step 2 Sgt after -$76,908 (diff +656) Step 3 Sgt prior -$76,960 (diff +708) Step 3 Sgt after -$77,064 (diff +812) Step 4 Sgt prior -$78,198 (diff +1946) Step 4 Sgt prior -$78,198 (diff +1946)
I can continue...But the charts give me a headache....Do you think it's fair that a 4 year sgt makes only $1870-$1946 more than a top pay cop? FOUR YEARS AS A SGT!!!! Trust me that's a lot to endure... But if you think that's so good...Vote yes than...
-- Edited by NYPD74 on Wednesday 15th of April 2009 01:40:36 AM
I'm definitely voting no to this B.S. contract. Kind of funny that I was at Worth St. the other day and everything sounded like it was going in our favor.Then the reality set in......
What exactly is the senior Sgt getting anyway? No home confinement, which can be taken away? Maybe a retro check. depending on when he/she hit top pay?
What happens if we turn it down? Go back and renegotiate or a lawsuit against the city? We are like 5000 members strong!!!
My point is even the senior Sgt is getting almost nothing. Yeah, you might get a retro check, but its not like you won't get one if you wait some more with a better reopener.
No way we turn this down is it the end, no way the City wants to explain in any court or defend itself against any precedents set in the history of American labor how supervisors make less than their subordinates.
Even if you take this raw deal, a 3rd grade detective makes more than a Sgt as base pay!!! So even if this reopener gets ratified, how in good conscience can the SBA say thats even right?
Nobody even mentions the 1500 dollar longevity boost that cops get at each step in august....that puts them way over what a Sgt. makes in the first 4 years. Total horse shilz
I think too many Sgt's are just thinking of getting retro checks in the next few months rather than looking at the consequences of supporting this proposal. Senior Sgt's, you will get a retro check eventually if we go back and renegotiate.
As of now though, besides a possible retro check, what is the senior Sgt getting? Nothing. A pilot program for home confinement while sick?
The PBA and DEA did a lot better for their members. PBA killed the range date issue, added more to the longevity, got the home confinement lifted, and even got starting pay for rookies to go up by $15,000+.
The DEA decreased the steps for top pay for a 3rd grade Detective by several years!!! And if the SBA proposal passes, 3rd grade Det makes more to start than a Sgt. Shameful!!!
The SBA needs to grow a pair and go back to the bargaining table or threaten lawsuits. Precedents set by the PBA and DEA would put negotiations in our favor. Precedents set by American labor unions that supervisors making more than their subordinates in general would also be in our favor.
Yes sergeants still go once a year on their rdo but the PBA won that day back with their new contract. I agree with you all on the issue of starting pay, a newly promoted sergeant should at least get paid what a newly made 3rd grade detective makes, definetly not less! If I get the opportunity to vote, I will be voting NO!
-- Edited by 2ndTimesACharm on Thursday 16th of April 2009 02:29:51 AM
NYPD74 I think you knocked off stiggityone with your charts
Not at all. We have a difference of opinion and we both stated our piece. I'm not going to beat a dead a horse. Vote how you feel appropriate and we'll see how things go.
Well Stiggy, if you are in rank for 3 years, you are getting fvcked too. Maybe not as bad as newly promoted Sgt's or the unborn, but what are you getting exactly? A retro check? You will get that no matter what we get.
Its definately worth it to attempt to renegotiate since the SBA membership is getting almost nothing. Guys like Stiggy that got promoted 3 years ago do get the biggest retro. Someone who was already at top pay in 2006 really gets very little. Someone promoted in the last 2 years gets retro but, still not much of a raise overall.
We get one bone? No home confinement while sick? Thats it? Keep it. Lets try for something a little more beneficial to membership. I can wait for a few thousand dollars in a retro check.
This reopener is a joke. If this passes, I will spend a lot of time and energy convincing others to vote Mullins out...
stiggityone your rationale for voting yes is rediculous. This horse sh*t of a contract they throw at you with the enticement of a retro check is designed exactly for people like yourself, who are completely incapable of understanding the long term ramifications vs the short term gratification . And personally I would take that as an insult.
"completely incapable of understanding..."...lol...that's comical. Quite the contrary pal. I know all about getting ****ed over by lists and bad contracts. Here's a history lesson for you junior.... I studied relentlessly for my test. Not just to make the list, but to be at the very top of my list so that I could get a crack at an impending LT's test. What happens? My list doesn't come out for 11 months, and even though I'm in the first class, I wind up getting promoted 12 ****IN DAYS after they give the test. It was a big kick in the balls to see people from the 2003Sgt's test that had raw scores around a 60, close to 30 ****in points lower than me get a crack at that test while I was shut out, but it was reality.
It sucked getting promoted just a few months after the SBA sold out the unborn....leading to ME making basically the same as a top pay cop. I had to come to the realization that that would be the case til I hit top pay. I dealt with it, I moved on.
This strucure shift is not perfect. The system has not yet been fixed. I have not said this move is perfect, but it's something. Shoot it down and there is no "back to the drawing board." You get nothing. And stop referring to it as a "contract." It's not the same thing. It's a an attempt at adjusting the steps. Vote it down and you get nothing...
And one more important thing zoo, since you want to be a condascending prick... It's very easy for you to talk about the retro like it's nothing. I can see from your posts you just ****in passed the last test. You are not even a ****in sgt. Hell...your ****in list isn't even out yet. You should not even be posting on this subject. "oh, you're enticed by retro." Of course retro means nothing to you....you got plenty as a cop officer. It's easy to scoff at a ****in ten thousand dollar retro check when you are getting dick. Your list should be out in about another 8 months, come talk to me then.
Look stiggy, I am not scoffing at the $10,000-$12,000 someone in your situation would get, which would be among the most retro. But consider that the DEA lowered steps and got more concessions from the city.
You have a year more in rank than me, but I would rather vote this down and take my chances with either more negotiations or a lawsuit. I can wait for a retro check, even if you are right and this mess never gets fixed and we get absolutely nothing, which I highly doubt, its worth the risk. Since the if you look at what it will cost you, me and plenty of others in the long run.
This reopener does not add to top pay, longevity, annuity contributions, etc. So a senior Sgt that was already at top pay in 2006, get pretty much nothing. A Sgt hired in the last 3 years gets retro, but for what? Just to make a few hundred more than a top pay PO at base pay and less than a 3rd grade detective?
If you look at the big picture, this reopener is going to set back the membership in the long run. Even if you honestly think we will get absolutely nothing if we turn it down, isn't worth the risk?
I mean do you honestly think we do not have a lawsuit with precedents set by other union reopeners and also in American labor contracts where supervisors never make less base pay than their subordinates? Any lawyer worth anything could embarass the city if we took them to court if they refused to negotiate.
Everyone should grow a pair and vote "No". If this passes though, it will be a cold day in hell before I vote for Mullins...
