Report Inappropriate Comments

Mr. FASTFREDWARD4 , here are the facts regarding financial aspects of the teacher contract compared to city contracts over the same 2003 - 2009 time period.

School teacher contact

1) 18.5 percent increase in pay.

2) No cap on out of pocket prescription drug cost.

3) Retirement healthcare benefit for teacher only after 30 years of service.

4) Retiree healthcare benefit terminates at age 65. NO future cost to city.

5) For the first time ever in city history, the contract required retired school employees pay for health benefits. No other contract to this day on the city side has that provision.

City employee’s contract 2003 - 2009

1) 21.25 percent increase in pay.

2) Cap of $600 on annual out of pocket prescription drug cost. City healthcare experts testified at the time that this cost over $1 million annually.

3) Retirement healthcare for both employee and spouse after working for only 10 years of service.

4) Retirement healthcare benefit for LIFE.

5) Retiree Healthcare benefit is free.

According to expert actuarial reports, based on these contract stipulations: CITY HEALTHCARE future cost is over $300,000,000 or 5 TIMES greater than school cost. This is the real financial time bomb in the city driving up cost every year.

Giving active employee a Cost of Living Increases of 3% over a 6 year period of time isn't. BTW: All city retired employees received a greater raise then the school teachers over the same period of time. Do you think retired employees should receive larger raises then the people currently employed? I won't hold my breath for your answer.

Take a look at the administration's record during that same time period as to what he suggested we give to the teachers at the time. Here is one sample: [The mayor suggested that the School Committee and teachers "accept whatever universal language [was] adopted in our police, fire and municipal contracts" and salary increases "be in line with other municipal contracts," Warwick Beacon, October 25, 2005].

You’re critical of the contract the school committee ratified? Imagine we took the mayor’s advice and mirrored police, fire and municipal contracts and included the lifetime healthcare provision. Do you think we should have listen to the Mayor's suggestion? Doubt you will answer this question.

I don’t take pleasure in beating you down online Freddy. It’s actually not that difficult. Rather if you want to have a real discussion of the city and school finances I will engage you with comprehensive concise facts, as opposed to your juvenile personal attacks.

My suggestion, FAST FREDDY, hit the pause button in your brains ongoing angry thought process. REWIND, take a couple of deep breaths and do some homework to compare the city versus school expenses. If you are capable of doing that and can present these facts in writing on this blog, I will engage in a point/counter point discussion, otherwise I won't continue to waste my time.

From: Mayor touts city's financial position

Please explain the inappropriate content below.