Monday night’s City Council meeting drew a large crowd of current and former municipal employees as the council considered whether to authorize City Manager Thomas Ambrosino to negotiate modifications to the city’s group health insurance policies.
The employees who attended were largely dissatisfied with the outcome. The council voted 8-2 to grant Ambrosino negotiating authority for the proposed changes. Councillors Roy Avellaneda and Yamir Rodriguez opposed the order, and Councillor Calvin T. Brown was absent.
The city operates under a three-year group health plan agreement with the Public Employee Committee (PEC), which is set to expire on June 30 of this year.
“During the months of
November through March, I did attempt to negotiate with the PEC a new
multi-year agreement that would provide some cost savings to the group health
plan,” Ambrosino wrote in correspondence to the council. “Unfortunately, I have not
been able to reach agreement with the unions.”
According to Massachusetts General Laws, Ambrosino explained, the existing PEC agreement would continue indefinitely if no new agreement is reached. Without City Council approval, Ambrosino indicated he would be unable to implement any health care cost reductions.
The City Council’s approval enables the city to utilize recent state legislation permitting municipalities to institute cost-saving plan design modifications independently when negotiations with the PEC fail, provided the city agrees to distribute a portion of first-year cost savings to the unions.
With this newly authorized power, the City Manager indicated his intention to pursue reasonable design modifications to the city’s group health policies, potentially including deductibles comparable to those required of Massachusetts state employees.
Ambrosino emphasized that Chelsea’s health insurance would remain at least equivalent to coverage provided to Massachusetts public employees, regardless of any modifications.
The Chelsea Public Employee Committee submitted a letter to the City Council detailing more than twenty objections to adopting the proposed group health insurance changes.
“The PEC strongly believes
that the adoption of Sections 21-23 is inappropriate and premature for multiple
reasons: the Self-Insurance Trust Fund is running about a $2 million surplus;
the PEC has agreed to apply any surplus to reduce future health insurance
costs; City Manager Thomas Ambrosino wants the sickest families among City
employees and retirees to pay $1 million more on an annual basis currently paid
by the City; the PEC and City Manager Thomas Ambrosino agree that no changes to
employee/retiree health insurance are needed until FY2022; Ambrosino has failed
to bargain in good faith for a successor PEC agreement; a grievance, including
an alleged unfair labor practice, are pending at this time; and Sections 21-23
will effectively disable bargaining on health insurance,” the letter states.
City Council President Damali Vidot disclosed that her husband is employed by the Department of Public Works and would be directly impacted by any health insurance modifications. Nevertheless, she contended the changes are essential to enable Ambrosino to engage in negotiations with city unions.
“We hire the Town Manager
to negotiate with the unions, and I’m not comfortable when he does not have all
the tools needed for the negotiations,” Vidot remarked.
Vidot expressed hope that Ambrosino would use these new negotiating tools to reach an agreement with the unions. She stressed that while the council prioritizes city employee welfare, it also bears fiscal responsibility to the broader community.
The council president also addressed what she characterized as miscommunication surrounding the issue, particularly regarding retirees. According to Vidot, only a small number of retirees ineligible for Medicare would be affected by group health insurance plan modifications.
District 1 Councillor Robert Bishop stated his support for providing the City Manager with all necessary resources during union negotiations.
The vote prompted vocal objections from audience members, with numerous attendees expressing disapproval and suggesting the council should be ashamed. The meeting was briefly disrupted as the crowd exited noisily, with several individuals attempting to address councillors individually.