The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
Z, 3 n z '■ Municipal .abor-Management delations: Chronology f Compensation developments i Milwaukee, 960-70 ulletin 1720 . S. Departm ent of La bor u reau of L a b o r Statistics orth Central Regional Office hicago, Illinois 971 Payton & Montgcwnery Co, Public Library NOV 241971 DOCUMENT COLLECTION Municipal Labor-Management Relations: Chronology of Compensation Developments in Milwaukee, 1960-70 Bulletin 1720 U. S. Department of Labor J. D. Hodgson, Secretary Bureau of Labor Statistics Geoffrey H. Moore, Commissioner North Central Regional Office Chicago, lllnois Wiliam E Rice, Regional Director 1971 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D .C . 20402 - Price $1.25 Preface This bulletin presents a summary of the major changes in salaries and supplementary (fringe) benefits that have taken place during the period 1960 to 1970 for municipal employees subject to the regulation of the Milwaukee Common Council, the city’s governing body. Included are provisions covering general city employees, who are subject to City Service Commission rules, and employees of the Fire and Police Departments, who are subject to the rules of the Fire and Police Commission. Excluded are special provisions applicable to prevailing wage employees, “exempt” employees, and part-time members of boards and commissions. Changes affecting employees whose compensation is set by the Milwaukee Board of School Directors or by the Milwaukee Sewerage Commission are outside the scope of the study. In 1970, the number of employees under the control of the Common Council averaged 10,035. Included were 6,053 general city employees and 360 prevailing wage employees subject to City Service Commission rules; 2,244 Police Department personnel, including 175 civilian employees; 1,110 Fire Department personnel, including 33 civilian employees; 215 exempt employees (includes Learn-by-doing and OJT trainees); 36 employees of part-time boards and commissions; 11 employees of the Fire and Police Commission; and two employees of the Fire and Police Annuity Boards. The Milwaukee School Board had an average employment of 11,813 in 1970, and the Sewage Commis sion had 440. A municipal government wage survey bulletin for Milwaukee, which the Bureau of Labor Statistics will publish in 1972, will supplement this report and update it through 1971. This bulletin was prepared by Woodrow C. Linn of the Bureau’s North Central Regional Office, Chicago, Illinois. The author gratefully acknowledges the cooperation of Robert C. Gamier, City Personnel Director for the city of Milwaukee, and Arnold A. Logan, Supervisor, Classification Division, Milwaukee Personnel Department. The author also would like to thank Theodore G. Scher, Personnel Analyst, who is on the staff of the Classification Division, for his assistance in preparation and checking of tables used in this manuscript. iii Contents Page Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Parties to agreements ........................................................................................................................... Statutes pertaining to compensation for municipal employees ..................................................... History of public employee unions in Milwaukee ............................................................................ Developments during the 1940’s Developments during the 1950’s 1 1 2 3 4 1959 developments ....................................................................................................................................... City’s formal wage hearing procedures set ........................................................................................ City grants official recognition to labor unions ............................................................................... State legislature passes Section 111.70 .............................................................................................. 6 6 6 7 1960 developments ....................................................................................................................................... Garbage collectors s trik e .................................................................................................................... 9 9 1961 developments .......................................................................................................................................... City’s cost-of-living adjustment machinery based on C P I.............................................................. City rejects union d e m a n d s.............................................................................................................. 10 10 10 1962 developments ....................................................................................................................................... WERB holds first representation hearings for city employees ........................................................ City hears union demands for 1963 ................................................................................................... Question o f procedures snags wage hearings ..................................................................................... Union seeks recourse through W E R B ................................................................................................. City personnel director presents recommendations for 1963 ........................................................ Traditional hearing procedures meet strong opposition ................................................................ City agrees to “Confer and Negotiate” on advice of city attorney ............................................... Finance committee recommendations opposed by two unions ..................................................... City closes wage negotiations over District Council 48’s objections ............................................ Joint policy and technical committees reestablished........................................................................ 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 14 14 1963 developments ....................................................................................................................................... WERB holds representation elections for city employees ............................................................. City prepares for 1963 negotiations ................................................................................................. Initial union demands listed ............................................................................................................... Earlier negotiations scheduled for 1963 ........................................................................................... Procedural problems arise at outset of n eg o tiatio n s......................................................................... Pay demand for city employees on union negotiating teams slows talks ...................................... Garbage union asks WERB to settle meeting time dispute .............................................................. City and union resolve paid negotiating time roadblock ................................................................ Negotiations commence on substantive issues .................................................................................. Finance committee presents city’s final offer .................................................................................. Unions reject final city o f f e r ............................................................................................................... Major unions apply to WERB for factfinding .................................................................................. Truck drivers stop work ..................................................................................................................... City joins major unions in requesting factfinding ............................................................................ 16 16 16 16 17 17 17 18 18 19 19 19 20 20 20 v Contents — Continued Page 1964 developments .......................................................................................................................................... 21 WERB conducts representation elections in non-DPW departments ............................................21 Unions submit demands for 1965 ...................................................................................................... 21 Prolonged factfinding delays negotiations for 1965 ......................................................................... 21 City appoints city personnel director as chief n e g o tia to r....................................................................22 Factfinders about ready to release recom m endations..........................................................................22 City reaches agreement with District Council 48 for 1965 .............................................................. 22 City offers District Council 48 terms for 1965 to other unions ........................................................ 22 Factfinding panel’s final report issued on December 14 23 Factfinders recommend new procedures for future negotiations ..................................................23 Full-time labor negotiator also recommended ..................................................................................... 23 New timetable suggested for future negotiations ............................................................................ 23 Factfinders favor written co n tracts......................................................................................................... 24 Panel suggests guidelines for public’s “Right to Know” .............................................................. 24 Factfinders recommend separate police pay p l a n ......................................................................... 24 Factfinders support most demands of fire fighters’ association.................................................. 24 Panel recommends that demands of garbage collectors be studied f u r th e r ............................. 24 Panel recommends further consideration of District Council 48’s dem ands............................. 25 Interpretation of factfinders’ report in dispute............................................................................... 25 City acts to implement factfinders’ recommendations ................................................................. 25 1965 developments ....................................................................................................................................... 26 City moves to implement factfinders’ recommendations ..............................................................26 WERB helps city and District Council 48 solve stickyis s u e s ............................................................... 26 City and District Council 48 agree on 1965 contractpro v isio n s......................................................... 26 Negotiations with District Council 48 for 1965 conclude with reallocations ............................. 27 City settles with police association for 1965 ..................................................................................... 27 Garbage Union negotiations for 1965 postponed until 1966 ........................................................ 27 Fire Association negotiations for 1965 rescheduled to 1966 ....................................................... 27 Unions submit demands for 1966 negotiations ............................................................................... 28 City responds to unions with counterproposal ............................................................................... 28 Division of labor relations created ................................................................................................... 29 Negotiations for 1966 show little p ro g re s s ........................................................................................... 29 City and District Countil 48 extend tim e ta b le ..................................................................................... 29 District Council 48 presents counteroffer to city ............................................................................ 30 City requests mediation in negotiations with District Council 48 ..................................................30 Tentative 3-year agreement reached with District Council 48 ........................................................ Tentative 3-year agreements reached with health department u n io n s ............................................ 30 Tentative 1-year agreement reached with police association .......................................................... 31 City and four unions agree to WERB m e d ia tio n ............................................................................... 31 City holds public hearing on tentative agreements with five u n io n s ............................................... 31 City and four more unions reach tentative agreement ....................................................................31 Fire Fighters’ Association heads towards im p a s s e ............................................................................ 31 Fire Fighters’ Association favors factfinding so lution...................................................................... 32 Garbage union asks court to enforce factfinders’ recommendations ............................................ 32 Independent Garbage Union affiliates with AFL-CIO, wins election challenge .......................... 32 Local 61 again asks courts to enforce factfinders’ recommendations ......................................... 32 vi Contents — Continued Page 1966 developments ..........................................................................................................................................34 City and Fire Fighters’ Association reach agreement for 1966 ..................................................... 34 Agreement with Garbage Collection Laborers averts strike ...........................................................34 City fails to reach agreement with Police and Fire A ssociations.................... ................................34 1967 developments ..........................................................................................................................................36 City and Fire Fighters’ Association reach agreement early in 1967 ............................................... 36 City and Police Association agree on 2-year pact ............................................................................ 36 Fire Associations sign memorandums of understanding for 1968 .................................................. 37 Factfinding by WERC employed in District Council 48 local issues ............................................ 31 District Council 48 submits demands for 1969 in a d v a n c e ............................................................. 37 Garbage Workers Union attempts to reopen 3-year contract for 1968 ...................................... 37 Common Council approves new managementrates ............................................................................. 38 WERC establishes one-man craft bargaining unit ............................................................................ 38 City Service Commission responds to collective bargaining ch allen g e............................................38 1968 developments .......................................................................................................................................... 40 1969 negotiations begin with 17 unions ........................................................................................... 40 Early agreement reached with Police Association ................................................................................40 Local 215 agreement sets pattern for other fire unions ................................................................ 40 Negotiations with general city employee unions move slowly ........................................................41 City makes counterproposal to initial union demands ................................................................... 41 Negotiations with general employee unions show little progress ..................................................42 City’s chief negotiator reports slowdown in negotiations ............................................................. 42 Union rivalries and excessive fragmentation complicate n eg o tiatio n s............................................ 42 Improved city offer designed to break logjam ..................................................................................43 District Council 48 rejects new city offer ........................................................................................43 District Council 48 membership authorizes strike a c ti o n ................................................................ 43 City’s request for factfinding rejected by WERC . . . ....................................................................43 WERC gives negotiations a needed push ...........................................................................................44 Negotiations with District Council 48 falter again ......................................................................... 44 City again requests factfinding with two major general unions ...................................................... 44 Teamsters union initiates factfinding with city ............................................................................... 44 Local 61 and District Council 48 balk on factfinding ..................................................................... 45 City and District Council 48 reach tentative agreement ................................................................ 45 1968 representation activities keep WERC busy ......................................................................... 45 Middle management classes receive selective adjustments in 1968 ............................................... 45 1969 developments ...................................................................................................................................... Garbage Collectors Union stages strike .............................................................................................. District Council 48 members ratify agreement with city ................................................................ Agreement with Garbage Collectors Union ends strike ................................................................... Most other unions accept District Council 48 formula ................................................................... Three late settlements follow factfinding proceedings ................................................................... WERC continues active role in representation cases ...................................................................... City Attorney rules on legality of negotiations in p r iv a te ................................................................. vii 47 47 47 47 48 48 48 48 Contents — Continued Page 1970 developments .......................................................................................................................................50 New management pay plan a p p ro v e d .................................................................................................... 50 Unions submit 1971 wage and fringe benefit demands ................................................................... 50 District Council 48 lists extensive demands for 1971 ...................................................................... 51 Various demands submitted by other large unions ......................................................................... 51 City hints at specific proposals for each union ............................................................................... 51 City’s 1970 negotiations with District Council 48 start slowly .....................................................51 1971 budget includes 5% million for anticipated wage increases ............................................... 52 City petitions WERC for representation election in new Bureau of Sanitation ...........................52 Negotiations with District Council 48 break o f f ............................................................................... 52 Contracts extended by city and its employee unions ................................................................... 53 PPPA membership authorizes strike v o t e .............................................................................................. 53 1970 ends with little to show in metropolitan area public employee negotiations ................. 53 Other major taxing units report tentative agreements ................................................................... 53 Five major taxing units negotiators confer regularly . . . .............................................................. 54 Several representation elections held in 1970 .................................................................................. 55 Tables: 1. General salary changes—general city employees, Milwaukee .......................................................... 57 2. General salary changes—police and fire service personnel, Milwaukee ......................................... 59 3. Overtime compensation—general city employees, Milwaukee ........................................................ 60 4. Overtime compensation—police and fire service personnel, M ilw aukee......................................... 62 5. Shift differential compensation—general city employees, M ilw au k ee............................................ 63 6. Weekend differential pay—general city employees, Milwaukee ..................................................... 64 7. Weekend differential pay—police and fire service personnel, Milwaukee ...................................... 64 8. Vacation provisions—general city employees, Milwaukee .............................................................. 65 9. Vacation provisions—police and fire service personnel, Milwaukee ............................................... 65 10. Holiday pay provisions—general city employees, M ilw aukee........................................................... 66 11. Holiday pay provisions—police and fire service personnel, Milwaukee .......................................... 67 12. Call-in pay provisions—general city employees, Milwaukee .............................................................. 67 13. Owed time provisions—general city employees, Milwaukee ........................................................... 67 14. Annual military training leave pay—city employees, Milwaukee ............................................... 68 15. Military funeral leave pay—city employees, Milwaukee .............................................................. 68 16. Pay for time off for military induction examinations—city employee, Milwaukee ..................... 68 17. Jury duty pay—city employees, Milwaukee ..................................................................................... 68 18. Sick leave benefits—general city employees, Milwaukee ................................................................ 69 19. Sick leave benefits—police and fire service personnel, Milwaukee .................................................. 69 20. Health benefit plans-city employees, M ilw aukee............................................................................ 70 21. Duty-incurred disability benefits—general city employees, Milwaukee .......................................... 71 22. Duty-incurred disability benefits—police and fire service personnel, M ilw aukee.......................... 71 23. Group life insurance—city employees, M ilwaukee........................................................................... 72 24. Retirement benefits under employees’ retirement system—city employees, Milwaukee . . . 73 25. Clothing allowance and related practices—city employees, M ilw aukee...................................... 76 26. 1960 salary rates, all city employees, Milwaukee ............................................................................ 77 27. 1961-67 salary rates (biweekly), all city employees, M ilw aukee..................................................... 79 28. 1961-67 salary rates (monthly), all city employees, Milwaukee ..................................................... 82 29. 1961-67 salary rates (annual), all city employees, Milwaukee ........................................................ 85 30. 1968-69 general salary rates (biweekly), city employees, Milwaukee ............................................ 88 viii Contents — Continued Page 31. 1968-69 general salary rates (monthly), city employees, Milwaukee ............................................. 90 32. 1968-69 general salary rates (annual), city employees, Milwaukee ...................................... 92 33. 1970 Nonmanagement salary rates, city employees, M ilw aukee..................................................... 94 34. 1970 Management salary rates, city employees, Milwaukee .......................................................... 96 35. 1969 Salary rates for engineers and architects, city employees, Milwaukee ................................ 98 36. 1970 salary rates for engineers and architects, city employees, Milwaukee ................................ 98 37. 1965-70 salary rates for police service personnel, Milwaukee ........................................................ 99 38. 1966-70 salary rates for fire service personnel, M ilw aukee.............................................................. 103 39. Earnings of selected classes of municipal employees, Milwaukee, July 1970 ........................... 105 Appendixes: A. Section 1 1 1 .7 0 ..............................................................................................................................109 B. Certified for recognized bargaining units, 1963-70 ................................................................ I l l IX Introduction entrance and promotional examinations for employees of the Fire and Police Departments. In major discipli nary actions, the commission serves in a quasijudicial capacity and conducts appeal hearings. Since 1946, the City Personnel Director, by authorization of the com mission, has had the responsibility for classifying and reclassifying employees in the Fire and Police Depart ments. Parties to agreements The Common Council is the legislative branch of the government of the City of Milwaukee. It passes the city’s laws in the form of ordinances, and sets its official policies through the adoption of resolutions. It has the responsibility of managing the city’s finances, property, public services, highways, and navigable waters. It has the power to handle all matters affecting the city government, good order, safety and health, or com mercial benefit. The Common Council is composed of aldermen, each elected for 4-year terms to represent his ward. In 1960, there were 20 aldermatic wards; however, the State Assembly Districts, which are contiguous with ward boundaries in the City of Milwaukee, were redrawn by the State Legislature before the 1964 elections, on the basis of the final 1960 U.S. Census figures. The redistricting, on this basis, left the city of Milwaukee with only 19 wards. So, the Common Council totalled 19 aldermen from 1964 through 1970. One of the important standing committees of the Common Council is the Committee on Finance-Printing, often referred to as the “ Finance Committee.” This is the principal committee involved with labor negotiations and other financial matters. The City Service Commission (established by charter ordinance in 1895) is composed of five citizen members appointed by the Mayor to overlapping 5-year terms. The commission’s major responsibilities are to establish personnel policy, subject to provisions of collective bargaining agreements; to set standards for and ad minister entrance and promotional examinations for employment in city departments, excluding the Fire and Police Departments; and to represent the public interest in matters of appeal. The commission’s staff, under direction of its chief executive and administrative officer, the City Personnel Director, administers the city’s comprehensive personnel program through its three divisions; examination, classification, and adminis tration. The Fire and Police Commission (established in 1885) is composed of five citizen members appointed by the Mayor to overlapping 5-year terms, subject, however, to Common Council approval. It is the oldest civil service authority in Wisconsin. The commission establishes personnel employment policy, subject to provisions of collective bargaining agreements, and sets standards for Statutes pertaining to com pensation fo r m unicipal em ployees Statutory requirements governing the compensation of the city’s employees are set forth in Section 526 of Chapter 66 of the Wisconsin Statutes. This section, entitled “General Municipal Law,” authorizes the Common Council of any first class city1 to adopt a uniform and comprehensive salary and wage ordinance based on a classification of offices, employments and positions in the city service, including any and all positions, whether or not previously so classified, “provided provision has been made in the budget of the current year for the total sum of money required for the paym ent. . . and a tax levied to include the same . . . . ” Chapter 65 of the Wisconsin Statutes, which governs the city’s budget system, establishes the Common Council as the general arbiter of conflicting demands for the city’s funds. Section 65.02 requires a uniform compensation schedule establishing uniform rates of pay for offices and positions in the city service for the ensuing fiscal year. Section 65.04 requires that the Common Council adopt not later than November 20 of each year a compensation schedule showing the number, title, and compensation range of each officer and position in the city service. Section 65.05 provides that the rates of pay and the number of positions established in the budget shall determine the total compensation of employees in the city service for the ensuing year, v/ith the exception that additional jobs may be added during the year by action of the Common Council. The aforementioned statutes apply to employees who are under the city’s civil service law. Sections 63.18 through 63.53 of the Wisconsin Statutes form Mil waukee’s civil service law and provide for the board of city service commissioners, appointed by the Mayor.2 Section 63.23 directs the City Service Commission to “classify all offices and positions in the city service, 1 except those subject to the exemptions of section 63.27, according to the duties and responsibilities of each position.”3 It also requires that all positions which the Commission considers as “substantially the same with respect to authority, responsibility and character of work” be included in the same class. It adds, “From time to time the Commission may reclassify positions upon a proper showing that the position belongs to a different class.” Section 63.23(2) authorizes the Commission, “if it sees fit, to receive any expert study or recommendation of the classification, allocation and compensation of offices and positions in the service of the city and transmit the same, with or without the Commission’s recommendations, to the Common Council.” Any such report becomes effective when approved by the Common Council. The function of the Classification Division of the City Personnel Department is to make studies for the City Service Commission, as well as to conduct surveys of wages and fringe benefits in private employment and in other cities to be used in the determination of pay ranges, classifications, job evalu ations or reallocations. Sections 63.24, 63.25, and 63.26 deal with the City Service Commission’s responsibility for establishing and administering uniform rules applicable to examinations, filling vacancies, promotions, terminations of em ployment, and appointments. Passage by the State Legislature of the Wisconsin Municipal Employee Relations Act (Section 111.70, Wisconsin Statutes) in 1959, together with the 1961 enactment of subsections (l)(c) and (4) to Section 111.70, introduced significant procedural changes in the system that the Common Council previously had observed in making decisions concerning wages, hours, and working conditions for the city’s employees. (See appendix A.) This system had been undergoing a gradual change during the previous two decades as a result of increasing union pressure and influence. Before continuing it would be well to briefly review earlier developments. Trades Council, an organization known as the Milwaukee City and County Civil Service Employees’ Union was affiliated with the AFL. The charter for this new organization was presented approximately 1 month after the first meeting in August. At about the same time, the firemen of the city were organizing. In April of 1920, the local group of the International Association of Fire Fighters reported that they had reached a membership of more than 50 percent of the 585 men in the Fire Department. The Milwaukee Policemen’s Protective Association, which did not refer to itself as a labor union for many years, has been in existence since 1909. A decline of labor union activity in Milwaukee during the 1920’s affected public employees even more than those in private industry. Renewed efforts to organize city employees did not occur until the 1930’s. Industrial unions were extremely active in Milwaukee during the organizing period of the 1930’s and in most cases the city administration was sympathetic to their interests and objectives. Private industrial unions had gained a strong foothold in local industries in earlier years, and the favorable national and state legislation of the 1930’s gave them the final push that they needed. For these reasons, together with a sympathetic public attitude toward unions, interest in. the unionization of public employees in Milwaukee was soon to follow. The year 1934 saw renewed interest in the organizing efforts among the city’s laborers, and the Federal Labor Union, Local 17710, was established within the AFL organization. In the same year the staff of the Milwaukee Public Library organized as the Staff Asso ciation. This group later became a chapter in Local No. 2 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees’ Union (AFSCME). The AFSCME had started with a small group of Wisconsin State employees who met on May 10, 1932, in Madison to establish an AFL organization for State employees. The charter was issued by the AFL on May 16, 1932, as Federal Labor Union 18213. Known initially as the “Wisconsin State Administrative Employees Asso ciation” the local’s name was later changed to “Wisconsin State Employees Association.” In December 1935, this group, together with other government locals (State, county, and municipal) meeting in Chicago, formed the AFSCME as an autonomous union for State and local government employees within the American Federation of Government Employees (AFL). In October 1936, on the recommendation of the AFGE, AFSCME was chartered as a separate international union within the AFL. The first organizing efforts of AFSCME in Milwaukee were reported in January, 1937; the president of the H istory o f pu blic em ployee unions in M ilw aukee Labor unions have had a strong foothold in private and public employment in the Milwaukee area for many years.4 The first effort in organizing public employees occurred in 1919, when city employees took steps to form the Milwaukee Employees’ Federation. Sixty-five employees met in August and one of the decisions made was whether the organization would affiliate with the American Federation of Labor (AFL) or remain in dependent. With the efforts of the Milwaukee Federated 2 Local 200, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America (AFLCIO) Local 494, International Brotherhood o f Electrical Workers (AFL-CIO) Local 215, Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Association, Inter national Association of Fire Fighters (AFL-CIO) Local 1037, Uniformed Pilots and Marine Engineers Asso ciation, International Association of Fire Fighters (AFL-CIO) Auto Mechanics Lodge 510, International Association of Machinists (AFL-CIO) Building Trades Council (and its affiliated locals) (AFL-CIO) Policemen’s Protective Association Milwaukee Government Service League City and County Public Service Employees Union (In dependent) Association of Graduate and Registered Engineers o f Mil waukee Milwaukee City Employees Association new organization reported that 2,000 employees already had joined the union since October 1936. However, Local 17710, which had reported a membership of nearly 600 in 1934, had been disbanded; this accounted, in part, for the claimed AFSCME membership. By the start of World War II, there were 11 active chapters in Local No. 2 of AFSCME. In 1945, 22 county and city municipal unions in the Milwaukee area formed the Milwaukee County District Council. These unions which were affiliated with the AFL and AFSCME (AFL) also had joined the Wisconsin State Federation of Labor and the Milwaukee Federated Trades Council. The old United Public Workers of America (CIO) also was very active among city employees in the 1940’s. The strength of GCEOC was centered in the Garbage and Forestry Bureaus of the Department of Public Works, where two locals were established. They were Local No. 1203 representing employees of the Garbage Bureau and Local No. 1087 representing employees in the Forestry Bureau. These locals retained their designa tions when they were absorbed into the AFSCME following the merger of the AFL and CIO in 1955. The Milwaukee Government Service League was founded in 1935. It was organized “to support good government and to protect the best interests of the community at large through the maintenance and promotion of the highest standards of public service.” Labor unions looked on the league as a “company union” and referred to it as a form of “ cheap unionism.” The League reached its peak membership of 7,000 in 1937, when its primary objective was the establishment of an adequate pension plan for its members in the five taxing units. Following 1937, when the Employees’ Retirement System was adopted, the League annually made requests for a group life insurance program, sick leave benefits, pension improvements, and salary increases. Developments during the 1940's Collective bargaining by public employee unions in the early 1940’s was new to Milwaukee and the city had not established procedures for officially recognizing the unions.5 The Wagner Act (1934) and the Wisconsin Labor Relations Act (1937) did not cover employees of State and local governments. In the absence of formal machinery with which to handle union problems, the Finance Committee of the Common Council met with union and employee organization representatives to hear their requests. Procedurally, this traditional system called for the committee to hold public hearings on the budget every year. Employee unions (although not of ficially recognized by the city) appeared before the committee to present their views and requests, which the Finance Committee then considered. The requests were referred to the Personnel Department, which prepared written reports and recommendations. After public release by the committee, these reports provided some basis for discussion and did resolve a great many issues. The committee hearings, however, did not provide a setting for give and take discussions in which there could be an attempt to reconcile all conflicting views and find some common ground. The major responsibility of the committee was formulating the city’s budget; labor relations was secondary. Changes in wages and working conditions recommended by the Finance Committee and approved by the Common Council were enacted as ordinances. The Finance Committee also was responsible for handling grievances and reclassification of jobs. The City Service Commission, whose administration and examination divisions controlled the hiring and firing of city employees, was the only agency which had a close relationship with the city’s labor force. Following a series of militant labor disputes in the period 194345 that resulted in strikes, the Common By the late 1950’s, the following labor unions and employee organizations were active on behalf of city employees and “unofficially” represented their members in wage hearings before the Finance Committee of the Common Council: District Council 48, (and its affiliated locals), American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFL-CIO) Local 17, Building Service Employees’ International Union (AFL-CIO) Local 195, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (AFL-CIO) Local 311, International Union of Operating Engineers (AFL-CIO) Local 125-B, International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers (AFL-CIO) 3 a great influence on the correction of the inequities and helped to foster better labor relations. Council took the first major step toward improving the cumbersome system, when, in July 1945, it established the position of Classification Examiner in the City Service Commission.6 This office would handle all problems dealing with classifications and wage inequities that once had been the responsibility of the Finance Com mittee.7 Developments during the 1950's As a result of increased union pressure beginning in 1950, a joint labor-management committee was charged with developing a new uniform grievance procedure.8 In July 1954, the committee submitted its report to the Finance Committee which accepted it. In turn, it was referred to the Common Council, which, in February 1955, adopted an ordinance giving the City Service Com mission the responsibility for establishing the program and procedures. The ordinance designated the City Service Commission as the official agency for settling employee complaints or* requests not involving changes in salaries, fringe benefits, or overtime allowance, and involving other matters requiring action by the Common Council or the Board of Estimates as prescribed in the city service law. It further provided that in cases involving the public library, the public museum, and the employees’ retirement system, the final appeal would be to their respective governing boards rather than to the City Service Commission. A new grievance manual pointed out that the ex ceptions to the procedure were (1) salaries and wages, (2) fringe benefits, (3) overtime assignments and over time allowances, (4) position classification, and (5) employment status (discharge, suspension, reduction), all of which would be handled under other established procedures. The new procedure was not to apply to the Fire and Police Departments. Basically, the procedure provided for five steps and had definite time limits for moving the cases from one step to the next, and, if necessary, to final action by the commission or by one of the other designated boards or commissions. A union dues check-off procedure was approved in 1954.9 In September 1956, a representative of GCEOC (CIO) requested that the Common Council permit dues check-off and suggested a procedure whereby the unions would allocate the dues collected by the city. He pointed out that for many years both CIO and AFL organizations had asked that the Common Council adopt a dues check-off system but that they were always put off because of the administrative problems involved. No action was taken for the 1955 budget year, but further consideration was given to the union’s suggested proce dure. In June 1955, the Finance Committee approved a union dues payroll deduction procedure which sub sequently was adopted by the Common Council to become effective on January 1,1956. The procedure (1) required that the unions supply payroll deduction authorization cards; (2) authorized the City of Mil waukee Employees Union Dues Trustees to receive and At the same time the City Service Commission established a procedure relating to job classifications. This procedure, which is found in Section 7 of Rule II of the City Service Commission rules, provides that: “disagreements between an employee and the city resulting from grievances or the interpretation or applica tion of established rules governing classification and closely related matters shall be handled by the employee or his representative, through established supervisory chan nels up to and including the designated head of the de partment concerned. Failing prompt and satisfactory ac tion, the employee or his representative may appeal the disagreement to the City Service Commission for investi gation and adjustment when the Commission has jurisdic tion over the position involved. The decision of the City Service Commission shall be final and where re-classifi cation to a different class is decided upon a report shall be submitted to the Common Council and the classification shall become effective on the beginning of the first pay roll period following approval by the Common Council.” The first classification report was submitted by the examiner’s office on April 12, 1946. The large number o f classificatio n grievances, approximately 1,400, covered the entire range of 5,900 city positions. The grievants were represented in some instances by depart ment heads and unions or by combinations of union, department heads, and aldermen, or by unions alone. The report included a section on the salaries for comparable job classifications in other major cities and a thorough analysis of each job in each department. The report recommended that the 65 pay ranges in the 1946 salary ordinance be reduced to 37 for 1947. The pro posed pay ranges eliminated some of the worst overlaps among previous pay ranges. All classifications were allo cated in standard three-step or five-step ranges. In the 1946 salary ordinance ranges had one to seven steps. Posi tions involving clerical, administrative, and technical duties and responsibilities were placed in five-step ranges. A second group involving trades, labor, custodial, and public safety duties and responsibilities were placed in three-step ranges. The report further recommended that provision be made for recruitment at a rate above the minimum of the pay range. The significance of this report was that for the first time in the history of Mil waukee city government, a comprehensive examination of wages and job descriptions was made. The report had 4 accept union dues deducted from city payrolls; (3) directed the city for and on behalf of a requesting union to pay such dues to the City of Milwaukee Employees’ Union Dues Trust Account; and (4) released the city from all liability or claims by reason of such payroll deductions and payment to the trust fund. In 1958, a joint labor-management committee was formed to make recommendations on health-medical insurance benefits. It also is interesting to note that in one instance there were documents carrying the sig natures of members of the Water Department, the AFSCME, and the City Service Commission. The parties in 1951 had been interested in expanding in-service training programs in that department. Since a number of unions represented employees in the Water Department, there was a question as to which one would carry on discussion with city representatives. The employees decided to have an election among themselves and Local 952 of the AFSCME was elected to carry on further discussions. The in-service training program finally agreed to covered three classifications, and for each the term “Statement of Understanding” was used. — FOO TN O TES— Policies and Practices in Municipal Government, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.” Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Northwestern University, 1957. Also see Joel A. D’Alba, “Administering a Collective Bargaining Agreement in the Public Sector, Mil waukee, Wisconsin-A Case Study.” Unpublished M. A. dis sertation, Illinois Institute o f Technology, 1969. 1By State Statute 62.05(2)C, first class city is defined as any city of over 150,000 inhabitants. However, the city must change its city charter in accordance with 62.05(2)C and the mayor must proclaim the change. 2The civil service law o f the city o f Milwaukee was originally enacted by the Wisconsin Legislature in 1895. After being amended several times, it was repealed and reenacted in 1919 and has been amended in several particulars since that date. Sections 63.18 to 63.53 now form the civil service law applicable to cities of the first class. (Milwaukee being at present the only such city). 3 Among the employees excepted by section 63.27 are “all members of the... Fire and Police Departments.” Although not covered by section 63.18 through 65.33, Fire and Police Depart ment personnel fall within the ambit o f section 65.05 o f the •Statutes, which relates to adoption o f the city budget. Section 65.05 (8) states that the adoption of the budget shall determine the amount of taxes for the ensuing year, and section 65.05 (9) provides ‘The compensation rates of pay and the number of positions established in the budget shall determine the com pensation to be paid and the number of positions for the ensuing year. . . ” 6 The first Classification Examiner, Robert Gamier was appointed on February 26,1946. He subsequently was appointed to the position o f City Personnel Director and Secretary to the City Service Commission on May 12, 1958, and is serving presently the city o f Milwaukee in that capacity. He also was named the City’s first Chief Negotiator in September, 1964, and currently is a member o f the city’s bargaining team. 7The committee did not have the time to give these problems much attention. The usual procedure was for the committee to drop one job classification and add one more to the growing list. 8The city’s first formal grievance procedure was established in August 1945, during a period when union representatives had threatened strike action. Although well intentioned, the proce dure was never used because o f the way in which it operated and because the unions had not been consulted and given an oppor tunity to participate in its development. Furthermore section 62.13 of the Statutes provides for a board of fire and police commissioners which has the power to organize and supervise the Fire and Police Departments and to prescribe regulations and rules thereof. This section also provides that the salaries o f chiefs and subordinates shall be fixed by the Common Council. 4 For an account o f the history of organized labor in Milwaukee see Thomas W. Gavett, “Development of the Labor Movement in Milwaukee.” Madison, Wise.: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1965. 5For a history of the city’s labor relations during this period and earlier see Edwin Layne Cling, “Industrial Labor Relations 9The first request for a dues check-off system had been made in 1940 by the AFSCME. The City Comptroller objected because o f administrative problems and an opinion o f the City Attorney’s office was that such action could not be ac complished without proper ordinances and resolutions. Although similar requests were made subsequently, real efforts to establish a dues check-off system did not come unitl late in 1954. In the meantime union officials had collected union dues on city time without any objection by supervisors or the City Service Com mission. 5 1959 Developments C ity's form al wage hearing procedures instances, a large militant union might be given several separate hearings. Invariably, the unions resorted to a great deal of political pressure. By 1959, hearing procedures and schedules for conferring on wages, hours, and conditions of employ ment had been formalized by resolution. Bargaining units, although not officially recognized and specified, were reasonably well understood. Union representatives met with city representatives. In deference to govern mental traditions, these meetings were identified as “public hearings,” rather than “ collective bargaining sessions.” Following the deadline date for receiving requests for salary adjustments and changes in fringe benefits, the Finance Committee scheduled a series of first round wage hearings to give unions and other employee representatives an opportunity to explain their requests and present data and arguments to support their case. Each union was scheduled separately for these ap pearances. The technical staff of the classification division of the City Service Commission studied the various requests and analyzed them in the light of intercity and local wage comparisons, published wage data, union contracts, and information and data presented by city depart ments, citizens’ groups, and labor unions at Finance Committee hearings. On the basis of this analysis, the City Personnel Director and the Classification Division Supervisor proposed a tentative pay plan and changes in fringe benefits. City grants official recognition to labor unions Although city officials had not extended formal recognition to labor unions, the unions had been taking an increasing part in the process of establishing the city’s personnel policy. Not until early in 1959 did the city first officially sanction public employee unions. The action came after the 3,600 members of District Council 48, AFSCME, in a strike vote on December 2, 1958, authorized their executive board to call a strike if the city failed to meet union demands: a collective bargain ing contract, or, as a minimum, recognition of District Council 48 as bargaining representative in city depart ments where its members were in the majority; a 3% percent or a 7 cent-per-hour minimum wage increase; 4 weeks’ vacation after 20 years; and improved hospital coverage.1 The Common Council had voted a 2-percent salary increase with a minimum of 4 cents an hour,when it had approved the 1959 budget on November 20. The opinion of the City Attorney in 1959 was that the city could not authorize a contract.2 City officials believed that a strike could be averted if the Common Council approved a union recognition resolution. The Mayor, on November 28, had recommended that the aldermen consider passage of a resolution recognizing District Council 48 as a bargaining unit and make ad d itio n a l contributions for Blue Cross-Blue Shield coverage. District Council 48 officials were willing to recognize any other labor union representing a majority of the employees in their claims departments. The city’s approach to wage determination could be termed as the “prepared package” technique, similar in many respects to the positive elements of the system developed by the General Electric Company. This technique relied heavily on staff research and evaluation of all wage and fringe benefit data, job studies, and other methods in arriving at a complete detailed set of analyses and recommendations intended to answer all union requests. The intent was to preserve a highly unified and integrated wage and fringe benefit system. In a move to avoid a strike the Finance Committee on January 2, 1959, voted to recommend a cost-of-living wage adjustment and an increase in the city’s contribu tion for family hospital-surgical insurance coverage. The committee also agreed that it later would recommend a resolution granting formal recognition of labor unions and other employee groups. The possibility of a strike was eased when the bargaining committee of District Council 48 agreed to recommend that the membership accept the latest proposals. The union had altered its request on the wage increase and sought a cost-of-living Proposals, along with the special studies, were transmitted to the Finance Committee for its review and determination, culminating in a recommendation to the Common Council. In this process, a second round of individually scheduled wage hearings was held at which unions could support or rebut the staff recommenda tions and present further data and arguments. In some 6 increase in addition to the 2-percent increase voted by the Council on November 20. State Legislature passes Section 111.70 In the same year, the State Legislature passed the first p a rt o f Section 111.70, Wisconsin Statutes, that extended the right of collective bargaining to municipal employees in Wisconsin.l*3 (See appendix A.) This new statute conferred upon employees of local units of government the right to form and join labor organiza tions and to be represented by such labor organizations in conferences and negotiations with their municipal employers on questions of wages, hours, and conditions of employment. It also provided that such municipal employees would have the right to refrain from any and all such activities, if they so wished. A municipal employer was defined as any city, county, village, town, metropolitan sewerage district, school district or any other political subdivision of the State. Municipal employees were defined in the statute to include any employee of the municipality, except city and village policemen, sheriffs deputies, and county traffic officers. This statute, however, did not provide for any administrative or enforcement powers and there fore had little effect on existing labor relations in Mil waukee. Late in 1961, the Legislature amended Section 111.70 with the additions of subsections (l)(c) and (4) that provided a comprehensive labor relations code governing the conduct of municipal employer-employee relations. This broad new amendment, which became law on January 31, 1962, charged the Wisconsin Em ployment Relations Board (WERB)4 with the administra tion and enforcement of Section 111.70. The WERB was em powered to prevent prohibited labor practices, mediate disputes between municipal employees and their employers, conduct collective bargaining elections, and initiate factfinding when negotiations were deadlocked or when either party refused to meet and negotiate in good faith. This amendment also required the recording of negotiated settlements in the form of an ordinance, a resolution, or an agreement. Strikes by municipal employees were prohibited, although no enforcement machinery was set up for the no-strike provision. Sub sequently, the 1965 Legislature enacted subsection (5), which stated that any municipal employer could employ a labor negotiator to represent it in bargaining negotia tions. On January 6, the Common Council adopted the committee’s recommendation for (1) a monthly cost-ofliving increase of $2.25 effective in July if the Mil waukee Consumer Price Index rose by 1.1 points between May 1958 and May 1959 (the same increase as a year earlier) and (2) an additional city contribution of $2.08 a month toward the cost of family coverage by Blue Cross-Blue Shield insurance. Still to be settled was agreement on the pending union recognition resolution asked by the union. The main point of difference was a clause that would allow the union to review the working rules and regulations issued by city department and bureau heads. The union’s strike threat was finally ended on February 17, when the Common Council, after long debate, approved the union recognition resolution that was recommended by the Finance Committee. This re solution recognized the right of city employees to join broadly defined labor organizations of their own choice and to be represented in hearings before the Finance Committee and Common Council dealing with wages, hours, and conditions of employment. It also granted u n io n representatives exclusive time to make ap pearances before Finance Committee wage hearings and to be given time off with pay to appear at hearings. Salaries and fringe benefits would continue to be estab lished by ordinance and the Finance Committee would continue to act as a Labor Policy Committee. Employees were protected against arbitrary discipline, discharge, and layoff contrary to civil service. Labor organizations were given the privilege of continued dues check-off. An earlier provision requiring unions to file a statement of their membership strength was softened to make filing of such a report voluntary. Dropped from the resolution was a controversial requirement that department heads submit directives, orders, and rules to union representa tives in advance. This resolution put into writing what had been un written procedures previously followed by the Common Council and Finance Committee in dealing with city em ployees and their unions on wages, hours, working conditions. — FOO TN OTES— l ln 1957, District Council 48 had called off a threatened strike on November 11 when the Finance Committee agreed to the union’s request for further hearings on 1958 wage and fringe benefits. The city further agreed to consider the union’s proposed revisions in hearing procedures. The union proposed a “Labor Advisory Committee’’ to work under the Finance Committee and conduct complete hearings on a continuing basis. It also proposed that the city’s wage proposals submitted annual ly by the City Personnel Director and die Budget Supervisor be released to interested parties at least 30 days in advance of the public hearings on the budget. 7 and join labor unions and to encourage mutual understandings between the parties on matters relating to wages, hours, and conditions of employment. It stated that it was unfair labor practice for a governmental unit to interfere with employees in exercising their rights or to discourage membership in any labor organization by means o f discrimination in the hiring, tenure, or other conditions of employment. The bill denied employees the right to strike. It further provided that the parties could jointly petition the Wisconsin Employment Relations Board to appoint a conciliator to help resolve the dispute when collective con sideration failed. The feeling was that if the legislature had excluded police and firemen the Governor might have signed the bill. 4The WERB was established in 1937 to administer the Wisconsin Labor Relations Act adopted that year by the State legislature. 2 The City Attorney in November 1956 had given an opinion that the city could not enter into a collective bargaining agree ment with a labor union or agree to a union shop for city employees. The Common Council’s Finance Committee had asked for the opinion after District Council 48 made a request for a formal collective bargaining agreement as one o f several 1957 wage demands submitted to the Finance Committee earlier. The union wanted exclusive bargaining rights and a union shop in each city department and bureau where its members were in a majority. Other unions did not object to the idea of a written agreement but objected to the idea o f exclusive representation for the AFSCME. 3In 1951, the legislature had passed a bill, later vetoed by the Governor, declaring that it was the public policy of the State to promote better relationships between local units of govern ment and their employees by according them the right to form 8 1960 Developments In 1960, the Common Council adopted a completely new integrated pay plan for 1961 that covered nearly all em p lo y ees, including police and fire department uniformed personnel.1 This plan, recommended by the Finance Committee after a series of meetings with employee groups on 1961 wage requests, was the result of two studies.2 The first of these was made by the Public Administration Service (PAS); it covered classes in the top 10 pay ranges (24-33) of the old salary schedule. (See table 26.) The second study was conducted by the Classification Division; it involved classes allocated to the remaining pay ranges of the old plan (1-23). The resulting integrated salary plan included salary adjustments ranging from Oto 11 percent; the aver age was 4 percent. Union representatives agreed gener ally with the wage recommendations proposed by the City Personnel Director. Requests for general wage in creases submitted earlier by unions and by other em ployee groups had ranged from a cost-of-living adjust ment to a pay increase of 5 percent or $35 a month minimum asked by District Council 48. Chief objection to the new pay plan came from the Policemen’s Protec tive Association, which had asked for a salary range of $475 to $550 a month for patrolmen. Instead, the new plan provided a range of $445 to $527 a month, which amounted to an increase of approximately $31 a month for patrolmen. Pay raises for other police ranks ranged from about $14 to $18 a month. This new integrated pay plan, the first comprehensive revision in salary schedules since 1946, provided for 27 pay ranges with a spread of approximately 20 percent between the minimum and the maximum rates of each pay range, the maximum step being attained after 4 years of service. (See tables 27-29.) Each range included five different pay steps; increments were typically 4.5 percent above the previous step rate. In some cases, where wage data and prevailing practice strongly indicated the need for a narrower range, provision was made for new employees in selected classes to start above the minimum rate. Provisions for additional pay for fire and police classes that were characteristic of previous pay schedules were eliminated. The special factors that had necessitated such payments were considered to be reflected in the 1961 pay range allocations of these classes. In addition to the revised pay plan, the Common Council also approved recommendations to adopt a group life insurance program for all employees (except prevailing rate employees) and to increase shift dif ferential rates by 2-cents-an-hour, effective pay period 1, 1961. The unions and other employee groups also had asked for improved vacation, sick leave, and health and welfare benefits. Also included were requests for new longevity and terminal leave pay benefits. The Mil waukee Fire Fighters’ Association again requested reduction in their workweek from 63 to 56 hours. Garbage collectors strike On July 6, the city’s 340 garbage collectors, members of Local 1203 of District Council 48, went on strike to protest alleged inhumane working conditions.3 The union had submitted a list of working rules and depart mental regulations to the Commissioner of Public Works for discussion and was seeking a written agreement covering work rules. The City Attorney continued to maintain that such written agreements would be illegal. The strike ended on July 8, when the workers voted to accept the recommendation of their union bargaining committee that they return to work while a factfinding committee, as proposed by the Mayor and approved by the Common Council, investigated their grievances. -F O O T N O T E S - 1 Excluded were prevailing wage employees, “exempt” employees, and members of boards and commissions. These groups are not within scope of this report. 2The city had made a major revision of its pay plan in 1946, when it reduced the number o f pay ranges for 1947 from 65 to 37. All classes were allocated to three-step or five-step ranges as substitutes for flat rates and ranges up to seven steps. In general, clerical, administrative, and technical classes were placed in fivestep ranges; trades, labor, custodial, and public safety jobs were assigned to three-step ranges. During the intervening 13 years, the city had found it necessary to provide additional compensa tion for certain jobs and certain classes by means of footnotes to existing ranges and special provisions in the salary ordinance in order to maintain appropriate relationships and job differentials. By 1960, 18 separate footnotes and 14 separate paragraphs provided extra compensation for 121 different job classes and about 3,000 employees. This meant that the basic pay plan was no longer appropriate for 35 percent of all city employees and had to be amended with a variety of provisions to meet the needs of the service. 3The last strike of garbage collection workers in 1951 lasted one week. All other city strikes in the previous 20 years also included garbage department workers. The longest on record lasted for 31 days in November and December 1943. Brief strikes occurred in 1945 (twice), 1948, and 1950. 9 1961 Developments In accordance with the existing ordinance provisions, the City Personnel Director pointed out that there was no need to make any general salary adjustment based on the CPI as the index was up less than 0.6 of a point (from 128.9 in August 1960 to 129.2 in August 1961).1 No general wage adjustment was approved for 1962. Sick leave provisions for general employees were liberalized for 1962. Accumulation of 90 days at full pay was continued, and unlimited accumulation beyond 90 days was allowed at half pay. In connection with the Finance Committee’s 1962 budget hearings, the City Personnel Director reported that the most generous adjustment that could be supported would be approximately 2 percent; this analysis was based on surveys of wages and fringe benefits in 27 local firms and of 27 cities having a population of 400,000 or more. He further recom mended that it would probably be advisable to delay 1962 salary adjustments 6,9, or over 12 months until a 4 or 5 percent adjustment could be justified. Following the October 20 hearing, the executive director of District Council 48 declared that a wage adjustment was due and necessary and that unionized employees would push their demands for a salary boost. He further noted that the City Personnel Director’s report was not conclusive and that there appeared to be some area for bargaining. District Council 48 had requested an across-the-board pay hike of $15 a month, a contribution of 5-cents-an-hour per employee for the operation of a union-operated medical clinic, and other improved fringe benefits. City's cost-of-living adjustment machinery based on CPI City rejects union demands A factor provided by ordinance to be considered in the establishment of salaries for Milwaukee City em ployees was the Milwaukee Consumer Price Index, prepared by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Financed by the city. Two paragraphs in the 1961 salary ordinance read as follows: The Finance Committee’s proposed city budget for 1962 was presented formally to the Common Council at a public hearing on November 10; the committee recommended the rejection of the union’s pay and benefits requests. The executive director of District Council 48, in discussing the proposed budget at the hearings, charged that the Finance Committee had not acted in good faith by turning down requests for a general pay increase and other fringe benefits. He said that the union had bargained in good faith and had scaled down its requests to a 4 percent wage increase effective July 1, and a city contribution of 2%-cents-anhour to the union’s health and welfare fund for its Hoan Medical Center program. He served notice on the city that District Council 48 was calling a mass meeting of union employees to explain to the membership what had transpired in negotiations and to ask for further instruc tions from the members. “It is hereby declared to be the policy and intention of the Common Council that the rates of pay in this ordinance shall be flexible in character and subject to change annually in accordance with changes in the Consumers’ Price Index for Milwaukee prepared by the United States Department o f Labor. In future years monthly rates of pay shall be increased or decreased $2.25 or fractional part thereof for each point change in the Index for Milwaukee or fractional part thereof as of August 15 prior to the budget to be effective on the following January 1st. Where the index has not changed more than six-tenths of one point (.6) since the last an nounced change which was made effective under the terms of this ordinance, no change shall be made. The salaries of part-time members o f boards and commissions and em ployees whose compensation is determined in accordance with the prevailing wage as listed in the city salary ordinances, are excluded from these provisions.” “It is hereby declared to be the policy o f the Common Council that salary changes (either upward or downward) made other than related to the cost-of-living adjustment factor may be predicated on such additional factors of practical pay plan problems as recruitment, general increases in the standard o f living and the establishment of proper salary differentials between various classes of positions, as well as appraisals o f and changes in duties and responsibilities of various occupations.” Union employees at this meeting on November 13 instructed negotiators to seek additional bargaining meetings with the Finance Committee. They further voted that if negotiations did not result in an agreement on a wage increase, the bargaining committee should take “any and all actions they deem necessary in the best interests of the affiliated locals.” The executive director of District Council 48, in commenting on this motion, said that it was not a strike vote. 10 The union’s request to the Finance Committee chairman for a resumption of negotations was intro duced on the floor of the Common Council the follow ing day and then was referred to the Finance Com mittee. The Committee’s Chairman said that it was impossible to call a special meeting of the committee before the day on which the Common Council was scheduled to vote on the 1962 budget and that it would be handled at the next regularly scheduled meeting. The Common Council subsequently approved the 1962 city budget. Not a single amendment to grant a wage increase was introduced. The Finance Committee at its regularly scheduled meeting on the following week closed the door on further wage negotiations by voting unanimously to place the union’s request on file. 1Historically, the city’s policy of annual cost-of-living adjustments had originated in 1943, when a special committee representing the five major separate taxing units in Milwaukee County got together and worked out a uniform plan for an annual automatic cost-of-living adjustment based on a year-toyear change in the BLS Consumer Price Index for Milwaukee. The five taxing units included the city, the county, the school board, the Milwaukee Area Vocational School, and the Sewerage Commission. In 1954, because of a change in the base of the BLS index from 1935-39=100 to 1947-49=100, the salary ordinance formula was changed to provide for an automatic increase or decrease in monthly rates of $2.25 or fractional part thereof for each 1.0 index change or fractional part thereof between successive August 15’s and to become effective the following January 1. When the index had not changed more than 0.6 point, no change would be made. (See first paragraph of 1961 salary oridinance cited in text.) In 1952, after Milwaukee was not included in the revised sample of areas from compiling the National Consumer Price Index, the city contracted with the BLS for a continuation of an index for Milwaukee. In 1963, Milwaukee was included again the BLS sample of CPI cities. In 1954, a second paragraph also was added to the annual salary ordinance, the same as the second paragraph for 1961 cited in the text. Both paragraphs were included in the salary ordinances from 1955 through 1965. The effect o f the second paragraph was that the exact proportion of the cost-of-living adjustment to the total salary adjustment was not identified separately after 1955. 11 1962 Developments Subsections (1) (c) and (4) of Section 111.70, Wisconsin Statutes, became effective on February 7, 1962. (See appendix A.) This major amendment required municipal employers to bargain with duly certified or recognized bargaining agents of public employees’, mediation and factfinding were to be ad ministered by the Wisconsin Employment Relations Board (WERB). Passage in 1959 of the original Section 111.70, which had lacked administrative provisions, had not greatly affected labor relations during 1960 and 1961. W ER B hold first representation hearings for city em ployees During the spring and summer of 1962, the WERB held hearings on petitions from 13 labor organizations asking for certification as collective bargaining represen tatives of city employees. Requests for recognition as co llec tiv e bargaining agents submitted earlier in February to the Finance Committee by District Council 48, Local 125B, International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers, and the Professional Policemen’s Protective Association were refused. Petitions submitted later by several other unions were turned down also. In the course of the WERB hearings numerous questions arose involving overlapping claims of jurisdiction, claims involving the designation of craft employees under terms of the new law, and requests for determinations as to confidential and supervisory employees to be excluded from the proposed bargaining units. At the request of the Board and under instructions from the Finance Committee,1 the Personnel Department’s Classification Division prepared seven volumes of reports, tables, and related information for use by the WERB. By December 31,1962, the Board had not made any final determina tions. Question o f procedures snags wage hearing At the outset of the hearings begun on September 5, the Finance Committee chairman said that the com mittee would follow the same procedures as in the past. The committee, he added, would continue to get recom mendations and studies from the personnel department and would consider them along with requests from the unions before making a recommendation to the Common Council. He claimed that the procedure of holding public hearings at which union representatives were permitted to appear constituted collective bargain ing. This procedure, he said, was not altered by the new State law guaranteeing the right of collective bargaining to municipal employees. The executive director of District Council 48, on the other hand, contended that: such public hearings did not provide the proper procedural framework for true collec tive bargaining. The position of the union was that they could not permit the new State law to become a “mockery” by failing to insist on the give and take of across-the-table bargaining which was widely accepted in private labor-management relations. The executive direc tor argued that the committee should negotiate by submitting counteroffers. City hears union demands for 1963 The first hearing on wage requests for 1963 was held b efo re th e Finance Committee on September 5. Demands for wage increases covering general employees ranged from 4 to 8 percent. The biggest wage hike request was a flat 30-cents-an-hour (slightly more than 8 percent) by District Council 48, the city’s largest union, which claimed a membership of about 4,000 city em ployees. District Council 48 also asked for a contribu tion of 5-cents-ari-hour per employee toward a proposed union health plan, more liberal vacations, 4 hours call back pay instead of 2, increased night differential pay, extra pay for regularly scheduled work on weekends, double pay for unscheduled work on Sundays and holidays, longevity pay, terminal leave pay, and an improved hospital and surgical insurance contract. The Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Association, Local 215, asked that salaries for firefighters be made comparable to the average of salaries paid by New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, and Seattle and that on-duty hours be reduced from 63 to 56 hours a week. The Policemen’s Protective Association, speaking for Police Department employees, requested a 5-percent sal ary increase and a separate pay plan providing additional increases for some ranks. Also included was a request for the creation of 81 positions of corporal, an intermediate rank between the patrolman and sergeant ranks. 12 of wages and fringe benefits in 26 local firms and 27 major cities having a population of 400,000 or more. Union seeks recourse through W ER B On September 14, District Council 48 filed a com plaint with the WERB charging that the city engaged in unfair labor practices and asked the WERB to set up factfinding into the city’s practices.. The complaint said that on July 1, the District Council had asked the Common Council to reopen negotiations with the union on wage increases for 1963 and that its requests was turned down by the Finance Committee. The complaint further asked the WERB to order the city to negotiate with the District Council. A union spokesman said that, although the city had said in the fall of 1961 it had no money for 1962 wage increases, it later granted raises to skilled “prevailing wage” employees in the spring of 1962 to keep them in line with union scales paid in the building construction industry. The WERB, on October 15, dismissed the union’s complaint, ruling that the complaint, as well as its petition for factfinding, was filed prematurely. The Board chairman said that no election had been held to determine who would be the bargaining agent for city employees, and that the city had not recognized any union as bargaining agent for the city employees without an election. Traditional hearing procedures meet strong opposition City Personnel Director presents recommendations for 1963 In a meeting of the finance committee on October 24, the City Personnel Director presented his customary two-volume comprehensive report on wages and benefits for 1963 in response to the requests by the employee organizations. He reported that a 3 to 4.5 percent general pay increase would be reasonable for city employees in 1963. He recommended that if the city granted an increase approaching 4.5 percent, it would be desirable to use a one-step increase for each range in the pay plan. He also pointed out that a $4,275 a month salary rate increase would be warranted on the basis of the salary ordinance requirement for a change in rates of pay in accordance with the change in the Consumer Price Index for Milwaukee. The City Personnel Director further suggested elimin ating some paid holidays, noting that city employees received 11 to 13 holidays, which greatly exceeded the number provided in private industry. He also recom mended the elimination of all paid lunch periods, the end of the practice of paying city employees who were union officials while these officials were on union business, and elimination of the practice of providing 2weeks’ pay by the city in addition to military pay for annual military training tours. The City Personnel Direc tor’s recommendations were based on the city’s surveys 13 The Finance Committee concluded its pay hearings on Wednesday, November 7, in a stalemate over collective bargaining procedures with District Council 48. The union demanded that the committee state what its recommendations would be so that the union, in turn, could make a counteroffer. The union claimed that the law required the city to bargain. The committee chairman replied that the committee, as in the past, could not make an offer and would not arrive at a conclusion until after the wage hearings were over. He said the committee would recommend pay changes to the Common Council in time for a public hearing on the budget and that the union had the right to make objec tio n s a t th a t tim e . Because of the procedural disagreement the committee and the union failed to dis cuss the 1963 wage recommendations of the City Personnel Director. A 1963 wage adjustment of one salary increment (averaging 4.48 percent) was recommended on No vember 8 by the Finance Committee. In other action, the committee recommended elimination of Columbus Day and Washington’s Birthday as holidays for general em ployees hired in the future. Present general employees would be given 2 extra days off with pay in lieu of the two holidays dropped. In addition, the committee re commended the creation of 90 positions of corporal in the Police Department. These posts would be filled by men performing the duties of acting desk sergeants and acting detectives and would receive $25 a month more than patrolmen. At the public hearing on the 1963 budget before the Common Council on November 9, the executive director of District Council 48 contended that the new State law required “conferences and negotiations” between the city and employee unions. The hearings held by the Finance Committee, he said, were not negotiations. He requested a joint meeting with the committee and with three other unions before the budget was adopted on November 20. The other unions joining in the request were the Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Association, Local 125-B of the International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers, and Local 311 of the International Union of Operating Engineers. City agrees to "confer and negotiate" on advice of City Attorney The Common Council on Tuesday, November 13, acting on advice of the City Attorney’s office, ordered (4) an increase in shift differential pay of 2 and 3 cents an hour; (5) 3 hours’ call-in pay; and (6) other minor changes. its Finance Committee to “confer and negotiate” with the unions representing city employees and to reconsider its previous recommendations for a wage increase, elim ination of holidays, and reclassifications. Following this meeting the committee chairman announced that a meeting of the committee was scheduled for Friday morning, November 16. Spokesmen for District Council 48 and Local 125-B accused the committee of breaking off negotiations with a compromise in sight. A member of the committee replied that the committee had negotiated in good faith and that a settlement could not be reached. He added that the committee had to act immediately, because the 1963 budget had to be approved by the Common Council on the following Tuesday, November 20. The executive director of District Council 48 when called a general meeting of his union for Monday, November 19, for ratification or rejection of the wage offer. The first formal bargaining session ever held between the aldermen and union representatives in Milwaukee took place on Friday, November 16, when 17 union representatives met with the Common Council’s Finance Committee. After more than 12 hours of negotiations, the city raised its wage offer to a 4 percent general wage increase. The Finance Committee, had earlier withdrawn its original recommendations for a 4.48 percent increase. It also offered to restore all but one-half day of holiday time and to provide an increase of 2-cents-an-hour in shift differential pay for second and third shifts. The union earlier in the day had rejected the city’s first offer of a 3 lA percent wage hike and the elimination of 5-3/4 holidays. District Council 48 modified its wage demands to a raise of 20-cents-an-hour for some employees and 28 cents for others (average of 7 to 8 percent). Initially the union had sought a flat 30-cents-an-hour increase. The unions also withdrew demands for longevity pay and terminal leave pay. They also offered to withdraw a request for 5-cents-an-hour in health benefits if the city would pick up the increased cost of health insurance the following year. City closes wage negotiations over District Council 48 objections A request by District Council 48 to reopen 1963 wage negotiations was rejected unanimously on Monday, November 19, by the Finance Committee. At a mass meeting later that night District Council 48 members passed a resolution authorizing the bargaining committee to take any action necessary to reopen negotiations. Included in the resolution was a rejection of the city’s proposals that holidays be reduced by 2% days, that overtime pay be reduced from 1.56 to time and one-half for some job categories, and that no reallocations be granted. The union’s bargaining committee earlier had accepted the city’s pay proposal of a 4.48 percent increase. On Tuesday morning, November 20, District Council 48 sought a writ of mandamus to compel the city to resume negotiations and a temporary restraining order to keep the Council from passing the budget later the same day in its proposed form. The circuit court judge, to whom the union’s application was assigned that morn ing, refused to sign on the basis that the Common Council had discretionary powers to reopen negotiations and that the court should not force it to do something it had a legal option to refuse. A request to the WERB asking for mediation also was made by the union, but the city refused to join in the request. Later that same day the council adopted the 1963 budget and the Finance Committee’s proposed wage and fringe package with one exception. Referred back to the Finance Committee was a proposal to establish a uniform time and one-half (1.5) premium overtime rate for all employees. Other union demands, for double time for unsched uled and holiday work, 4 hours call-in pay instead of 2, time and one-quarter for all rotating shift work and Saturday and Sunday work, and numerous requests for reallocation of jobs were rejected by the committee. The committee also turned down requests by police for pay increased beyond 4 percent and a request by firemen for a cut in their workweek from 63 to 60 hours. Fire Fighters’ Local 215 initially had sought a reduction to 56 hours. Finance committee recommendations opposed by two unions Early on Saturday November 17, the committee recommended a one-step pay boost in 1963, after the city and two unions reached a stalemate over wage issues in an 18 hour bargaining session that ended at 3:25 a.m. that morning. The committee also recommended (1) elimination of two and a half holidays, with present employees getting 2 other days off instead; (2) approval of 90 positions of police corporal to start July 1, 1963; (3) rejection of job reallocation requests by the unions; Joint policy and technical committees reestablished During the year a Policy Committee of the five major 14 Milwaukee area taxing units was reestablished, with representation from the city, county, School Board, Vocational School, and Sewerage Commission.2 The committee’s objective was to find ways of providing greater uniformity in wages and fringe benefits paid to public employees by essentially the same taxpayers. A Technical Committe also was formed with represen tation from the taxing units. The City Personnel Director and the Classification Supervisor represented the city on this latter committee. Written reports were made by the Technical Committee transmitting a fringe benefit summary, salary data and definitions for seven “benchmark jobs,” salary data from local industry, and recommendations for better coordination on wage increases among the five units. Both committees decided to continue meeting and exchanging information in 1963. FOOTNOTES 1A resolution designating the Finance Committee as the offi cial Labor Policy Committee for the city was approved by the Common Council in March. The resolution noted the need for such a body to deal with the new law giving municipal em ployees collective bargaining rights. Under terms o f the resolu tion, the Committee would represent the city in matters and hearings before the WERB. tatives was referred to as the Policy Committee and the other as the Technical Committee. When work of the Technical Com mittee was completed, it resulted in an annual cost-of-living salary adjustment (COLA) plan based on a year-to-year change in the BLS Consumer Price Index for Milwaukee. This plan was accepted by the legislative bodies of the various units and became effective August, 1943. In 1953, the Technical Committee was reestablished to alter the COLA formula to conform to the BLS index change from 1935-39=100 to 1947-49=100. During the next 2 years the five units discontinued their cost-of-living adjustment plans. The city dropped the plan effective in 1956. In September 1956, the five units agreed to reconvene the Technical Committee to coordi nate salary increases for their employees. Public officials saw a “whipsaw” effect take place when one of the units granted a salary increase or additional benefits. 2 A committee representing the five major over-lapping taxing units operating within the city limits was first established in 1942. On August 6, 1942 the Director of the Milwaukee Vocational School proposed that a committee o f representatives from the city, county, Sewerage Commission, School Board, and Board of Vocational and Adult Education study the question of salary adjustments for public employees. One group of represen 15 1963 Developments by m id-Septem ber. Preliminary negotiations were scheduled tentatively for July and final hearings in September. The committee chairman said the earlier deadlines would allow certified unions time for fact finding if negotiations were deadlocked. The year 1963 was a significant year in city labor re lations, since it was Milwaukee’s first full year of experience in formal negotiations with certified unions under the provisions of Section 111.70 o f the State Statutes. W ER B holds representation elections for city employees Initial union demands listed Representation elections conducted by the WERB on March 27 and 28 among Department of Public Works employees resulted in certification in April and May of six bargaining agents to represent 3,404 employees in the various bureaus of the Department of Public Works (See appendix B.) These included the following: (1) Local 17, Building Service Employees International Union (AFL-CIO); (2) City of Milwaukee Garbage Collection Laborers Independent Local Union; (3) Local 195, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (AFL-CIO); (4) Local 494, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (AFL-CIO); (5) Local 125-B, Inter national Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers (AFL-CIO); (6) Milwaukee District Council 48 (and its appropriate affiliated locals) American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFL-CIO). On December 16, two more representation elections were held; one among fireboat pilots and marine engi neers, and the other among fire alarm dispatchers in the Fire Department. Bargaining agents subsequently certi fied for these employees included: (1) Uniformed Pilots and Marine Engineers Association, Local 1037, Inter national Association of Fire Fighters (AFL-CIO); and (2) Local 494, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (AFL-CIO). On October 16, the Milwaukee Fire Fighters Association Local 215, International Associ ation of Fire Fighters (AFL-CIO), was granted recog nition by Common Council resolution to represent n ea rly all other nonsupervisory Fire Department employees.1 (See appendix B.) On May 15, District Council 48, the city’s largest union, presented the Common Council with a demand for a 7 percent general wage increase with a minimum increase of 20-cents-an-hour. In addition to the wage increase demand, the union demanded the following fringe benefits: (1) Improved vacation schedule to provide 3 weeks after 8 years of service, 4 weeks after 15 years, and 5 weeks after 25 years. (2) Unlimited accumulation of sick leave. (3) A differential of 15-cents-an-hour for second-shift workers and 20 cents for third-shift workers (4 cents more on both shifts). (4) Payment by the city of the full cost of medical and surgicial insurance premiums, including major medical insur ance premiums, and elimination of the $25 deductible feature for hospital admissions. (5) Double time pay for all unscheduled work on Saturdays and Sundays. (6) A maximum o f 1 year disability leave at full pay for each duty-incurred injury. Local 125-B of the International Brotherhood of Fire men and Oilers submitted similar demands. Another demand coming from the Garbage Collection Laborers Independent Union was that garbage collection laborers be moved up three pay ranges—from a range of $393 to $464 a month to $445 to $527. They also asked for an added 25-cents-an-hour in addition to the re quested reallocation and $5 a month longevity pay for each 5 years of service, up to a maximum of $25 a month. Local 215 of the Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Associ ation presented a demand for a $50 a month pay increase for all fire personnel up to the rank of Deputy Chief. Another request was for cash overtime pay for all hours worked in excess of 2,000 a year, and a cut in the firefighter’s workweek from 63 to 56 hours. In addition, a request was made for 4 weeks’ vacation after 10 years’ service instead of 3 weeks, and for 5 weeks’ vacation after 15 years. The association also demanded (1) city payment of all, rather than half, of health insurance City prepares for 1963 negotiations Early in the spring, the city began making arrange ments for 1963 negotiations, when the Finance Commit tee set May 15, instead of June 15 as in the past, as the deadline for the Common Council to receive wage and fringe benefit requests for 1964 from unions and other employee groups. The committee, at the same time, "suggested starting wage negotiations early so that pay recommendations could be sent to the Common Council 16 pertaining to uniformity and equal treatment of employees” were involved. The committee claimed it was bound to include this provision because the State budget law required uniform pay rates for similar positions in city government. The two union groups and the committee agreed to meet separately on August 16 to arrive at a bargaining procedure. The matter of separate bargaining was settled when the Common Council, on August 1, approved a resolu tion outlining procedures for the Finance Committee to follow that provided for the following alternatives: (1) joint negotiations and conferences for the certified unions; or, (2) separate negotiations and conferences, but in the interest of uniformity and equal treatment of employees, the committee would have the right to require joint conferences and negotiations of all certified unions; or (3) the committee might confer and negotiate with one or more certified unions at time but would only submit responses on a uniform basis respecting wages, hours, and conditions of employment. Bargaining talks resumed on August 16, when the five AFL-CIO unions met with the Finance Committee. The u n io n s submitted several proposals on bargaining procedures that called for annual labor negotiations starting by June 1, every possible attempt for reaching a “good faith” agreement by July 15, the right to “sepa rate and uninterrupted negotiations” for all certified unions, agreements to be put in writing and signed by both parties, and excuses with full pay to attend nego tiations during working hours for union representatives working for the city. costs; (2) longevity pay with a maximum of $54 a month; and (3) terminal leave pay equal to half the employee’s accumulated sick leave accumulation. The Professional Policemen’s Protective Association requested the Common Council to increase the mini mum salary of patrolmen from $464 a month to $600 in 1964. Increases also were requested for higher level police officers to maintain current pay differentials. A shift differential for late shift work was requested as well as a larger extra payment for motorcycle officers. The as sociation also renewed its demand for a $125 yearly clothing allowance for detectives. Later in May, the Police Chief requested a one-step pay increase for almost all Police Department personnel in addition to any general pay raise given general employees. Other requests were submitted by Local 195, Inter national Brotherhood of Electrical Workers; by Local 17, Building Service Employees’ Union; and by several uncertified employee groups. Earlier negotiations scheduled for 1963 The Finance Committee, on May 29, voted to begin negotiations with certified employee unions in July and also start hearings for other employee groups and the general public at the same time. In past years wage hearings were not started until September. Early in July, the City Personnel Director announced that on July 22 the Finance Committee would hear petitions from civic groups, department heads, and employee groups not certified as officials bargaining agents. July 23 was reserved to hear petitions from employee groups for whom WERB certification was pending. Representatives of certified unions were scheduled to appear on July 26. Pay demand for city employees on union negotiating teams slows talks Virtually all of the requests were rejected by the city negotiators. The committee’s chairman said that many of the union’s proposals could not be made binding beyond the election of a new Common Council the following spring. He added that labor matters were negotiated on an annual basis. He also argued that the committee had decided not to pay employees while they a tte n d e d b arg ain in g sessions. Union spokesmen contended that union representatives should not lose pay and that the city’s refusal to pay was unfair and discriminatory since city officials were paid for nego tiations. If union representatives were not to be paid, meetings should be held after working hours so the union negotiators would not suffer any loss in pay. Until 1962, the city paid workers for time lost in wage hearings. The current sessions were expected to take much longer, because the unions were officially certified as bargaining agents, and many city employees might be Procedural problem s arise at outset o f negotiations On July 26, the Finance Committee, acting as the Labor Policy Committee, met for the first time with the six employee unions that had been certified as official bargaining agents under Section 111.70. The all-day session ended in nearly a complete deadlock on proce dures. The committee’s proposal that all union represen tatives negotiate as a panel on wage matters and fringe benefits was rejected immediately. District Council 48 and the other four AFL-CIO affiliated unions agreed to meet as a panel if the Garbage Collection Laborers Independent Union were excluded, and the latter organi zation took the same position.2 Later, the committee proposed an alternative plan which both union groups tentatively agreed to accept. The proposal called for separate negotiations up to a point where in the committee’s judgement, “matters 17 District Council 48 had filed a petition asking the circu court to review the WERB’s certification of the Indepe; dent Union. The circuit court on September 5 dismissed tt petition filed by District Council 48 and upheld th election of the Milwaukee Garbage Collection Laborei Independent Local Union to represent garbage collectio laborers. On September 17, the WERB threw out th city’s motion seeking dismissal of the complaint mad by the Independent Union, stating that an appeal of th circuit court’s ruling to the State Supreme Court b; District Council 48 did not constitute an automatic sta] of the Board’s certification of the Garbage Collectioi Laborers Union. The city and Independent Union wen given 1 week to work out their differences on a time fo negotiations-with or without pay for union represen tatives. If an agreement could not be reached, a hearing on the union’s complaint would be rescheduled. Such 2 hearing scheduled for September 25 had been postponed by the WERB chairman.3 involved, since each union could determine the size of its bargaining committee according to its own needs. In reply to the unions’ requests for a written and signed agreement,,the committee’s chairman said that the city would implement its agreements by the passage of ordinances as provided under the State law. However, the committee also would give consideration to an alternative union proposal that the committee pass resolutions spelling out the agreements reached. When the 3-hour session adjourned about 12:40 p.m., the next meeting was set tentatively for September 6 or 7, but no time was mentioned. The executive director of District Council 48 said his union group was not pre pared to meet on basic bargaining issues until the question of pay for negotiating time was settled. The issue of pay for negotiating time also resulted in the late appearance of representatives of the Garbage Collection Laborers Union who appeared at the City Hall for a meeting at 3:30 p.m. No committee members were present. The union’s attorney had requested a 3:30 session, but was informed that the committee would hear the union’s requests at 11 a.m. They showed up at the later time anyway, contending that they were off work then and could meet without losing pay. The attorney for the union said he would send a telegram to the committee chairman offering to meet on weekdays after 3:30 p.m. or on Saturdays, at the committee’s choice. Garbage Union asks W E R B City and unions resolve paid negotiating time roadblocks The next negotiating session with the five AFL-CIO unions took place on September 5 at 7:30 p.m. Repre sentatives of the Garbage Collection Laborers Union were not invited. The chairman of the Finance Com mittee said that the Independent Union would have to make the first move in asking for another meeting. In a 5 hour session, a tentative agreement was reached that the city would pay for one representative from each of the AFL-CIO certified locals or unions4 for time off the job while attending 1964 wage negotiations. The unions earlier had asked that two employees from each local or union be paid. Still unsettled was a union request for an exception to this plan in certain cases involving reallo cations of entire job classifications. The unions conceded that the most workable method would be for the committee to take the initiative in setting the time and place of meetings, but added that the committee would have to accept the fact that it would be impossible for the unions to meet at certain times. The agreement was approved by the Finance Committee in a subsequent negotiating meeting on September 18, when it also decided to hold a meeting the following week with the Garbage Collection Laborers Union to discuss the issue of pay for union negotiators.5 The matter finally was settled on September 27, when the Common Council adopted a resolution spec ifying that one representative from each bargaining unit be paid his regular base salary for time spent in confer ence and negotiations during working hours. The to settle meeting time dispute L a t e r , th e Garbage Collection Laborers Union accused the city of refusal to bargain and notified the WERB that it intended to file charges. In a letter to the WERB chairman, the union noted that 4 days had elapsed since it had sent a telegram to the Finance Committee asking that negotiations take place on weekends or after 3:30 p.m. on weekdays. On August 23, the union filed a formal complaint with the WERB, charging that the city refused to meet on August 16, to respond to a request to meet, and to meet separately. The complaint said the city had changed a long estab lished practice of permitting employee representatives to attend wage hearings during normal working hours with full pay. The union asked the Board to order the city to meet separately and either pay employees or to conduct meetings during off-hours. On August 29, the city filed a motion with the WERB asking for a dismissal of the union’s complaint. The city alleged that the Garbage Collection Laborers Union was not entitled legally to file a complaint or even partici pate in wage negotiations. The motion noted that 18 Finance Committee would set times for conferences and negotiations, but provision was made for changing this time schedule when it was inconvenient to the union representatives. Finance Committee presents city's final offer Following a week of additional negotiating sessions the Finance Committee on Friday, November 15, made a final counterproposal to be accepted or rejected on Monday, November 18, and said that if the unions rejected it, the committee would recommend that the Common Council adopt the initial proposal of October 29. During the course of these negotiations District Council 48 reduced its previous demand for a 6 percent pay raise to 5 xk precent. The union also agreed to a city proposal that employees get 4-week vacations after 20 years instead of after 25 and dropped its demand for a fifth week after 25 years. The union rejected the com mittee’s proposal to switch certain holidays for other off-days. It had not requested any change in holiday provisions. No agreement was reached on the union’s demand for reallocations of jobs. The city’s final counterproposal on November 15 included the following major provisions: Negotiations commence on substantive issues The first negotiating session devoted to substantive issues took place on October 1, when representatives of District Council 48 and of Local 125-B, International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers, renewed their 1964 requests for a 7 percent general wage increase and improved fringe benefits.6 Between October 1 and November 7, the Finance Committee met from time to time with one or the other of the certified and uncertified unions. On October 29, the committee made its first major offer—a 3 percent general wage increase—which, after considerable nego tiations, was rejected by the certified unions. In separate bargaining sessions on November 4, the Professional Policemen’s Protective Association and the Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Association also rejected the city’s offer. The policemen held to their demand for job reallocations that would raise the starting salary for patrolmen from $464 to $600 a month. The firemen offered a counterproposal, unsatisfactory to the com mittee, to reduce their pay increase demand from $50 a month to $35. On November 5, the Finance Committee turned down a request by District Council 48 and Local 125-B that a WERB mediator be called in to help resolve the stalemate in negotiations. The committee flatly rejected the latest demand of the two unions for a 6 percent across-the-board wage increase; it held firm to its original offer of a 3 percent raise. The issue of job reallo cations also remained unresolved. (1) A general wage increase o f 3 percent for 1964; (2) A fourth week of vacation after 20 rather than after 25 years o f service for general employees; (3) An additional payment of $2.70 toward the employee’s share o f the family hospital care insurance payment; (4) A change in the holiday schedule for general employees (a) to eliminate Lincoln’s Birthday and Veteran’s Day and substitute in lieu thereof the last working days before Christmas and New Year’s Day; (b) to provide three additional “off-days” in lieu o f election days heretofore treated as holidays for employees on the payroll as of January 1,1964; and (c) to recognize the Friday before Memorial Day and July 4 as paid holidays when these days fell on Saturday; (5) A 10 cent-an-hour weekend shift differential to employ ees regularly employed on any of the three daily shifts on weekends. Firefighters were excluded; (6) Free influenza shots; (7) A provision for $60,000 in the 1964 budget, to begin implementation of the Gage-Babcock Report providing a plan for institution o f a 56 hour week for firefighters; (8) A variety o f other benefits, including clothing allowances and city absorption of any additional cost of group life insurance. Representatives of Local 195, IBEW, and of Local 17, BSEIU, in a bargaining session on November 6, asked the Finance Committee to up its 1964 pay raise offer from 3 percent to 4 percent. The bridge tenders, represented by Local 195, originally had asked for a 20-cent-an-hour increase. Natatorium workers, represented by Local 17, had asked for a AlA percent increase. Unions reject final city offer On November 8, a public hearing on the budget was held in accordance with Section 65.04 (7) of the Wisconsin Statutes that requires a public hearing on the budget not later than November 10. The proposed budget was incomplete, because a final determination of proposed wage increases for 1964 had not been made. However, the proposed budget did include a possible amendment that provided $1,710,000 to cover a 3 percent general wage increase which had been included in the city’s offer of October 29. This final counterproposal by the city was rejected by all the major unions on November 18. Mediation was proposed by District Council 48 and Local 125-B, but the city rejected the proposal because of the November 20 statutory deadline for adoption of the city budget. The committee also rejected consideration of a last minute union counteroffer, because it would have pro longed negotiations. District Council 48 offered to accept a 3 percent general increase, if the full family premium of Blue Cross-Blue Shield was paid and if 19 money earmarked for an unwanted change in holidays was used to grant certain reallocation of positions. The other certified AFL-CIO unions joined District Council 48 in the counteroffer. City joins major unions in requesting factfinding City truckdrivers belonging to Local 33 returned to work on November 27. On November 26, the Common Council unanimously approved a resolution in which it joined the unions in petitioning the WERB for fact finding. The approved resolution did not call for binding factfinding but recognized “a strong moral obligation ----- upon all parties to give consideration to any recommendation of a responsible' factfinder designated under law by the WERB” . The WERB on December 12 found that all conditions precedent to factfinding existed and ordered that fact finding be initiated pursuant to Section 111.70(4). The three-man panel appointed by the WERB held its first public hearing on December 16. By order of the WERB the petitions of the following labor organizations were consolidated for the purpose of hearings before the fact finding panel appointed by the Board: Major unions apply to W ER B for factfinding Following the city’s rejection of the final counter offer by the unions the executive director of District Council 48 said he would submit a request for fact finding to the WERB for his certified locals and for Local 125-B of the International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers. The Professional Policemen’s Pro tective Association also indicated it would ask for fact finding as did the Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Association. (1) City of Milwaukee Garbage Collection Laborers Indepen dent Local Union; (2) Milwaukee District Council 48 (and its appropriate affil iated locals), American Federation o f State County and Municipal Employees (AFL-CIO); (3) Milwaukee Fire Fighters Association, Local 215, Inter national Association of Fire Fighters (AFL-CIO); (4) The Professional Policemen’s Protective Association of Milwaukee. Truckdrivers stop work On November 19, about 240 city truckdrivers rep resented by Local 33 of District Council 48 began a 1 week work stoppage that idled about 1,200 other city employees and halted garbage and rubbage collection.7 On November 20, the Common Council adopted by resolution and incorporated in its budget for 1964 the terms of the Finance Committee’s final counterproposal submitted to the unions on November 18. Local 125-B, International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers withdrew its petition for factfinding before December 12. — F O O TN O TES— lrThe association earlier in 1963 had petitioned WERB to conduct an election. The resolution followed the findings of the Board concerning the eligible employees in the bargaining unit. 2 Local 1203 of District Council 48 had represented garbage collection laborers prior to 1963. Early in 1963, the local presi dent, in a feud with the Executive Director of Council 48, led a bolt and formed the Milwaukee Garbage Collection Laborers Independent Local Union. Later the independent union won the 1963 certification election 175 to 102. 3The State Supreme Court on March 31, 1964 upheld the WERB’s administrative authority to certify the Independent Union as bargaining representative for garbage workers. 4 Representatives from each of the recognized locals of District Council 48, in addition to a representative from Local 125-B, International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers; Local 195, International Brotherhood o f Electrical Workers; Local 17, Building Service Employees Union; and Local 494, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. 5At this same meeting, Local 195 o f the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and Local 17 o f the Building Service Employees Union notified the committee that they were withdrawing from the panel of AFL-CIO negotiators. The attor ney for the two unions said they were withdrawing because of delays resulting from a disagreement between the committee and District Council 48. He added they would ask to negotiate separately and would notify the committee when they would be available to meet. 6 Information for use by the Labor Policy Committee in negotiations was contained in a report prepared by the Personnel D epartm ent, This report contained recommendations for changes in wages and fringe benefits based on (1) a survey of wages and fringe benefits practices in 27 cities having a population o f 400,000 or more, and (2) an analysis of surveys conducted by the Bureau o f Labor Statistics o f private employers in the Milwaukee area. In addition to the Bureau’s regular annual area occupational wage survey, the city contracted with BLS to conduct a special survey of private employers having 500 or more employees. The special BLS survey implemented a recommendation of the Policy Committee of the five taxing units in the hope that the information from such a survey would provide the units with a more useful and common basis upon which to conduct wage negotiations with their employee organizations. The latter survey replaced the survey of local industry previously conducted by the city in alternate years. 7 Local 33 truck drivers reported to work every morning, then left to attend union meetings. 20 1964 Developments Factfinding by the panel appointed by the WERB with regard to the deadlock in negotiations of wages and fringe benefits adopted by the city for 1964 continued throughout most of the year. Public hearings were held on February 11 and 18, after the initial hearings on December 16, 1963. Further hearings were held on March 10 and 11. The task o f the panel was to determine why the unions and the city had reached an impasse and how it could be resolved. The demand of the unions raised a number o f both economic and noneconomic issues. The economic issues included demands (a) for a general wage increase and for new or improved fringe benefits greater than those placed in effect by the city on January 1, 1964 and (b) for correction of alleged gross inequities affecting particular jobs. The major noneconomic issues were demands for a written contract, an agency shop, and m o d ific a tio n o f the existing grievance and arbitration procedures. W ER B increases of 15 cents an hour each year. Other major bargaining goals listed by District Council 48 included time and one-half pay for regularly scheduled Saturday and Sunday work; full payment by the city of hospital-surgical care; terminal leave pay amounting to one-half the accumulated sick leave at retirement, to a maximum of 45 days pay; a second-shift differential of 5 percent and a third-shift differential of 7 percent; a vacation program calling for 2 weeks after 1 year oi service, 3 weeks after 5 years, 4 weeks after 12 years, and 5 weeks after 20 years; double time for all unscheduled (overtime) work on weekends and holidays; and restoration of the holiday schedule in effect as of 1962 with all holidays guaranteed. The union also asked for a reduction of service between increments from 1 year to 6 months, making it possible for an employee to reach the top of his pay range in 2 years instead of 4 years; for the accumulation of vacation time, but not more than 1 week a year for a maximum of 10 weeks; and sick leave pay for employees covering absences when family members were ill. The Professional Policemen’s Protective Association requested an increase from $478 to $625 a month in the minimum salary for patrolmen. A 40-hour week and a special pay schedule were requested by Local 215, Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Association. Among other certified unions Local 17, BSEIU requested a 3-year con tract with a 5-percent wage increase each year; Local 195, IBEW, asked for a reallocation of bridgetenders to raise minimum salaries from $5,080 a year to $5,500 plus a 7-percent general increase for all employees; the Staff Nurses’ Council asked for the reallocation of nurses and public health nurses to hijgher pay categories; and Local 125-B, IBFO, requested a 15-cents-per-hour increase. The Garbage Collection Laborers Union re quested reallocation of garbage collectors to raise their pay from $ 4 ,7 1 6 a year to $ 5 ,5 6 8 , plus a 2 5 -c en t-an -h o u r across-the-board increase. Other requests were submitted by the Association of Graduate and Registered Engineers, Milwaukee Government Service League, City and County Public Service E m ployees U nion, and Association of Scientific Personnel. conducts representation elections in non-DPW departments On April 22, the WERB conducted representation elections for approximately 1,100 employees in 11 non-DPW departments. Four unions, including District Council 48 and three smaller unions, won representation for about 900 employees. The smaller unions were the Association of Physicians and Dentists, the Association of Scientific Personnel, and the Staff Nurses Council of the Milwaukee Health Department. (See appendix B.) District Council 48 won representation for about 700 more employees, most of them in the Public Library, the Public Museum, the Department of Building Inspection and Safety Engineering, and in the Tax Department. Unions submit demands for 1965 Fifteen unions and other organizations representing city employees submitted 1965 wage and fringe benefit requests by the May 15 deadline. These requests included demands for general pay increases ranging from 4 to 7 percent, 2 and 3-year contracts, the reallocation of jobs to higher pay ranges, new and more liberal fringe benefits, and impartial arbitration of grievances. District Council 48, which now officially represented about 3,600 workers, asked for a 2-year contract with Prolonged factfinding delays negotiations for 1965 An early starting date for negotiations, as in July 1963, became impossible when the factfinding panel 21 p.m . on Friday. Further unsuccessful negotiating sessions took place on November 11 and 12. failed to make its recommendations for 1964 and scheduled further public hearings for July 15 and 16. Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Local 215 was the only one of the four unions engaged in factfinding which asked the city to begin negotiations, regardless of whether the panel had returned its recommendations for 1964. Representatives of the other three unions engaged in factfinding wanted to start 1965 talks as soon as possible, but not until recommendations for 1964 had been received and a settlement had been reached. Factfinders about ready to release recommendations In a statement on November 11, the factfinding panel announced it had reached unanimous agreement on tentative recommendations for settling the 1964 dispute and that its report would be released early the following week. On November 12, it was reported that the 12 member bargaining team for District Council 48 and some members of the Finance Committee would meet on Friday morning, November 13, in Madison with the chairman of the 3-member factfinding panel. Since it was believed that the panel’s forthcoming report might possibly involve some suggestions for 1965, it was felt that an agreement could be reached easily on 1965 demands if the panel’s recommendations were known. City appoints City Personnel Director as chief negotiator In September, the Common Council, in preparation for negotiations with certified unions, designated the City Personnel Director to serve as the city’s first chief negotiator. In past years, negotiations and wage hearings had been held before the entire Finance Committee. Negotiations were open to the public but both sides met secretly to establish positions. The Common Council, in a policy statement, said that the Finance Committee would set guidelines for the chief negotiator and would co n fer frequently with him on the progress of negotiations. The committee would reserve the right to negotiate directly. Final decisions on all wage and labor matters would continue to be made by the Common Council. On November 10, the Common Council held a public hearing on the 1965 budget; however, the preliminary budget did not include the projected cost of wages and other benefits for employees. It was announced that a public hearing on wages and benefits would be held before November 16, when the budget was scheduled to be adopted. The Council had moved the budget adoption deadline up 4 days from the statutory requirement of November 20. Very little hard bargaining had taken place before November 10. The unions accused the city of stalling and waiting to see what the factfinders would recommend for 1964. The Finance Committee chairman said that the city’s last offer included a general wage proposal of about 3 percent. He added that the city was negotiating on the basis of that offer until the factfinders returned their recommenda tions for 1964 and settlements were reached for 1964. The city, he said, had conducted negotiations on 1965 demands on the assumption that what had been offered employees for 1964 was right. The director of District Council 48 demanded that the city present his union with a proposal by 3 p.m. on Friday, November 13. If the city didn’t make an offer that could be presented for ratification, his members, he said, would take appropriate action at a mass meeting called for 4 City reaches agreement with District Council 48 for 1965 Following a 7-hour mediation session on Friday, November 13, the chairman of the factfinding panel announced that representatives of the city and District Council 48 had reached an agreement providing for a 3-percent-wage increase with a minimum raise of $12.50-a-month for 1965. The agreement also called for the city to pay the full cost of Blue Cross-Blue Shield insurance for single coverage and $3 of the $6 monthly premium paid by the employee for family coverage. The city also agreed to pay the full cost of family coverage beginning July 1965. In addition, the city agreed to establish a fund of $150,000 to correct wage inequities for District Council 48 and an additional $180,000 for the other certified unions. City offers District Council 48 terms for 1965 to other unions The Finance Committee submitted the terms of this agreement later that same night to the representatives of eight other certified unions in a meeting at City Hall. Fire Fighters’ Local 215 also was offered a 56-hourwork-week effective July 1, 1965, in addition to a 3-percent pay increase. On November 16, the Common Council adopted a 1965 budget which included a 3-percent salary increase and higher hospital-surgical insurance payments. The budget also included $330,000 to cover actions that might be recommended by the factfinding panel. The Professional Policemen’s Protective Association and Fire Fighters’ Local 215 immediately rejected the 3-percent 22 wage increase as inadequate. Representatives from both organizations said they did not feel obligated to approve the city’s settlement with District Council 48. from a roster of university professors and public-spirited citizens acceptable to both parties. The suggested duties of the Peace Agency included the following: (1) to assist the parties in coverting the terms of an informal agree m ent in to contract language; (2) to furnish an “observer” to attend any or all negotiations; (3) to assist the parties in the event of an impasse by identifying and clarifying all of the issues in dispute and the positions of the respective parties; (4) to serve an an intermediary between the parties and the mediator, or the “fact finder” , if either should be appointed, pointing out the hard-core issues and making suggestions to expedite the mediation or factfinding procedures; (5) to assist the “factfinder” in securing acceptance of his recommenda tions; and (6) to furnish the “neutral” (or “ public”) m em bers for the recommended tri-partite “ Study Committees” . The panel recommended Study Committees for the purpose of studying those issues which the panel referred to them. They noted that those issues were so numerous that the panel couldn’t give them sufficient consideration to make an informed and reasoned recommendation on their merits. Factfinding panel's final report issued on December 14 The long-awaited factfinding panel’s final report was issued on December 14. For the year 1964, the fact finders stated: “In the opinion of the panel, the city’s 3-percent-wage increase, at least in hindsight, was sub stantial and fair to the employees.” The panel also recommended, that the city assume a greater share of the cost of Blue Cross-Blue Shield insurance. It suggested that, for the month o f December 1964, the city absorb one-half of the employee’s present contribution for family coverage, which stood at $6-a-month, and all of the cost for single person coverage, to which the employee was contributing $l-a-month. The panel noted that the city and District Council 48, in bargaining for 1965, had already agreed to a two-step elimination of the employee’s contribution, the city to absorb one-half of the employee’s contribution for family coverage and all of the single person’s contribution beginning January 1, 1965, and the balance beginning July 1, 1965. The panel suggested that some of the many other union demands for 1964 seemed to have merit and ought to be referred to “Study Committees” if further facts were needed; recommended that some be remanded to the parties where the p.anel felt that they had not exhausted their “duty to bargain” as contemplated by Section 111.70; and some were to be referred, because of their special significance, directly to the recommended “City of Milwaukee Labor Peace Agency.” Other demands were considered as dropped. Full-time labor negotiator also recommended The panel also recommended changes in procedures for conducting negotiations. They suggested that the city appoint a full-time, experienced labor negotiator with well-defined authority to continue in charge of negotiations until the time came for the Labor Policy Committee to participate. In the past, all bargaining was carried on by the Finance (Labor Policy) Committee. This system was inadequate and extremely cumbersome. (The Common Council in September had designated the City Personnel Director to serve as the city’s chief negotiator in bargaining on 1965 wages and fringe benefits.) Factfinders recommend new procedures for future negotiations For 1965, the panel recommended that the parties negotiate a settlement of the economic issues as soon as possible, so as to be free to inaugurate recommended procedures to be followed in future negotiations. Included among these recommendations were basic reforms which hopefully would prevent future impasses. The panel, in recommending the establishment of a Labor Peace Agency, concluded that a specialized agency should be created to assist the parties when an impasse was reached in their bargaining. They noted that there the parties could really do nothing in the event of a deadlock or stalemate, since in public employment there was no legal right to strike. They also noted that the legislature had not provided for compulsory arbitra tion. The personnel of the Peace Agency would come New timetable suggested for future negotiations The p an el recommended that a timetable for collective bargaining be established in order to insure that negotiations and factfinding, if necessary, be completed by October 15, well ahead of November 20, the statutory deadline for approval of the city’s budget. The steps of the timetable were (1) submission of union demands to city by February 1; (2) submission of city’s answer (within 6 weeks) by March 15 ; (3) negotiations to begin (within 4 weeks) by April 15; (4) conclusion of negotiations (within 3 months) by July 15; (5) mediation, if any, on July 15 ; (6) factfinding, if any, by August 1; (7) recommendations issued by October 15. 23 working conditions reflecting the character and impor tance of the policemen’s duties in 1965, A.D. and not B.C.” The panel also proposed a conference to consider setting up a special educational program for policemen, outside the department. The attorney for the Police men’s Association called the findings of the panel “a magna carta for a new professional status for Milwaukee policemen.” Factfinders favored written contracts The panel also recommended that with the exception of those matters which were required by law to be dealt with by ordinance or resolution, that all terms or condi tions of employment finally agreed upon by the parties be incorporated into a written signed contract. The panel noted that Section 111.70 (4)(i) did not deal with the length (duration) of a written contract. The panel doubted whether the legislature, which concerned primarily with stabilizing public employee labor rela tions, intended that bargaining take place each year. To avoid any possible legal question, the panel recom mended that the parties enter into a 2-year contract that contained a provision that on 30 days’ notice before the end of the first year, either party could reopen all or any part of the contract, and that, in the absence of such notice, the contract would be renewed automatically for another year. Factfinders support most demands fo Fire Fighters' Association Panel suggests guidelines for public's "right to know" The panel in commenting on the principle of the public’s “right to know” , that underlies the State’s “Anti-Secrecy Statute” , felt that the statute did not pre v en t re a lis tic p ublic collective bargaining as contemplated by the legislature in adopting Section 111.70. The panel believed that both principles could be accommodated and suggested that negotiations be in private until the time when they came before the Finance Committee, at which time all proceedings would be public. A nother significant recom m endation concerned the prevailing grievance procedure which made the City Service Commission the arbitrator for those employee groups under its jurisdiction. The unions charged that the city was acting as both advocate and judge since the Commission was a branch of the city government. They contended that such a procedure was unfair, though the Commission might act in the best of faith. The panel agreed and recommended that a new grievance and arbitration procedure be negotiated, and that the present procedure be continued in the interim. The panel supported the Fire Fighters’ Association request for a reduction of the workweek from 63 to 56 hours but said the reduction should come July 1, not January 1, as requested by the association. The city already had agreed to the reduction on July 1, with the knowledge that it would be recommended by the fact finders’ report. The panel recommended that a study committee take up the question of whether fire fighters were entitled to more time off in lieu of holidays. The panel noted that the number of work hours off for holidays was less than the number of holidays “granted to general employees in Milwaukee and less than the number granted to firemen in most other comparable cities.” The panel supported the association’s demand for the 10-cent weekend shift differential paid to all other employees for regularly scheduled, non-overtime weekend work. In lieu of making such a payment retro active, the panel recommended that the parties negotiate a lump sum payment. The panel rejected the as sociation’s request that fire fighters be lifted out of the city’s overall pay classification structure. They said that this request had been made since the close of formal hearings in the factfinding proceedings before the panel. The factfinders said that they could not approve bracketing fire fighters with policemen, but that further negotiations, or study by the Peace Agency, might well suggest a separate pay range for fire fighters. This separa tion, the panel said, would permit the Fire Fighters’ Association more freedom to bargain on their own special problems. Panel recommends that demands of garbage collectors be Factfinders recommend separate police pay plan studied further The factfinding panel’s report recommended that police classes be taken out of the city’s single, over-all pay classification structure, so that policemen would be free to concentrate on their own special problems in future collective bargaining. The factfinders suggested that the city and the Policemen’s Association “bargain out a new and realistic system of compensation and The panel recommended that the request of the Garbage Collection Laborers for reallocation to a higher pay range be referred to a study committee. It also recommended that the city grant the union’s request that* the seniority practice in the assignment of garbage collectors to emergency snow removal be incorporated into a written contract. 24- Panel recommends further consideration of District Council 48's demands The panel took no position on the merits of the demand of District Council 48 for an agency shop agree ment. They recommended that the “agency shop” issue be referred to the Peace Agency for study. The issue of compensation for pumping and filtration plant em ployees for holidays at time and one-half eliminated in 1963 was remanded to the city and District Council 48 for further bargaining. The contention by District Council 48 that truckdrivers and automotive mechanics were underpaid in comparison to their counterparts in private industry was referred to a study committee for its consideration. All other union demands were considered by the panel as dismissed for the year 1964. Interpretation of factfinders' report in dispute Following release of the panel’s report spokesmen for the Fire Fighters’ Association, the Policemen’s As sociation, and the Independent Garbage Collection Laborers said that they construed the panel’s recom mendation as giving them an opportunity to bargain for more than the 3-percent increase verbally accepted by District Council 48 on November 13. The City Personnel Director (chief negotiator), however, announced that negotiations for 1965 definitely were through. A few days later, the director of District Council 48, in a letter to the Common Council, asked for a written contract by January 1. The settlement reached in the mediation session in Madison on November 13 was subsequently ratified on November 30 by the bargaining committee for District Council 48. City acts to implement factfinders' recommendations On December 15 the Common Council adopted a resolution calling for the Finance Committee to deter 25 mine the impact of the factfinding panel’s report on city-union negotiations and to report on how the recommendations might be implemented. On December 30, the Common Council adopted a Finance Committee recommended resolution providing for written labor c o n tra c ts. The resolution provided for a special committee of five to prepare tentative drafts of the contracts after conferring and negotiating on the terms of the contracts. The committee would consist of the Deputy City Attorney, as chairman; the City Personnel Director; the City Budget Director; the Information Secretary to the Council; and the Clerk of the Finance Committee. All other recommendations of the fact finding panel, except the implementation of the 56-hour week for fire fighters, were referred to the city’s chief negotiator (City Personnel Director) with instructions to negotiate the implementation of the panel’s findings with the respective unions. In another action the Common Council decided to cut the workweek of fire fighters from 63 to 56 hours effective May 1, 1965. This action, as recommended by the Finance Committee, approved a plan proposed by the Fire Chief for reducing the number of engine and ladder companies and the elimination and reallocation of several fire stations, while holding new personnel needs to a minimum. Approval of the plan by the Council climaxed a 6-year fight by the Fire Fighters’ Association for a shorter workweek. The city, in its negotiations, utilized information contained in the Classification Division’s survey of wages and benefit practices in 27 cities with over 400,000 population and the BLS Milwaukee area wage surveys, consisting of its regular survey and a special survey of large firms conducted as a contract service for the city. 1965 Developments re p o rte d ly had balked; they contended that the compromise would help the union undermine the City Service Commission, which handled major disciplinary cases. City negotiators also tentatively agreed on final and binding arbitration on contract interpretation disputes on nondisciplinary matters not handled by the City Service Commission. The WERB commissioners scheduled a meeting on March 17. This meeting and several subsequent bargaining sessions mediated by WERB commissioners failed to produce a written agree ment. The parties could not agree on the details of contract language covering arbitration clauses and the no-strike, no-lockout clauses. The signed report of the factfinding panel was submitted officially on December 14,1964. City moves to implement factfinders' recommenda tions Implementation of the panel’s recommendations as they pertained to two of the involved unions followed within less than 6 months. The city’s first written labor contract, with District Council 48 and its appropriate affiliated locals, was signed on May 7. It had been ratified by the Common Council on April 20. This agree ment was for the remainder of 1965. Bargaining talks between the city and representatives of District Council 48 had been largely futile until March, when the WERB was requested by the parties to assist in resolving their differences. At the start of a mediation meeting on March 15, the parties were told by the WERB chairman to “concentrate on sincere col lective bargaining rather than collective haggling.” In criticizing both sides the chairman urged representatives of the city and District Council 48 to concentrate their efforts on reaching an agreement and to “refrain from harassment by action and inaction.” He said the union’s harassment was “by action in threatening a strike; and the city’s harassment was “by inaction in failing to take a position on the issues and as to whether it will effectu ate the recommendations of the factfinding panel.” City and District Council 48 agree on 1965 contract provisions W ER B helps city and District Council 48 solve sticky issues The biggest issues in dispute revolved around arbitra tion clauses and a no-strike pledge to be inserted in the first written contract for city employees. Subcontracting of work was a third major issue. The arbitration impasse was resolved tentatively, when city negotiators on the 15th verbally agreed to accept a WERB compromise proposal for advisory arbitration of employee grievances involving suspension and discharge cases that fell under the statutory jurisdiction of the City Service Com mission. The WERB recommendation had been made more than a week before, but was not acted on im mediately by the City Service Commission after a meeting with WERB mediators. The union, which previously had insisted that a no-strike pledge must be co n d itio n ed on binding arbitration of grievances, a c c e p te d th e compromise plan. City negotiators 26 Final agreement on contract terms did not come until March 28—after a 40-hour nonstop bargaining session that had started on March 26. WERB members served as mediators during the marathon session. The agreement included clauses on grievance and arbitration procedures, prohibition of strikes and lockouts, and union and management rights, which were particularly significant, either because they were departures from previous city practices or because they clearly defined employment policies which were set forth in an agreement between city employees and management for the first time. Only those matters not covered by the City Service Com mission statute would be subject to binding arbitration. These would include disputes over seniority rights, work rules, and application of the contract’s terms on wages, hours, and working conditions. Disciplinary disputes would be subject to advisory arbitration, which the City Service Commission could overrule. The commission still would have sole authority to arbitrate grievances on promotions and job examinations. The union agreed that it would not cause directly or indirectly any work stoppage, slowdown, or refusal by city workers to do customarily assigned duties. The city agreed not to lock out or bar any workers from their jobs in a labor dispute. Employees taking part in an unauthorized strike would be subject to discharge or loss of pay and holiday and vacation benefits. In the event of a strike, the union would have to pay the city $20 a day for each striker and $500 a day as damages if the strike prevented other employees from working. In case of a lockout, the city would have to pay the regular wages of employees prevented from working plus $500 damages to the union if more than 50 workers were affected. Garbage Union negotiations for 1965 postponed until The union recognized the city’s right to hire private contractors for work normally handled by city em ployees, as long as this procedure was not done to under mine the union or discriminate against its members. As of May 1, still to be settled were 1965 wage rates for the members of the Garbage Collection Laborers Union and the Fire Fighters’ Association. The Garbage Collection Laborers were seeking a $20 a month raise for 1965, in addition to the 3-percent increase granted to all city employees on January 1. On May 17, the union petitioned the WERB to mediate the wage dispute, claim ing that negotiations were deadlocked. City negotiators said 1965 wage talks were completed and that there was nothing to mediate. In commenting on the petition, the union president said that the union’s bargaining committee had been authorized to call a “work stoppage,” if the city did not consent to mediation or agree to set up an impartial study com mittee to review the union’s 1965 requests. The Common Council refused to agree to mediation at its meeting on the 17th and the union president announced and a “work stoppage” would begin with the morning pickup on Wednesday, May 19. Late on May 18, the union postponed the scheduled work stoppage at the request of the WERB chairman, who promised that a Board representative would be in Milwaukee the fol lowing day to look into the dispute. 1966 Schedule “A” of the agreement contained a list and summarization of ordinances, resolutions, and other provisions which related to wages, hours, and conditions of employment in effect for 1965. Amendments to any of these designated ordinances or resolutions affecting the rights of either party would not be deemed a part of the agreement, unless agreed to by the parties in writing.1 Negotiations with District Council 48 for 1965 conclude with reallocations On April 22, the city and District Council 48 reached an agreement on extra pay for 85 water department em plo y ees retroactive to January 1965. The added compensation was given to pumping station and filtra tion plant employees whose previous holiday schedule adjustment had resulted in an alleged pay cut. On April 24, city and union negotiators agreed on a 7-cents-anhour increase, effective July 1, for truckdrivers. Truckdrivers had received 11 cents in January as part of a 3-percent raise for all city employees. This 7-cent raise used up the balance of the $150,000 set aside in the 1965 budget to correct job inequities for AFSCME’s 10 city locals “almost to the last penny,” the Director of D istric t Council 48 said. These two settlements concluded bargaining on holdover issues with District Council 48 over 1965 wage issues. City and union negotiators agreed to a truce on May 27. They accepted a WERB recommendation to end negotiations for 1965 and then take up the wage issue anew in negotiations for 1966. In exchange for the union’s agreement to defer the wage issue to 1966 negotiations, the city accepted a WERB plan to have an observer, not a mediator, present when the job realloca tion issue was taken up. Fire Association negotiations for 1965 rescheduled to 1966 Fire Fighters’ Local 215 sought a 1965 wage raise comparable to the 5H percent increase given policemen earlier in February. The city refused to grant a similar increase. In a meeting on April 30, negotiators for the association said they might compromise their 1965 request if the city “came to an understanding” with the association in 1966 wage talks scheduled to begin later. The association’s attorney said that if the impasse continued, the association would seek factfinding on wage issues which the association considered unresolved for 1964, 1965, and 1966. The City Personnel Director, said the city would discuss the wage request as a 1966 issue, if it was dropped for 1965. He added that the factfinding panel had not recommended the same pay increase for firemen as for policemen. City settles with Police Association for 1965 S im ilar im p lem entation of factfinding recom mendations pertaining to police personnel represented by the Professional Policemen’s Protective Association of Milwaukee resulted in the establishment of a separate pay plan for police classes that incorporated a salary increase of 5 lA percent above 1965 salary rates for the ranks of police patrolman through lieutenant of police.2 This new separate pay plan was approved by the Common Council on February 23, and became effective on May 16. (See table 37.) The city’s chief negotiator (City Personnel Director) had recommended the increase to the Finance Committee following negotiations earlier with the Policemen’s Association. 27 tenders)—a 7-percent general pay increase, a 2-year col lective bargaining agreement, and a reallocation of bridgetenders to a higher pay category; city and county Public Service Employees Union and Milwaukee Govern ment Service League—a 5-percent general wage increase. Union submit demands for 1966 negotiations Negotiations with certified unions on wages and fringe benefits for 1966 began on April 15 under the timetable suggested by the 1964 factfinding panel. Wage and fringe benefit demands for 1966 were filed on February 1, the deadline recommended by the 1964 factfinding panel. A $28 monthly pay increase for all city employees was requested by District Council 48. Other requests of the Council called for a 6-hour day and a 30-hour workweek from Memorial Day through Labor Day; 2 year-written agreement, with the right to reopen negotiations later for 1967; a change in vacation schedule providing 3 weeks after 5 years of service, 4 weeks after 12 years, and 5 weeks after 20 years; time and one-half for scheduled Saturday and Sunday work; double pay for holiday work and unscheduled weekend work; incorporation of all departmental rules into the contract; a change in the progression schedule to permit employees to reach the top in each pay range in 2 years instead of 4; payments of $25 a week for laid-off workers for a period coinciding with unemployment compensation payments; and adding the day after Thanksgiving, Good Friday, and employee’s birthday as regular days off with pay. The Professional Policemen’s Protective Association asked that the minimum pay of patrolmen be increased from $492 to $625 a month. The association also asked for time and a half for overtime, excluding time spent testifying in court; double time for work on cancelled off-days; longevity pay ranging from 2 to 6 percent; a fourth week of vacation after 15 years service; and other improvements. Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Association Local 215 requested that the city begin planning for a 40-hour workweek; establish a separate pay plan that would recognize the hazards and long hours of firemen’s work; and revise an ordinance to permit firemen to work on other jobs while off duty. The. Garbage Collection Laborers Union asked for a 25-cent-an-hour pay raise and reallocation of garbage collection laborers from pay range 21 ($4,007 to $5,907 a year) to pay range 17 ($5,907 to $7,014). The In dependent Union also asked for 3 weeks of vacation after 8 years, 4 weeks after 15 years, and 5 weeks after 25 years of service in addition to other improvements. Among other city unions and employee organizations which filed wage and benefit requests for 1966, and their key demands, were: International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers, Local 125-B—5 percent general wage increase, longevity pay, and reallocation of workers at incinerator plants to higher pay ranges; International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 195 (bridge- City responds to unions with counterproposal Subsequently, on March 15, the City Personnel Director, in accordance with the suggested timetable, submitted the city’s answer to the requests made by the unions and employee associations on February 1. In lieu of a general wage increase, the city proposed to employ a qualified consultant to conduct a comprehensive classification and pay study. The City Personnel Director predicted that a consultant could make a preliminary recommendation on wages by July 1, and that he could have a complete report, including job reclassifications, ready by October 1. He also proposed: (a) an early meet ing to discuss the city’s fiscal position, including the tax rate, tax base, and other economic factors; (b) establish ment of a special governmental institute to assist the city and unions “in developing greater clarity and under standing on a complete list of subjects that are negotiable” under municipal labor law; (c) modifying the city’s pension plan to increase pension benefits; (d) establishing a 5-percent service charge for dues check off, to pay for processing costs; (e) eliminating coffee breaks, or as an alternative, limiting breaks to 10 minutes; and (f) initiating operational studies on a frequent basis “to assure that work done by city em ployees is competitive on a cost basis with similar work performed in private industry.” The city’s response also proposed (a) that salary increases be based on merit rather than longevity; (b) elimination of pay for the first 2 days of sick leave; (c) changing the basis for computing overtime for certain workers in the Department of Public Works to provide a true time and one-half rate rather than the current rate of 1.56; (d) to limit salary payments under the injury pay provision to 70 percent of base salary; (e) to eliminate paid lunch periods for certain employees except those who work on a threeshift operation, in which case, the paid lunch period would not exceed 15 minutes; (f) to limit the attendance of employees at meetings of city boards, commissions, and committees to their own time; and (g) to dis continue the practice of permitting some employees to attend union conventions on city time. The Director of District Council 48 said the city failed to answer any of his union’s requests, but listed items it would take away. He also added that the city’s answer would violate the timetable for negotiations recommended by the factfinding panel. 28 Division of Labor Relations created In April, the City Personnel Director had submitted his letter of resignation from the added duties of chief labor negotiator. The Common Council did not accept his resignation. Instead, on April 20, it approved a resolution formally establishing a city negotiating team which would consist of the City Personnel Director (as chief negotiator) and a new position of labor negotiator, to be filled by the present Finance Committee Chair man; the City Attorney would provide such legal service and advice as required and requested by the negotiating team. It was understood that the City Personnel Director would continue temporarily as Chief Labor Negotiator, and he did so for several more months. In an ordinance adopted on June 15, the Common Council created a new Division of Labor Relations in the Office of the City Clerk to be headed by the city’s new labor negotiator. At the same time, the council approved a resolution creating a new negotiating team consisting of the new labor negotiator as chief negotiator and the City Person nel Director, with the City Attorney’s office to provide any required or requested legal service and advice. It referred back to the Finance Committee a resolution that would have given the new labor negotiator au thority to start legal action in case of a strike. (Section 111.70, Wisconsin Statutes, prohibits strikes by municipal employee unions, but no strike penalties are provided under the State labor law.) Wisconsin municipalities have the option of seeking an injunction against striking unions under other State statutes, but this had never been found politically feasible by the city. In another action, the Council shelved a proposal for a Labor Peace Agency; this had been a major recommendation of the factfinding panel. On June 15, the Finance Committee Chairman resigned as an alderman and was appointed to the new labor negotiator post after the Mayor signed the ordinance creating the position.3 Negotiations for 1966 show little progress Very little progress in bargaining on 1966 wage issues was made between April 15 and July 15, the factfinding panel’s suggested deadline for completing bargaining. Under the timetable, if basic agreement had not been reached by July 15, mediation was to begin.4 Un resolved issues from 1964 had kept negotiators working until late May. Furthermore, the chief negotiator (City Personnel Director) and the director of District Council 48 had been kept busy going to Madison numerous times to testify before legislative committees on two impor tant bills.5 29 On June 7, negotiators for the city had agreed tentatively to accept District Council 48’s proposal for a 3-year labor agreement. Under a schedule accepted by both parties, the Common Council would approve the 3-year contract by June 31, 1965. The council would have to ratify the terms of the contract which applied to the ensuing year by July 31 each year. Annual ratifica tion was necessary, because the city’s budget was computed on a calendar-year basis and also because Section 111.70 limits written contracts to 1 year’s dura tion. The union would have the right to cancel the contract within 10 days after July 31, if the Common Council refused to ratify the terms of the contract for the ensuing year. City and District Council 48 extend timetable Early in July, the city and District Council 48 agreed that it was futile to recognize the July 15 th cut-off date for negotiations. They agreed that mediation was not necessary, because the hard bargaining period had not been reached. By mutual consent they postponed the deadline indefinitely. The city, on July 16, offered Dis trict Council 48 a 3-year contract calling for no pay raise in 1966, a 2 percent or 4-cents-an-hour raise in 1967, and 2Vi percent or 5-cents-an-hour more in 1968. The proposal fell far short of the union’s latest request for a 20-cent-an-hour wage increase in each of 3-years. The Director of District Council 48 called the city’s counter offer completely unacceptable. The city also offered a fifth week of vacation after 30 years of service; an in crease in the maximum, number of days of hospital care under Blue Cross-Blue Shield coverage, from 120 days to 365 days; an increase in differential pay for scheduled Sunday work from 10-cents-an-hour to 15 cents; a $40,000 inequity fund to cover items such as new job classifications and clothing allowances; full tuition re imbursement for employees who completed courses ap proved by the city; and a change in the rate for overtime work to time and one-half rather than 1.56 for some job categories. The city proposed that reviews of the contract be made before July 31 of each year in order to extend the agreement through 1967 and 1968. If, however, the Council’s Finance (Labor Policy) Committee failed to act before July 31, the union could terminate the contract within 10 days. Furthermore, if the Common Council did not adopt the financial terms at its annual budget meeting in November, the union could terminate the agreement within 10 days after the passage of the budget. District Council 48 presents counteroffer to city In reply to the city’s latest offer, District Council 48, on July 20, asked for a 3-year contract calling for a 20-cent-per-hour raise in 1966, and 18-cent-per-hour increases in 1967 and 1968. The union also reduced its demand for overtime pay to time and one-quarter pay for scheduled Saturday and Sunday work in 1966; time and one-quarter pay for scheduled Saturday work, and time and one-half for scheduled Sunday work in 1967; and time and one-half pay for all scheduled Saturday and Sunday work in 1968. Initially, the union had requested time and one-half for all scheduled weekend work in each of the 3 years. The union also rejected the city proposed change in the overtime rate of pay for certain job categories. The union’s counterproposal also included an anti-poverty program wherein certain city employees would work only 30 hours a week between Memorial Day and Labor Day, but would get paid for 40, thus making room for the hiring of needy persons on a part-time basis. The city, on July 28, presented a slightly-increased wage offer to District Council 48. The city negotiating team proposed a 3- year contract with no pay raise the first year; 2 percent or 4 cents an hour on January 1, 1967; and additional 2 percent increases on January 1, 1968, and on July 1, 1968. The city’s previous offer was similar, except that it provided for only one increase in the third year of 2 lA percent or 5 cents on January 1, 1968. The city also offered to set up a fund of $15,000 a year to finance wage inequity adjustments; it previous ly had offered $40,000 for the 3 years. City requests mediation in negotiations with District other 1966 demands. The WERB chairman, on August 11, directed a board member to meet with city and union negotiators in an attempt to resolve the impasse. By mutual agreement, the parties postponed negotiations until early in September because of vacation schedules. Tentative 3-year agreement reached with District Council 48 The city and District Council 48, with the assistance of a WERB member participating in the negotiations, on September 21, announced tentative agreement on a new 3-year contract. The settlement was reached after about a dozen meetings over a 4-week period, and without deadline pressures, strike threats, or the use of mediators. The contract provided for wage increases of 10-cents-an-hour or 3 percent, whichever was greater in 1966, 1967, and 1968, for about 3,500 members represented by the union. The contract also added a fifth week of vacation in 1967 for employees with 30 years of service, improved holiday procedures, and e lim in a te d th e social security offset formula in computing pensions, beginning in 1967. The city agreed to continue to pay the full cost of hospitalizationsurgical care insurance and to pay any additional costs that might develop over the next 3 years. The city also guaranteed that the present employee contribution of 21 cents per thousand dollars of group life insurance would not be increased during the term of the contract. The union recognized the city’s right to establish reasonable work rules, but any dispute on their reasonableness would be submitted to factfinding. Provision was made for reopening the contract to negotiate an agency shop agreement, if the State Legislature should legalize such agreements.6 Council 48 Tentative On August 10, the city petitioned the WERB to mediate the slow moving negotiations with District Council 48. The city’s action was rejected promptly by the union. The union’s director told the city’s nego tiators that he was prepared to continue negotiations, and charged that the city was in violation of the con tract which called for the conclusion of negotiations prior to a request for mediation. He added that he would petition for an impartial arbitrator to determine whether the city was violating the contract. The Labor Negotiator replied that he was not suggesting the termination of ne gotiations, but that the city’s negotiating team viewed mediation as an extension of the bargaining process, with a third party present. The union’s director said that the union was preparing a counterproposal to the city’s latest wage offer that had been made the day before, but the union was ready to continue negotiations on 3-year agreements reached with Health Department unions On September 23, the city and the Staff Nurses Council of Milwaukee reached a tentative agreement on a 3-year contract calling for a wage increase of 10 cents an hour or 3 percent, whichever was greater, each year. The agreement, covering about 175 Health Department nurses, also provided for a fifth week of vacation after 30 years of service and other improvements in fringe benefits similar to the terms in the tentative agreement between the city and District Council 48. Subsequently, the city reached tentative agreements with the Asso ciation of Physicians and Dentists and with the Asso ciation of Scientific Personnel that included wage and fringe benefit provisions for 1966, 1967, and 1968 similar to the terms in the city’s tentative agreement with District Council 48. 30 City and four more unions reach tentative agreement Tentative 1-year agreement reached with Police Asso ciation On November 5, the city’s negotiating team and four more unions announced that they had reached agree ment on 3-year contracts providing wage increases of 3 percent or 10 cents an hour, whichever was greater, in each year. The unions were Local 17, BSEIU; Local 195, IBEW; Local 494, IBEW; and Local 75, Journeyman Plumbers and Gas Fitters Union. Negotiators for the city and Policemen’s Protective Association reached a tentative agreement on a 1-year contract on September 29. It provided for a wage increase of 10-cents-an-hour or 3 percent, whichever was greater, effective January 1, 1966 for about 1,800 patrolmen and sergeants. A 3-year contract was not p o ssib le because of pending surveys on pension proposals and survivorship benefits which the union did not want to freeze for 3 years. The Common Council, on November 19, approved the 1966 city budget following a routine public hearing on November 9. Included were funds for 1966 wage increases and fringe benefits previously approved and recommended by the Finance Committee. The money covered all city employees, including firemen and garbage collectors, as well as unaffilated employees. All of the unions except Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Asso ciation and Public Employees’ Union No. 617 either had signed contracts with the city or were close to agree ment. City and four unions agree to W ER B mediation The WERB announced, on October 22, that the city had consented to mediation with four unions who claimed that their requests to reopen medicare negotia tions to allow some city employees to become eligible for medicare had been rejected. The four unions, representing about 300 employees, included Local 195, IBEW, representing bridge tenders; Local 494, IBEW, representing fire alarm dispatchers in the Fire Depart m en t; L ocal 17, BSEIU, representing natatorium workers; and Local 125-B, IBFO, representing incinera tion plant workers. The city’s final offers to the unions in September had not contained any provisions for employees not under social security to enroll in 1966 and become eligible for medicare. When enrollment had been opened earlier, medicare had not yet become a reality, and some employees had declined to enroll. Negotiations with the firefighters and garbage col lectors were deadlocked. The dispute with the firemen was in factfinding and the garbage collectors’ impasse was in mediation at the end of 1965. Fire Fighters' Association heads towards impasse In a meeting on June 11, representatives of the Fire Fighters’ Association had told city negotiators that they would consider their 1966 negotiations at a standstill and would petition for factfinding unless the city was ready to raise firemen’s 1966 wages to the same level as policemen. The association’s ultimatum came after the city had proposed a 1966 wage package consisting of a $10 monthly increase, a 10 cents hourly weekend dif ferential, holiday time equal to that of other city em ployees, a separate pay plan, and other improvements. The City Personnel Director said the city was ready to bargain and asked the firemen to present a counteroffer. The association’s attorney replied that firemen were entitled to $50 a month more. This raise would have brought salaries for firemen above the level of police men. The Finance Committee Chairman said the at torney’s response implied that the union was not prepared to negotiate. The membership of the as sociation in meetings on June 14 and 15, rejected the city’s offer and authorized its bargaining committee to seek factfinding from the WERB if the city did not grant the $50 raise. City holds public hearing on tentative agreements with five unions The firs t p u b lic hearing before the Finance Committee on tentative agreements with five unions representing more than 5,000 employees was held on November 1. Contract proposals, which had been negotiated earlier by the city’s bargaining team with the five unions were open for discussion and action by the committee. The unions involved were: District Council 48, the Staff Nurses Council, the Association of Physicians and Dentists, the Association of Scientific Personnel, and the Professional Policemen’s Protective Association. The tentative agreement with the District Council 48 had set the pattern for memorandums of understanding with three of the other four unions. The committee on November 2 committed itself to granting a 3-percent or 10-cents-an-hour raise, whichever was greater, to all employees. 31 to refer the reallocation issue to a study committee. The city then filed a motion to quash the writ on the grounds that the recommendation of the factfinders placed no legal requirements on either party. The Court did not order the city to create the study committee, but said the Common Council should commit itself on the factfinding panel’s recommendations. On September 21, the Council acted by approving a recommendation of its Finance Committee rejecting the union’s demand for a reallocation study committee and a change in work assignments—the two recommendations made by the factfinding panel in December 1964. Fire Fighters' Association favors factfinding solution On August 18, the labor negotiator said that city negotiators and representatives of the Fire Fighters’ As sociation had reached a deadlock in negotiations on 1966 wages and working conditions. The impasse came at the end o f talks before a WERB mediator. A spokesman for the Fire Fighters said that the association was considering petitioning the WERB to intiate factfinding. On September 7, it was announced by the WERB Chairman that the Fire Fighters’ Association had asked the board for factfinding. The city’s bargaining team, in a letter to the WERB on September 11, argued that the association’s request failed to set forth any issues upon which an impasse existed. The letter further stated that factfinding should be limited to unresolved 1966 issues, because the 1964 factfinding panel had reviewed earlier disputes. The association, in its petition, asked that the factfinder investigate 1964 and 1965 issues which centered on the union’s demand that fire fighters receive pay increases similar to the 5H percent salary raise granted to policemen in the spring. The WERB scheduled a mediation hearing for September 17. Early in October, the WERB agreed to appoint a fact finder after the WERB chairman met with both parties in a mediation session. At a factfinding session on October 20, it was an nounced that the city was willing to grant a 3 percent increase to firefighters for 1966. In addition to a general raise, the city also offered Local 215 a $5 monthly pay increase in lieu of weekend differential pay, additional pay for firemen called from off duty status for special circumstances, and a plan to make promotions from old eligibility lists until new lists were available. Garbage union asks court to enforce Independent Garbage Union affiliates with A F L -C IO , wins election challenge A representation election among garbage collection personnel that had been petitioned by Local 1203 of District Council 48 late in 1964 was held on October 18 and 19. About 3 weeks before the election, the Independent Garbage Workers Union, in response to the unanimous vote of its members on September 24, was granted a charter as Public Employees’ Union No. 61 by the Laborers’ International Union of North America (AFL-CIO).8 Local 61 won the election 213 to 70. (See appendix J.) Earlier, on March, 25, bargaining rights for 204 City engineers and technicians were won by an independent association-Technicians, Engineers and Architects of Milwaukee (TEAM). The vote was 119 for TEAM and 68 for Local 1238, District Council 48. Local 61 again asks courts to enforce factfinders' recommendations factfinders' recomme ndations Earlier the city’s labor negotiators and the Garbage Collection Laborers Independent Local Union had reached an impasse on August 2, when they ended mediation hearings on job reallocations. The union also sought a 25-cents-an-hour increase for 1966. Mediation talks had started on July 19 after the union members had given their executive board the authority to call a strike. The city’s Labor Negotiator said the city would not oppose factfinding by the WERB if the union wanted to file a petition for such action. He rejected the union’s proposal to submit the reallocation question to an impartial study committee for binding recommenda tions. Subsequently, the union asked for a writ of mandamus from the Circuit Court ordering the city to carry out the recommendation of the factfinding panel 32 On December 2, Public Employees’ Union No. 61, in a new attempt to gain higher wages for the city’s garbage collectors, again asked the Circuit Court for a writ of mandamus to order the city to refer the union’s request for the reallocation of garbage collectors to a higher pay range to a study committee. This time, the union contended that a resolution passed by the Common Council on November 16, 1964, provided $180,000 in the 1965 budget to cover alleged inequities involving employees except those represented by District Council 48. A $150,000 fund had been established for District Council 48 and had been used for its designated purpose. The union also charged that the November 16, 1964, resolution required the city to refer alleged inequities to a study committee. The union also alleged that, because the study committee was not established, payments from the fund would be illegal and void. Oral argu ments on the union’s request were scheduled for December 20 by a judge of the Circuit Court.9 Data provided in 1965 to the city n egotiating team on wages and fringe ben efits were m ainly based on the C lassification D ivision’s survey o f 27 major cities and from the BLS M ilwaukee area wage surveys. — FOO TN O TES— 1The contract also included a unique statement that would 5One o f the bills provided for an agency shop for govern not be found in private sector bargaining agreements. The state mental employees; it was backed by District Council 48 and ment reflects the importance of State and municipal law and opposed by the city. It would have enabled municipal unions to establish agency shops and collect initiation fees and dues from reads: nonmembers. The second bill would have made City Service This agreement shall in all respects.. . . be subject and Commission rulings subject to Common Council approval; it was subordinate to the provisions of the Milwaukee City opposed by the city and backed by the union. Charter in effect at the time of the execution of this Agreement and shall also be subject to the rules and 6The agency shop bill then before the State Legislature was regulations of the City Service Commission of the city of vetoed by Governor Knowles on December 15, after the measure Milwaukee, within its statutory jurisdiction, and shall had passed the Assembly 86 to 9 and the Senate on a voice vote. further be subject and subordinate to the statutes of the The governor’s veto later was overridden by a 73 to 23 vote of State of Wisconsin. the Assembly on May 17, 1966. The Senate, on June 1, upheld 2This separate pay plan incorporated 15 pay ranges covering his veto by a 2 vote margin. The vote was 20 to 12 in favor of all police service ranks from police matron (pay range P-15) to overriding the veto, but was short o f the required two-thirds. chief o f police (pay range P-1). The SVi percent increase was in addition to the 3-percent increase granted all city employees 7The Garbage Collection Laborers Independent Local Union (except prevailing wage employees) for 1965, and applied only had been granted a charter as Public Employees’ Union No. 61 to the ranks o f police patrolman (pay range P-14) through by th e Laborers’ International Union o f North America lieutenant of police (pay range P-9). (AFL-CIO) in September 1965. The city and the association, in reaching their first memo 8See footnote 2, p. (20). randum of agreement, recognized that the question of the ap propriate recognition unit for personnel in the Police Depart 9On May 5, 1966, the Circuit Court dismissed the union’s ment had not been resolved. Both parties understood that this writ of mandamus, ruling that the city had complied with the matter was still before the WERB for determination, and that legal requirements set down in the previous agreement with the neither party had waived its right before the Board. union to the extent that the Common Council had acted upon 3Because of restrictions under Section 66.11 of the state the requests for resolving inequities in salary schedules by statutes, which prohibit an elected official from being appointed causing the funds set aside to be transferred to the general fund. to a position created during his term o f office, Section 111.70 of The Common Council in September, 1965, had approved its the Wisconsin Statutes subsequently was amended to permit this Finance Committee’s recommendation rejecting the union’s appointment. The appointment was made under Section 63.41 request for a study committee and a change in work assignments of the state statutes and involves Civil Service tenure. which the factfinding panel had recommended in December 4 The p an el’s recommended negotiating timetable was 1964. This action was taken in response to the Court’s earlier included in the written agreement with District Council 48 that ruling that the Common Council should commit itself on the had gone into effect on May 7. panel’s recommendations. 33 1966 Developments First-year major wage and fringe benefit changes agreed to in the 3-year contracts or memorandums of understanding signed late in 1965, and effective the first pay period of 1966 included: (1) a general wage increase of 3 percent or 10-cents-an-hour, whichever was greater; (2) a provision that when Christmas and New Year’s Day fell on a Saturday, they would be observed on the following Monday; (3) an increase of 2-cents-an-hour in the weekend shift differential (from 10 cents to 12 cents-an-hour); (4) expansion in sick leave provisions to allow use of sick leave for necessary absence due to the death of a mother-in-law or father-in-law; and (5) an in crease in Blue Cross-Blue Shield coverage to include pediatric care. These changes were extended to all gen eral city employees, except garbage collection laborers, by action of the Common Council. Terms of the 1-year memorandum of understanding with the Policemen’s Association also provided for a pay increase of 3 percent or 10 cents, whichever was greater, for 1966 and for podiatric care under Blue Cross-Blue Shield coverage. Police aides, police matrons, and Police Department civilian employees were made eligible for the increased weekend differential pay of 12-cents-anhour. 38.) These provisions basically carried out the recom mendations of the factfinder in the second factfinding proceeding between the city and the Fire Fighters’ Association. Agreement with Garbage Collection Laborers averts strike The City and Public Employees’ Union No. 61, Laborers’ International Union of North America (AFLCIO), ended a long wage dispute when an agreement was reached on August 1 covering the remainder of 1966, plus 1967 and 1968. The settlement followed an allnight mediation session that ended at 5:45 a.m., minutes before the start of a threatened walkout. The terms of th is agreem ent, which covered garbage collection laborers, called for a 10-cents-an-hour increase for the remainder of 1966, and a 10-cent-hourly increase in 1967 and again in 1968. An additional 3-cents-an-hour was granted for the duration of the 3-year agreement instead of retroactivity pay for the 7 months that had passed since the 10-cent-an-hour increase that had been granted to other general city employees, effective pay period 1, 1966. Contract terms covering fringe benefits were essentially the same as those in the 3-year agree ments concluded with the other unions in 1965. Included was a no-strike clause without the monetary penalty present in the written agreements with other general city employee unions. The contract also provided for creation of a joint union-management committee to study safety hazards and to improve work procedures in conjunction with discussions o f the union’s reallocation requests in future negotiations with the city. City and Fire Fighters' Association reach agreement for 1966 On April 28, the city and the Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Association signed a memorandum of under standing after factfinding proceedings. In addition to a 1966 salary adjustment of 3 percent of $8 biweekly, whichever was greater, the city granted $5 a month in lieu of weekend differential pay and $12 a month in lieu of 2 off-days for all assigned to a regularly scheduled 56-hour workweek. These changes were retroactive to the first 1966 pay period. The agreement, which was for the remainder of 1966, also included lump-sum pay ments for firefighting personnel on the payroll during 1964 and 1965, who were assigned to a 56-hour work week, in lieu of weekend differential payments for those years, and an increase in hospital coverage to include podiatric care. The parties also agreed that the following classes of firefighting personnel could be broken out of the general city pay ranges and would be placed in a separate fire service pay range: fire lieutenant, motor pump operator, firefighter, fire prevention lieutenant, fire prevention officer, and marine fireman. (See table City fails to reach agreement with Police and Fire Associations Failure of the city and the bargaining representatives for policemen and fireman to agree on wage and fringe adjustments for 1967 resulted in mediation under the auspices of the WERB. Mediation was still in progress at the end o f 1966 with representatives of the Fire Fighters’ Association. Failure to reach a settlement th ro u g h m e d ia tio n w ith representatives of the Professional Policemen’s Protective Association resulted in factfinding proceedings which were in progress at the close of the year. 34 Negotiators for the city and the Policemen’s Asso ciation had reached a deadlock in bargaining after a second attempt at mediation on September 16. A member of the WERB who was helping mediate the dispute, along with a state mediator, told the parties that factfinding would start immediately. The association had petitioned the WERB to approve a factfinder a week before. The main issues were wages and retirement eligibility requirements. The Policemen’s Association, in its bargaining demands for 1967 submitted in February, had asked the city to grant patrolmen an annual range of $6,900 to $8,400 the first year and of $7,600 to $9,200 the second year in a request for a 2-year contract.1 Other major improvements asked by the Policemen’s Association were: (1) 4 weeks of vacation after 15 years of service and 5 weeks after 20 years (policemen were getting 4 weeks after 20 years); (2) a change in retirement eligibility requirements so policemen could retire after 25 years regardless of age rather than after 25 years but not before age 57; (3) a 2 percent pension increase for each year in excess of 25 years; (4) an increase in differential pay for motorcycle duty from $10 to $25 a month; and (5) full payment of tuition for accredited college courses on police subjects. The city initially had offered a 2-year contract calling for annual raises of 3 percent but not less than 10-cents-anhour. Later the Policemen’s Association rejected an offer of a 10 percent raise over a 2-year period.2 The city’s last wage offer to negotiators for the Fire Fighters’ Association was made on December 6 and included a 4 percent pay raise in 1967 and 3 percent in 1968 to employees classified as firefighting personnel. Fire department civilian employees (mechanics, typists, stenographers, and clerks) were offered a raise of 3 percent or 10 cents an hour, whichever was greater, in both years. The Fire Fighters’ Association initially had asked for (1) a maximum annual salary rate of $9,500 (a 28-percent increase in the maximum salary) for fire fighters and comparable increases for all members of the bargaining unit; (2) a 40-hour workweek; (3) longevity pay ranging from a minimum of $18 a month after 7 years of service to a maximum of $54 a month after 16 years of service through the rank of lieutenant; (4) a change in retirement eligibility requirements to permit retirement after 25 years of service regardless of age plus improvements in retirement benefits; (5) 2 additional workdays off in lieu of holidays; (6) a change in vaca tions to provide 1 additional day after 5 years of service, 1 additional day after 10 years, and 1 additional day after 20 years; and (7) a new grievance and arbitration procedure calling for a joint committee to discuss grievances with a right to arbitration. One representation election was held and three ad ditional representation cases were pending before the WERB at the end of the year.3 The city’s negotiating team again utilized the Clas sification Division’s annual survey of wages and fringe benefits in 27 major cities and the regular BLS Mil waukee area wage survey together with the special BLS survey of large Milwaukee firms conducted under contract for the city. — FOO TN O TES— AFL-CIO referee recommended this arrangement as a means of settling a jurisdictional dispute that dated back to early 1964. It was agreed that Local 139 would receive dues from those employees who worked more than 50 percent o f the time on heavy equipment and Local 33 of District Council 48 would collect dues from those employees who spent most of their time driving trucks. Forty-seven equipment operators mainly in the Bureau of Municipal Equipment voted for joint representation by the two Unions, and two voted for no representation. A mem orandum of understanding was concluded with the representatives o f this new bargaining unit on June 27. This agreement, effective through May 31, 1967, covered prevailing wage e q u ip m e n t opera to rs who are outside the scope of this study. ‘ The second written agreement between the city and the Policemen’s Protective Association signed on September 30, 1965, was a 1-year memorandum of understanding that expired on December 31, 1966. 2 Members of the PPPA at two meetings on November 25, voted to reject a memorandum o f understanding signed on November 21 by city and Association negotiating teams, by a vote of 575 to 62. 3The WERB scheduled an election on February 23 after District Council 48 and Local 139, International Union of Operating Engineers (AFL-CIO) jointly petitioned for represen tation. The unions sought the joint representation after an 35 1967 Developments pay period 1, 1967, salaries for civilian members of the bargaining unit (most of whom were scheduled to work a 40 hour week)—such as Fire Department mechanics, repairmen, typists, stenographers, clerks, and custodial w o r k e r s —w e r e i n c r e a s e d by 3 pe r c e n t or 10-cents-an-hour, whichever was greater. The city agreed to reduce the 56-hour average work week to an average of 55.079 hours by granting 2 additional days off during 1967 on scheduled duty days to members of the Fire fighting Division in the bargaining unit. It was further agreed that employees in those classifications regularly assigned a scheduled 55.079-hour workweek should be paid $2.30 biweekly in lieu of weekend differential. In addition, they were to receive $5.52 biweekly in lieu of actually taking the 2 additional duty days off. And, for continuing to work a 56-hour average workweek in 1967, the employees would receive extra duty pay for those added hours worked over and above 55.079 hours on a prorata straight time basis. Maximum vacation benefits were increased to 12 working days off after 30 years’ service for personnel on the new 55.079-hour average workweek; the maximum had been 10 working days after 20 years’ service. Fringe benefit changes for civilian employees included a fifth week of vacation after 30 or more years and the Friday after Thanksgiving as an added holiday for new employees to correspond with 1967 vacation and holiday changes for general city employees. Similarly, the 1967 improvement in the pension plan to elimate the social security offset pay ment that the city had negotiated with the other unions was extended to civilian members of the bargaining unit. Blue Cross-Blue Shield benefits were changed to provide additional hospital care and the maximum payment for diagnostic service was increased from $50 to $100 a year for both fire service and civilian employees. The agree ment also provided for increased widow surviorship benefits, a change in recall pay, and tuition reimburse ment by the city up to a maximum of $150 a year. The city further agreed to establish before December 1, 1967, for members of the bargaining unit a grievance procedure that would be consistant and not in conflict with state law, charter ordinances, Fire and Police Commission rules and regulations, and the authority of the Fire Chief. The year 1967 marked the second year of the 1966-68 period covered by the 3-year contracts or memorandums of understanding concluded with most o f the labor organizations in 1965. Under the terms of th ese agreements and the agreement with Public Employees’ Union 61 reached on August 1, 1966, salaries were increased 3 percent or 10-cents-an-hour whichever was greater, and various fringe benefits were further liberalized beginning with the first pay period in 1967 for most city employees except police, fire, and prevailing wage employees. The Common Council also approved a similar salary increase and identical fringe benefits for general employees not included in the bargaining units. Important changes in fringe benefits included a fifth week of vacation after 30 or more years of service, an additional holiday on the Friday after Thanksgiving for new employees (current employees received this as a regular holiday in exchange for a floating holiday previously granted), and the use of 1 day of sick leave to attend the funeral of an employee’s grandparent. Hos pital care benefits were increased from k maximum of 120 days to a maximum of 365 days for all conditions except for nervous and mental care, which were increased from 70 days to 120 days. The allowance for diagnostic services was increased from $50 a year to a maximum of $100. The weekend shift differential was increased from 12-cents-an-hour to 15-cents-an-hour. The pension plan was amended effective with pay period 1, 1967, to completely eliminate the social security offset reduction. Employees who had retired in 1966 were made eligible to receive the increased retirement benefit resulting from elimination of the social security offset, effective with the first 1967 pay period. The 70 percent pension limitation, however, was not removed. City and Fire Fighters' Association reach agreement early in 1967 During 1967, five contracts were signed.1 On Jan uary 9 the negotiating team for the Fire Fighters’ As sociation and city negotiators signed a memorandum of understanding for the year 1967. The parties agreed that, effective with pay period 2, 1967, salaries for the following classes o f firefighting personnel would be increased by 4 percent: fire lieutenant, motor pump operator, firefighter, fire prevention lieutenant, fire prevention officer, and marine fireman. Effective with City and Police Association agree on 2-year pact Following factfinding initiated in 1966, a settlement was reached with the Professional Policemen’s Protective 36 An agreement also was negotiated with Local 1037 of the Uniformed Pilots and Marine Engineers Association incorporating a similar salary increase for 1968. Both associations in the Fire Department received increases in surviorship benefits comparable to those negotiated by the Police Association earlier in the year. Association. A 2-year contract was signed on July 7, retroactive to January 1, 1967, and extending through December 31, 1968. Terms of the police agreement included an annual salary increase of $1,077.24 for 1967 and 1968 for all ranks from police patrolmen through sergeant; additional surviorship benefits; establishment of a committee to study the merits of various proposed educational plans for police; and increased clothing allowances for detectives and policewomen. Other important contract changes included a fifth week of vacation after 30 or more years of service, additional days of hospital care, and higher diagnostic service pay ments under Blue Cross-Blue Shield for police service personnel. Factfinding by W E R C employed in District Council 48 local issues Salaries of civilian employees in the Police Depart ment for 1967 had been increased 3 percent or 10-cents-an-hour, whichever was greater, effective with the first 1967 pay period. This change was made by action of the Common Council on recommendation of the Police Chief. Changes in those fringe benefits that were the same as for general city employees, also had been approved earlier by the Common Council on recommendation of the Police Chief, effective with pay period 1, 1967. District Council 48 submits demands for 1969 in advance District Council 48 on October 10, in an unexpected move before the Common Council began hearings on the city’s 1968 budget, submitted a list of 1969 contract demands that included a 90-cents-an-hour general wage increase for 1969. The union’s director said that 1969 negotiating demands were being made far in advance of the February 1, 1968 deadline for such demands so that the Common Council could prepare for the financial effect of the union’s demands. He said that the Common Council could, by providing additional money in the 1968 budget contingency fund, spread the cost over 2 years. Other demands included a cost-of-living wage escalation clause, major changes in hospital and surgical care coverage, full payment for $10,000 of group life insurance, longer vacations, and revisions in the pension system. A complete list of demands was to be submitted in January 1968, the director added. Fire Associations sign memorandums of understanding for 1968 A 1-year memorandum of understanding covering 1968 was signed on October 10 with the Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Association. All added wage differentials that existed in 1967 were incorporated into the base salary schedule and maximum salaries were increased $668.70 a year effective with the first pay period in 1968 for ranks from firefighter through fire lieutenant.3 It was further agreed that employees assigned to the Fire fighting Division would continue to work a 56-hour average work week in 1968 as in 1967. A committee was to be established to study a possible future reduction in the average workweek. Salaries for Fire Department civilian employees were increased by 3 percent or 10 cents an hour, whichever was greater, effective pay period 1, 1968. The Fire Fighters’ Association had demanded a 1968 maximum yearly salary of $9,500 for firefighters compared with the 1967 maximum of $7,513. It also repeated its request that the workweek be cut from 56 hours to 40 hours with compensation for work in excess of 40 hours. Other major demands included: (1) retirement after 25 years of service regard less of age; (2) the same number of guaranteed holidays off as for general city employees with time and a half pay for holidays worked. On August 17, a factfinding hearing was convened with Local 40 of District Council 48 to settle a deadlock over the proper pay rate for nine positions of District Assessor. The factfinders’s decision, agreed to by both parties, recommended no pay adjustment for 1967; how ever, in 1968, the District Assessors were to be re allocated from pay range 26 to 27. A decision in another factfinding case heard by the WERC4 on October 10, involving a demand for the reallocation of building inspectors from pay range 18 to 20, was pending at the close of the year. Garbage workers union attempts to reopen 3-year contract for 1968 On January 30, Public Employees Union Local 61, in an attempt to reopen bargaining on the 1968 terms of its 3-year agreement signed on September 27, 1966, had submitted a list of negotiating demands for 1968. The union’s letter included a request for a reallocation of garbage collection laborers from pay range 21 to 17, plus an additional 25 cents an hour in wage increases and an 37 The Commission decided that since there had been no change in the supervisory responsibilities of the captains since its original decision in 1963, there was no reason for considering them employees within the meaning of Section 111 .70, and therefore dismissed the petition.6 A case concerning police representation was still pending at the close of 1967. Two representation cases were initiated in 1967. The case involving 23 attorneys in the city attorney’s office was pending in the Circuit Court at the close of the year. The WERC certification of the Association of Municipal Attorneys as bargaining agent was challenged by the city on the grounds that the attorneys were management employees and thus did not constitute an appropriate bargaining unit. The petition by District Council 48 for a new bargaining unit for technical and maintenance employees in the Department of City Development was still pending before the WERC at the end of 1967. escalator clause for 1968, in addition to many other demands. The union said that it was seeking new bargaining on 1968 terms because of the increased cost of living, and added that the terms initially agreed to approved for 1968 were therefore inadequate. The city replied that the contract was binding on both the union and city until December 31,1968, and called the union’s attempt to reopen it “an act of extreme bad faith.” The fact finder’s report of July 1966, that had served as a basis for the garbage collectors contract, had recom mended a 3-year agreement comparable to the one between the city and District Council 48. When the city refused to reopen negotiations for 1968, the union filed a prohibited practices complaint.5 Common Council approves new management rates The Common Council in July approved a revision in the top ten pay ranges in the salary schedule covering general employees to become effective with the first 1968 pay period. This action approved the salary rates and reallocations recommended by the Public Adminis tration Service, and included a 3 percent adjustment of these rates in recognition of the 1-year delay in implementation.6 City service commission responds to collective bargain ing challenge The Milwaukee Board of City Service Commissioners, on December 1, created a new Civil Service Rule (Rule XVII), relating to employment relations policy and practice that reflected the city’s response to collective bargaining up to that time. The rule read as follows: W ER C establishes one-man craft bargaining unit During 1967, two of three representation cases that were pending at the end of 1966 were resolved. In the Sheet Metal Workers’ case, the city’s position was denied, and a new craft bargaining unit was established. On February 16, 1967, a representation election was held among Fire Equipment Repairmen II in the Fire Depart ment to determine if a majority of such employees, who performed sheet metal work more than 50 percent of their working time, desired to be represented by Local No. 24, Sheet Metal Union (AFL-CIO). There was only one such eligible employee in the bargaining unit and he voted “yes.” He resigned his employment November 17, 1967, and since then all sheet metal work in the Fire Department has been contracted out. The WERC ruled in favor of the city’s position involving fire personnel. The Fire Fighters’s Association had filed a petition on October 17,1967, requesting the WERC to conduct a representation election among all regular fire fighting employees, including captains, but excluding all other employees. The union predicated its position for the inclusion of captains in the unit on the basis that they did not perform any administrative duties in connection with their supervisory function, and, further, it requested the commission to change its policy with respect to excluding non-adminstrative supervisory employees from collective bargaining units. “Section 1. Section 111.70. The fact that the city of Milwaukee has certain collective bargaining respon sibilities under Section 111.70 o f the Wisconsin Statutes of 1965 is recognized as being in harmony with the State Civil Service Law and Civil Service Rules. “Section 2. In conforming with provisions o f Section 111.70 o f the Wisconsin Statutes of 1965, the personnel department o f the City Service Commission shall assist the City o f Milwaukee negotiating team by providing useful and effective technical data for good-faith negotia tions and factfinding hearings by developing and retaining a comprehensive file on wages, fringe benefits, and other related data. “The personnel department o f the City Service Com mission in accordance with the staff service concept, shall make itself available in an advisory capacity for such matters as mediation, collective bargaining, factfinding and o th er p ractices involving sound employment relations. Furthermore, upon completion of negotiations and agreement, the personnel department of the City Service Commission shall avail itself for the maintenance o f good-faith administration.” As in previous years, the Classification Division conducted its annual wage and fringe benefits survey of 27 major cities, and again contracted with the BLS to conduct a special survey of large Milwaukee employers in addition to its regular annual Milwaukee Area Wage Survey. 38 — FOO TN OTES— 1One o f these, covering about 60 prevailing wage employees outside the scope o f their report, was the city’s second written contract with the joint bargaining unit of District Council 48, AFSCME (AFL-CIO) and Local 39 of the International Union of Operating Engineers (AFL-CIO) covering prevailing wage equip ment operators. This 3-year contract was signed on June 27, 1967, and provided for an increase o f 25-cents-an-hour on June 1, 1967, 10 cents as of Dec. 1, 1967, 35 cents on June 1,1968, and an additional 30 cents on June 1, 1969. A fifth week of vacation after 30 years or more o f service was also added. 2A similar salary increase later was approved by the Common Council for the supervisory lieutenant of police class. 3A similar 1968 salary increase was approved by the Common Council later for the supervisory fire captain class. 4 Formerly known as the Wisconsin Employment Relations Board (WERB); it changed to the Wisconsin Employment Rela tion Commission (WERC) by the provisions of chapter 75 of the 1967 Laws o f Wisconsin, which became effective on Aug. 1, 1967. The WERC rejected the union’s complaint in February 1968. The union decided not to appeal the WERC decision because the contract would be terminated anyway by the end o f the year. sPAS had been employed by the City and Milwaukee County in 1966 to make a joint study of all their management and higher professional level positions. The county implemented the recommended PAS management rates at the beginning of 1967; the Common Council’s implementation came 1-year later for the city’s management employees. 6 Local 215 had petitioned WERB in 1963 to conduct an election in the Fire Department. The Board decided that “because o f the authority to direct firefighters, the responsibility for commanding, the authority to discipline and recommend same, the authority and responsibility to evaluate the men under their command, the level of their supervision, the number of men under their supervision, and because o f their pay dif ferential” the fire captain classification was supervisory and therefore excluded from the persons eligible to vote. The WERB, by applying the same criteria, concluded that fire lieutenants did not perform such supervisory duties so as to exclude them from the eligible employees. The Board also had decided in 1963 that “the appropriate bargaining unit must consist o f all eligible employees in the department with the exception o f supervisors, confidential employees, and craft employees or those classifications which constitute a separate division and representation for them are claimed by another organization.” It therefore decided that certain designated civilian positions were to be included in the over-all Fire Department bargaining unit. 39 1968 Developments The year 1968 concluded the 1966-68 contract p erio d between the city and labor organizations representing most of its general employees. It also marked the final year of the 2-year agreement with the Professional Policemen’s Protective Association of Mil waukee. A 1-year memorandum of understanding with the Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Association also expired on December 31. Except for fire and police personnel, salaries of most general employees were adjusted 3 percent or 10-centsan-hour, whichever was greater, effective in the first 1968 pay period. Salary increases for management and professional positions in the top ten pay ranges also in clu d ed special adjustments (averaging about percent) as recommended in the PAS study. Fire personnel ranks from firefighters through fire captain received a flat increase of $668.70 a year.1 Fire person nel above the captain rank received a 3 percent increase plus the special adjustments applicable to the top ten pay ranges of the general salary schedule. Police ranks below captain did not receive a salary adjustment in 1968. Police personnel above the captain rank received a 3 percent increase plus the special adjust ments applicable to the top ten pay ranges o f the general salary schedule. No major changes in fringe benefits were due in 1968 for either general employees or for fire and police service personnel. ' The salary ordinance establishing salary rates for 1968 reversed and renumbered the pay range numbering system previously used from 1961 through 1967 so that the lowest pay range number now included the lowest salary rates and the highest pay range number now included the highest salary rates. (See tables 30-32.) This was done to facilitate electronic data processing of payrolls and to provide an integrated pay plan in which overlapping pay ranges were matched throughout the general pay plan to conform to the PAS plan for management and professional classes of positions. 1969 negotiations begin with 17 unions In 1968, the city entered into negotiations with 17 labor organizations that had existing contracts or memorandums of understanding which were due to expire on December 31, 1968. By the end of the year, 2-year tentative agreements had been reached with four 40 labor organizations representing personnel of the Fire and Police Departments. Early agreement reached with police association Provisions of the tentative agreement with the Profes sional Policemen’s Protective Association included a $500 annual salary increase in 1969 for ranks below captain of police, with additional second year salary increases of $250 effectiye with the first pay period of 1970, plus $270 additional effective pay period 14, 1970, for ranks below lieutenant of police. Agreement also was reached on liberalization of pension, health, and insurance provisions, on an educational program, and on other miscellaneous fringe benefit changes for police service personnel. It was agreed that civilian employees in the bargaining unit would be granted the same wage increases and fringe benefits as later would be granted other general city employees. The Police Association originally had requested annual salaries of $9,520 to $11,020 for patrolmen compared with the 1968 salary range of $7,200 to $8,700 and an equalization of pay differences between police ranks up through lieutenant. Other demands had included 4 weeks of vacation after 15 years of service and 5 weeks after 20 years; time and one-half for overtime worked after 8 hours daily and 40 hours weekly by all employees with police powers; shift differentials of 12 cents and 15 cents for police person nel assigned to early and late shift work; and improved pension, health, and insurance benefits. Local 215 agreement sets pattern for other fire unions The 2-year tentative agreement with the Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Association provided a $400 increase in the annual salary rate for 1969, and an additional $250 increase effective pay period 1, 1970, and a further increase of $250 effective pay period 14, 1970, for all ranks below fire captain except fire prevention officer.2 Major fringe benefit changes were pension, health, and life insurance provisions; special duty pay; standby compensation; a reduction in the average workweek hours by granting two additional days off; permission to take outside employment under strict controls; and other related benefits. All civilian employees of the Fire Department represented by the Fire Fighters’ As sociation were to receive the same wage and fringe benefit increases accorded general city employees. Initial 1969 demands by the Fire Fighters’ Association had included a maximum base salary of $10,200, with comparable pay increases for all members in the bargaining unit; a 40-hour workweek with time and one-half cash payment for overtime after 40 hours; one additional workday off for each successive 5 years of service after 5, 10,15, 20, and 25 years of service; the same holidays as other city employees or 3 additional workdays off in lieu thereof; time and one-half for holidays worked; payment by the city of premiums for major medical insurance; improved pension benefits; increased clothing allowances; an educational program; and other miscellaneous items. Tentative agreements were reached with two other unions representing Fire Department personnel; Local 1037, Uniformed Pilots and Marine Engineers Asso ciation, and Local 494, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, representing fire alarm dispatchers. Generally these reflected the wage and fringe benefits granted under the agreement with the Milwaukee Fire Fighters’ Association. The local 494 agreement also provided for a reallocation of fire alarm dispatchers from pay range 17 of the general salary schedule to pay range 72 of the fire service salary schedule. Negotiations with general city employee unions move slowly Wage talks between the city and 13 other unions that represented most of the city’s general employees had resulted in very little progress before November 11. Although numerous negotiating sessions had been held over the previous 7 months, negotiations were stalled in spite of a negotiating timetable that called for fact find ing if a settlement was not reached by August 1,1968.3 District Council 48’s original demands for a 1969 contract, submitted on February 1, included a 90 cent an hour pay raise and a quarterly cost-of-living adjust ment of one cent for each four-tenths (0.4) of a point increase in the BLS Consumer Price Index for Mil waukee. Further major proposals called for (1) 15 cents second shift pay and a 20 cents third shift pay; (2) a change in the vacation schedule to provide for 3 weeks after 2 years of service; (3) city payment of $15 a month per employee into a union operated health and welfare fund for dental and optical service; (4) a minimum of $10,000 of life insurance for each employee, with the full premium to be paid by the city; (5) full payment by the city of the employee’s annuity contribution; (6) full retirement at age 55 with 30 years of service; (7) double pay (cash or compensatory time off, optional with em ployee) for all work performed on Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays; (8) a change in the pay plan to 41 provide for any ranges of two steps instead of five, the first being a 60 day probationary period and the second step the top step; (9) unlimited accumulation of sick leave at full pay; (10) a long list of job reallocations; (11) removal of the no-strike, no-lockout clause; and (12) negotiation of a strong “no-subcontracting” clause. The union also proposed eliminating the five off-days granted only those general employees on the payroll on January 1, 1963, and substituting five fully paid “personal” days off for all general employees instead. In 1969 major wage and fringe demands submitted by the other unions representing general city employees also included requests for general salary increases, longer vacations, improved overtime pay practices, increases in late shift and weekend differential premiums, city paid m ajor medical insurance, $10,000 noncontributory group life insurance, added holidays with more premium pay for holiday work, expanded hospital and medical in su ran ce coverage and benefits, and substantial improvements in the pension program. City makes counter proposal to initial union demands The city’s response to the union’s demands included proposals that no pay increases be granted for 1969, and that no changes be made in vacations or the city’s contributions to employees’ life and health insurance programs. The city also proposed doubling the monetary strike penalty from $20 to $40 a day for individual em ployees and $500 to $1,000 a day for unions. In ad dition, the city demanded unlimited rights in sub contracting city operations. The city also proposed (1) replacing flat rate payments for employees who used personal cars on city business with payments based on actual mileage; (2) elimination of December 31, as a paid holiday; (3) establishment of a 2 percent service charge for the city’s deducting union dues from employees’ pay checks; (4) elimination of all paid lunch periods, except for employees who worked on a three-shift operation; and (5) that weekend differential premiums be paid only if an employee worked an 8-hour shift during the weekend. City establishes bargaining procedure covering pension requests In preparation for bargaining on 1969 demands, the Common Council, in a resolution adopted on March 7, established a formal procedure for processing pension requests. The resolution directed (1) the city’s labor negotiator to refer requests on pension matters to the appropriate city pension board;4 (2 ) that a staff member of the appropriate pension board attend those negotia ting sessions at which the union explained its pension requests; and (3) that the appropriate board supply the labor negotiator prior to negotiations a report of the cost, method of funding, and legality of the requested changes, and similar information for any subsequent alternate bargaining proposals. The resolution further, required that before any agreement was reached affect ing pensions, the chief labor negotiator would have to confer with the appropriate pension board covering any intended changes before they were presented in his negotiations. Furthermore, the pension boards could make recommended pension changes for the considera tion of the Finance Committee and the Common Council and for such disposition as the committee and the council might deem appropriate; pension negotia tions by the labor negotiator would have to reflect pension changes approved by the Common Council. Negotiations with general employee unions show little progress On July 9, the city’s labor negotiator, following a long evening bargaining session with District Council 48 on July 8, reported that some progress was being made in negotiations with the unions on noncontroversial items but that there had been few advances made on economic issues. In another bargaining session on July 8, the city made its first known wage offer, a b^-cents-anhour increase for about 350 garbage collection laborers represented by Local 61 of the Public Employees Union. The president of Local 61, which was demanding a 1969 pay hike from the current maximum of $6,600 a year to $9,800, said the city’s offer was unacceptable. Representatives of District Council 48 and the city’s negotiating team agreed to meet again sometime in September after making no further progress toward reaching an agreement in a session on August 27. The parties were still far apart on the key wage issue. The union had rejected the city’s offer to raise salaries 41/4-cents-an-hour in 1969 and an additional 8% cents in 1970. The union’s director contended that the city would not now be facing a major wage problem if it had agreed in the fall of 1967 to the union’s request to reopen the matter of 1968 wage provisions under the 3-year contract. He said that an unpredictable increase in the cost-of-living had proven the need for reopening the contract at that time. Following an all day bargaining session on September 10, the Director of District Council 48 stated that negotiators were nowhere near agreement. The union not only rejected the city’s demand to double strike penalties but suggested deletion of the penalty entirely. 42 The union’s director said he would agree to a clause— without penalties—that prohibited both strikes by his union and lockouts by the city. City's chief negotiator reports slowdown in negotiations On October 10, the city’s chief negotiator, in reporting on the progress on negotiations to a closed executive session of the Common Council, told the aldermen that negotiations were nearing a stalemate. He said that neither the city nor the unions had budged from their positions in recent sessions. He added that it was possible that factfinding would be required to settle the dispute. Finally on November 11, the city’s labor negotiator reported that he had asked for mediation assistance from the WERC after the earlier wage talks had not produced settlements. The Finance Committee had scheduled a hearing for November 15, on the unions’ wage settlements, but it was expected that there would not be much to hear unless negotiations took an unexpected turn at the last minute. The city’s negotiator also was expected to come up with an estimate of the cost of all labor contracts before Saturday, November 16, when the Common Council was scheduled to have a 1969 budget hearing. The budget vote by the Common Council was set for Monday, November 18. It would be necessary for the Council to include an amount of money for wage increases, even though negotiations were not completed. Union rivalries and excessive fragmentation complicate negotiations With virtually no progress after months of negotia tions, the city’s negotiator remarked that bargaining with 18 separate unions made negotiations extremely difficult. The big problem was the excessive fragmenta tion of city employees into many unions and jurisdic tions which was permitted under Section 111.70and sub sequent rulings by WERC. The law specified that craft employees must have separate units from non-craft employee groups, and “craft’* was interpreted to mean everything from plumbers to attorneys, nurses, doctors, and dentists. Negotiations were further complicated by political rivalaries between District Council 48, the Teamsters, and the Garbage Laborers Union. The supremacy of District Council 48 was threatened for the first time by the two unions that represented truckdrivers and garbage collectors. At one time members of both unions had belonged to District Council 48. The WERC had au thorized representation elections, and the employees had wiped out the 3 percent (10 cents an hour minimum) y ea rly in creases that city employees got under their 1966-68 contract. County employees had received cost-of-living raises in addition to annual increases under their former contract and city employees had not. The Common Council’s Finance Committee, on the same day, approved the 4 percent wage hike for 1969 and recommended increasing the proposed 1969 city budget to cover the pay increase, plus the city’s increased contribution to the pension fund and other improved fringe benefits. voted to reject District Council 48 as their representa tive. This led to a competitive situation, with each of the three unions trying to outdo the others. Until 1968, District Council 48 had set the pattern for most of the other general employee union contracts with only minor variations. In 1968, the Teamsters and the Garbage Laborers had special demands of their own. Improved city offer designed to break logjam On November 15, following last minute negotiating sessions on November 13 and 14 in which state mediators participated but did not act as mediators, the city proposed a general salary increase of 4 percent for 1969 and 4 percent for 1970 for all general employees. The offer was made to District Council 48 by the city’s negotiator, who said the city could offer no more with out exceeding its mill tax limit. The city also offered to pay most of the cost of employees’ annuity contribu tions and to establish a cost-of-living clause in 1970. District Council 48 membership authorizes strike action Members of locals affiliated with District Council 48, on November 17, rejected the city’s latest contract proposal and authorized a strike by the 4,000 employees in the bargaining unit. By a vote of 1,460 to 30, they gave their local presidents and bargaining team power to schedule the strike “at their discretion” if the deadlock continued. The Council’s director said the union was no longer interested in a 2-year contract. He added that the union’s “final minimum demand” was a 1-year agree ment with 58-cents-an-hour in wage raises and benefit improvements. The demand included a 40-cents-an-hour general wage increase, 16.6-cents-an-hour for changes in the pension plan, a wage escalator clause, and other improvements. No move was made by the union or city to resume negotiations. District Council 48 rejects new city offer The city’s wage offer was rejected immediately by the Director of District Council 48 who said the city’s proposal was “an indecent offer” and announced that the union’s members would meet on Sunday morning, November 17, to decide what to do next. He added that the union’s negotiating committee would recommend rejection of the city’s offer. The city’s contract offer fell far short of Council 48’s demands. Although a precise comparison was difficult, the union’s director said that the city’s offer was at least 30-cents-an-hour short of the union’s demand. The union’s latest demand called for wage and benefit increases totaling at least 56^-centsan-hour in 1969 and another 26 cents in 1970. The union also had asked for a cost-of-living formula in 1969 and the reallocation of a large number of jobs to higher pay ranges. The city’s offer totaled 52 cents to 56-centsan-hour over the 2 years, depending on the exact cost of the pension fund financing. The city’s labor negotiator estimated that the proposed 4 percent increase would result in an hourly wage increase of 19 cents in 1969 and 20 cents in 1970, plus an additional 5 to 6-cents-an-hour in the pension plan. Medical insurance improvements were estimated at an additional 3H-cents-an-hour. The city’s offer was similar to the offer District Council 48 had agreed to in its recent settlement with Milwaukee County, but the union insisted that city employees should get more to catch up with county workers and with wages in private industry. The union contended that the increase in the cost-of-living had City's request for factfinding rejected by W ER C On November 30, the city’s negotiator said that he had requested the WERC to appoint a fact finder to help settle the apparent deadlocks in bargaining with District Council 48 and with Local 61 of the Public Employee U nion w hich represented garbage collectors. The director of District Council 48, on learning of the city’s decision, said he was against factfinding without further negotiations and said he has asked for negotiations to resume on December 5. The WERC on December 3, decided to delay appoint ment of a factfinder pending further negotiations. The WERC chairman said that the two unions charged that the city had violated its contract by requesting factfind ing before going through the necessary steps at the bargaining table. The director of District Council 48, in commenting on the commission’s decision, said that the union’s contract called for factfinding following media tion, and that his union did not intend to go through mediation. Local 61’s president said the union would consider its contract broken if factfinding was ordered in its wage negotiations for 1969, and that under no circum stances would the union participate in factfinding. The 43 union’s president said the contract required that fact finding begin on August 1 and that the fact finder’s recommendations be issued by October 15. The city requested factfinding contrary to the provisions of the contract, he added. The union had presented a revised contract proposal on December 13 that called for a 40-cent-per-hour wage increase for 1969, 30 cents for 1970, and city payment of the employee’s annuity contribution of 5Vi percent of salary. The union asked the city to pick up 3 percent in 1969 and 2 XA percent in 1970. The city offered 2Vi percent in 1969 and 3 percent in 1970. The city’s wage proposal called for a 4 percent raise or 15-cents-an-hour, whichever was greater, the first year, and 4 percent or 12 cents in 1970. The city also offered a less generous costof-living clause for 1970 than the union was seeking. W ER C gives negotiations a needed push City officials and representatives of District Council 48, in a negotiating session on December 5, made no progress after arguing over side issues for two hours. Following this session a WERC member met separately with the two sides as part of an “informal investigation” City again requests factfinding with two major general to determine if an impasse in negotiations existed. A unions joint meeting with the WERC member was set for the following morning. On December 17, the city negotiator in a telegram to At the joint meeting of city and union officials with a the WERC chairman, asked the agency to take imme Commissioner of the WERC on December 6, District diate steps to expedite the start of factfinding in dis Council 48 changed its contract demands and city offi putes with District Council 48 and Local 61. The WERC cials requested time to study the new proposal. The had delayed action on his earlier request on November WERC Commissioner, who had come to Milwaukee the 27, in the hope that negotiations would settle the dis day before to determine whether the city and union had putes. On the same day, the Common Council president reached an impasse and whether a fact finder should be and Finance Committee chairman, in telegrams to the appointed, said that he would meet with the city and Director of District Council 48, turned down his pro with the union again on December 11. posal for direct negotiations. They agreed with the city Following the meeting on December 11, the WERC negotiator’s request for factfinding. Commissioner reported that the city had improved its The WERC on December 18, scheduled hearings on contract offer to District Council 48 in response to the city’s request for a factfinder. A hearing to deter changes the union made in its demands at the December mine whether factfinding proceedings should be started 6 meeting. He said money was still the key issue and ' in the dispute involving Local 61 was set for Monday added that the city and union were willing to solve the morning, December 23. Another hearing was scheduled other issues. The WERC Commissioner was serving as a for the afternoon to deal with the city’s request as it go-between in the negotiations, but not acting as a concerned District Council 48. The Mayor, in a telegram mediator in the strict sense of taking charge of negoti to the Director of District Council 48 on December 20, ations, making suggestions to the parties, and deciding urged him to join with the city’s labor negotiator in when they should meet separately with him and when requesting factfinding. The Mayor said in his request with each other. that he would continue his policy of treating the advi sory recommendations of the factfinder as binding on the city. The union’s director earlier had said that he Negotiations with District Council 48 falter again would attend the hearing to express his objection to factfinding but that union officials would not appear at Negotiators for the city and District Council 48 any hearings, if, and when a factfinder was appointed suddenly broke off wage talks on December 13. The by the WERC. He refused to comment on the Mayor’s WERC commissioner, who had been sitting in on negoti telegram until a meeting with his union’s local presidents ations, said that he believed that wage negotiations were on Monday night, December 23. According to the hopelessly deadlocked. He added that he would tell the union’s position, factfinding should have been con WERC that factfinding was necessary to resolve the impasse which threatened to precipitate a strike. In tele ducted long before the city on November 18 adopted its budget, which included funds for salary increases. grams sent to the Mayor, the President of the Common Council, and the Finance Committee Chairman, later on the same day, the director of District Council 48 Teamsters Union initiates factfinding with city demanded direct talks with top city officials. He charged that negotiations were not working out and said he On December 21, it was announced that Local 242 of wanted to meet with “responsible public officials.” th e T eam sters U n io n , representing about 400 44 truckdrivers in the Department of Public Works, would ask the WERC to appoint a factfinder in its wage dispute with the city. The Teamsters Union wanted its members to be paid “prevailing rates,” the same hourly rates as paid truckdrivers in the construction industry in Milwaukee. This was the practice that the city had followed for years in the setting of wage rates for con struction craftsmen employed by the city, but the city had successfully rejected suggestions that it be extended to noncraft workers. Construction industry rates were much higher than the rates paid by the city. The city had offered the Teamsters a 4 percent wage increase for 1969, 4 percent for 1970, payment of employee annuity contributions, and a cost-of-living formula for 1970—the same offer made to the other unions. Local 61 and District Council 48 balk on factfinding At the WERC hearing on the morning of December 23 the president of Local 61 told the WERC that the union would not participate in factfinding, even if ordered to do so. He said the city had ignored the fact finders’ recommendations in previous disputes with his union in 1963 and 1966. An attorney for District Council 48 at a second WERC hearing in the afternoon, argued that the appointment of a factfinder in its dispute would be a violation of its labor agreement. Later that night officials of District Council 48 sched uled a strike against the city but refused to reveal the date pending a new effort to settle its dispute. Negoti ators for the city and union agreed to meet again on Friday, December 27, with a WERC commissioner present in an attempt to break the deadlock before the union contract expired on December 31. 1968 representation activities keep W E R C busy During 1968 four bargaining unit representation elections were held under the auspices of the WERC. These resulted in the establishment of a bargaining unit in the operations section of the Bureau of Municipal Equipment represented by the Municipal Truckdrivers’ Local Union 242, affiliated with the International Union of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousmen, and Helpers of America;5 establishment of bargaining units in the Building and Grounds Division of the Police Depart ment, and in the Technical and Maintenance Division of the Department of City Development, represented by District Council 48; and the establishment of a bar gaining unit including the firemen at the Parklawn Housing Project in the Department of City Development represented by Local 317, International Union of Operating Engineers (AFL-CIO). In addition, the city granted recognition to District Council 48 as the repre sentative of employees in the Real Estate Division and in the Planning and Programming Division of the Depart ment of City Development. Middle management classes receive selective adjustments in 1968 In 1968, the city undertook a revision of the salary plan particularly in respect to middle level supervisory and professional classes excluded from bargaining units in order to solve recruitment and retention problems and to relate the salaries to higher level administrative and professional classes covered under the PAS salary adjustments reflected in the top ten pay ranges for 1968. Recommended salary increases for these classes later were incorporated in the 1969 general salary schedule. The Classification Division, in 1968, conducted its annual survey of wages and fringe benefits in 27 major cities and contracted with the BLS to again make a special survey of wages and related practices in large Milwaukee firms at the same time that BLS conducted its regular annual Milwaukee area wage survey. City and District Council 48 reach tentative agreement After almost 24 hours o f continuous negotiations the city and District Council 48 reached tentative agreement on a new 2-year contract on December 28. Although the settlement covered all the big issues, some items were set aside for further bargaining the following week. The union’s director said the bargaining committee would recommend that the members accept it. Details of the pact were not announced pending ratification by the union; and on Monday, December 30, the city’s Labor Negotiator told the Common Council that he would not publicly divulge the terms until he had settled with all bargaining units. No progress was made in a negotiation session on December 30, with Public Employees’ Union No. 61 and no further meetings were scheduled. On the following day the union’s president said the union was considering a strike. 45 — FOO TN O TES— ‘ Fire captains, although not in the bargaining unit repre sented by the Fire Fighters’ Association, received the same flat increase in 1968 so as to maintain the same wage differential between captains and fire lieutenants in terms o f cash, although not in terms o f percentage. 2The salary for fire prevention officer was frozen at $9,217.28 a year during 1969, and during the first 13 pay periods of 1970; thereafter the salary was to be the same as for firefighter. The fire prevention officer rank was eventually phased out. Fire captains, although not in the bargaining unit, received the same flat increase for 1969. 3See “New Timetable Suggested for Future Negotiations,” p. 23. 4Milwaukee has three retirement benefit systems with separate retirement boards. The Fireman’s Annuity and Benefit System and the Policemen’s Annuity and Benefit System were established by acts of the legislature in the early 1920’s and all employees who were in the regular service on that date and those who entered prior to July 29, 1947, were eligible for member ship in the fund. Both systems were “closed” to new entrants on that date and all persons employed by either the Fire Depart ment or the Police Department on or after July 29, 1947, have been required to be members of the general City Employees’ Retirement System, although with somewhat different provi sions than those stipulated for regular city employees. The general City Employees’ Retirement System was established Jan. 1,1938. (See table 24 for 1970 provisions.) 5 The more than 400 truckdrivers, equipment operators, and other allied workers in the city’s Bureau of Municipal Equipment in this new bargaining unit had formerly been represented by Local 33 of District Council 48. District Council 48 had been certified by the WERB in 1963 to bargain for more than 1,500 employees in the City Depart ment o f Public Works-including these more than 400 employ ees-when it defeated Teamsters’ Local 200 in a representation election. 46 1969 Developments Negotiations that had begun in April 1968, were still in progress at the beginning of 1969 with 12 of 17 labor organizations whose contracts had expired on December 31,1968. Garbage collectors union stages strike On the morning of January 3,360 garbage collection laborers, represented by Public Employees’ Union No. 61, went on strike.1 The workers left their jobs after contract talks broke off following an all-night bargaining session. The union was demanding a 79 cent-per-hour wage increase in a 2-year contract plus a cost-of- living escalator clause and city financing of pensions. The city’s last offer included a 39 cent-per-hour wage increase, pension changes, and a cost-of-living clause w hich was unacceptable to the union. A WERC commissioner who had been participating in the negoti ations scheduled a meeting for January 6, in an effort to settle the strike. District Council 48 members ratify agreement with city Meanwhile, the contract settlement with District Council 48, which was reached on December 28, 1968, was ratified by the union in a membership meeting on January 5. First-year terms of this 2-year agreement provided for an increase of 25 cents an hour or 4 percent, whichever was greater, effective pay period 2, 1969 ; and for an additional increase of 10-cents-an-hour on July 6, 1969, to raise an employee’s minimum salary increase for the year to 35-cents-an-hour. Many workers also received additional increases as the result of nego tiated reallocations. Changes in fringe benefits for 1969 included 3-weeks of vacation after eight rather than 10 years of service; an increase of 2-cents-an-hour in shift differential premiums; full payment by the city of up to $7,000 of life insurance coverage for the employee; implementation o f a uniform 5.5 percent pension deduction rate for general city employees, with the city paying 3 percent o f the employee’s annuity contri bution; an additional “off day” for all employees; and full payment by the city of tuition reimbursement up to a maximum o f $150 a year for each employee. Maximum pension benefits were boosted from a limit of 70 percent to 75 percent of the final average annual salary the employee had received in his three highest 47 earning years, with a provision that in 1970 the maximum would go to 80 percent. The pension formula was simplified and improved to provide benefits equiv alent to 1.9 percent of final average salary multiplied by years of service effective the first 1969 pay period. The agreement also provided that in 1970 the city would pay the remaining 2.5 percent of the 5.5 percent of the em ployee’s annuity contribution. O th er sec o n d -y ea r provisions included a 20 cent-per-hour increase in wages for 1970, plus a cost-ofliving adjustment; full payment by the city of major medical insurance and of up to $8,000 of life insurance coverage; and an additional 2 cent-per-hour increase in shift differential premiums. The parties also agreed to a new merit promotional program which provided additional salary increments above the maximum rate for second, third, and fourth level clerical classifications in pay ranges 7, 10, and 12. Personnel would become eligible after having completed a specified number of years at the maximum rate at each range and if they had successfully completed job-related course work as defined or determined in accordance with the terms of the agreement. The agreement also contained an unusual provision to keep a rival union from getting ahead of District Council 48. City laborers (regular) in the Bureau of Street Sani tation were equated in salary with garbage collection laborers (truck loader-conbustible) and their job title was changed to “sanitation laborer.” Provision also was made that if garbage collection laborers (who were then on strike) received a wage increase greater than District Council 48 received, Department of Public Works laborers in pay ranges 9 and 10 would receive an addi tional increase equal to the difference between Council 48’s general increase and the increase received by garbage collection laborers. Agreement with garbage collectors union ends strike The strike by Public Employees’ Union No. 61 ended late on January 9, when the garbage collection laborers ratified a new 2-year contract that was agreed to earlier in the day. The settlement came after several intensive negotiating sessions in which a WERC commissioner acted as mediator. The new contract provided hourly pay raises in 1969 and 1970 identical to the pay increases provided in District Council 48’s contract, which had been ratified on January 5. Fringe benefit they get “prevailing rates,” the rates paid truckdrivers in the building construction industry. The factfinder concluded that the union had failed to justify its demands for prevailing rates, which were higher than city rates. The city had contended that it was misleading to compare city wages with those in the construction industry, because the city’s fringe benefits were more generous. provisions also were the same. The city reserved the right to consolidate garbage and trash collection at some future date. Most other unions accept District Council 48 formula Two-year agreements with most other bargaining units covering general city employees were concluded subsequently; their provisions were generally in accord with the District Council 48 contract. Other general employees outside the bargaining units received similar salary increases and improved fringe benefits by action of the Common Council. Settlements with three bar gaining units, however, were not concluded until late in 1969 after lengthy factfinding proceedings. The three unions involved were Technicians, Engineers, and Archi tects of Milwaukee (TEAM); Local 195, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (AFL-CIO) which represented bridgetenders; and Municipal Truckdrivers Local Union 242, affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffers, Warehouseman, and Helpers of America. W ER C continues active role in representation cases The city was involved in five representation cases during 1969. A bargaining unit represented by District Council 48 was established in the Department of Central Electronic Data Services. A significant representation case initiated in 1967 was settled in July 1969, when the Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed WERC and Circuit Court decisions to create a bargaining unit of the city’s attorneys to be represented by the Association of Municipal Attorneys of Milwaukee. The Association of Municipal Attorneys, representing the city’s 23 assistant attorneys, had petitioned WERC for factfinding in August, 1968, when the city refused to bargain with the Association on a 1968 request for a $4,000 annual salary increase. Three late settlements follow factfinding proceedings The latest and most significant of these three settle ments occurred in December with TEAM. In addition to including similar fringe benefits granted to other general city employees for 1969 and 1970, except for a cost-ofliving adjustment, this 3-year contract provided for a separate pay plan with a 10 percent salary increase retro active to pay period 2, 1969, and a 6 percent salary increase in 1970 for engineers and architects; plus merit steps based on service and education for the engineering technicians represented by TEAM. The city had offered 4 percent each year. Provision was made for reopening negotiations in 1970 on the subject of wages to be paid in 1971, changes in the general pension program to be extended to create uniformity with any changes for general city employees, and other items that might be mutually agreed on. This was the first time that such a reopener clause had been included in one of the city’s contracts or memorandums of understanding with a labor union. Local 195’s 2-year contract covering bridge operators (formerly bridgetenders) and boat operators called for a one pay range reallocation in addition to the same 1969 and 1970 pay increases as agreed to by District Council 48. The factfinder in the Teamsters’ contract dispute recommended that the union’s truckdrivers and special equipment operators get raises identical to those granted to most other general city employees for 1969 and 1970. Teamsters’ Local 242, representing about 450 employees, had demanded that 48 City Attorney rules on legality of negotiations in private The question of whether the city could legally conduct labor negotiations in private was raised offi cially in connection with 1969 wage negotiations with the Attorney’s Association. The chief negotiator, in a letter of November 4, asked the city attorney for an opinion after reporters on November 3, had refused to leave a bargaining session at which the city’s negotiating team decided that negotiations had to be conducted in private. The City Attorney, in his reply of November 5, said that the State Supreme Court, in a recent decision involving the Milwaukee School Board, had stated that “While preliminary steps of the bargaining process between a school board and a teachers’ majority repre sentative union may be carried on in private, once the bargaining period is past, no final action can be taken until the recommended changes in salary schedules are made public and discussed in an open meeting, which is the final step in the negotiation process.” The City Attorney wrote, “If you do determine that you are initiating preliminary negotiating steps then on such basis in the light of the case’s declarations we conclude that such steps may be carried on in private.” Two representative cases, one involving police supervisors and one a District Council 48 challenge of the Teamster bargaining unit, were dismissed following hearings by the Wisconsin Relations Commission. The Professional Policemen’s Protective Association had filed a petition for factfinding on July 8, 1966, with the WERC alleging that the city had failed and refused to negotiate with the PPPA as the bargaining representative for all ranks of the Police Department below the Chief of Police. The decision of the WERC, issued on March 12, 1969, held that members of the Police Department holding the rank of lieutenant and above were agents of the Police Department with respect to the relationship of the city and the nonsupervisory ranks of the Police Department. The commission further held that members of the Police Department holding the rank of lieutenant or above, or their representatives, did not have the right to proceed to factfinding. The commission noted that the supervisory duties of members of the Police Depart ment, having the rank of lieutenant and above, had not, since the issuance of its March 19, 1965 decision, changed to such an extent that they were now nonsuper visory employees. The PPPA had raised the identical issue in a petition for representation filed on November 1, 1963, and the commission had then ruled that members of the Police Department having the rank of lieutenant and above were supervisory employees. The city’s position was that the ranks of sergeant and above should have been excluded as supervisory when the matter of PPPA certification first was presented to the WERC in 1963. District Council 48 once again unsuc cessfully challenged the outcome of the August 9, 1968, representation election in which Teamsters’ Local 242 had won the right to represent 398 truckdrivers and equipment operators formerly represented by Local 33 of District Council 48. One additional case concerning employees of the Central Board of Purchases remained pending at the close of 1969. The Classification Division, as in past years, con ducted its annual wage and fringe benefit survey of 27 major cities. In addition it again contracted with BLS for a special survey of wage: and fringe benefits in large Milwaukee firms to be made at the same time that BLS conducted its regular annual Area Wage Survey. — F O O TN O TES— Local 33, District Council 48. The truckdrivers, who were represented by the Teamsters Union, did not strike, but most of them were idled when laborers struck. 1The strike halted the collection of garbage and household trash that were burned at city incinerators. The strike did not affect the collection o f noncombustible materials that were hauled to land fill sites. That work was done by members of 49 1970 Developments Council on January 22. The plan, proposed by the city personnel director, eliminated the automatic pay raises that management employees had received annually in the past. This new plan extended to all management employees who were in 1969 pay ranges 13 and above. All management employees were granted a 5 xh percent general salary increase, effective pay period 1,1970. All management positions were assigned to 31 eight-step pay ranges. (See table 34.) Annual anniversary advances through the sixth step required a favorable recommen dation from the department or bureau head after appropriate formal merit review and evaluation of job performance. In addition to the SVi percent general increase, all management employees receiving a favorable merit review recommendation were also eligible for an additional one-step increase (approximately 4 # percent). Steps 7 and 8 of the plan, called special management review rates, and intended to be used for extraordinary performance, were not activated during 1970. In the early part of 1970, the attorneys, represented by the Association of Municipal Attorneys, were placed under the management pay plan.1 The second year of the 2-year, 1970, union agree m en t p erio d covered most city nonmanagement employees. Terms of the contracts or memorandums of u n d e rsta n d in g fo r most general nonmanagement employees provided for a 20-cents-an-hour increase in wages for 1970, plus an hourly cost-of-living adjustment of 10.7 cents ($8.59 biweekly) to reflect the change in the BLS Consumer Price Index for Milwaukee between November 1968 and November 1969. Major changes in fringe benefit terms included (1) full payment by the city of major medical insurance and of up to $8,000 of group life insurance coverage; (2) an increase from 13 cents to 15-cents- an-hour for second shift work and from 18 cents to 20 cents for third shift work; (3) city payment of the employee’s pension annuity contri bution; and (4) further liberalization of pension benefits. Management employees and nonmanagement employees in a few bargaining units did not receive the same wage increase and cost-of-living adjustment, although most received the same fringe benefit changes. One exception to the general wage increase and costof-living adjustment applying to most nonmanagement employees had been an increase of 6 percent without a cost-of-living increase given to engineering personnel represented by the Technicians, Engineers, and Architects of Milwaukee (TEAM) bargaining unit. This was the result of a 3-year agreement beginning in 1969. In addition, employees represented by the Association of Scientific Personnel and by the Association of Physicians and Dentists bargaining units received an increase of 20-cents-an-hour plus the cost-of-living increase, or 4 percent plus the cost-of-living increase, whichever was greater. Police and fire service personnel represented by the Policemen’s Association and Fire Fighters’ Association received a $250 increase in annual rates effective with the first pay period in 1970, in accordance with their 1969-1970 contracts. In addition, nonsupervisory police officers received another $270 increase effective pay period 14, while nonsupervisory fire personnel received $250 more effective pay period 14. Civilian employees in these two bargaining units received the same wage and cost-of-living increases as granted nonmanagement general city employees. Unions submit 1971 wage and fringe benefit demands During 1970, the city was involved in labor negoti ations with 17 labor unions having contracts or memorandums of understanding that would expire on December 31.2 New wage and fringe demands for 1971 that were submitted by the unions late in January fore warned o f a long year of heated and difficult bargaining in the midst of what city officials described as a fiscal crisis of major proportions. By the end of 1970, contract terms remained unsettled with all bargaining units except two, which together represented fewer than 100 workers. The first negotiated agreement occurred in April. This settlement was reached with the Association of Physicians and Dentists and provided that physician and dentist classes be placed under the management merit review pay plan beginning with pay period 9, 1970, through December 31, 1973. Dental hygenists w ere granted an additional 10-cents-an-hour wage increase for the remainder of 1970.3 The agreement further provided that dental hygenists would receive general wage increases in 1971,1972, and 1973 equal to the general wage increases granted to other employees of comparable status as determined by the city. In November, an agreement was reached with the joint bargaining unit of Local 139, International Union New management pay plan approved A merit review pay plan for approximately 865 management employees was approved by the Common 50 vacation time, extra holidays, more pay for weekend work, improvements in health and life insurance cover age, extra retirement benefits, numerous reallocations, and a long list of miscellaneous items. of Operating Engineers and District Council 48 repre senting about 70 prevailing wage equipment operators.4 District Council 48 lists extensive demands for 1971 The largest city union, District Council 48, had submitted demands for a 1971 contract that included a 50-cent-an-hour pay increase, a semiannual instead of an annual cost-of-living adjustment, and a 35-hour week. Other major contract proposals were (1) a change in vacations to provide for 2 weeks after 1 year of service, three after 5 years, four after 10 years, and five after 20; (2) an additional 2 paid holidays to include a day off on January 15, to honor the memory of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., a day off to celebrate the employee’s anniversary of joining the union, and a full day off on Good Friday instead of only a half day; (3) a $15,000 noncontributory life insurance policy; (4) double-time pay for Saturday, Sunday, and holiday work, which was paid at the rate of time and one-half; (5) and 4 hours of guaranteed pay, instead of two, for employees called in on their day off. Other demands included unlimited sick leave, improvements in hospital and medical insurance coverage, a $10 a member a month contribution to the union’s dental and drug prescription plan, liberalized pension benefits, terminal leave pay, a maximum of 1 year of full-paid injury pay for each duty-incurred injury, and a number of miscel laneous items. City hints at specific proposals for each union Although bargaining was not scheduled to begin until April 15, the city’s negotiators on March 16, asked the unions to begin bargaining as soon as possible. Rather than submitting a list of city demands as required, the city’s chief negotiator and personnel director, in a letter to the respective unions, said the city was prepared to discuss general rates of pay; limitations on time off with pay; pension and insurance improvements; limitations on union activity relating to subjects covered in bargaining; and the duration, form, and content of the contract. The city, the letter said, had specific proposals which would be discussed with each union at the initial and sub sequent negotiating sessions. City's 1970 negotiations with District Council 48 start slowly Most 1969-70 union contracts and memorandums of understanding incorporated a bargaining timetable that was identical to that included in earlier agreements. This timetable called for mediation, if any, to begin by July 15, if negotiations were not completed. Factfinding, if any, was to begin by August 1, with recommendations issued by October 15. In spite of the timetable, hard bargaining over 1971 economic demands did not get underway until late in October. On October 22, District Council 48’s bargaining team announced that it had broken off contract negotiations. The union’s executive director said that the city had proposed a 3-year con tract with raises averaging about 5 percent the first year, 4 to 4 lA percent the second year, and a straight 4 # percent the third. He added that the city had offered a cost-of-living adjustment in 1973 but had offered nothing to cover higher living costs in 1971. The city, he added, was “still hanging on to its first counteroffer, only slightly amended.” The union’s latest proposal was for a 2-year contract with a 35 cent-per-hour raise on January 1, 15 cents more on July 1, an additional 20 cents on January 1, 1972, and 15 cents in July, 1972. The union also demanded cost-of-living adjustments in January and July of the second year. The union further charged that the city wanted to take away the vested pension rights of employees with less than 10 years of service, and not put any money into their annuity fund until they had 10 years of service. The city’s Labor Negotiator, on the other hand, contended that the city’s Various demands submitted by other large unions Wage demands of other large city unions included a request by the Policemen’s Association that the starting pay for patrolmen be increased $2,280 a year to a minimum rate of $10,500 in 1971 with an increase of $3,780 in the maximum rate, providing a new maximum rate of $13,500 after 3 years of service, and comparable increases for other jobs in the bargaining unit. The Fire Fighters’ Association had asked for pay equality with policemen’s salaries, a 40-hour workweek, a costof-living increase, and longevity pay of 3 percent for each 5 years of service up to a maximum of 12 percent after 20 years. Public Employees’ Local Union 61 demanded an annual salary equal to or better than $11,800, a quarterly cost-of-living adjustment, and 3 percent longevity pay for each 5 years of service. Teamsters’ Local 242 sought a pay raise of $l-an-hour and reallocation of truckdrivers from pay range 11, which paid a maximum of $7,308 a year, to pay range 18 with a maximum yearly salary of $9,703. Like District Council 48, the other unions also had asked for im p ro v ed fringe benefits that included increased 51 pension offer would terminate the annuity account for new employees, but that the city would provide them with a fully paid pension system with vesting after 10 years. He said that all employees who had put any money into the annuity portion of the retirement pro gram would continue to have the right to withdraw it if they left their city jobs. He added, though, that since 1968 the city had paid the total cost of the program so new employees would not have anything to withdraw. He also said that the city offered to increase pension benefits under the proposed new three-year contract. combine the separate refuse and garbage collections that were presently being handled by the city’s Garbage and Street Sanitation Bureaus. Workers in the new bureau coming from the two bureaus had formerly been repre sented by four unions: Public Employees’ Local Union No. 61 had represented garbage collection laborers; District Council 48 had represented street sanitation crews and noncombustible rubbish collectors; truckdrivers had been represented by Teamsters’ Local 242; and incinerator plant workers had been represented by Local 125-B of the Firemen and Oilers. The city, in asking the WERC to hold the election, contended that there should be a single union for all the workers in the new bureau. It said the WERC should consider the matter an emergency because the contracts of the respective unions expired on December 31. The elimination of several hundred jobs under the new waste disposal system and the rivalry among the unions for the right of representing workers was affecting the progress of labor negotiations. The city’s labor negotiator and City Personnel Director said that they could not nego tiate a new contract without knowing who would repre sent the workers. The WERC chairman replied that it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to hold the election before December 31. A layoff plan proposed by the City Personnel Director in anticipation of the creation of the new Bureau of Sanitation, was rejected by the City Service Commission in response to objections by union leaders who contended that such matters were negotiable. City officials had estimated that the city’s new waste disposal system would result in laying off from 150 to 250 workers. The proposed plan would provide general guidelines for dismissing the excess workers, but it did not go into detail or specify the number of employees to be dismissed. It suggested that seniority be the basis for determining who would be laid off and proposed that efforts be made to find jobs for workers in other departments. 1971 budget includes 5% million for anticipated wage increases The city’s negotiating team, in a letter of November 5, to the Finance Committee, proposed that $5.5 million be appropriated in the 1971 budget for pay and fringe benefits resulting from new wage contracts. It was not known how much money would be needed because negotiations with the city’s unions were not completed. The city’s budget procedures however, required that the funds be included in the proposed budget to be adopted later in November. It was proposed that $4 million be placed in a special fund for wage increases and that $1.5 million be put in the contingent fund to cover fringe benefits and some unforseeable costs. Subsequently, the Common Council, on November 20, adopted the 1971 b u d g et w h ich in c lu d e d a contingency fund of $5,250,000, most of which went for anticipated wage raises and fringe benefit changes. L ate in November the city’s labor negotiator announced that contract negotiations between the city and District Council 48 would be resumed on December 8. It would be the first bargaining session since midOctober when the union’s negotiation team rejected the city’s wage offer and broke off talks. On December 2, members of District Council 48 voted unanimously to reject the city’s last offer and authorized their leaders to call a strike, if necessary, to win a satisfactory contract. Negotiations with District Council 48 break off City petitions W E R C for representation election in new Bureau of Sanitation Negotiations that had resumed on December 8 between the city and District Council 48 broke off again on December 22 when the union rejected a new city offer and set a strike deadline of January 11. The union’s director said that the city had only reiterated the position it had made earlier; that offer had already been rejected by the union membership on December 2. The city’s Labor Negotiator, however, said that the city had presented a revised and improved offer. The city’s offer, he added, included a pay increase of 5 lA percent for 1971, a 4 percent raise for 1972, and 3 percent for the Two days later, on December 4, the city petitioned the WERC to hold an election as soon as possible to determine which union would represent the approxi mately 1,000 workers in the newly consolidated Bureau of Sanitation. The new bureau was set up to handle a new waste disposal system that called for a private scavenger firm to haul most of the city’s garbage and refuse to landfill sites outside the county beginning January 4. This new system would enable the city to 52 third year, plus cost-of-living adjustments in 1972 and 1973. The offer also included a substantial improvement in the pension program. Both city and union officials said that no further bargaining sessions were scheduled. The WERC chairman announced on December 29, that a hearing on the city’s petition for a representation election for employees in the new Bureau of Sanitation was scheduled for January 6. He also announced that negotiations between the city and District Council 48 would resume on January 5, at the request of the WERC, with the three members of the WERC partici pating in the talks. instructing the Police Chief not to take disciplinary action against the police bargaining team members for good faith negotiations on subjects of wages, hours, and conditions of employment in bargaining sessions with the city. The resolution also directed the chief to send an authorized representative to negotiating sessions. The four unions involved in garbage collection and street sanitation work had been urged by the WERC to keep working, pending a hearing on the city’s request for an election to reduce the four unions to one to represent the workers in the new Bureau of Sanitation. Local 242 of the Teamsters’ Union, one of the four unions, on December 14, had voted to authorize a strike if contract talks failed. Other city unions were expected to continue to work even if they had not formally extended their agreements. Contracts extended by city and its employee unions On December 30, the city negotiator said that all labor contracts expiring at midnight on December 31, would be extended either formally or informally. The agreement with the Fire Fighters’ Association was extended to January 19, after a meeting on December 30. Another bargaining session was scheduled for January 14. A WERC member had been mediating talks between the city and the association. Earlier on December 15, the Fire Fighters’ Association had taken the first strike vote in its history; the results had been overwhelmingly in favor of a walkout if agreement on a new contract had not been reached by December 31. 1970 At the close of 1970, it was estimated that there were more than 25,000 public employees in the Milwaukee area working under terms of agreements that were ex piring at midnight on December 31. Included were about 25,000 employees working for the city, the County School Board, the Milwaukee Sewerage Commission, and the Milwaukee Area Technical College (formerly the Mil waukee Vocational School). In addition, there were public employee contracts in many Milwaukee area suburbs that would also expire on New Year’s Eve. Contract negotiations between the five taxing units and more than 30 unions had been underway for many months without a major new contract having been signed. Only two agreements, both with the city, had been reached and they covered less than 100 employees. The independent association representing 24 doctors, dentists, and dental hygenists early in 1970 had accepted coverage under the city’s management pay plan rather than negotiate pay rates. The joint bargaining unit of Local 139 of the Operating Engineers and District Council 48, representing 70 prevailing wage heavy equip ment operators, also had reached an agreement with the city in November on a 2-year contract. But about 8,500 other city employees represented by 15 unions still did not have new agreements. PPPA membership authorizes strike vote After a short meeting on December 29, negotiators for the city and the Policemen’s Association agreed to extend the Police Association’s contract to January 12, after the membership had voted overwhelmingly on December 28, to give their board of trustees, their negotiating team, the authority to call a strike if nego tiations failed. It was the first strike vote by policemen in the city’s history. An association official emphasized that a vote authorizing the board to call a strike would not necessarily assure a walkout. He assured members that the trustees hoped to return to the bargaining table and obtain a new contract. If the trustees felt a strike was the only way out, he said, another membership meeting would be held. He said the vote would be used to convince the city labor negotiator, other city officials, and the police chief that the trustees wanted to bargain without the threat of disciplinary action by the Police Department for their activities at the bargaining table. Members of the union’s board of trustees had been disciplined earlier for such action, he alleged. Shortly after the announcement that the contract with the Police Association had been extended, the Common Council unanimously passed a resolution ends with little to show in metropolitan area public employee negotiations Other major taxing units report tentative agreements Tentative agreements, however, had been reached by the other taxing units covering some of their employees. The school board had reached tentative agreement on a new 2-year contract with the Milwaukee Teachers 53 corporated the terms of agreements reached with District Council 48. The first written contract was a 2-year agreement for 1969 and 1970. Education Association covering 5,400 teachers. The teachers were to vote on the pact by mail, with the re sults expected by January 18. Tentative agreements also had been reached with three other unions covering about 1,700 school engineers, clerks, truckdrivers, and other employees. No agreements had been reached with substi tute teachers, school aides, and accountants. The county had reached a tentative agreement on December 24, with negotiators for the county’s largest union, District Council 48 representing about 6,000 employees, but the union membership had voted to reject the agreement. No agreements had been reached with four other unions representing about 460 other county employees. The Technical College had reached tentative agreements with two unions (Local 212 of the American Federation of Teachers and District Council 48) representing all of the school’s 680 teaching and nonteaching employees. Ratification meetings were scheduled for early in Jan uary. No settlements had been reached by the Sewerage Commission and its three unions representing about 350 employees. The commission had voted to extend the old contracts for 30 days. The first certification of District Council 48 as a bargaining representative for employees of the Mil waukee Area Technical College was made in November 1968. The union currently represents their clerical, custodial, maintenance, and security guards. Before November 1968, the college recognized District Council 48 and had consummated three 1-year contracts. The first was effective January 1, 1966. Before 1966, there were no contracts but agreements with the union were passed in the form of board resolutions. The various employee groups were recognized by the college at dif ferent times; however, by the time District Council 48 was certified by WERC, practically all employees covered by the union had been recognized by the college. District Council 48 was certified to represent all non craft and nonsupervisory employees of the Sewerage Commission on April 2, 1965. A resolution was passed by the commission approving and adopting the terms of the first labor agreement on March 31,1966, which was a 1-year agreement effective January 1, 1966. Sub sequently, agreements were each for 2-years (1967-68 and 1969-70). There was much closer coordination than in the past. In March, the Common Council had ap proved a resolution of its Finance Committee aimed at strengthening the collective bargaining of the five major taxing units in Milwaukee . The proposal spelled out the importance of closer cooperation among the five govern mental units to assure (1) development of uniform bargaining conditions in the preparation for negotiations and during negotiations, (2) an exchange of information between the units to effect economies in preparing for negotiations; and (3) a reduction of “whipsaw” bargain ing by unions. The resolution asked negotiators for the five units to hold monthly meetings to exchange in formation. In the past, representatives of the units had held meetings to exchange information on bargaining, but the meetings were infrequent and often of little value. District Council 48’s director claimed that they saw the school board appeared to be making the same proposals and counterproposals as advanced by the city, and that they related to what the county had offered. He believed, however, that the five taxing units showed more mistrust and suspicion among themselves than unity of purpose. In 1969, he had suggested that they band together and bargain jointly with his union which represented about 13,500 employees of the city, county, school board, technical college, and Sewerage Com mission.5 Five major taxing unit negotiators confer regularly Negotiators for the five taxing units had been meeting and coordinating their negotiations with District Council 48, as they had done in previous years. District Council 48 was certified to represent a large majority of the nonsupervisory employees of Milwaukee County on December 10, 1965. The first bargaining session took place on January 21, 1966 and a 2-year contract for 1967-68 was finally agreed to on February 3, 1967. In subsequent representation elections, District Council 48 was certified to represent laborers and construction job equipment operators, social workers, and pharmacists on August 2, 1966; barbers on March 19, 1968; court reporters on December 22, 1969; parttime hospital attendants and child psychiatric aides on August 6, 1970; and dentists on August 7, 1970. The union’s second county contract was for 1969 and 1970 and covered approximately 6,000 employees. The WERB on July 16,1963, certified District Council 48 to represent municipal recreation custodial em ployees on the school board. On December 7, 1966, District Council 48 was certified to represent window cleaners; on June 21, 1967, store clerks, material handlers, and truckdrivers; on May 28, 1969, social work aides; on June 24, 1969, clerical and technical em ployees; and on February 17, 1970, repair and construc tion division employees. For the years 1964 through 1968 the school board adopted resolutions that in 54 the buyers in the Central Board of Purchases, who had asked initially that they be represented, and later had asked to represent the whole department. This resulted in an election being held on February 2, in which neither the Milwaukee Purchasing Department Employees’ In dependent Union, District Council 48, nor the choice for no representation received a majority of the 27 ballots cast by the 30 eligible voters. Previously, in 1964, “a majority of employees” in purchasing had voted against union representation. The Classification Division in 1970, as in previous years, conducted a survey of salaries, fringe benefits, and related pay practices of municipal employees in 28 major cities. It also contracted with the BLS to survey additional jobs at the time BLS conducted its regular annual Milwaukee Area Wage Survey in the spring of 1970. Several representation elections held in 1970 During the course of the year, the city was involved in several representation cases. Natatoria employees in the Bureau of Bridges and Public Buildings voted to decertify their former representative, Local 17, Building Service Employees International Union. Twice during the year, District Council 48, sought to enlarge its representation in the Bureau of Municipal Equipment to cover truckdrivers. The first case was dismissed and the second case resulted in an election being held, which Teamsters Local 242 won. The city, after discussions with District Council 48, agreed, without a WERC elec tion, to recognize the union as the representative of a number of positions in the Department of City Develop ment, some of which were formerly considered by the city to be management. One additional case concerned agreed to a percentage reduction o f offset of the prevailing wage rates in return for full city fringe benefits. The 2-year contract provided wages o f 95 percent o f prevailing wage in the construc tion industry for the first year (June, 1970-May, 1971) and of 92 percent o f the prevailing wage in the construction industry for the second year (June, 1971-May, 1972). Full city fringe benefits, including holidays, were to be granted effective Jan. 3, 1971. 1The Association of Municipal Attorneys was formed in 1965. In 1967, the WERC certified the association as bargaining agent for assistant city attorneys. This action was challenged by the city on the grounds that the attorneys were management employees and thus did not constitute an appropriate bargaining unit. In July 1969, the State Supreme Court upheld the asso ciation’s right to bargain. 2T ech n ician s, Engineers, and Architects of Milwaukee (TEAM) had a 3-year contract that expired on Dec. 31, 1971. This agreement included a 1970 reopening clause for negotiating wages to be paid in 1971, changes in the general pension plan, and other items mutually agreed to. 3The 10-cents-an-hour wage increase was in addition to the 1970 wage increase called for in the association’s 2-year agree ment that would have expired on December, 1970. 4 Prevailing wage employees are outside the scope o f this report. A significant aspect o f this agreement, which was retro active to June 1, was that for the first time a city trade union 5 On June 20, 1969, the Executive Director of District Council 48 and the national President o f AFSCME, in a meeting of officials o f the five taxing units, had proposed unified labor negotiations by the five units, with uniform wages and fringe benefits. Other recommendations in the union’s proposed plan to ease the money problems of the five local governments included the establishment of a trust company by the five units with employee pension funds as a major source of deposits and investment capital, and incentives for the 30,000 employees of the five bodies to use the county hospital. 55 Table 1. General salary changes-general city employees, Milwaukee Applications, exceptions, and related matters Provisions Pay period and year Pay period 1, 1960 4 percent increase. Pay period 1, 1961 Increases varied by class. percent. All general employees. Averaged about 4 All general employees. Completely revised integrated pay plan adopted; salary increases selectively allocated to classes; improvement of salary rates and pav differentials of technical, professional, and administrative classes; salary increases varied by class. Pay period 1, 1962 No general increase. Readopted 1961 pay plan. Pay period 1, 1963 Advanced one salary step. Equivalent to approx imately a 4% percent increase. Adjustments ranged from $14 per month in All general employees. lowest pay range to $75 per month in highest pay range. Pay period 1, 1964 3 percent increase. Adjustments ranged from $8 per month in lowest pay range to $56 per month in highest pay range. All general employees. Pay period 1, 1965 $12.50 per month (7 cents per hour) or 3 percent, vrtiichever was greater All general employees. A fund of $330,000 was established to correct inequities during the year. Pay period 1, 1966 10 cents per hour or 3 percent, whichever was greater. All general employees. Pay period 1, 1967 10 cents per hour or 3 percent, whichever was greater. All general employees. Pay period 1, 1968 10 cents per hour or 3 percent, whichever was greater. All general employees. Special increases averaging about 6% percent in addition to 3 percent increase granted to other employees. Professional and management classes in pay ranges 24 and above. 25 cents per hour or 4 percent, whichever was greater. All general employees except those represented by Technicians, Engineers, and Architects of Milwaukee (TEAM) 10 percent. Employees represented by TEAM. Special pay ranges 17(a), 21(b) and 45 through 48 established for classes covered by TEAM. 10 cents per hour. All employees who received 25 cents an hour in January; employees in pay ranges 3 through 27 affected except for employees represented by independent Health Department unions noted below. Employees who received more than 25 cents an hour in January. The result was that employees in some or all steps in pay ranges 28 through 37 received less than a 10-cent-per-hour increase and employees in pay ranges 38 through 44 received no increase except for employees rep resented by independent Health Department unions r -ted helox*. Pay period 2, 1969 Pay period 15, 1969 One (1) to 10 cents per hour depending on whether the 4 percent general increase granted January 5, 1969 was less than 35 cents but more than 25 cents per hour. No increase where the 4 percent increase in January amounted to 35 cents or more. 10 cents per hour or 4 percent, whichever was greater. Employees represented by the Association of Scientific Personnel and by the Association of Physicians and lentists. Special increases for Graduate Nurse I, Junior Public Health Nurse, and Public Health Nurse II in accordance x*ith agreement with Staff Nurses' Council. Increase for all nurses in bargaining unit averaged approximately 3 h percent. Special pay range 14(a) established covering Graduate Nurse I and Junior Public Health Nurse formerly allocated to pay range 14. Special pay range 18(a) established for Public Health Nurse II formerly allocated to pay range 18. Public Health Nurse I retained in pay range 17 and received same increase as other classes allocated to pay range 17. 57 Table 1. General salary changes—general city employees, Milwaukee— Continued Pay period 1, 1970 Applications, exceptions., and related matters Provisions Pay period and year 20 cents per hour plus $8.50 biweekly (10.7 cents hourly) cost-of-living increase based on change in BLS Consumer Price Index for Milwaukee between November 1968 and November 1969. Cost-of-living adjustment granted at rate of $1.0349 biweekly for each 1.0 point change in the BLS Consumer Price Index for Milwaukee (1957-59-100) between November, 1968, and November, 1969, effective pay period 1, 1970 provided there was at least a 0.4 point change in the All-Items Index. Most general employees except where otherwise noted. Engineering technicians I-III and drafting personnel I-III received salary increases that were intended to maintain former relationships with Engineering technicians IV and V represented by the Technicians, Engineers and Architects of Milwaukee bargaining unit. Salary rates for such classes were provided in special pay ranges 9(a), 13(a), 17(a) and 21(b). Cost-of-living adjustment did not apply to latter pay ranges. 20 cents per hour plus $8,59 biweekly (10.7 cents hourly) cost-of-living increases or 4 percent plus cost-of-living increase, whichever was greater. Employees represented by the Association of Scientific Personnel and by the Association of Physicians and Dentists. Salary rates included in special pay ranges 21(a), 25(a), 27(a), 28(a), 29(a), 31(a), and 34(a) to provide for 4 percent increases that exceeded 20 cents an hour. 6 percent increase without any cost-of-living increase. Engineering personnel represented by Technicians, Engineers, and Architects of Milwaukee (TEAM) bargaining unit. New salary rates provided in special pay ranges 45 through 48 for classes covered by TEAM. 5% percent general increase. In addition, employees receiving a favorable merit review recommendation were advanced one additional step in the normal pay range. Management personnel in new Management Merit Review Pay Plan for 1970 covering former management classes in 1969 pay ranges 13 and above. Merit review increase was part of general 1970 increase for management employees and separate from any within-range increase which an employee might be eligible for on his anniversary date. Notes: Milwaukee usually has 26 biweekly pay periods each year; pay period 1 usually starts several days before January 1 of the new year. 1960-1970 All civilian employees in Fire and Police Departments received same general increases as general employees. included in pay plans for general employees. 1960-1964 All fire and police service personnel received same general increases as general employees. See General Salary Changes-Police and Fire Service, 1960-70. (See table 2.) Fire and police service classes were included in the single pay plan that covered nearly all City employees. 1965 All fire personnel received same general salary increases as general employees. New separate pay plan was established for all police service personnel. See General Salary Changes-Police and Fire Service Personnel, 1960-70. (See table 2.) 1966 All fire and police service personnel received same general salary increases as general employees. and Fire Service Personnel, 1960-70. (See table 2.) 1967 Fire service personnel in ranks above Fire Captain received same general salary increases as general employees. New separate pay plan was established for fire service personnel covering ranks of Firefighters through Fire Captain. Police service personnel in ranks above Lieutenant of Police received same general salary increases as general employees. See General Salary Changes-Police and Fire Service Personnel, 1960-70. (See table 2.) 1968 Fire service personnel in ranks above Fire Captain received same general salary increases as general employees. Police service personnel in ranks above Lieutenant of Police received same general increases as general employees. See General Salary Changes-Police and Fire Service Personnel, 1960-70. (See table 2.) 1969 Pay Period 1 Fire service personnel in ranks above Fire Captain received same general salary increases as general employees. Police service personnel in ranks above Lieutenant of Police received same general salary increases as general employees. See General Salary Changes-Police and Fire Service Personnel, 1960-70. (See table 2.) 1969 Pay Period 15 Fire service personnel in ranks above Fire Captain received same general salary increases as general employees. Police service personnel in ranks above Lieutenant of Police received same general salary increases as general employees. See General Salary Changes-Police and Fire Service Personnel, 1960-70. (See table 2.) 1970 Fire service personnel in ranks above Fire Lieutenant received same general salary increases as general management employees. Police service personnel in ranks above Lieutenant of Police received same general salary increases as general management employees. See General Salary Changes-Police and Fire Service Personnel, 1960-70. (See table 2.) 58 Civilian classes See General Salary Changes-Police Table 2. General salary changes-police and fire service personnel, Milwaukee Provisions Pay period and year Applications, exceptions, and related matters Pay period 1, 1960 Police and Fire--4 percent increase. All ranks Pay period 1, 1961 Police and Fire— Increases varied by class. Completely revised integrated pay plan adopted. See comments under General Salary Changes for General Employees (table 1). Pay period 1, 1962 Police and Fire--No general increase. All ranks Pay period 1, 1963 Police and Fire— Advanced one salary step: Equivalent to approximately a 4% percent increase. AH Police and Fire— 3 percent increase. All ranks Pay period 1, 1964 Pay period 1, 1965 Fire— 3 percent or $12.50 per month (7 cents . per hour), whichever was greater. ranks All ranks j Police--3 percent for ranks of Captain of I Police and above Pay period 11, 1965 Police— 5% percent increase for ranks from Police Matron through Lieutenant of Police New pay plan established for Police personnel provided 15 pay ranges covering all police service ranks from Police Matron up to and including the Chief of Police. Pay period 1, 1966 Police— 3 percent or 10 cents an hour, whichever was greater. All ranks. Effective June 12 four pay ranges (71-74) established for Fire service personnel below Fire Captain rank. Fire— 3 percent or 10 cents an hour, whichever was greater. All ranks Police— Flat increase of $1,077.24 per year for ranks from Police Patrolman through Lieutenant of Police; 3 percent for ranks of Captain of Police and above. Police Matron received a 3 percent increase for pay periods 1 through 13. Beginning with pay period 14 first three steps of annual pay range were increased $300, fourth step $350, and maximum $400 over 1967 annual salary rates. Fire— 4 percent increase for ranks of Firefighter through Fire Captain; 3 percent for ranks above Fire Captain. New pay plan established for Fire service personnel contained five pay ranges covering ranks of Firefighter through Fire Captain. Ranks above Fire Captain included in general pay schedule. Police— No increase for ranks below Captain of Police except Police Ma.tron; 3 percent for ranks of Captain of Police and above'plus special increase for'management classes. Police service pay plan reduced from 15 pay ranges to 7 pay ranges covering only ranks below Captain of Police. Ranks of Captain of Police and above included in general pay schedule. Police Matron received annual salary increase equal to the increase granted in pay period 14, 1967. Pay period 1, 1967 Pay period 1, 1968 Fire— Flat increase of $668.70 per year for ranks from Firefighter through Fire Captain; 3 percent for ranks above Fire Captain plus special increase for manage ment classes. Pay period 1, 1969 Police--Flat increase of $500 per year for ranks below Captain of Police, and 4 percent for Captain of Police and higher ranks. Fire--Flat increase of $400 per year for ranks below Battalion Chief, and a 4 percent increase for Battalion Chief and higher ranks. Pay period 15, 1969 Recruitment rate for Firefighters was increased $500 per year. Police— Additional increases for Captain of Police and higher ranks to bring total increases for 1969 to 35 cents an hour where the 4 percent increase in January amounted to less than 35 cents. Fire--Additional increases for Battalion Chief and higher ranks to bring total increase for 1969 to 35 cents an hour where the 4 percent . increase in January amounted to less than 35 cents. Pay period 1, 1970 Pay period 14, 1970 Police— Flat increase of $250 per year for ranks below Lieutenant of Police. 5% per cent for Lieutenant of Police and higher ranks. Management classes (Lieutenant of Police and higher ranks) in new Management Merit Review Pay Plan. In addition to 5% percent general increase,employees receiving a favorable merit review recommendation were advanced one additional step in the normal pay range. Fire--Flat increase of $250 per year for ranks below Fire Captain. 5% percent increase for Fire Captain and higher ranks. Management classes (Fire Captain and higher ranks) in new Management Merit Review Pay Plan. In addition to 5% percent general increase^ employees receiving a favorable merit review recommendation were advanced one additional step in the normal pay range. Police— Flat increase of $270 per year for ranks below Lieutenant of Police. No increase for ranks of Lieutenant of Police and above. Fire— Flat increase of $250 per year for ranks below Fire Captain. No increase for ranks of Fire Captain and above. Notes: Recruitment rate for Firefighters was increased $270 per year. Milwaukee usually has 26 biweekly pay periods each year; pay period 1 usually starts several days before January 1, of the new year, All civilian employees in Fire and Police Departments received same salary increases as general city employees during the period 1960-70. (See table 1.) Civilian classes were included in pay plans for general city employees. 59 Table 3. Overtime compensation—general city employees, Milwaukee Year 1960 Provisions One and one-half hours compensatory time off, or compensation in cash at time and one-half rate or at other rate when specifically authorized, for each hour of necessary overtime employment that is worked before or after the normal hours scheduled to be worked in each day, or for hours in excess of the regularly scheduled 40 in a week, and for work performed on legal holidays, or on Saturdays or Sundays when such Saturdays or Sundays are not a part of the scheduled work week. Accumulated compensatory time off credit for each employee shall at no time exceed 180 hours. When cash payment for overtime work is authorized a department may allow compensatory time off when work conditions permit. When cash payment for overtime is authorized, it shall be paid at the rate of time and one-half (biweekly salary rate divided by 80 multiplied by 1.5), unless a different rate is specifically prescribed. In case of death of an active employee, cash payment shall be made to his estate for accrued but unused overtime hours worked, not to exceed payment for 120 hours worked at the rate of time and one-half (180 hours pay ) . ! j | j j I Cash payment at time and one-half (1.5) for overtime worked by Petroleum Station Custodian authorized when necessary to expedite delivery of petroleum products. Cash payment at time and one-half (1.5) for overtime assignments of nurses at city operated hospitals authorized when necessary to promote the public health and to render more efficient service at city operated hospitals. Cash payment at time and one-half (1.5) for overtime service of firemen at city operated hospitals authorized when necessary due to the shortage of manpower and necessity to control contagion hazards among the residents of the city. Cash payment at time and one-half (1.5) for overtime assignments of meat and food inspectors authorized when necessary to inspect a slaughtering or meat packing plant conducting slaughtering or meat packing for a period of more than 8 hours on Monday through Friday, or on Saturday. Cash payment at time and one-half (1.5) for engineers, draftsmen, engineering aides, project inspectors, and certain other supervisory and technical employees in the Department of Public Works when overtime work is necessary because of the extreme shortage of manpower or in other declared emergencies. Bridgetenders working on any of the 6 principal holidays, or having an off day on any such holiday, received one and one-half hours off during the non-navigable season for each hour worked on such holidays. Cash payment at rate of 1.56 (annual salary divided by 2,000 hours) for overtime worked by foremen, mechanics and laborers in Harbor Commission authorized when overtime is necessary to expedite the leading and unloading of boats and railway cars for economy reasons or to meet the general emergenices and conditions which arise in port operations. Cash payment at time and one-half (1.5) for authorized overtime worked by supporting clerical employees in field operations in such emergencies. Cash payment at time and one-half (1.5) for overtime worked by library staff of Milwaukee Public Library authorized when necessary to maintain normal daily operations. City departments authorized to make cash payment for overtime at time and one-half (1.5) when snow removal work in excess of 40 hours per week is necessary on account of heavy snowfall or special work caused by an emergency as determined by the Commissioner of Public Works. Cash payment at rate of 1.56 authorized for rotating shift employees at filtration plant and pumping stations of Water Department for work in excess of a pre-arranged schedule; pyramiding of overtime authorized. Cash payment at rate of 1.56 for emergency overtime authorized by Commissioner of Public Works for city operating and maintenance workers in trades and labor positions. Cash payment at time and one-half (1.5) for overtime worked by supporting clerical employees in field operations in such emergencies. Cash payment at time and one-half (1.5) authorized for overtime worked by permanent staff members of Board of Election Commissioners on election days or while making official recounts. Employees in management positions excluded from provisions relating to payment in cash or compensatory time off for overtime worked. Added: Commissioner of Public Works authorized to employ Civil Engineers III and Engineering Technicians VI in the Bureau of Engineers for overtime work and to compensate for scheduled overtime in excess of 40 hours during any one year either in cash or in time off at the rate of time and one-half; overtime hours worked on a regular work day and any overtime of less than four hours on a normal day off not to be credited in such 40-hour overtime bank. 1961 1963 Applications, exceptions, and related matters Added: No overtime period of service nor the compensation received therefore, shall be counted as accruing toward credit or deduction on any annuity pension rights. 1966 Change: Bridgetenders to receive 8 days off in lieu of pay or time off for work on holidays at time and one-half, to be taken off during the nonnavigable season. Added: Because of extreme shortage of manpower or in other declared emer gencies, Commissioner of Public Works authorized to assign Engineering Technicians V, Architectural Designers II, Engineers II, Draftsmen V, and Engineering Draftsmen V for cash payment of overtime work at time and onehalf; however, no payment for any overtime of less than two hours in a day nor for the first 40 hours of overtime in any one year, and no overtime of less than two hours in a day to be credited to the limitation of 40 hours in any year. 60 Table 3. Overtime compensation—general city employees, Milwaukee--- Continued Applications, exceptions, and related matters Provisions Year 1968 Added: Cash payment at time and one-half (1.5) authorized for overtime assignments of Health Department nurses, clinic assistants, and clerks in immunization clinics when necessary to promote the public health and render more efficient service at city immunization clinics. Added: Cash payment at the rate of 1.56 authorized for overtime worked in excess of a 100-hour accumulated balance of compensatory time off by certain Department of City Development, Technical and Maintenance Division classes: Building Inspectors; Draftsmen V; Maintenance Technicians; Labor Foremen l; Maintenance Mechanics; Mechanic Helpers; Special Buildings and Ground Laborers; City Laborers (Regular). Eliminated: Provisions for cash payment at time and one-half (1.5) for overtime worked by Petroleum Station Custodian; class was eliminated. 1969 Added: Cash payment at time and one-half (1.5) for overtime assignments of clinic assistants and Health Department nurses authorized when necessary to promote the public health and render more efficient service. Added: Chief of Police authorized to employ Police Department employees in the Buildings and Grounds Division within the certified collective bargaining unit represented by District Council 48 for overtime assignments, and to compensate for such assignments either in cash or in compensatory time off at the rate of time and one-half. Added: Bridge Operators also to receive one additional day off for work on holidays at straight-time rate. Added: Cash payment at rate of time and on-half (1.5) authorized for overtime worked on weekends by computer operators in Department of Central Electronic Data Services to perform emergency work resulting from computer malfunctions. 1970 Added: Cash payment at time and one-half (1.5) authorized when necessary to employ Field Supervisors (Rodent Control) and Foremen I (Rodent Control) in Health Department for overtime work. Added: When necessary, department heads may authorize engineers, architects, engineering technicians and architectural designers in the certified bargaining unit of the Technicians, Engineers, and Architects of Milwaukee for overtime assignments with cash payment at time and one-half (1.5). Change: Bridge Operators to receive 9 days off in lieu of pay or time off for work on holidays at time and one-half, to be taken off during the nonnavigable season. (Additional day off for holiday work eliminated). Commissioner of Public Works authorized to provide cash payment for a maximum of 4 hours of the total time off for Bridge Operators at a straighttime rate. Mote: All civilian employees in the Fire and Police Departments except those in the Police Department's Building and Grounds Division, who are eligible for cash for overtime assignments, receive compensatory time off for overtime assignments at the rate of time and one-half (1.5). 61 Table 4. Overtime compensation—police and fire service personnel, Milwaukee Provisions Year 1960 Applications, exceptions, and related matters Police— Cash overtime pay authorized on a straighttime basis in lieu of compensatory time off under certain conditions when determined by the Chief of Police to be required to meet the shortage of qualified manpower in the patrol service and to maintain an adequate patrol police force. Police-Chief of Police may grant compensatory time off at straight-time rate in lieu of cash overtime pay when feasible at his discretion. Only designated police service classes may receive cash overtime pay. Fire— One day per year granted as a vacation day in lieu of cash or time off for overtime. Fire— Day off in lieu of overtime compensation based upon authority of the Chief Engineer, Fire. 1966 Fire— Eliminated the one vacation day per year in lieu of cash or time-off for overtime in exchange for the provision of recall pay for greater alarms and other emergencies. Fire— Recall pay provided a guaranteed minimum of 3 hours' per recall for emergencies; maximum not to exceed employee's basic daily rate of pay. 1969 Police— Change: Overtime pay authorized at rate of time and one-half either in cash or compensatory time off at discretion of Chief of Police, for time worked on regularly scheduled vacation or off-days unless employee is notified one week in advance. Police— Not applicable to court time and training time. Straight-time pay, either in cash or compensatory time off at discretion of Chief of Police, for first 12 hours overtime worked beyond or prior to employee's 8-hour work day in any one pay period. Overtime worked in excess of 12 hours in any one pay period compensated at rate time and one-half either in cash or compensatory time off at discretion of Chief of Police. Not applicable to court time, training time, or time worked in connection with a proclaimed civil emergency. Cash overtime provision includes pay for "roll-call time" prior to or after the end of an 8-hour work day. Fire— Added: Employees in designated fire service classes on 56-hour average duty week required to remain on duty at the scene of an alarm one-half or less beyond their normal shift are granted compensatory time off for such emergency overtime. When required to remain on duty at scene of an alarm for more than one-half hour, employee is compensated in cash at rate of time and one-half computed on basis of 55.079 hour average duty week for all hours since end of shift. Fire-Added: Maximum pay when required to remain on duty beyond end of normal shift not to exceed employee's basic daily rate. Recall pay provision essentially the same as in 1966. All other overtime compensated at straight time off. All other overtime compensated at straight-time rate either in cash or compensatory time-off at discretion of Chief of Police. Bnployees in designated fire service classes on 56-hour average duty week when required to remain in station after end of their normal shift onehalf hour or less, due to a greater alarm, granted compensatory time off at straight-time rate for such standby duty. If required standby duty time exceeds one-half hour employee is compensated in cash at straight-time rate computed on basis of 55.079 hour average duty week for all hours since end of shift. Note: All civilian employees in the Fire and Police Departments except those in the Police Department's Building and Grounds Division, who are eligible for cash for overtime assignments, receive compensatory time off for overtime assignments at the rate of time and one-half (1.5). 62 Table 5. Shift differential compensation—general city employees, Milwaukee Provisions Year 1960 Second shift - 7 cents per hour Third shift - 11 cents per hour Applications, exceptions, and related matters Applicable to only those employees performing designated work regularly scheduled for the second or third shift. Shifts justifying shift differential compensation identified as follows: 2nd shift - 3:PM to 11:PM 3rd shift - 11:PM to 7:FM Employee to be eligible for second or third shift premium rates must work not less than 4 hours of his regular workday in either the second or the third shift. Employees satisfying that requirement receive the shift premium for the entire workday. Personnel in positions allocated to pay range 25 and above not eligible for differential payments. Employee absent on compensated leave (vacation, sick leave, etc.) during a period when normally assigned to second or third shift is paid at first shift rates. Employee paid at overtime rate, due to any cause, does not receive shift differential pay in addition for the same hours regardless of period worked. Change: Second shift - 9 cents per hour Third shift - 13 cents per hour Change: Personnel in positions allocated to pay ranges 1 through 11 not eligible for shift differential payments. (These positions were assigned to pay range 25 and above in the 1960 pay schedule). Change: Second shift - 11 cents per hour Third shift - 16 cents per hour Change: Personnel in positions allocated to pay ranges 20 through 44 not eligible for shift differential payments. 1969 Change: Second shift - 13 cents per hour Third shift - 18 cents per hour Change: Personnel in positions allocated to pay ranges 21 through 44 not eligible for shift differential payments. 1970 Change: Second shift - 15 cents per hour Third shift - 20 cents per hour Change: Personnel in positions allocated to pay ranges 21 through 44 for non-management employees and personnel in management pay ranges M-9 through M-32 not eligible for shift differential payments. Note; Above provisions apply to eligible civilian employees in the Fire and Police Departments. receive shift differential compensation. 63 Police and fire service personnel do not Table 6. Weekend differential pay—general city employees, Milwaukee Provisions Year Applications, exceptions, and related matters 1960 1964 A differential of 10 cents an hour paid for all hours worked on Saturdays and Sundays on any of the three shifts as a part of a regular work schedule. 1966 Change: W e e k e n d differential increased to 12 cents an hour. 1967 Change: Weekend differential increased to 15 cents an hour. Weekend work was defined as any work performed between the hours of 12:01 A.M. Saturday and 12:01 A.M. the following Monday. All employees eligible for shift differential compensation were eligible for "weekend differential". Paid in addition to regular second and third shift premiums, but not in addition to overtime compensation. Added: Water Department laboratory employeees at the Linwood Avenue Filtration Plant made eligible for weekend differential pay. Added: Bureau of Street Sanitation city laborers assigned duties as whitewingers on regular schedule to clean streets or green markets and Bureau of Municipal Equipment service maintenance personnel made eligible for weekend differential pay. Note: Weekend differential pay applies to designated eligible civilian employees in the Fire and Police Departments.(See table 7.) T a b le 7. W e e k e n d d iffe re n tia l p a y — p o lic e a n d fire s e rv ic e personnel, M ilw a u k e e Applications, exceptions, and related matters Provisions Year 1960 1964 A differential of 10 cents an hour paid for work on Saturdays and Sundays by designated Police and Fire Department personnel. 1965 Police — Change: Weekend differential pay was eliminated for Police Department Officer personnel formerly eligible for weekend differential. 1966 Police a n d F i r e — C h a n g e : W e e k e n d differential incr e a s e d to 12 cents an hour. 1967 Police and Fire-Change: Weekend differential increased to 15 cents an hour. | i ! j J Weekend work for eligible Fire Department personnel was defined as any work performed between the hours of 12:01 A.M. Saturday and 12:01 A.M. the following Monday. Weekend work for eligible Police Department personnel was defined as work on a tour of duty recorded on Police Department duty assignment records as a Saturday or Sunday tour of duty; provided that no police officer may receive weekend differential compensation for more than 16 hours for any one weekend. Eligible Fire Department personnel included Fire Alarm Dispatchers and Assistant Chief Dispatchers. Eligible Police Department personnel included all officer personnel up to and including rank of Lieutenant of Police as well as early and late shift custodial and civilian clerical personnel and elevator operators at the Safety Building. Police— Eligible Police Department personnel included Police Aides, Police Matrons, and all Police Department civilian employees in pay ranges 12 through 27 of the pay plan covering general employees. Fire— No change in eligible Fire Department personnel. 1968 Police— Eligible Police Department personnel still included civilian employees in former pay ranges 12 through 27 now in pay ranges 3 through 19 in new 1968 pay plan. Fire— Custodial workers in Fire Department made eligible. 1970 Police— Eligible Police Department personnel still included civilian management employees formerly in 1969 pay ranges 13 through 18 (now pay range M-l through M-6 in new 1970 Management Pay Plan), as well as other civilian employees in pay ranges 3 through 19 in 1970 pay plan for non-management general employees. Fire— No change in eligible Fire Department personnel. Note: Above provisions also apply to the designated eligible civilian employees in the Police Department. Civilian employees in the Fire Department, in addition to those designated, who are eligible for shift differential compensation also are eligible for weekend differential pay. 64 Table 8. Vacation provisions—general city employees, Milwaukee Provisions Year Applications, exceptions, and related matters 1960 10 working days with pay after 12 months' service, IS working days after 10 years, and 20 working days after 25 years. Eligibility for vacation after 12 months of actual service following appoint ment, but accumulations retroactive to time of appointment. Employee whose service is expected to continue so as to complete a year's actual service may, after 6 months service, be allowed vacation within the year of appoint ment if the convenience of the service is promoted thereby. If employee leaves service before completion of the initial 12 month period, vacation is deemed unearned and vacation payments are deducted upon termination of employment. Vacation time is earned at rate of 1 day per month since last anniversary date with a maximum of 10 days per calendar year for employees with less than 10 years service; 1% days per month with a maximum of 15 days after 10 years; and 2 days per month with a maximum of 20 days after 25 years. Vacation taken before full amount is earned is considered time owed until earned. Vacation time owed city is deducted from compensation of employee leaving service due to resignation, retirement, termination, discharge, lay off, or death. Any employee leaving service due to resignation, retirement, lay off, or death or who takes military leave is paid for earned vacation time accumulated. Discharged employees are not entitled to pay for accumulated vacation time. Each year's vacation must be taken before December 31. Vacation time not taken off by end of year is lost. Employees injured at work or on military leave accumulate vacation time at the same rate as if employed. 1964 Change: 20 working days after 20 years service. Change: Vacation time earned at rate of 2 days per month since last anniversary date with a maximum of 20 days per calendar year after 20 years' service. 1967 Added: 25 working days after 30 years' service. Added: Vacation time earned at rate of 2% days per month since last anniversary date with a maximum of 25 days per calendar year after 30 years' service. 1970 Change: 15 working days after 8 years service. Change: Vacation time earned at rate of 1% days per month since last anniversary date with a maximum of 15 days per calendar year after 8 years' service. Note: Above vacation provisions apply to all civilian employees in the Fire and Police Departments. T a b le 9 . V a c a t io n p ro v is io n s — p o lic e a n d fire s e rv ic e p e rs o n n e l, M ilw a u k e e 1960 1964 Applications exceptions, and related matters Provisions Year Police — 10 working days with pay after 12 months; 15 working days after 10 years' service; 20 working days after 25 years. Based on 40-hour workweek. Fire - 14 calendar days after 12 months service; 21 calendar days after 10 years; 28 calendar days after 25 years. Based on 63-hour workweek. Police — Change: service. Fire — Change: service. 20 working days off after 20 years' 28 calendar days off after 20 years' 1966 Fire — Clarification: 5 working days off after 12 months; 7 working days after 10 years; 10 working days after 20 years. 1967 Police — Added: years' service. Clarification: Based on adoption of 56-hour workweek. 25 working days off after 30 Fire — Added: 12 working days off after 30 years' service. Note: Vacation provisions for civilian employees in Fire and Police Departments are the same as for general city e m p l o y e e s . 65 (See table 8). Table 10. Holiday pay provisions—general city employees, Milwaukee Applications, exceptions, and related matters Provisions Year 1960 10 regular holidays plus 2 regular half holidays with pay. In addition maximum of 3% election days off with pay authorized when applicable. Regular full days were: New Year's Day, Lincoln's Birthday, Washington's Birthday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Veteran's Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas. Half-days were: Good Friday afternoon and State Fair (Milwaukee) Day afternoon. Election days were: Municipal Flection Day, September Primary Election Day, General Election Day, and Municipal Primary Election Day (afternoon only). Holidays falling on Sunday celebrated on following Monday. Bridgetenders received 6 work days off in lieu of holidays at one and one-half time rate (see overtime compensation). Did not apply to employees who received extta pay in lieu of holidays. 1961 Change: 1% election days applicable, Change: Election days were: Municipal Election Day and Municipal Primary Election Day (afternoon only). 1962 Change: 3 election days applicable, Change: Election days were: Municipal Election Day, September Primary Election Day, and General Election Day. 1963 Change: 8% regular holidays with pay. Washington's Birthday, Columbus Day, and State Fair (Milwaukee) Day afternoon eliminated as paid holidays, and two work days off with pay added in lieu of 2% holidays eliminated. Change: Employees on payroll as of January 1, 1963 authorized 8% regular holidays, 2 off days in lieu of 2% holidays eliminated, and maximum of 3% election days. First off day earned by any employee who remained in service to March 1 of any year and second off day earned by any employee who remained in service to October 1 of any year. Off days taken any time during year with approval of department head. Employees entering service on or after January 1, 1963 authorized 8% regular holidays (New Year's Day, Lincoln's Birthday,- Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veteran's Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas, and Good Friday afternoon) and maximum of election days. 1964 Change: 8% regular holidays with pay. Last normal workday before Christmas and New Year's Day added as paid holidays. Lincoln's Birthday and Veteran') Day eliminated as paid holidays. 3% election days eliminated, and 3 work days off with pay added in lieu of 3% election days eliminated. Change: Employees on payroll as of January 1, 1963 authorized 8% regular holidays, two work days off in lieu of 2% holidays eliminated in 1963, and 3 work days off in lieu of 3% election days eliminated. Employees on payroll as of January 1, 1964 authorized 8% regular holidays and 3 off days in lieu of 3% election days dropped. Two off days annually, in lieu of 2% holidays eliminated in 1963, earned at rate of 2/10 days for each month worked but not to exceed two days annually. Such days scheduled and used in same manner as vacation days with approval of department head. Three off days annually, in lieu of 3% electLon days eliminated, earned at rate of 3/10 day for each month worked but not to exceed three days annually. Such days scheduled and used in same manner as vacation days with approval of department head. Employees entering service on or after January 1, 1964 authorized 8% regular holidays. Memorial Day and Indpendence Day falling on Saturdays observed as holidays on preceding Fridays. Added: New Year's Day and Christmas falling on Saturdays to be observed as holidays on following Mondays. 1966 1967 Change: 9% regular holidays with pay. Friday after Thanksgiving Day provided as paid holiday. Two off days (was 3 work days off) in lieu of 3% election days eliminated in 1964 in exchange for Friday after Thanksgiving for employees on payroll on January 1, 1964. Change: Two work days off in lieu of elimination of 3% election days in 1964 (was 3 work days off previously). Two off days annually earned at rate of 2/10 days for each month worked but not to exceed two days annually. Such days scheduled and used in same manner as vacation days with approval of department head. Employees on payroll as of January 1, 1963 authorized 9% regular holidays, 2 off days in lieu of 2% holidays eliminated in 1963, and 2 off days in lieu of elimination of 3% election days in 1964. &nployees on payroll as of January 1, 1964 authorized 9% regular holidays and 2 off days in lieu of elimination 3% election days in 1964. Employees entering service on or after January 1, 1964 authorized 9% regular holiday. 1969 Added: 9% regular holidays with pay, plus one "floating" work day off earned at 1/10 day for each month worked not to exceed one day annually. Added: New employees must complete 10 months of actual service during his first calendar year of employment to become eligible for "floating" off day. Eligible employee who leaves due to resignation, retirement, lay off, or death, or who takes military leave is paid for accumulated time to the nearest 1/10 of a day computed from January 1 of year of severance. Discharged employees not entitled to pay for any accumulated time toward said off-day. Employees on payroll as of January 1, 1963 authorized 9% regular holidays, 2 off days in lieu of 2% holidays eliminated in 1963, 2 off days in lieu of 3% election days eliminated in 1964, plus "floating" off day. Qnployees on payroll as of January 1, 1964 authorized 9% regular holidays, 2 off days in lieu of 3% election days eliminated in 1964, plus "floating" off day. Employees entering service on or after January 1, 1964 authorized 9% regular holidays plus "floating" off day. Note: Holiday pay provisions for civilian employees in Fire and Police Departments are the same as for general city employees. 66 Table 11. Holiday pay provisions—police and fire service personnel, Milwaukee Applications, exceptions, and related matters Provisions Year 1960 Police— 7 off days per annum to compensate for duty on legal holidays. Police - Worked into regular work schedule. Fire— 6 consecutive calendar days off per annum of 24 consecutive hours each for the purpose of compensating for duty on legal holidays. Fire - Scheduled with vacation period. See explanation. Fire-Explanation: Two additional duty days off were granted to fire personnel in 1969 reducing the average work week from 56 hours to 55.079. These were not considered as added vacation days or holidays. 1969 Fire— Note: Holiday pay provisions for civilian employees in Fire and Police Departments are the same as for general city employees. (See table 10.) T a b le 12. C a ll- in p a y p r o v is io n s — g e n e ra l c it y e m p lo y e e s , M ilw a u k e e Provisions Year Applications, exceptions, and related matters 1960 Employee is credited with two hours pay at his strAight-time rate if he reports to work at his regularly-assigned time and is officially excused and sent home due to lack of work or inclement weather before completing two hours of work. 1963 Added: Employee who reports to work for an emergency overtimd assignment and who is officially excused before completing three hours of work is credited with three hours pay at time and one-half. Such credit is given in cash or in compensatory time-off in accordance with Overtime Ordinance provisions. 1968 Added: Rnployees in Technical and Maintenance Division of the Department of City Development assigned to maintenance function in cases where they report for authorized call-ins to unlock doors for tenants unable to enter their locked apartments are credited with a minimum of 1 hour's pay at time and one-half. Such credit is given in eash or in compensatory time-off in accordance with Overtime Ordinance provisions. ± Note: Call-in pay provisions did not apply to Fire and Police Department personnel until in 1969 when employees in the Police Department's Building and Grounds Division within the certified bargaining unit represented by District Council 48 were made eligible. T a b le 13. O w e d t im e p r o v is io n s — g e n e ra l c it y e m p lo y e e s , M ilw a u k e e Provisions Year 1960 Officially-excused time lost for which employee was compensated constitutes time owed City, and is deducted from employee's pay to the extent he does not work assigned emergency or other overtime assignments except when excused from such assignments for a legitimate reason. 1969 Added: Employees who lose time from work during regularly scheduled workweek because of civil disturbances who were ready, willing, and able to report to work are permitted to owe lost time. Note: Applications, exceptions, and related matters Owed time is made up (worked off) at rate of time and one-half. Owed time provisions did not apply to Fire and Police Department personnel until in 1969 when employees in the Police Department's Buildings and Grounds Division within the certified collective bargaining unit represented by District Council 48 were made eligible. 67 Table 14. Annual military training leave pay-city employees, Milwaukee Provisions Year 1960 Leave not to exceed 15 successive calendar days off with full pay in addition to their military pay for such training. 1964 Change: Leave not to exceed 15 successive calendar days off with pay for such training. Applications, exceptions, and related matters Granted upon presentation of satisfactory evidence of military, air force or naval authority to take such training. i Change: Full City pay in addition to their military pay only for employees who, because of honorable service in any of the wars of the United States, are eligible for veteran's preference credit in City employment, as term "Veteran" is defined in Section 16.18 and 63.37 of Wisconsin statutes (1961). Other City employees to receive only the difference between their regular City pay and military pay received during said period. Change: Wisconsin Statutes (1961) made optional with City's determination of eligibility for veterans preference credit as a basis for full City pay in addition to military pay for such training. 1969 Change: Leave off; if taken 10 days. All full City pay Note: Annual military training leave pay provisions cover all general city employees and all employees of Fire and Police Departments. T a b le 15. not to exceed 15 successive calendar days on an intermittent basis, not to exceed employees subject to such training receive in addition to their military pay. Change: Full pay provision retroactive through December 22, 1968. Provision expires December 31, 1970; contribution of benefit is subject to negotiations. 1970 M ilit a ry fu n e ra l le a v e p ay—c ity e m p lo y e e s . M ilw a u k e e i Provisions Year Applications, exceptions, and related matters 1960 Time off with pay to attend military funeral of veterans whose leave is requested by a proper veterans' organ ization for employee's service to conduct a proper military funeral. Note: Military funeral leave pay provisions cover all general city employees and all employees of Fire and Police Departments. T a b le 16. P a y fo r tim e o ff fo r m ilita ry in d u c tio n e x a m in a tio n s — c ity e m p lo y e e s , M ilw a u k e e Applications, exceptions, and related matters Provisions Year 1960 Time off with pay while taking physical or mental examinations for the purpose of eligibility for induction in armed forces. Note: Military induction examination pay provisions cover all general city employees and all employees of Fire and Police Departments. T a b le 17. J u ry d u ty p a y — c it y e m p lo y e e s , M ilw a u k e e Applications, exceptions, and related matters Provisions Year Compensation received (exclusive of travel pay) for such duty or service to be paid over to City Treasurer. Employee to retain payments for jury duty service performed on off-days. 1960 Time off with pay for jury duty or jury service. Note: Jury duty pay provisions cover general city employees and all employees of Fire and Police Departments. 68 Table 18. Sick leave benefits—general city employees, Milwaukee Provisions Year Applications, exceptions, and related matters 1960 One and one-quarter (Ifc) working days with full pay for each month of service, not to exceed 15 days per year, Total accumulation was limited to 90 working days. Employee eligible after 6 months service, but sick leave accumulated retroactive to time of appointment. Maximum of 3 days sick leave allowed because of death in immediate family when both death and funeral occur in Milwaukee or its vicinity. When either death or funeral occurs elsewhere, travel time in addition to day of funeral is allowed as sick leave. Any employee sustaining compensable injury or contracting compensable disease under Workmen's Compensation Law has option of accepting sick leave benefits or workmen's compensation after "injury pay" benefits are exhausted. (See Duty-Incurred Disability Benefit Provisions). Separation by resignation or for cause cancels all unused accumulated sick leave allowance. Bnployee laid off due to lack of work or funds loses accumulated sick leave if not rehired within one year. Sick leave terminates on date of retirement or on date ordinary disability allowance under retirement system becomes effective. 1962 Change: Eliminated 90 days total accumulation limit, Accumulation up to 90 working days now termed the "normal sick leave account" with sick leave granted at full pay. Accumulation in excess of 90 working days now termed the "special sick leave account" with sick granted at half pay. Added "special sick leave account?'not charged until normal sick leave account is exhausted. When the balance in the normal sick leave account falls below 90 working days, additional earned but unused days are credited in employee's "normal sick leave account" until a total of 90 working days is again reached; additional credits are accumulated in the "special sick leave account". 1966 Added: Calendar days used for computations of sick leave used for funeral leave, but sick leave days only charged for regular work days. Definition of immediate family expanded to include motherin-law and father-in-law for funeral leave. 1967 Added: One day of sick leave with pay allowed to attend funeral of employee's grandparents. Note: Sick leave benefits for civilian employees in the Fire and Police Departments are earned at the same rate (15 days a year), but their usage and accumulation provisions are somewhat more liberal than for other general city employees. (See table 19.) T a b le 19. S ic k lea v e b e n e fits — p o lic e a n d fire s e rv ic e p e rso n n e l, M ilw a u k e e Year Provisions Applications, exceptions, and related matters 1960 Police — 15 working days' sick leave with pay earned per year at rate of li working days per month of service. No maximum on accumulation New employees are eligible as soon as any sick leave credit is earned. Maximum amount of sick leave with pay granted for any one period of sick leave not to exceed 365 calendar days, regardless of length of service or amount of sick leave credit accumulated. Absence due to death in family or sickness in family is accounted for separately as provided by rules and regulations of Police Department. 1960 Fire — 21 calendar days' sick leave with pay earned per year at rate of 1 2/3 calendar days per month of service. No maximum on accumulation. New employees are eligible as soon as any sick leave credit is earned. Maximum amount of sick leave with pay granted for any one period of sick leave not to exceed 365 calendar days, regardless of length of service or amount of sick leave credit accumulated. Sick leave is granted with pay because of death in immediate family, beginning with time of death to and including the day of funeral. Immediate family is defined as husband or wife, brother, sister, parent or child of employee, including foster parents and foster children. Sick leave is granted with pay on the day of funeral of a grandchild, grandparent, father-in-law or mother-in-law of employee. Note: Above sick leave benefits also apply to all civilian employees in Fire and Police Departments. 69 Table 20. Health benefit plans—city employees, Milwaukee Year Provisions 1960 Blue Cross-Blue Shield hospital and surgical-medical care coverage provided employee on a noncontributory basis, and on a contributory basis for family coverage. Participant paid first $25 of covered in-hospital patient charges. Subscriber and dependents eligible for 70 days of hospital service for each period of disability. Blue-Shield physician fee allowances for services rendered in or out of hospital ranged from up to $5 to $700. For medical (non-surgical) care in hospital Blue Shield paid up to $4 per day for up to 70 days of medical care for each period of disability starting with first day of hospitalization. City paid entire cost of monthly premium of $5.43 for single contract (employee coverage). Employee paid $7.70 and City $6.87 for family contract coverage premium. Period for same cause, condition, disease or ailment renewed for subscriber after 90 days have elapsed between periods of hospitalization. New employees eligible for enrollment after 30th day of employment. Insured employee going on pension automatically eligible to transfer directly into pension groups with no lapse of protection. 1962 Change: Blue Cross-Blue Shield employee hospital and surgical-medical care coverage made contributory. Hospital care increased from maximum of 70 days to maximum of 120 days. Maximum of 70 days of care in sanitaria for nervous or mental conditions added. Maximum Blue Shield physician fee allowance increased to $850. Change: Blue-Shield medical (nonsurgical) care in hospital increased from maxiumum of 70 days to maximum of 120 days. Change: Employee covered by single contract paid $1 per month and City paid $5.17. Employee having family contract coverage paid $8.70 and City $8.88. No change in deductible amount of $25. For readmissions within 20 days no deductible on subsequent hospital stays. 1963 Added: Major Medical coverage provided at employee's option entirely paid by employee. After employee paid out $100 for covered medical expenses during a calendar year-(the deductible amount)-plan paid 80 percent of covered medical expenses thereafter, up to a maximum of $10,000. Employee paid monthly Major Medical premium of $1.16 for single plan and $2.41 for family plan. Change: City's share of Blue Cross-Blue Shield single plan contract premium increased to $5.46 and to $9.74 for family contract premium. No change in employee's share of single and family contract premium. Applications, exceptions, and related matters Change: City's share of Blue Cross-Blue Shield single plan contract premium in creased to $6.14 and to $13.48 for family contract premium. Employee's share of family contract premium reduced to $6 from $8.70. No change in employee's share of single contract premium. 1964 1965 Change: Employee Blue Cross-Blue Shield hospital and medical-surgical care coverage made noncon tributory. Family coverage remained contributory until July 1965 when it was made noncontributory also. Change: Employee made no payment for Blue Cross-Blue Shield single contract coverage and City paid entire cost of monthly premium of $7.82. Employee paid $3 per month for family coverage and City $17 until July 1965. City paid entire monthly premium of $20 for family coverage beginning July 1965. 1966 Added: Podiatric care added under Blue Cross-Blue Shield plan. Change: Blue Cross-Blue Shield monthly premium for employee coverage paid by City increased to $8.36 and to $21.32 for family coverage. Added: Employee not to receive duplicate coverage for same cdre by Blue CrossBlue Shield plan and under another group plan. Employee not to receive duplicate coverage under Blue Cross-Blue Shield plan and under Medicare. Employees entitled to benefits under Medicare to receive those benefits first and Blue Cross-Blue Shield supplemental benefits provided by latter plan. 1967 Change: Hospital care increased from maximum of 120 days to maximum of 365 days, and from 70 days to maximum of 120 days for nervous and mental care. No changes in deductible. Diagnostic services increased from maximum of $50 per year to maximum of $100 as provided by $100 Mutualized Blue Cross-Blue Shield Diagnostic Amendment. Blue Cross paid for outpatient hos pital charges for diagnostic X-ray and laboratory examinations for each covered participant per calendar year. Surgical Care-Blue Shield to provide for physician's charges for diagnostic X-ray and laboratory examination for each covered participant per calendar year. Any portion of the $100 to be used for either the hospital’s or the physician's charges. Blue Shield medical (nonsurgical) care by physicians in hospitals up to $4 per day increased to maximum of 365 days (was 120 days) in general hospital and 120 days of care in sanitaria. No change in Blue Shield physician fee allowances. Change: Blue Cross-Blue Shield monthly premium for employee coverage paid by City increased to $8.42 and to $21.47 for family coverage. 1968 -------------------------------------------------------- Change: Blue Cross-Blue Shield monthly premium for employee coverage paid by City increased to $9.18 and to $23.38 for family coverage. Change: Blue Cross-Blue Shield monthly premium for employee coverage paid by City increased to $11.26 and to $28.66 for family coverage. 1969 1970 Added: Free Major Medical coverage for employee and family dependents provided by City. Formerly employee paid full cost if enrolled. City paid $1.15 Major Medical monthly premium for single plan contract and $2.36 for family contract coverage. Not available to retired employees. If more than one member of family is injured in a common accident, only $100 deductible is applied to expenses incurred in that accident. Maximum of $300 in deductibles per family per year. Sanitorium or nursing home service limited to 90 days. Change: Blue Cross-Blue Shield monthly premium for employee coverage paid by City increased to $12.22 and $31.12 for family coverage. Note: Health benefit plans cover general city employees and all employees of Fire and Police Departments. 70 Table 21. Duty-incurred disability benefits—general city employees, Milwaukee Applications, exceptions, and related matters Provisions Year .. 1960 Full pay ("injury pay") in lieu of workmen's compens ation for any duty-incurred injury within scope of Workmen's Compensation Law. Duty-incurred disability benefits differ for civilian employees in Fire and Police Departments. T a b le 2 2 . (See ta b le 2 2 .) D u ty -in c u rre d d is a b ility b e n e fit s — p o lic e a n d fire s e rv ic e p e rs o n n e l, M ilw a u k e e Provisions Year 1960 ................................ ......................... Change: Employee in no case to receive "injury pay" for more than one year (250 working days) during his entire period of employment with the city regardless of the number of compensable Injuries involved. 1962 Note: « .. ....................... "Injury pay" for the period of time employee may be temporarily totally or temporarily partially disabled not to exceed one calendar year from day following date of injury. Employee has option of accepting sick leave benefits or accepting workmen's compensation after "injury pay" benefits have been exhausted. (See Sick Leave Benefits). Option can be terminated in writing without prejudice to Workmen's Compensation benefits thereafter, but sick leave already used is not restored. Police and Fire — Full pay ("injury pay") in lieu of workmen'8 compensation for any duty-incurred injury incurred within scope of Workmen's Compen sation Law. Applications, exceptions, and related matters "Injury pay" for the period of time employee may be temporarily totally or temporarily partially disabled is subject to the following limit ations: (a) Injury pay may be granted for a maximum of one year for any one injury or recurrence of such injury. (b) Injury pay may be granted for another full year for any other injury not related to a former injury. Employee has the option of accepting sick leave benefits or accepting workmen's compensation after "injury pay" benefits have been exhausted (See Sick Leave Benefits). Option may be terminated in writing without prejudice to Workmen's Compensation benefits thereafter, but sick leave already used is not restored. Note: Above benefits also apply to all civilian employees in Fire and Police Departments. 71 Table 23. Group life insurance—city employees, Milwaukee Provisions Year 1960 None 1961 Contributory group life insurance plan on a voluntary basis after 6 months qualifying service, providing insurance coverage equal to employee's basic annual salary to the next higher $1,000 of earnings. Applications, exceptions, and related matters City and employees shared equally aggregate cost of monthly premium of SO cents for each $1,000 of life insurance. Eight (8) cents of premium was placed in a "Group Life Insurance Reserve Fund" for the purpose of stabilizing the monthly premium in future years in a manner to be determined by the Common Council. Entire premium cost was assumed by the City when employee or retiree reached age 65, or when employee was disabled. Employee who waived coverage within 30 days of his original eligibility date, and then applied for coverage must be under age 50, wait one year from date of application, and submit evidence of insurability to insurance company at his own expense. Eligible employee was required to take the maximum coverage provided in the plan. At age 65, coverage was reduced to 75 percent of annual salary; at age 66 to 50 percent of annual salary; and at age 67 and thereafter to 25 percent of annual salary. An insured employee entitled to retire after age 55 after 25 years of service under his respective retirement plan (after 25 years' service regardless of age for police and fire personnel) and who did so paid a monthly premium of 46 cents and City paid 8 cents per month until age 65 when City assumed entire cost of premium. Eight (8) cents of the total premium ( 4 cents from •both the employee and Citj)was placed in the "Group Life Insurance Reserve Fund". An insured employee who retired without retirement benefits was eligible for coverage if retirement took place at age 60 or older, or in the case of firemen and policemen at age 57 or older. Such employees were, required to pay the same premium until age 65 as employees retiring earlier with retirement benefits. 1962 Change: City and employee shared equally aggregate cost of monthly premium of 42 cents per $1,000 of insurance. Contribution of equal payments of 4 .cents by City and employee to the "Group Life Insurance Reserve Fund" was eliminated, since fund was eliminated. Retired employee was required to pay monthly premium of 42 cents and City paid 4 cents until age 65. 1964 Change: Employee paid monthly premium of 21 cents and City paid 29 cents per $1,000 of insurance. Retired employee was required to pay monthly premium of 44 cents and City paid 6 cents until age 65. 1967 Employee paid monthly premium of 21 cents and City paid 31 cents per $1,000 of insurance. No change in premium costs for retired employees. 1968 Change: Employee paid monthly premium of 21 cents and City paid 32 cents per $1,000 of insurance. Retired employee was required to pay monthly premium of 47 cents and City paid 6 cents until age 65. Retirement plan was changed to permit retirement after age 55 with 20 years of service (previously after 25 years of service). 1969 Change: Free group life insurance on a voluntary basis after 6 months qualifying service providing coverage equal to employee's basic annual salary to next $1,000 up to maximum of $7,000. Contributory plan for cover age above $7,000 equal to employee's basic annual salary to the next $1,000. Change: City assumed full cost of monthly premium of 54 cents per $1,000 of insurance up to maximum of $7,000. Employee paid monthly premium of 21 cents and City paid 33 cents per $1,000 for coverage above $7,000. Retired employee was required to pay monthly premium of 48 cents and City paid 6 cents until age 65. 1970 Change: Free group life insurance on an voluntary basis after 6 months qualifying service providing coverage equal to employee's basic annual salary to next $1,000 up to maximum of $8,000. Contributory plan for cover age above $8,000 equal to employee's basic annual salary to next $1,000. Change: City assumed full cost of monthly premium of 56 cents per $1,000 of insurance up to maximum of $8,000. Employee paid monthly premium of 21 cents and City paid 35 cents per $1,000 for coverage above $8,000. Retired employee paid entire monthly premium cost of 56 cents until age 65. Reduction in amount of free insurance coverage for employee's who retired prior to January 1, 1970 commences at age 65; reduction provision same as in 1961. Change: E f fe c t iv e f o r employees r e t i r i n g a ft e r January 1, 1970, no red u ction in insurance coverage occu rs at age 65; a t age 66 coverage is reduced to 6 6 -2 /3 p ercen t; and at age 67 and t h e re a fte r coverage is reduced to 3 3 -1 /3 p ercen t. C ity continued to pay premiums f o r r e t i r e e s age 65 and ov er. Note: Group life insurance covers general city employees and all employees of Fire and Police Departments. 72 Table 24. 1970 Retirement benefits under employes'retirement system—city employees, Milwaukee Provisions Applications, exceptions, and related matters Participation requirements Employees become members of the System as a condition of employment. Types of membership (1) Coordinated Plan (coordinated with Social Security Program) All general employees who have entered service on or after January 1, 1958, are automatically members of this plan. Also includes employees with prior service who subsequent ly have elected to participate in the Social Security Program. (2) Basic or Non-Coordinated Plan Includes those general employees who entered service prior to January 1, 1958 and who did not elect to join the Coordinated Plan at the time it was established, or have not joined subsequently when permitted to. (3) Plan for Firemen and Policemen Firemen and policemen are not eligible for Social Security Act coverage. Employee contributions General employees: City pays full contribution rate of 5% percent of employee's earnings (excluding overtime compensation). Policemen and firemen: City pays 6 percent of full contri bution rate of 7 percent of employee's earnings (exclud ing overtime compensation). Employee pays remaining one percent. Service retirement General employees: Age 60 Policemen and firemen: Age 52 with 25 year's service or at age 57. Also see Firemen and Policemen's Survivorship Fund. General employees must retire at age 70, and policemen and firemen at age 63. See separation benefits Service retirement allowance General employees: Annual allowance is equal to $1.90 per each $100 of employee's final average salary for each year of service. Policemen and firemen: Annual allowance is equal to $2.15 per each $100 of employee's final average salary for each of the first 25 years, and $2.30 for each year over 25. Ordinary disability retirement allowance General employees: Annual allowance is equal to $1.71 per $100 of employee's final average salary for each year of service to disability. Policemen and firemen: Annual allowance is equal to $1,935 per $100 of employee's final average salary for each of the first 25 years of service, plus $2.07 for each year over 25. Duty disability retirement allowance 75 percent of employee's final average salary plus additional allowance based on employee's contributions. Employee's final average salary is the average of his basic compensation (without overtime pay) during the 3 years when his compensation was the highest. If an employee is a member of the Coordinated Plan, and entitled to a Social Security benefit at age 65, the maximum allowance he can receive from Social Security and the City is 80 percent of his final average salary. Firemen and policemen are not eligible for Social Security Act coverage. At time of retirement employee must select one of the several reduced allowance options described under Optional Benefits to provide death benefit to designated beneficiaries. Minimum ordinary disability allowance is 25 percent of employee's final average salary. If employee has less than 10 years of service, the allowance is paid as long as he is disabled up to one-auarter of the time he worked for City. If employee has over 10 years of service, the allowance is payable as long as he is disabled. If a person is employed and received earnings while receiving a disability allowance, his earnings plus allowance cannot exceed the current salary for the position held at retire ment. Ordinary disability allowance is also subject to the 807. limit, indicated above, if employee is member of Coordi nated Plan and receives a Social Security disability benefit. Paid instead of ordinary disability allowance if employee is totally and permanently disabled as a result of an injury while performing his job. Duty disability allowance is subject to 1007. limit for a Coordinated Plan merber when he becomes eligible for Social Security benefits. State or Federal Compensation payments on account of the same disability are offset against allowance. Ordinary death benefits Contributions together with interest paid designated beneficiary. If employee has over one year of service, an additional benefit of one-half his final average salary is paid to beneficiary. Beneficiary can take benefit as lump sum, or as monthly pay ments over any time period, or as a lifetime benefit. Also see Firemen and Policemen's Survivorship Fund benefits. Duty death benefits Contributions together with interest paid beneficiary and, instead of lump sum ordinary death benefit, a pension of Also see Firemen and Policemen's Survivorship Fund benefits. one-half of employee's final average salary is paid to widow or children as long as widow is unmarr.ied or employee's children are under 18, or to a dependent father or mother. See n otes at end o f ta b le. 73 T a b le 2 4 . 1970 R e t ir e m e n t b e n e fit s u n d e r e m p lo y e s ' re t ire m e n t s y s te m — c it y e m p lo y e e s , M ilw a u k e e — C o n tin u e d Provisions Applications, exceptions, and related matters Separation benefits Employee on ceasing to be employed by City can always request accumulated contributions returned in cash. If employee voluntarily leaves service after working 5 years he is eligible for deferred retirement allowance if he leaves contributions in system. At age 60 (or age 57 for firemen and policemen) he is entitled to a re tirement allowance based on years of service and final average salary at time he leaves the City’s service. If employee is separated from service for any cause other than fault or delinquency on his part after 15 years of service and after reaching age 55, he can elect to have allowance start immediately, but allowance will be reduced to take into account that it starts at an earlier date. If employee is involuntarily separated from service for any cause other than fault or delinquency on his part, he has option to elect an immediate allowance (actuarially reduced) or leave contributions in the System for a retirement allowance payable at the minimum service retirement age. Optional reduced allowance benefits Option 1-a: Reduced retirement allowance for life provided that if retiree dies before he has received payments from that portion of allowance equal to his contribut ions with interest, the balance, if any, will be paid to his beneficiary in a lump sum. Option 1-b: Reduced retirment allowance for life provided that if retiree dies before he has received total allow ance payments equal to his contributions plus interest, the balance, if any,will be paid to his beneficiary in a lump sum. Option 2: Reduced retirement allowance for life provided that if retiree dies, the same reduced allowance will continue to beneficiary for life. Option 3: Reduced retirement allowance for life provided that if retiree dies one-half of the reduced allowance will continue to beneficiary for life. Option 4: Any other optional allowance approved by Annuity and Pension Board. Option l-b provides a slightly higher current allowance but reduced the benefit payable to the beneficiary. Protective survivorship option An employee continuing to work after reaching minimum retirement age may elect the Protective Survivorship Option six months before he reaches minimum service retirement age of 60 (age 57 or age 52 with 25 years of service for firemen or policemen). With this option, he must elect Option 2, 3, or 4 as the form of retirement allowance to be paid after retirement or in event of his death before retirement. This option provides beneficiary with a life-time pension instead of the lump sum death benefit beneficiary would receive as provided under "Ordinary Death Benefit." Firemen and Policemen's Survivorship Fund Firemen and policemen pay an annual contribution of 0.87 percent of the first $6,000 of annual earnings (a maxi mum of $52.20 yearly) to the fund and City matches contribution. Fund pays (a) $200 per month to widow as long as there is one or more unmarried children under 18. (b) $100 per month to widow starting at age 62 if there are no unmarried children under age 18, and widow does not remmary When all children reach age 18, benefit ceases until widow reaches age 62, when benefit of $100 per month starts, if not remarried at that time. If widow remarries, the $200 allowance continues as long as there are two or more children under 18. If, after death or remarriage of widow there remained only one child, allowance would be $100 per month until child reached 18. If there is a disabled dependent child whose disability commenced before age of 18, child may be eligible to to have benefits continued on after age 18. If there is no surviving widow or children, dependent parents may be eligible for benefits. Widower is entitled to same benefits as widow, except that if there are no children eligible for benefits, benefit paid to widower commences at age 65. NOTES: This summary of retirement benefits is limited to current 1970 benefits provided by the Employes4 Retirement System of the City of Milwaukee. The System was established January 1, 1938, under provisions of Chapter 396, Wisconsin Laws of 1937. The Retirement System law has been amended from time to time and the following major changes were made: 1947: Firemen, policemen, and elected officials brought under the System. City given Home Rule powers to amend the Retirement Act. 1951: Basic formula of the System changed to increase retirement benefits; the final average salary, upon shich benefits were figured, was changed to the average of the five highest earnings years; and contribution rates were increased to provide for the increased benefits. 1957: System divided to permit members desiring Social Security coverage to elect such coverage under a modified plan coordinated with Social Security. 1958: Since January 1, 1958, all eligible new employees are automatically enrolled under the Coordinated Plan. Firemen and Policemen's Survivorship Fund created. 1959: Members who were eligible to come within provisions of the Coordinated Plan at time it was created but did not do so giver opportunity to be transferred to the group covered by the Coordinated Plan retroactive to January 1, 1956, or the date covered earnings first paid, if later. 74 Table 24. 1970 Retirement benefits under employes' retirement system—city employees, M i l w a u k e e ---- C o n t i n u e d NOTES— Continued 1960: 1961: 1963: 1964: 1965: 1966: 1967: 1968: 1969: 1970: Provisions made to limit the annual salary on which contributions were made to the Firemen and Policemen's Survivor ship Fund to $6,000, and to reduce the period of creditable service reouired for eligibility for ordinary dis ability retirement for firemen and policemen from 15 years to 10 years. Limit on the final average salary to be used in determining the reduction offset in the pension payable after a member of the Coordinated Planbecomes eligible for Social Security benefits changed so that with respect to service prior to January 1, 1960, only the first $4,200 of final average salary is used, and after that date the first $4,800 of the final average salary is used. Reduction was limited to 50 percent of the member's Social Security primary insurance benefit. Provision regarding the lump sum death benefit payable on the death of a member of the Coordinated Plar was changed so that dependents eligible to receive Survivor's insurance benefits under the Social Security Act received the same benefit from the System as those who wore not so eligible; however, an adjustment was made for the lump sum amount paid by Social Security. An additional optional plan (Option 1-b) was created which members could select at time of retirement. This option is similar to the original Ootion 1, which was renumbered Option 1-a. Option 1-b provides a slightly higher current allowance but reduces the benefit payable to the beneficiary. Changes made with respect to excess contributions to provide that a member could withdraw such contributions. Changes made to permit eligible Non-Coordinated Plan members to elect transfer to the Coordinated Plan prior to June 1, 1962; to reduce creditable service requirement for eligibility for ordinary disability retirement for general employees from 15 to 10 years, the same as for firemen and policemen; and to remove the maximum pension provision and the State Workmen's Compensation Award offset against accidential death benefits payable to depend ents of members. Firemen's and policemen's survivorship benefits increased to provide a monthly allowance of $175 for a widow with one or more children, or $87.50 per month for an individual benefit (one dependent child or a widow). Change made in disability provisions to provide that earnings limit should be based on difference between retirement allowance and current salary for position. Change made to remove the offset under the Coordinated Plan effective January 1, 1967, for all members who retired after December 31, 1965. The 70 percent Coordinated Plan limit was not removed. Non-Corrdinated Plan members given another opportunity to transfer to the Coordinated Plan during 1966. Provisions made for a member to make one lump sum payment into an excess contribution account of an amount equal to the amount deducted from his annuity account for retroactive Social Security taxes. Firemen's and policemen's survivorship benefits increased to provide an allowance of $200 per month for a widow with one or more children, or $100 per month for an individual benefit, (one dependent child or a widow). Change made to provide that a fireman or policeman who retired after July 1, 1967, because of an approved dis ability, was eligible to participate in the firemen and policemen's survivorship benefits by continuing his contributions to the survivorship fund. Firemen and Policemen's Survivorship Fund contribution rate increased to 0.87 percent of the first $6,000 earnings. Outside earnings allowance for disability pensioners increased. Provision made for the employer to pay the employee's contribution. Final average salary changed to a highest 3-year average. Rate of employee contribution set at 5.5 percent of basic salary for general employees and 7 percent for firemen and policemen. Computation of service retirement allowance simplified. Service retirement formula for general employees changed to 1.9 percent of final average salary for each year of creditable service. Service retirement formula for firemen and policemen changed to 2.15 percent of final average salary for the first 25 years of creditable service and 2.30 percent for each year thereafter. Firemen and policemen attaining age 52 with 25 years of creditable service made eligible for full service retirement allowance. Coordinated Plan limit of 70 percent was increased to 75 percent for retirements after January 1, 1969. Optional survivorship plan was provided for active members, to be elected within the 6 months prior to attain ment of the minimum service retirement age. Coordinated Plant limit was increased from 75 percent to 80 percent after January 1, 1970. Provision made to remove the $250 Coordinated Plan offset from the Ordinary Death benefit. 75 Table 25. Clothing allowance and related practices—city employees, Milwaukee General Employees Year Fire and Police Service Personnel 1960 Public health nurses and sanitation inspectors: $60 annual uniform replacement allowance. Hospital personnel exposed to communicable diseases (nurses, maids, janitors and laundry workers): Uniforms provided daily. Fire and police-uniformed: $250 initial issue uniform allowance; $90 annual uniform replacement allowance after 12 months' service. 1961 Change: Public health nurses and sanitation inspectors: Annual uniform replacement allowance increased from $60 to $90. Change: Fire and Police - uniformed: increased to $125. Change: Police-uniformed: Initial issue uniform allowance increased to $290. Police-motorcycle: $260 initial issue uniform allowance provided. 1963 Added: Automotive mechanics and helpers: Coverall service provided. Garbage collection laborers: Raingear furnished. Aborists: Work shoes furnished. 1964 1965 Annual uniform replacement allowance Change:' P olice -u n ifo rm e d : I n i t i a l is su e uniform allow ance in crea sed to $305. Police-motorcycle: Initial issue uniform allowance increased to $270. Added: Detectives, detective sergeants and policewomen-non-uniformed: $60 annual clothing replacement allowance. Change: Fire-uniformed: Initial issue uniform allowance increased to $260. Ad d e d : Museum guards: $60 annual uniform replacement allowance. ; Museum truck drivers: Uniform jackets and caps furnished. i 1966 I Added: ' Water Department meter readers in field: annual uniform replacement allowance. $38 j Change: Detectives and policewomen-non-uniformed: increased to $125. 1967 1968 Change: Police-uniformed: Initial issue uniform allowance increased to $330. Police-motorcycle: Initial issue uniform allowance increased to $295. Added: Licensed practical nurses: replacement allowance. 1969 Annual clothing allowance $90 annual uniform Change: Police-uniformed: Initial issue uniform allowance increased to $375. Police-motorcycle: Initial issue uniform allowance increased to $330. Detective sergeants-non-uniformed: Annual clothing allowance increased to $125. Fire-uniformed: Initial issue uniform allowance increased to $310; and annual uniform replacement allowance increased to $135. 76 Table 26. 1960 salary rates, all city employees, Milwaukee Biweekly, monthly, ard annual salary rates Pay range Step rates Interval 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 Biweekly Monthly Arnual $122.81 267.54 3,210.48 $131.60 286.70 3,440.40 $136.79 298.00 3,576.00 2 Biweekly Monthly Annual 144.56 314.94 3,779.28 150.08 326.97 3,923.64 156.69 341.35 4,096.20 Biweekly Monthly Annual 150.08 326.97 3,923.64 156.69 341.35 4,096.20 164.70 358.81 4,305.72 Biweekly Monthly Annual 147.17 320.61 3,847.32 153.39 334.18 4,010.16 Biweekly Monthly Annual 166.20 362.08 4, 344. 96 173.92 378.89 4,546.68 Biweekly Monthly Annual 173.92 378.89 4,546.68 181.75 395.95 4,751.40 189.63 413.12 4,957.44 Biweekly Monthly Annual 176.35 384.20 4,610.40 184.47 401.89 4,822.68 192.36 419.06 5,028.72 _ . - _ . - - - Biweekly Monthly Annual 166.20 362.08 4,344.96 172.79 376.43 4,517.16 180.56 393.37 4,720.44 188.55 410.78 4,929.36 Biweekly Monthly Annual 181.75 395.95 4,751.40 191.29 416.73 5,000.76 199.17 433.90 5,206.80 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not 11 12 Not in in $141.98 309.31 3,711.72 $147.17 320.61 3,847.32 _ $153.39 334.18 4,010.16 . - _ . - - - . _ - - . - - - 160.60 349.87 4,198.44 166.20 362.08 4,344.96 172.79 376.43 4,517.16 - 181.75 395.95 4,751.40 184.04 400.95 4,811.40 _ . _ _ - use _ - 196.44 427.96 5,135.32 _ - _ . - _ _ - - use _ . _ _ _ - - - Biweekly Monthly Annual 191.29 416.73 5,000.76 199.46 434.53 5,214.36 207.34 451.71 5,420.52 Biweekly Monthly Annual 180.56 393.37 4,720.44 188.55 410.78 4,929.36 196.44 427.96 5,135.52 Biweekly Monthly Annual 196.44 427.96 5,135.52 206.00 448.78 5,385.36 213.88 465.96 5,591.52 Biweekly Monthly Annual 196.44 427.96 5,135.52 202.99 442.22 5,306.64 211.45 460.66 5,527.92 219.34 477.84 5,734.08 . . _ _ - - Biweekly Monthly Annual 196.44 427.96 5,135.52 202.99 442.22 5,306.64 211.45 460.66 5,527.92 219.34 477.84 5,734.08 227.82 496.32 5,955.84 - Biweekly Monthly Annual 219.34 477.84 5,734.08 227.82 496.32 5,955.84 238.92 520.50 6,246.00 Biweekly Monthly Annual 213.88 465.96 5,591.52 224.07 488.16 5,857.92 234.14 510.10 6,121.20 Biweekly Monthly Annual 224.07 488.16 5,857.92 234.14 510.10 6,121.20 244.69 533.08 6,396.96 Biweekly Monthly Annual 234.14 510.10 6,121.20 244.69 533.08 6,396.96 256.26 558.28 6,699.36 Biweekly Monthly Annual 244.69 533.08 6,396.96 256.26 558.28 6,699.36 267.81 583.44 7,001.28 - . . - - - 22 Biweekly Monthly Arnual 234.14 510.10 6,121.20 244.69 533.08 6,396.96 255.09 555.74 6,668.88 265.30 577.98 6,935.76 23 Biweekly Monthly Annual 252.17 549.38 6,592.56 263.52 574.10 6,889.20 275.43 600.04 7,200.48 287.77 626.93 7,523.16 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 213.88 465.96 5,591.52 . . - _ - - ___________________ i 77 _ - _ - . _ _ . _ _ - - - _ . 244.69 533.08 6,396.96 . _ _ - - _ . _ _ . - - - _ _ . _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ 276.02 601.33 7,215.96 _ . . - _ _ " ' See footnote at end of table. 206.00 448.78 5,385.36 Table 26. 1960 salary rates, all city employees, Milwaukee^— Continued Biweekly, monthly, and annual salary rates Pay range Step rates Interval 1 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 2 3 Biweekly Monthly Annual $276.02 601.33 7,215.96 $287.77 626.93 7,523.16 $299.11 651.64 7,819.68 Biweekly Monthly Annual 325.99 710.20 8,522.40 339.28 739.15 8,869.80 354.20 771.64 9,259.68 Biweekly Monthly Annual 354.20 771.64 9,259.68 368.29 802.34 9,628.08 Biweekly Monthly Annual 382.39 833.06 9,996.72 Biweekly Monthly Annual 409.73 892.62 10,711.44 Biweekly Monthly Annual 4 $311.38 678.36 8.1A0.32 6 5 $324.12 706.12 8,473.44 - - 368.29 802.34 9,628.08 . . - - 382.39 833.06 9,996.72 396.17 863.09 10,357.08 409.73 892.62 10,7]1.44 " 396.17 863.09 10,357.08 409.73 892.62 10,711.44 423.29 922.16 11,065.92 436.84 951.68 11,420.16 ' 423.29 922.16 11,065.92 436.84 951.68 11,420.16 450.40 981.22 11,774.64 463.96 1,010.77 12,129.24 436.84 951.68 11,420.16 450.40 981.22 11,774.64 463.96 1,010.77 12,129.24 477.77 1,040.86 . 12,490.32 491.07 1,069.83 12,837.96 Biweekly Monthly Annual 463.96 1,010.77 12,129.24 477.77 1,040.86 12,490.32 491.07 1,069.83 12,837.96 504.62 1,099.35 13,192.20 518.18 1,128.89 13,546.68 - Biweekly Monthly Arnual 504.62 1,099.35 13,192.20 518.18 1,128.89 13,546.68 545.29 1,187.96 14,255.52 558.58 1,216.91 14,602.92 - - - - - ' Biweekly Monthly Annual 541.07 1,178.76 14,145.12 566.88 1,234.98 14,819.76 592.68 1,291.20 15,494.40 618.49 1,347.42 16,169.04 - - - “ ' Biweekly Monthly Annual 585.22 1,274.94 15,299.28 612.33 1,334.00 16,008.00 639.92 1,394.11 16,729.32 _ - - - - - ! 1 | * . - - - - - * - In 1960 there was a single pay plan that covered nearly all city employees, including all employees of the Fire and Police Departments. Pay ranges 1, 4, 9, 13, 18, 22, and 24 included clerical, administrative, technical, and professional classes. The remaining pay ranges, up through pay range 23, contained trades, labor, custodial, and public safety jobs. Pay ranges 25 through 33 included management positions, which did not receive additional pay or compensatory time off for overtime worked. City employees are paid biweekly. Classes included in pay range 1 were Blueprint Trimmer, Clerk I, Clerk Stenographer I, Clerk Typist I, Keypunch Operator I,and Library Aide I. Classes included in pay range 2 were Bindery Sewer I, Custodial Worker I, Elevator Operator 1, and Laundry Worker 1. Classes included in pay range 33 were Commissioner of Health and Commissioner of Public Works. Classes included in pay range 32 were Attorney V, Chief Engineer-Fire Department, Chief of Police, City Engineer, Deputy City Attorney, Deputy Commissioner of Public Works, Municipal Port Director, and Tax Commissioner. 78 Table 27. 1961-67 salary rates (Biweekly), all city employees, Milwaukee Biweekly salary rates Pay range Step rates Year 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 $690.41 690.41 724.93 774.64 769.08 792.15 815.91 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 607.56 607.56 635.18 652.44 673.86 694.08 714.90 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966. 1967 | ! 1 $724.93 724.93 759.45 780.10 805.70 829.87 854.77 3 i 4 5 6 $759.45 759.45 793.97 815.56 842.33 867.60 893.63 $793.97 793.97 828.49 851.02 878.95 905.32 932.48 $828.49 828.49 863.01 886.48 915.57 943.04 971.33 635.18 635.18 662.79 680.81 703.16 742.25 745.98 662.79 662.79 690.41 709.18 732.46 754.43 777.06 690.41 690.41 724.93 744.64 769.08 792.15 815.91 724.93 724.93 759.45 780.10 805.70 829.87 854.77 529.32 529.32 552.33 567.34 585.96 603.54 621.65 552.33 552.33 579.95 595.71 615.26 633.72 652.73 579.95 579.95 607.56 624.08 644.56 663.90 683.82 607.56 607.56 635.18 652.44 673.86 694.08 714.90 635.18 635.18 662.79 680.81 703.16 724.25 745.98 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 483.29 483.29 506.30 520.07 537.14 553.25 569.85 506.30 506.30 529.32 543.70 561.55 578.40 595.75 529.32 529.32 552.33 567.34 585.96 603.54 621.65 552.33 552.33 579.95 595.71 615.26 633.72 652.73 579.95 579.95 607.56 624.08 644.56 663.90 683.82 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 439.56 439.56 460.27 472.79 488.30 502.95 518.04 460.27 460.27 483.29 496.43 512.72 528.10 543.94 483.29 483.29 506.30 520.07 537.14 553.25 569.85 506.30 506.30 529.32 543.70 561.55 578.40 595.75 529.32 529.32 552.33 567.34 585.96 603.54 621.65 - 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 418.85 418.85 439.56 451.51 466.33 480.32 494.73 439.56 439.56 460.27 472.79 488.30 502.95 518.04 460.27 460.27 483.29 496.43 512.72 528.10 543.94 483.29 483.29 506.30 520.07 537.14 553.25 569.85 506.30 506.30 529.32 543.70 561.55 578.40 595.75 - 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 382.03 382.03 400.44 411.32 424.82 437.56 450.69 400.44 400.44 418.85 430.24 444.36 457.69 471.42 418.85 418.85 439.56 451.51 466.33 480.32 494.73 439.56 439.56 460.27 472.79 488.30 502.95 518.04 460.27 460.27 483.29 496.43 512.72 528.10 543.94 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 347.51 347.51 363.62 373.50 385.76 397.33 409.25 363.62 363.62 382.03 392.41 405.29 417.45 429.97 382.03 382.03 400.44 411.32 424.82 437.56 450.69 400.44 400.44 418.85 430.24 444.36 457.69 471.42 418.85 418.85 439.56 451.51 466.33 480.32 494.73 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 317.59 317.59 331.40 340.41 351.58 362.13 372.99 331.40 331.40 347.51 356.95 368.67 379.73 391.12 347.51 347.51 363.62 373.50 385.76 397.33 409.25 363.62 363.62 382.03 392.41 405.29 417.45 429.97 382.03 382.03 400.44 411.32 424.82 437.56 450.69 - 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 303.78 303.78 317.59 326.22 336.93 347.04 357.45 317.59 317.59 331.40 340.41 351.58 362.13 372.99 331.40 331.40 347.51 356.95 368.67 379.73 391.12 347.51 347.51 363.62 373.50 385.76 397.33 409.25 363.62 363.62 382.03 392.41 405.29 417.45 429.97 - 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 265.12 265.12 277.08 284.62 293.96 302.78 311.86 277.08 277.08 289.97 297.86 307.63 316.86 326.37 289.97 289.97 303.78 312.04 322.28 331.95 341.91 303.78 303.78 317.59 326.22 336.93 347.04 357.45 317.59 317.59 331.40 340.41 351.58 362.13 372.59 See footnote at end of table. 79 - - _ - t - - . - - . - . - _ - _ - - _ - - _ - _ ' _ - Table 27. 1961-67 salary rates (Biweekly), all city employees, Milwaukee1— Continued Biweekly salary rates Pay range Step rates Year 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2 3 4 5 6 _ 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 $253.61 253.61 265.12 272.33 281.26 289.70 298.39 $265.12 265.12 277.08 284.62 293.96 302.78 311.86 $277.08 277.08 289.97 297.86 307.63 316.86 326.37 $289.97 289.97 303.78 312.04 322.28 331.95 341.91 $303.78 303.78 317.59 326.22 336.93 347.04 357.45 - 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 242.56 242.56 253.61 260.51 269.05 277.12 285.43 253.61 253.61 265.12 272.33 281.26 289.70 298.39 265.12 265.12 277.08 284.62 293.96 302.78 311.86 277.08 277.08 289.97 297.86 307.63 316.86 326.37 289.97 289.97 303.. 78 312.04 322.28 331.95 341.91 _ 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 232.44 232.44 242.56 249.16 257.34 265.34 273.34 242.56 242.56 253.61 260.51 269.05 277.12 285.43 253.61 253.61 265.12 272.33 281.26 289.70 298.39 265.12 265.12 277.08 284.62 293.96 302.78 311.86 277.08 277.08 289.97 297.86 307.63 316.86 326.37 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 222.77 222.77 232.44 238.76 246.59 254.59 262.59 232.44 232.44 242.56 249.16 257.34 265.34 273.34 242.56 242.56 253.61 260.51 269.05 277.12 285.43 253.61 253.61 265.12 272.33 281.26 289.70 298.39 265.12 265.12 277.08 284.62 293.96 302.78 311.86 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 213.57 213.57 222.77 228.83 236.34 244.34 252.34 222.77 222.77 232.44 238.76 246.59 254.59 262.59 232.44 232.44 242.56 249.16 257.34 265.34 273.34 242.56 242.56 253.61 260.51 269.05 277.12 285.43 253.61 253.61 265.12 272.33 281.26 289.70 298.39 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 204.82 204.82 213.57 219.37 226.57 234.57 242.57 213.57 213.57 222.77 228.83 236.34 244.34 252.34 222.77 222.77 232.44 238.76 246.59 254.59 262.59 232.44 232.44 242.56 249.16 257.34 265.34 273.34 242.56 242.56 253.61 260.51 269.05 277.12 285.43 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 196.54 196.54 204.82 210.39 217.30 225.30 233.30 204.82 204.82 213.57 219.37 226.57 234.57 242.57 213.57 213.57 222.77 228.83 236.34 244.34 252.34 222.77 222.77 232.44 238.76 246.59 254.59 262.59 232.44 232.44 242.56 249.16 257.34 265.34 273.34 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 189.17 189.17 196.54 201.88 208.50 216.50 224.50 196.54 196.54 204.82 210.39 217.30 225.30 233.30 204.82 204.82 213.57 219.37 226.57 234.57 242.57 213.57 213.57 222.77 228.83 236.34 244.34 252.34 222.77 222.77 232.44 238.76 246.59 254.59 262.59 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 180.89 180.89 189.17 194.32 200.69 208.69 216.69 189.17 189.17 196.54 201.88 208.50 216.50 224.50 196.54 196.54 204.82 210.39 217.30 225.30 233.30 204.82 204.82 213.57 219.37 226.57 234.57 242.57 213.57 213.57 222.77 228.83 236.34 244.34 252.34 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 173.52 173.52 180.89 185.81 192.07 200.07 208.07 180.89 180.89 189.17 194.32 200.69 208.69 216.69 189.17 189.17 196.54 201.88 208.50 216.50 224.50 196.54 196.54 204.82 210.39 217.30 225.30 233.30 204.82 204.82 213.57 219.37 226.57 234.57 242.57 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 166.16 166.16 173.52 178.24 184.48 192.48 200.48 173.52 173.52 180.89 185.81 192.07 200.07 208.07 180.89 180.89 189.17 194.32 200.69 208.69 216.69 189.17 189.17 196.54 201.88 208.50 216.50 224.50 196.54 196.54 204.82 210.39 217.30 225.30 233.30 See footnote at end of table. 80 " _ _ ' _ _ _ - - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ . - _ . _ _ _ - _ - - _ - - _ _ - - _ . - - . - ~ Table 27. 1961-67 salary rates (Biweekly), all city employees. Milwaukee1— Continued Biweekly salary rates Pay range Step rates Yeai 1 2 3 4 5 6 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 $158.79 158.79 158.79 163.11 169.31 177.31 185.31 $166.16 166.16 166.16 170.68 176.90 184.90 192.90 $173.52 173.52 173.52 178.24 184.48 192.48 200.48 $180.89 180.89 180.89 185.81 192.07 200.07 208.07 $189.17 189.17 189.17 194.32 200.69 208.69 216.69 $ 196.54 201.88 208.50 216.50 224.50 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 152.35 152.35 158.79 163.11 169.31 177.31 185.31 158.79 158.79 166.16 170.68 176.90 184.90 192.90 166.16 166.16 173.52 178.24 184.48 192.48 200.48 173.52 173.52 180.89 185.81 192.07 200.07 208.07 180.89 180.89 189.17 194.32 200.69 208.69 216.69 25 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 139.46 139.46 145.91 149.87 156.04 164.04 172.04 145.91 145.91 152.35 156.49 162.67 170.67 178.67 152.35 152.35 158.79 163.11 169.31 177.31 185.31 158.79 158.79 166.16 170.68 176.90 184.90 192.90 166.16 166.16 173.52 178.24 184.48 192.48 200.48 . - 26 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 133.48 133.48 133.48 137.11 143.24 151.24 159.24 139.46 139.46 139.46 143.25 149.40 157.40 165.40 145.91 145.91 145.91 149.87 156.04 164.04 172.04 152.35 152.35 152.35 156.49 162.67 170.67 178.67 158.79 158.79 158.79 163.11 169.31 177.31 185.31 _ 166.16 170.68 176.90 184.90 192.90 27 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 127.96 127.96 127.96 131.43 137.55 145.55 153.35 133.48 133.48 133.48 137.11 143.24 151.24 159.24 139.46 139.46 139.46 143.25 149.40 157.40 165.40 145.91 145.91 145.91 149.87 156.04 164.04 172.04 152.35 152.35 152.35 156.49 162.67 170.67 178.67 158.79 163.11 169.31 177.31 185.31 23 24 . . - 1 In 1961, a c o m p le t e ly new pa y plan in c o r p o r a t in g 27 pa y ra n g e s w as a d op ted . T h is pa y plan re m a in e d in e ffe c t until 1968. O r ig in a lly it c o v e r e d n e a r ly a ll e m p lo y e e s , in clu d in g p o lic e and f i r e dep a rtm en t p e r s o n n e l. E x clu d e d w e r e p r e v a ilin g w age e m p lo y e e s , " e x e m p t " e m p lo y e e s , and e m p lo y e e s o f b o a r d s and c o m m is s io n s . P a y ra n g es 1 throu gh 1 1 in clu d e d m a n a g em en t p o s it io n s m o s t o f w h ich did not r e c e iv e a d d ition a l pay o r c o m p e n s a t o r y tim e o f f fo r o v e r t im e w o rk e d . In 1965, a new s e p e r a t e p a y plan fo r p o lic e s e r v i c e p e r s o n n e l w as e s t a b lis h e d w h ich con ta in ed 15 pay ra n g e s c o v e r in g all ranks fr o m P o li c e M a tro n up to an in clu d in g the C h ie f o f P o li c e . (See table 37. ) In 1967, a new se p a r a te pa y plan fo r fir e p e r s o n n e l w as e s t a b lis h e d w h ich co n ta in e d 5 pa y ra n g es c o v e r in g ranks o f F ir e fig h t e r th rou gh F ir e C a p ta in Ranks a b ov e F ir e C aptian w e r e in clu d e d in the g e n e ra l pa y sc h e d u le . (See table 38. ) C la s s e s in clu d e d in pa y ra n g e 1 w e r e C o m m is s io n e r o f H ealth, C o m m is s io n e r o f P u b lic W o rk s , and D ir e c t o r o f C ity D e v e lo p m e n t. C la s s e s in clu d e d in pay ra n g e s 2 w e r e C h ie f E n g i n e e r -F ir e D ep a rtm en t, C h ief o f P o l i c e . C ity E n g in e e r, D tpu ty Com m L- s io n e r o f P u b lic W o r k s , M u n icip a l P o r t D ir e c t o r , and T a x C o m m i s s i o n e r . In 1965, C h ie f o f P o lic e w as a s s ig n e d to the new se p a r a te p a y plan c o v e r in g a ll ra n k s o f p o lic e p e r s o n n e l. C la s s e s in clu d e d in pa y ra n g e 27 w e r e C le r k I, C le r k S ten og ra p h er I, C le r k T y p is t I, K ey P u n ch O p e r a to r I, and l ib r a r y A id e I. C la s s e s in clu d e d in p a y ra n g e 26 w e r e B in d e r y S ew er I, C u s to d ia l W o rk e r I, E le v a t o r O p e r a t o r I, and L au n d ry W o rk e r I. 81 Table 28. 1961-67 salary rates (Monthly), all city employees, Milwaukee1 Monthly salary rates Pay range Step rates Year 1 1 2 3 5 6 8 9 10 11 2 3 ! 4 5 6 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 $1,500.00 1,500.00 1,575.00 1,622.25 1,670.92 1,721.04 1,772.66 $1,575.00 1,575.00 1,650.00 1,699.50 1,750.49 1,802.99 1,857.09 $1,650.00 1,650.00 1,725.00 1,776.75 1,830.05 1,884.96 1,941.52 $1,725.00 1,725.00 1,800.00 1,854.00 1,909.62 1,966.92 2,025.92 $1,800.00 1.8C0.00 1,875.00 1,931.25 1,989.19 2,048.87 2,110.33 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1,320.00 1,320.00 1,380.00 1,421.40 1,464.04 1,507.97 1,553.21 1,380.00 1,380.00 1,440.00 1,483.20 1,527.70 1,573.52 1,620.73 1,440.00 1,440.00 1,500.00 1,545.00 1,591.35 1,639.09 1,688.26 1,500.00 1,500.00 1,575.00 1,622.25 1,670.92 1,721.04 1,722.66 1,575.00 1,575.00 1,650.00 1,699.50 1,750.49 1,802.99 1,857.09 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1,150.00 1,150.00 1,200.00 1,236.00 1,273.08 1,311.26 1,350.61 1,200.00 1,200.00 1,260.00 1,297.80 1,336.73 1,376.83 1,418.13 1,260.00 1,260.00 1,320.00 1,359.60 1,400.39 1,442.40 1,485.68 1,320.00 1,320.00 1,380.00 1,421.40 1,464.04 1,507.97 1,553.21 1,380.00 1,380.00 1,440.00 1,483.20 1,527.70 1,573.52 1,620.73 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1,050.00 1,050.00 1,100.00 1,133.00 1,166.99 1,202.00 1,238.07 1,100.00 1,100.00 1,150.00 1,184.50 1,220.04 1,256.64 1,294.34 1,150.00 1,150.00 1,200.00 1,236.00 1,273.08 1,311.26 1,350.61 1,200.00 1,200.00 1,260.00 1,297.80 1,336.73 1,376.83 1,418.13 1,260.00 1,260.00 1,320.00 1,359.60 1,400.39 1,442.40 1,484.68 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 955.00 955.00 1,000.00 1,030.00 1,060.90 1,092.72 1,125.50 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,050.00 1,081.50 1,113.95 1,147.36 1,181.77 1,050.00 1,050.00 1,100.00 1,133.00 1,166.99 1,202.00 1,238.07 1,100.00 1,100.00 1,150.00 1,184.50 1,220.04 1,256.64 1,294.34 1,150.00 1,150.00 1,200.00 1,236.00 1,273.08 1,311.26 1,350.61 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 910.00 910.00 955.00 983.65 1,013.16 1,043.55 1,074.86 955.00 955.00 1,000.00 1,030.00 1,060.90 1,092.72 1,125.50 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,050.00 1,081.00 1,113.95 1,147.36 1,181.77 1,050.00 1,050.00 1,100.00 1,133.00 1,166.99 1,202.00 1,238.07 1,100.00 1,100.00 1,150.00 1,184.50 1,220.04 1,256.64 1,294.34 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 830.00 830.00 870.00 896.00 922.98 950.65 979.18 870.00 870.00 910.00 965.42 994.39 1,024.22 910.00 910.00 955.00 983.65 1,013.16 1,043.55 1,074.86 955.00 955.00 1,000.00 1,030.00 1,060.90 1,092.72 1,125.50 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,050.00 1,081.50 1,113.95 1,147.36 1,181.77 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 755.00 755.00 790.00 813.70 838.11 863.25 889.14 790.00 790.00 830.00 854.90 880.55 906.96 934.16 830.00 830.00 870.00 896.10 922.98 950.65 979.18 870.00 870.00 910.00 937.30 965.42 994.39 1,024.22 910.00 910.00 955.00 983.65 1,013.16 1,043.55 1,074.86 . 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 690.00 690.00 720.00 741.60 763.85 786.77 810.37 720.00 720.00 755.00 777.65 800.98 825.01 849.76 755.00 755.00 790.00 813.70 838.11 863.25 889.14 790.00 790.00 830.00 854.90 880.55 906.96 934.16 830.00 830.00 870.00 896.10 922.98 950.65 979.18 . 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 660.00 660.00 690.00 710.70 732.02 753.99 776.60. 690.00 690.00 720.00 741.60 763.85 786.77 810.37 720.00 720.00 755.00 777.65 800.98 825.01 849.76 755.00 755.00 790.00 813.70 838.11 863.25 889.14 790.00 790.00 830.00 854.90 880.55 906.96 934.16 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 576.00 576.00 602.00 620.06 638.66 657.83 677.55 602.00 602.00 630.00 648.90 668.37 688.42 709.08 630.00 630.00 660.00 679.80 700.19 721.20 742.84 660.00 660.00 690.00 710.70 732.02 753.99 776.60 690.00 690.00 720.00 741.60 763.85 786.77 810.37 937.30 See footn ote at end o f ta b le. 82 - - _ - - _ - - _ - - _ - - _ - - - - - - - . - . - Table 28. 1961-67 salary rates (Monthly), all city employees, Milwaukee1 — Continued Monthly salary rates Pay Step rates 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 2 3 4 5 6 $576.00 576.00 602.00 620.06 638.66 657.83 677.55 $602.00 602.00 630.00 648.90 668.37 688.42 709.08 $630.00 630.00 660.00 679.80 700.19 721.20 742.84 $660.00 660.00 690.00 710.70 732.02 753.99 776.60 _ 576.00 576.00 602.00 620.06 638.66 657.83 677.55 602.00 602.00 630.00 648.90 668.37 688.42 709.08 630.00 630.00 660.00 679.80 700.19 721.20 742.84 576.00 576.00 602.00 620.06 638.66 657.83 677.55 602.00 602.00 630.00 648.90 668.37 688.42 709.08 551.00 551.00 576.00 593.28 611.08 629.41 648.29 576.00 576.00 602.00 620.06 638.66 657.83 677.55 527.00 527.00 551.00 567.53 584.56 602.08 620.13 551.00 551.00 576.00 593.28 611.08 629.41 648.29 505.00 505.00 527.00 542.81 559.09 576.48 593.86 527.00 527.00 551.00 567.53 584.56 602.08 620.13 484.00 484.00 505.00 520.15 535.75 553.13 570.51 505.00 505.00 527.00 542.81 559.09 576.48 593.86 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 $551.00 551.00 576.00 593.28 611.08 629.41 648.29 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 527.00 527.00 551.00 567.53 584.56 602.08 620.13 ! 1 j 551.00 551.00 576.00 593.28 611.08 629.41 648.29 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 505.00 505.00 527.00 542.81 559.09 576.48 593.86 | ! j 1 } ! i 527.00 527.00 551.00 567.53 584.56 602.08 620.13 551.00 551.00 576.00 593.28 611.08 629.41 648.29 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 484.00 484.00 505.00 520.15 535.75 553.13 570.51 | 505.00 505.00 527.00 542.81 559.09 576.48 593.86 527.00 527.00 551.00 567.53 584.56 602.08 620.13 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 464.00 464.00 484.00 498.52 513.48 530.86 548.24 484.00 484.00 505.00 520.15 535.75 553.13 570.51 505.00 505.00 527.00 542.81 559.09 576.48 593.86 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 445.00 445.00 464.00 477.92 492.26 509.63 527.01 464.00 464.00 484.00 498.52 513.48 530.86 548.24 484.00 484.00 505.00 520.15 535.75 553.13 570.51 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 427.00 427.00 445.00 458.35 472.10 489.49 506.87 445.00 445.00 464.00 477.92 492.26 509.63 527.01 464.00 464.00 484.00 498.52 513.48 530.86 548.24 I i ! : ; : [ 1 } ' > j | 1 j 1 » ! ! j - _ - _ - _ - - | j i l 1 i ! ! | j ; i 20 21 22 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 411.00 411.00 427.00 439.81 453.00 470.37 487.75 427.00 427.00 445.00 458.35 472.10 489.49 506.87 445.00 445.00 464.00 477.92 492.26 509.63 527.01 464.00 464.00 484.00 498.52 513.48 530.86 548.24 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 393.00 393.00 411.00 423.33 436.03 453.40 470.79 411.00 411.00 427.00 439.81 453.00 470.37 487.75 427.00 427.00 445.00 458.35 472.10 489.49 506.87 445.00 445.00 464.00 477.92 492.26 509.63 527.01 464.00 464.00 484.00 498.52 513.48 530.86 548.24 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 377.00 377.00 393.00 404.79 417.29 434.68 452.06 393.00 393.00 411.00 423.33 436.03 453.40 470.79 411.00 411.00 427.00 439.81 453.00 470.37 487.75 427.00 427.00 445.00 458.35 472.10 489.49 506.87 445.00 445.00 464.00 477.92 492.26 509.63 527.01 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 361.00 361.00 377.00 388.31 400.81 418.19 435.57 377.00 377.00 393.00 404.79 417.29 434.68 452.06 393.00 393.00 411.00 423.33 436.03 453.40 470.79 411.00 411.00 427.00 439.81 453.00 470.37 487.75 1 ; 1 j 1 { ; j | : | | 484.00 484.00 505.00 520.15 535.75 553.13 570.51 ! j ' • j 83 f j | i j 427.00 427.00 445.00 458.35 472.10 489.49 506.87 - . - - _ - _ ! - - _ 1 See fo o tn o te at end o f ta b le. ! ! » ' - _ j 19 I - | _ - - Table 28. 1961-67 salary rates, (Monthly), all city employees, Milwaukee1— Continued! Monthly salary rates Pay range Step rates Year 1 23 24 25 26 27 1 2 3 4 !! 5 6 1 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 $345.00 345.00 345.00 355.35 367.85 385.23 402.61 $361.00 361.00 361.00 371.83 384.33 401.72 419.10 $377.00 377.00 377.00 388.31 400.81 418.19 435.57 $393.00 393.00 393.00 404.79 417.29 434.68 452.06 $411.00 411.00 411.00 423.33 436.03 453.40 470.79 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 331.00 331.00 345.00 355.35 367.85 385.23 402.61 345.00 345.00 361.00 371.83 384.33 401.72 419.10 361.00 361.00 377.00 388.31 400.81 418.19 435.57 377,00 377.00 393.00 404.79 417.29 434.68 452.06 393.00 393.00 411.00 423.33 436.03 453.40 470.79 1961 1962 1963 19.64 1965 1966 1967 303.00 303.00 317.00 326.51 339.01 356.40 373.78 317.00 317.00 331.00 340.93 353.43 370.80 388.18 331.00 331.00 345.00 355.35 367.85 385.23 402.61 345.00 345.00 361.00 371.83 384.33 401.72 419.10 361.00 361.00 377.00 388.31 400.81 418.19 435.57 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 290.00 290.00 290.00 298.70 311.20 328.59 345.97 303.00 303.00 303.00 312.09 324.59 341.97 359.35 317.00 317.00 317.00 326.51 339.01 356.40 373.78 331.00 331.00 331.00 340.93 353.43 370.80 388.18 345.00 345.00 345.00 355.35 367.85 385.23 402.61 361.00 371.83 384.33 401.72 419.10 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 278.00 278.00 278.00 286.34 298.84 316.23 333.61 290.00 290.00 290.00 298.70 311.20 328.59 345.97 303.00 303.00 303.00 312.09 324.59 341.97 359.35 317.00 317.00 317.00 326.51 339.01 356.40 373.78 331.00 331.00 331.00 340.93 353.43 370.80 388.18 345.00 355.35 367.85 385.23 402.61 S e e footnote 1, table 27. 84 - $427.00 439.81 453.00 470.37 487.75 . _ - - _ - _ - _ - Table 29. 1961-67 salary rates (Annual), all city employees, M ilw aukee1 1 Annual saLary rates Pay rai'ge Step rates Year 1 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 See 3 2 6 4 5 $21,600.00 21,600.00 22,500.00 23,175.00 23,870.25 24,586.40 25,323.96 . _ - - 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 $18,000.00 18,000.00 18,900.00 19,467.00 20,051.01 20,652.48 21,271.94 $18,900.00 18,900.00 19,800.00 20,394.00 21,005.82 21,635.90 22,285.08 $19,800.00 19,800.00 20,700.00 21,321.00 21,960.63 22,619.57 23,298.21 $20,700.00 20,700.00 21,600.00 22,248.00 22,915.4423,602.99 24,311.09 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 15,840.00 15,840.00 16,560.00 17,056.80 17,568.50 18,095.66 18,638.46 16,560.00 16,560.00 17,280.00 17,798.40 18,332.35 18,882.23 19,448.76 17,280.00 17,280.00 18,000.00 18,540.00 19,096.20 19,669.07 20,259.06 18,000.00 18,000.00 18,900.00 19,467.00 20,051.01 20,652.48 21,271.94 18,900.00 18,900.00 19,800.00 20,394.00 21,005.82 21,635.90 22,285.08 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 13,800.00 13,800.00 14,400.00 14,832.00 15,276.96 15,735.15 16,207.30 14,400.00 14,400.00 15,120.00 15,573.60 16,040.81 16,521.99 17,017.60 15,120.00 15,120.00 15,840.00 16,315.20 16,804.66 17,308.82 17,828.16 15,840.00 15,840.00 16,560.00 17,056.80 17,568.50 18,095.66 18,638.46 16,560.00 16,560.00 17,280.00 17,798.40 18,332.35 18,882.23 19,448.76 _ 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 12,600.00 12,600.00 13,200.00 13,596.00 14,003.88 14,424.02 14,856.80 13,200.00 13,200.00 13,800.00 14,214.00 14,640.42 15,079.71 15,532.05 13,800.00 13,800.00 14,400.00 14,832.00 15,276.96 15,735.15 16,207.30 14,400.00 14,400.00 15,120.00 15,573.60 16,040.81 16,521.99 17,017.60 15,120.00 15,120.00 15,840.00 16,315.20 16,804.66 17,308.82 17,828.16 . 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 11,460.00 11,460.00 12,000.00 12,360.00 12,730.80 13,112.63 13,506.04 12,000.00 12,000.00 12,600.00 12,978.00 13,367.34 13,768.32 14,181.29 12,600.00 12,600.00 13,200.00 13,596.00 14,003.88 14,424.02 14,856.80 13,200.00 13,200.00 13,800.00 14,214.00 14,640.42 15,079.71 15,532.05 13,800.00 13,800.00 14,400.00 14,832.00 15,276.96 15,735.15 16,207.30 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 10,920.00 10,920.00 11,460.00 11,803.80 12,157.91 12,522.63 12,898.32 11,460.00 11,460.00 12,000.00 12,360.00 12,730.80 13,112.63 13,506.04 12,000.00 12,000.00 12,600.00 12,978.00 13,367.34 13,768.32 14,181.29 12,600.00 12,600.00 13,200.00 13,596.00 14,003.88 14,424.02 14,856.80 13,200.00 13,200.00 13,800.00 14,214.00 14,640.42 15,079.71 15,532.05 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 9,960.00 9,960.00 10,440.00 10,753.20 11,075.80 11,407.81 11,750.13 10,440.00 10,440.00 10,920.00 11,247.60 11,585.03 11,932.63 12,290.59 10,920.00 10,920.00 11,460.00 11,803.80 12,157.91 12,522.63 12,898.32 11,460.00 11,460.00 12,000.00 12,360.00 12,730.80 13,112.63 13,506.04 12,000.00 12,000.00 12,600.00 12,978.00 13,367.34 13,768.32 14,181.29 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 9,060.00 9,060.00 9,480.00 9,764.40 10,057.33 10,358.96 10,669.73 9,480.00 9,480.00 9,960.00 10,258.80 10,566.56 10,883.52 11,209.93 9,960.00 9,960.00 10,440.00 10,753.20 11,075.80 11,407.81 11,750.13 10,440.00 10,440.00 10,920.00 11,247.60 11,585.03 11,932.63 12,290.59 10,920.00 10,920.00 11,460.00 11,803.80 12,157.91 12,522.63 12,898.32 - 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 8,280.00 8,280.00 8,640.00 8,899.20 9,166.18 9,441.25 9,724.38 8,640.00 8,640.00 9,060.00 9,331.80 9,611.75 9,900.10 10,197.06 9,060.00 9,060.00 9,480.00 9,764.40 10,057.33 10,358.96 10,669.73 9,480.00 9,480.00 9,960.00 10,258.80 10,566.56 10,883.52 11,209.93 9,960.00 9,960.00 10,440.00 10,753.20 11,075.80 11,407.81 11,750.13 - 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 7,920.00 7,920.00 8,280.00 8,528.40 8,784.25 9,047.83 9,319.23 8,280.00 8,280.00 8,640.00 8,899.20 9,166.18 9,441.25 9,724.38 8,640.00 8,640.00 9,060.00 9,331.80 9,611.75 9,900.10 10,197.06 9,060.00 9,060.00 9,480.00 9,764.40 10,057.33 10,358.96 10,669.73 9,480.00 9,480.00 9,960.00 10,258.80 10,566.56 10,883.52 11,209.93 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 6,912.00 6,912.00 7,224.00 7,440.72 7,663.94 7,893.91 8,130.64 7,224.00 7,224.00 7,560.00 7,786.80 8,020.40 8,260.99 8,508.93 7,560.00 7,560.00 7,920.00 8,157.60 8,402.33 8,654.41 8,914.08 7,920.00 7,920.00 8,280.00 8,528.40 8,784.25 9,047.83 9,319.23 8,280.00 8,280.00 8,640.00 8,899.20 9,166.18 9,441.25 9,724.38 fo o tn o te at end o f ta b le . 85 - - - - - . - . - _ - _ _ . - . - - Table 29. 1961-67 salary rates (Annual), all city employees, M ilw aukee1—‘Continued Annual salary rates Pay range Step rates Year 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2 3 4 5 6 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 $6,612.00 6,612.00 6,912.00 7,119.36 7,332.94 7,552.89 7,779.45 $6,912.00 6,912.00 7,224.00 7,440.72 7,663.94 7,893.91 8,130.64 $7,224.00 7,224.00 7,560.00 7,786.80 8,020.40 8,260.99 8,508.93 $7,560.00 7,560.00 7,920.00 8,157.60 8,402.33 5,654.41 8,914.08 $7,920.00 7,920.00 8,280.00 8,528.40 8,784.25 9,047.83 9,319.23 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 6,324.00 6,324.00 6,612.00 6,810.36 7,014.67 7,224.91 7,441.57 6,612.00 6,612.00 6,912.00 7,119.36 7,332.94 7,552.89 7,779.45 6,912.00 6,912.00 7,224.00 7,440.72 7,663.94 7,893.91 8,130.64 7,224.00 7,224.00 7,560.00 7,786.80 8,020.40 8,260.99 8,508.93 7,560.00 7,560.00 7,920.00 8,157.60 8,402.33 8,654.41 8,914.08 _ 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 6,060.00 6,060.00 6,324.00 6,513.72 6,709.13 6,917.79 7,126.36 6,324.00 6,324.00 6,612.00 6,810.36 7,014.67 7,224.91 7,441.57 6,612.00 6,612.00 6,912.00 7,119.36 7,332.94 7,552.89 7,779.45 6,912.00 6,912.00 7,224.00 7,440.72 7,663.94 7,893.91 8,130.64 7,224.00 7,224.00 7,560.00 7,786.80 8,020.40 8,260.99 8,508.93 . 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 5,808.00 5,808.00 6,060.00 6,241.80 6,429.05 6,637.53 6,846.10 6,060.00 6,060.00 6,324.00 6,513.72 6,709.13 6,917.79 7,126.36 6,324.00 6,324.00 6,612.00 6,810.36 7,014.67 7,224.91 7,441.57 6,612.00 6,612.00 6,912.00 7,119.36 7,332.94 7,552.89 7,779.45 6,912.00 6,912.00 7,224.00 7,440.72 7,663.94 7,893.91 8,130.64 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 5,568.00 5,568.00 5,808.00 5,982.24 6,161.71 6,370.29 6,578.86 5,808.00 5,808.00 6,060.00 6,241.80 6,429.05 6,637.53 6,846.10 6,060.00 6,060.00 6,324.00 6,513.72 6,709.13 6,917.79 7,126.36 6,324.00 6,324.00 6,612.00 6,810.36 7,014.67 7,224.91 7,441.57 6,612.00 6,612.00 6,912.00 7,119.36 7,332.94 7,552.89 7,779.45 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 5,340.00 5,340.00 5.568.00 5,735.04 5,907.09 6,115.58 6,324.15 5,568.00 5,568.00 5,808.00 5,982.24 6,161.71 6,370.29 6,578.86 5,808.00 5,808.00 6,060.00 6,241.80 6,429.05 6,637.53 6,846.10 6,060.00 6,060.00 6,324.00 6,513.72 6,709.13 6,917.79 7,126.36 6,324.00 6,324.00 6,612.00 6,810.36 7,014.67 7,224.91 7,441.57 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 5,124.00 5,124.00 5,340.00 5,500.20 5,665.21 5,873.89 6,082.46 5,340.00 5,340.00 5,568.00 5,735.04 5,907.09 6,115.58 6,324.15 5,568.00 5,568.00 5,808.00 5,982.24 6,161.71 6,370.29 6,578.86 5,808.00 5,808.00 6,060.00 6,241.80 6,429.05 6,637.53 6,846.10 6,060.00 6,060.00 6,324.00 6,513.72 6,709.13 6,917.79 7,126.36 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 4,932.00 4,932.00 5,124.00 5,277.72 5,436.05 5,644.46 5,853.04 5,124.00 5,124.00 5,340.00 5,500.20 5,665.21 5,873.89 6,082.46 5,340.00 5,340.00 5,568.00 5,735.04 5,907.09 6,115.58 6,324.15 5,568.00 5,568.00 5,808.00 5,982.24 6,161.71 6,370.29 6,578.86 5,808.00 5,808.00 6,060.00 6,241.80 6,429.05 6,637.53 6,846.10 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 4,716.00 4,716.00 4,932.00 5,079.96 5,232.36 5,440.85 5,649.42 4,932.00 4,932.00 5,124.00 5,277.72 5,436.05 5,644.46 5,853.04 5,124.00 5,124.00 5,340.00 5,500.20 5,665.21 5,873.89 6,082.46 5,340.00 5,340.00 5,568.00 5,735.04 5,907.09 6,115.58 6,324.15 5,568.00 5,568.00 5,808.00 5,982.24 6,161.71 6,370.29 6,578.86 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 4,524.00 4,524.00 4,716.00 4,857.48 5,007.48 5,216.11 5,424.68 4,716.00 4,716.00 4,932.00 5,079.96 5,232.36 5,440.85 5,649.42 4,932.00 4,932.00 5,124.00 5,277.72 5,436.05 5,644.46 5,853.04 5,124.00 5,124.00 5,340.00 5,500.20 5,665.21 5,873.89 6,082.46 5,340.00 5,340.00 5,568.00 5,735.04 5,907.09 6,115.58 6,324.15 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 4,332.00 4,332.00 4,524.00 4,659.72 4,809.72 5,018.23 5,226.80 4,524.00 4,524.00 4,716.00 4,857.48 5,007.48 5,216.11 5,424.68 4,716.00 4,716.00 4,932.00 5,079.96 5,232.36 5,440.85 5,649.42 4,932.00 4,932.00 5,124.00 5,277.72 5,436.05 5,644.46 5,853.04 5,124.00 5,124.00 5,340.00 5,500.20 5,665.21 5,873.89 6,082.46 See fo o tn o te at end o f ta b le. 86 - - - - - ” . - . - _ - - . - . - _ - - - Table 29. 1961-67 salary rates (Annual), all city employees, Milwaukee 1— Continued Annual salary rates Pay range Step rates Year 1 23 24 25 26 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 $4,140.00 4,140.00 4,140.00 4,264.20 4,414.20 4,622.73 4,831.30 $4,332.00 4,332.00 4,332.00 4,461.96 4,611.96 4,820.61 5,029.18 $4,524.00 4,524.00 4,524.00 4,659.72 4,809.72 5,018.23 5,226.80 $4,716.00 4,716.00 4,716.00 4,857.48 5,007.48 5,216.11 5,424.68 $4,932.00 4,932.00 4,932.00 5,079.96 5,232.36 5,440.85 5,649.42 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 3,972.00 3,972.00 4,140.00 4,264.20 4,414.20 4,622.73 4,831.30 4,140.00 4,140.00 4,332.00 4,461.96 4,611.96 4,820.61 5,029.18 4,332.00 4,332.00 4,524.00 4,659.72 4,809.72 5,018.23 5,226.80 4,524.00 4,524.00 4,716.00 4,857.48 5,007.48 5,216.11 5,424.68 4,716.00 4,716.00 4,932.00 5,079.96 5,232.36 5,440.85 5,649.42 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 3,636.00 3,636.00 3,804.00 3,918.12 4,068.12 4,276.76 4,485.33 3,804.00 3,804.00 3,972.00 4,091.16 4,241.16 4,449.61 4,658.18 3,972.00 3,972.00 4,140.00 4,264.20 4,414.20 4,622.73 4,831.30 4,140.00 4,140.00 4,332.00 4,461.96 4,611.96 4,820.61 5,029.18 4,332.00 4,332.00 4,524.00 4,659.72 4,809.72 5,018.23 5,226.80 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 3,480.00 3,480.00 3,480.00 3,584.40 3,734.40 3,943.04 4,151.61 3,636.00 3,636.00 3,636.00 3,745.08 3,895.08 4,103.64 4,312.21 3,804.00 3,804.00 3,804.00 3,918.12 4,068.12 4,276.76 4,485.33 3,972.00 3,972.00 3,972.00 4,091.16 4,241.16 4,449.61 4,658.18 4,140.00 4,140.00 4,140.00 4,264.20 4,414.20 4,622.73 4,831.30 4,332.00 4,461.96 4,611.96 4,820.61 5,029.18 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 3,336.00 3,336.00 3,336.00 3,436.08 3,586.08 3,794.70 4,003.27 3,480.00 3,480.00 3,480.00 3,584.40 3,734.40 3,943.04 4,151.61 3,636.00 3,636.00 3,636.00 3,745.08 3,895.08 4,103.64 4,312.21 3,804.00 3,804.00 3,804.00 3,918.12 4,068.12 4,276.76 4,485.33 3,972.00 3,972.00 3,972.00 4,091.16 4,241.16 4,449.61 4,658.18 4,140.00 4,264.20 4,414.20 4,622.73 4,831.30 Se e footnote 1, table 27. 87 - $5,124.00 5,277.72 5,436.05 5,644.46 5,853.04 _ - - . - - _ - _ - Table 30. 1968-69 general salary rates (Biweekly), city employees, Milwaukee Biweekly salary rates Pay range Step rates Year 1 3 6 $167.24 187.24 195.24 | $173.40 193.40 201.40 $180.04 200.04 208.04 $186.67 206.67 214.67 $193.31 213.31 221.31 January July 1968 1969 1969 167.24 187.24 195.24 173.40 193.40 201.40 | | j 180.04 200.04 208.04 186.67 206.67 214.67 193.31 213.31 221.31 200.90 220.90 228.90 Januarv July 6, 1968 1969 1969 180.04 200.04 208.04 186.67 206.67 214.67 i ! 193.31 213.31 221.31 200.90 220.90 228.90 208.48 228.48 236.48 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 193.31 213.31 221.31 200.90 220.90 228.90 208.48 228.48 236.48 216.07 236.07 244.07 224.69 244.69 252.69 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 193.31 213.31 221.31 200.90 220.90 228.90 208.48 228.48 236.48 216.07 236.07 244.07 224.69 244.69 252.69 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 208.48 228.48 236.48 216.07 236.07 244.07 224.69 244.69 252.69 232.50 252.50 260.50 241.30 261.30 269.30 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 216.07 236.07 244.07 224.69 244.69 252.69 232.50 252.50 260.50 241.30 261.30 269.30 250.57 270.57 278.57 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 224.69 244.69 252.69 232.50 252.50 260.60 241.30 261.30 269.30 250.57 270.57 278.57 260.34 280.34 288.34 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 232.50 252.50 260.50 241.30 261.30 269.30 250.57 270.57 278.57 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 241.30 261.30 269.30 250.57 270.57 278.57 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 250.57 270.57 278.57 260.34 280.34 288.34 July 6, 1969 290.59 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 8 9 10 11 12 • ! 1 j 270.59 290.59 298.59 260.34 280.34 288.34 270.59 290.59 298.59 281.54 301.54 309.54 270.59 290.59 298.59 281.54 301.54 309.54 293.99 313.99 321.99 301.54 313.99 327.34 260.34 280.34 288.34 270.59 290.59 298.59 281.54 301.54 309.54 293.99 313.99 321.99 307.34 327.34 335.34 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 270.59 290.59 298.59 281.54 301.54 309.54 293.99 313.99 321.99 307.34 327.34 335.34 321.22 341.22 349.22 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 281.54 301.54 309.54 293.99 313.99 321.99 307.34 327.34 335.34 321.22 341.22 349.22 336.16 356.16 364.16 January July 1969 1969 309.70 309.70 323.39 323.39 338.07 338.07 353.34 353.34 369.78 369.78 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 293.99 313.99 321.99 307.34 327.34 335.34 321.22 341.22 349.22 336.16 356.16 364.16 352.17 372.17 380.17 July 6, 1969 341.22 356.16 372.17 385.25 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 307.34 327.34 335.34 321.22 341.22 349.22 336.16 356.16 364.16 352.17 372.17 380.17 368.17 388.17 396.17 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 321.22 341.22 349.22 336.16 356.16 364.16 352.17 372.17 380.17 368.17 388.17 396.17 384.18 404.18 412.18 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 336.16 356.16 364.16 352.17 372.17 380.17 368.17 388.17 396.17 384.18 404.18 412.18 398.57 418.57 426.57 January July 1969 1969 369.78 369.78 387.38 387.38 404.99 404.99 422.60 422.60 438.42 438.42 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 384.18 404.18 412.18 398.57 418.57 426.57 414.15 434.15 442.15 429.73 449.73 457.73 450.33 470.33 478.33 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 398.57 418.57 426.57 414.15 434.15 442.15 429.73 449.73 457.73 450.33 470.33 478.33 470.95 490.95 498.95 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 24 25 | S ee fo o tn o te at end o f ta b le . 88 | ! i 260.34 280.34 288.34 13 21(b) 5 $161.55 181.55 189.55 7 18(a) 4 1968 1969 1969 5 17(a) 3 January July 4 14(a) 2 - - 7 - _ - - _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - . 232.50 252.50 260.50 - _ - - _ _ - _ - - _ _ - - - - _ _ - . - - _ _ - - - - . _ - _ - - _ _ - - - - - - . _ - - - - _ - - - - _ . - - 387.38 387.38 $404.99 404.99 _ _ - - - - - - _ . - - - - _ _ - - - - _ _ - - 455.57 455.57 472.70 472.70 _ . - - - - . . - - " Table 30. 1968-69 general salary rates (Biweekly), city employees, M ilw au kee1— Continued Biweekly salary rates Step rates Pay range Year 1 1 4 5 6 j 7 January July 6, $414.15 434.15 442.15 $429.73 449.73 457.73 $450.33 470.33 478.33 $470.95 490.95 498.95 $494.58 514.58 522.58 - - “ - 1968 1969 1969 429.73 449.73 457.73 450.33 470.33 478.33 470.95 490.95 498.95 494.58 514.58 522.58 517.69 538.40 545.69 . _ January July 6, - - - - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 450.33 470.33 478.33 470.95 490.95 498.95 494.58 514.58 522.58 517.69 538.40 545.69 543.83 565.58 571.83 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 470.95 490.95 498.95 494.58 514.58 522.58 517.69 538.40 545.69 543.83 565.58 571.83 569.45 592.23 597.45 - - " - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 494.58 514.58 522.58 517.69 538.40 545.69 543.83 565.58 571.83 569,45 592.23 597.45 595.59 619.41 623.59 - - - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 517.69 538.40 545.69 543.83 565.58 571.83 569.45 592.23 597.45 595.59 619.41 623.59 621.23 646.08 649.23 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 543.83 565.58 571.83 5b9.45 592.23 597.45 595.59 619.41 623.59 621.23 646.08 649.23 652.39 678.49 680.39 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 569.45 592.23 597.45 595.59 619.41 623.59 621.23 646.08 649.23 652.39 678.49 680.39 683.55 710.89 711.55 - - - - 1968 1969 1969 595.59 619.41 623.59 621.23 646.08 649.23 652.39 678.49 680.39 683.55 710.89 711.55 714.21 742.78 742.78 . . January July 6, - - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 621.23 646.08 649.23 652.39 678.49 680.39 683.55 710.89 711.55 714.21 742.78 742.78 745.37 775.18 775.18 January July 6, 1968 1969 1S69 652.39 678.49 680.39 683.55 710.89 711.55 714.21 742.78 742.78 745.37 775.18 775.18 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 683.55 710.89 711.55 714.21 742.78 742.78 745.37 775.18 775.18 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 714.21 742.78 742.78 745.37 775.18 775.18 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 745.37 775.18 775.18 January July 6, 1969 1969 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 _ _ - - . . _ . . - - _ _ - - - * . - - - - _ - - * - 776.54 807,60 807.60 . . - - - - 776.54 807.60 807.60 817.74 850.45 850.45 - - - - 776.54 807.60 807.60 817.74 850.45 850.45 869.52 904.30 904.30 776.54 807.60 807.60 817.74 850.45 850.45 869.52 904.30 904.30 921.27 958.12 958.12 _ . - - - ' 807.60 807.60 850.45 850.45 904.30 904.30 958.12 958.12 1,011.97 1,011.97 - - - - 817.74 850.45 850.45 869.52 904.30 904.30 921.27 958.12 958.12 973.05 1,011.97 1,011.97 1,024.83 1,065.82 1,065.82 . . January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 - 1968 1969 1969 973.05 1,011.97 1,011.97 1,024.83 1,065.82 1,065.82 1,075.91 1,118.95 1,118.95 1,129.91 1,175.11 1,175.11 1,186.29 1,233.74 1,233.74 - - January July 6, - - 36 37 38 40 3 1968 1969 1969 26 39 2 ! 41 44 - - _ . - - - - - 1 The s a la r y o r d in a n c e e s t a b lis h in g s a la r y ra te s fo r 1968 r e v e r s e d and r e n u m b e r e d the p a y ra n g e numt->e**ing s y s te m p r e v io u s ly u se d fr o m 1961 th rou gh 1967 s o that the lo w e s t pay ra n g e n u m b er in clu d e d the lo w e s t s a la r y ra te s and the h igh est p a y ra n g e n u m b er in clu d e d the h ig h est s a la r y r a t e s . P a y ra n g e s 1, 2, 6, 22, 23, 4 2, and 43 w e r e not u sed . P a y ra n g e s 21 th rou g h 44 in clu d ed m a n ag em en t p o s it io n s w h ich did not r e c e iv e pa y o r c o m p e n s a t o r y tim e o ff fo r o v e r t im e w o rk e d . F ir e s e r v i c e ra n ks o f F ir e fig h t e r throu gh F ir e C a ptian w e r e c o v e r e d b y a se p a r a te pay pla n having 5 pay r a n g e s . table 38. ) R anks a b ov e F ir e C aptian in clu d e d in g e n e r a l p a y s c h e d u le . (See In 1968 the p o lic e s e r v i c e pa y plan a d op ted in 1965 w as r e d u c e d fr o m 15 pa y ra n g es to 7 p a y ra n g e s c o v e r in g o n ly ranks b e lo w C aptian o f P o li c e . (See table 37. ) Ranks o f C a ptian o f P o li c e and a b ov e in clu d e d m g e n e r a l p a y s c h e d u le . In 1969 a new se p a r a te p a y plan p r o v id in g f o r 4 p a y ra n g e s w as e s ta b lis h e d fo r n e a r ly a ll p o s it io n s c o v e r e d b y the T e c h n ic ia n s , E n g in e e r s , and A r c h ite c t s o f M ilw a u k ee (T E A M ) c o l le c t iv e b a rg a in in g unit. (See table 3 5 .) E n g in e e rin g T e c h n icia n s , IV w as r e a llo c a t e d to n ew ly e s t a b lis h e d p a y ra n g e 17 (a) and E n g in e e rin g T e c h n ic ia n V w as r e a llo c a t e d to n ew ly e s t a b lis h e d pa y ra n g e 21 (b) in the g e n e r a l s a la r y s c h e d u le . C la s s e s in clu d e d in pa y ra n g e 3 w e r e C le r k I, C le r k S te n o g ra p h e r I, C le r k T y p is t I, K ey P u n ch O p e r a t o r I, and L ib r a r y A ide l. C la s s e s in clu d e d in pay ra n g e 4 w e r e B in d e r y S ew er I, C u s to d ia l W o r k e r I, E le v a t o r O p e r a t o r , and L au n d ry W o rk e r I. C la s s e s in clu d ed in pa y ra n g e 41 w e r e C h e if E n g i n e e r -F ir e D ep a rtm en t, C h ie f o f P o li c e , C ity E n g in e e r , D eputy C o m m is s io n e r o f H ealth, D eputy C o m m is s io n e r o f P u b lic W ork s, M u n icip a l P o r t D ir e c t o r , and T a x C o m m is s io n e r . D eputy o f C ity D e v e lo p m e n t w as a dded in 1969. 89 1968-69 general salary rates (Monthly), city employees, Milwaukee Monthly salary rates Step rates Year 1 3 7 - $376.73 420.18 437.57 $391.16 434.61 451.99 $405.56 449.01 466.40 $419.99 463.44 480.82 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 363.35 406.80 424.18 376.73 420.18 437.57 391.16 434.61 451.99 405.56 449.01 466.40 419.99 463.44 480.82 436.48 479.93 497.31 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 391.16 434.61 451.99 405.56 449.01 466.40 419.99 463.44 480.82 436.48 479.93 497.31 452.95 496.40 513.78 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 419.99 463.44 480.82 436.48 479.93 497.31 452.95 496.40 513.78 469.44 512.89 530.27 488.17 531.62 549.00 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 419.99 463.44 480.82 436.48 479.93 497.31 452.95 496.40 513.78 469.44 512.89 530.27 488.17 531.62 549.00 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 452.95 496.40 513.78 469.44 512.89 530.27 488.17 531.62 549.00 505.13 548.58 565.97 524.25 567.70 585.09 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 469.44 512.89 530.27 488.17 531.62 549.00 505.13 548.58 565.97 524.25 567.70 585.09 544.39 587.84 605.23 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 488.17 531.62 549.00 505.13 548.58 565.96 524.25 567.70 585.09 544.39 587.84 605.23 565.62 609.07 626.45 - - - * 1968 January 1969 1969 July 6, 505.13 548.58 565.96 524.25 567.70 585.09 544.39 587.84 605.23 565.62 609.07 626.45 587.89 631.34 648.72 _ _ - - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 524.25 567.70 585.09 544.39 587.84 605.23 565.62 609.07 626.45 587.89 631.34 648.72 611.68 655.13 672.51 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 544.39 587.84 605.23 565.62 609.07 626.45 587.89 631.34 648.72 611.68 655.13 672.51 638.73 682.18 699.56 July 6, 1969 631.34 655.13 682.18 711.18 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 565.62 609.07 626.45 587.89 631.34 648.72 611.68 655.13 672.51 638.73 682.18 699.56 667.73 711.18 728.57 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 587.89 631.34 648.72 611.68 655.13 672.51 638.73 682.18 699.56 667.73 711.18 728.57 697.89 741.34 758.72 - - - - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 611.68 655.13 672.51 638.73 682.18 699.56 667.73 711.18 728.57 697.89 741.34 758.72 730.35 773.80 791.18 - January July 6, 1969 1969 672.85 672.85 702.60 702.60 734.50 734.50 767.68 767.68 803.39 803.39 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 638.73 682.18 699.56 667.73 711.18 728.57 697.89 741.34 758.72 730.35 773.80 791.18 765.13 808.58 825.97 July 6, 1969 741.34 773.80 808.58 837.00 - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 667.73 711.18 728.57 697.89 741.34 758.72 730.35 733.80 791.18 765.13 808.58 825.97 799.89 843.34 860.73 J«iy 6, 1968 1969 1969 697.89 741.34 758.72 730.35 773.80 791.18 765.13 808.58 825.97 799.89 843.34 860.73 834.68 878.13 895.51 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 730.35 773.80 791.18 765.13 808.58 825.97 799.89 843.34 860.73 834.68 878.13 895.51 865.94 909.39 926.77 January July 6, 1969 1969 803.39 803.39 841.64 841.64 879.88 879.88 918.15 918.15 952.53 952.53 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 834.68 878.13 895.51 865.94 909.39 926.77 899.79 943.24 960.62 933.64 977.09 944.47 978.40 1,021.85 1,039.23 1968 1969 1969 865.94 909.39 926.77 899.79 943.24 960.62 933.64 977.09 994.47 978.40 1,021.85 1,039.23 1,023.19 1,066.64 1,084.03 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 January 21 21< 6 $363.35 406.80 424.18 8 18 ( 5 $350.99 394.44 411.82 7 171 4 1968 1969 1969 5 141 3 January July 6, 4 12 2 24 25 January July 6, n ote at en d o f ta b le . 90 - - _ _ - . . _ _ - - _ _ . - 505.13 548.58 565.97 * _ _ - _ _ - - - - _ . - - - - _ _ - - _ _ - - ' - _ _ - - - - - - . _ - - - - _ _ _ - * - 841.64 841.64 $879.88 879.88 . . - - - - _ _ - - - ' _ . - - " - - - - - 989.77 989.77 1,027.00 1,027.00 . _ - - - - . - - - - Table 31. 1968-69 general salary rates (Monthly), city employees, M ilw au kee1— -Continued Monthly Salary rates Pay range Step rates Year 1 4 5 $1,023.19 1,066.64 1,084.03 $1,074.53 1,117.98 1,135.37 1968 1969 1969 $899.79 943.24 960.62 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 933.64 977.09 994.47 978.40 1,021.85 1,039.23 1,023.19 1,066.64 1,084.03 1,074.53 1,117.98 1,135.37 1,124.74 1,169.73 1,185.58 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 978.40 1,021.85 1,039.23 1,023.19 1,066.64 1,084.03 1,074.53 1,117.98 1,135.37 1,124.74 1,169.73 1,185.58 1,181.54 1,228.80 1,242.37 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 1,023.19 1,066.64 1,084.03 1,074.53 1,117.98 1,135.37 1,124.74 1,169.73 1,185.58 1,181.54 1,228.80 1,242.37 1,237.20 1,286.69 1,298.03 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 1,074.53 1,117.98 1,135.37 1,124.74 1,169.73 1,185.58 1,181.54 1,228.80 1,242.37 1,237.20 1,286.69 1,298.03 1,293.99 1,345.75 1,354.82 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 1,124.74 1,169.73 1,185.58 1,181.54 1,228.80 1,242.37 1,237.20 1,286.69 1,298.03 1,293.99 1,345.75 1,354.82 1,349.70 1,403.68 1,410.53 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 1,181.54 1,228.80 1,242.37 1,237.20 1,286.69 1,298.03 1,293.99 1,345.75 1,354.82 1,349.70 1,403.68 1,410.53 1,417.39 1,474.09 1,478.23 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 1,237.20 1,286.69 1,298.03 1,293.99 1.345.75 1,354.82 1,349.99 1,403.68 1,410.53 1,417.39 1,474.09 1,478.23 1,485.09 1,544.50 1,545.93 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 1,293.99 1,345.75 1,354.82 1,349.70 1,403.68 1,410.53 1,417.39 1,474.09 1,478.23 1,485.09 1,544.50 1,545.93 1,551.71 1,613.78 1,613.78 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 1,349.70 1,403.68 1,410.53 1,417.39 1,474.09 1,478.23 1,485.09 1,544.50 1,545.93 1,551.71 1,613.78 1,613.78 1,619.41 1,684.17 1,684.17 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 1,417.39 1,474.09 1,478.23 1,485.09 1,544.50 1,545.93 1,551.71 1,613.78 1,613.78 1,619.41 1,684.17 1,684.17 1,687.13 1,754.61 1,754.61 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 1,485.09 1,544.50 1,545.93 1,551.71 1,613.78 1,613.78 1,619.41 1,684.17 1,684.17 1,687.13 1,754.61 1,754.61 1,776.64 1,847.70 1,847.70 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 1,551.71 1,613.78 1,613.78 1,619.41 1,684.17 1,684.17 1,687.13 1,754.61 1,754.61 1,776.64 1,847.70 1,847.70 1,889.14 1,964.70 1,964.70 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 1,619.41 1,684.17 1,684.17 1,687.13 1,754.61 1,754.61 1,776.64 1,847.70 1,847.70 1,889.14 1,964.70 1,964.70 2,001.57 2,081.63 2,081.63 January July 6, 1969 1969 1,754.61 1,754.61 1,847.70 1,847.70 1,964.70 1,964.70 2,081.63 2,081.63 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 1,776.64 1,847.70 1,847.70 1,889.14 1,964.70 1,964.70 2,001.57 2,081.63 2,081.63 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 2,114.07 2,198.63 2,198.63 2,226.57 2,315.62 2,315.62 2,337.54 2,431.05 2,431.05 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 41 44 1 3 $978.40 1,021.85 1,039.23 January July 6, 26 40 2 $933.64 977.09 994.47 S ee fo o tn o te 1, ta ble 30. 91 6 7 _ _ - - - - _ . - - - - _ _ - " _ - . - . _ - - - - _ - _ - - _ _ - - - - . _ - - - - _ - - _ - - - - _ _ - - _ - _ - _ . - - - - _ _ - - 2,198.63 2,198.63 _ _ 2,114.07 2,198.63 2,198.63 2,226.57 2,315.63 2,315.62 _ - 2,454.86 2,553.07 2,553.07 2,577.36 2,680.45 2,680.45 . - - - - - - - Table 32. 1968*69 general salary rates (Annual), city employees, Milwaukee Annual salary rates Pay range Step rates Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 $4,211.84 4,733.27 4,941.84 $4,360.18 4,881.61 5,090.19 $4,520.78 5,042.21 5,250.79 $4,693.90 5,215.33 5,423.90 $4,866.75 5,388.18 5,596.75 $5,039.87 5,561.30 5,769.87 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 4,360.18 4,881.61 5,090.19 4,520.78 5,042.21 5,250.79 4,693.90 5,215.53 5,423.90 4,866.75 5,388.18 5,596.75 5,039.87 5,561.30 5,769.87 5,237.75 5,759.18 5,967.75 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 4,693.90 5,215.33 5,423.90 4,866.75 5,388.18 5,596.75 5,039.87 5,561.30 5,769.87 5,237.75 5,759.18 5,967.75 5,435.37 5,956.80 6,165.37 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 5,039.87 5,561.30 5,769.87 5,237.75 5,759.18 5,967.75 5,435.37 5,956.80 6,165.37 5,633.25 6,154.68 6,363.25 5,857.99 6,379.42 6,587.99 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 5,039.87 5,561.30 5,769.87 5,237.75 5,759.18 5,967.75 5,435.37 5,956.80 6,165.37 5,633.25 6,154.68 6,363.25 5,857.99 6,379.42 6,587.99 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 5,435.37 5,956.80 6,165.37 5,633.25 6,154.68 6,363.25 5,857.99 6,379.42 6,587.99 6,061.61 6,583.04 6,791.61 6,291.03 6,812.46 7,021.04 - 1968 1969 1969 5,633.25 6,154.68 6,363.25 5,857.99 6,379.42 6,587.99 6,061.61 6,583.04 6,791.61 6,291.03 6,812.46 7,021.04 6,532.72 7,054.15 7,262.72 _ _ January July 6, - - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 5,857.99 6,379.42 6,587.09 6,061.61 6,583.04 6,791.61 6,291.03 6,812.46 7,021.04 6,532.72 7,054.15 7,262.72 6,787.43 7,308.86 7,517.44 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 6,061.61 6,583.04 6,791.61 6,291.03 6,812.46 7,021.04 6,532.72 7,054.15 7,262.72 6,787.43 7,308.86 7,517.44 7,054.67 7,576.10 7,784.67 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 6,291.03 6,812.46 7,021.04 6,532.72 7,054.15 7,262.72 6,787.43 7,308.86 7,517.44 7,054.67 7,576.10 7,784.67 7,340.15 7,861.58 8,070.15 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 6,532.72 7,054.15 7,262.72 6,787.43 7,308.86 7,517.44 7,054.67 7,576.10 7,784.67 7,340.15 7,861.58 8,070.15 7,664.74 8,186.17 8,394.74 July 6, 1969 7,576.10 7,861.58 8,186.17 8,534.22 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 6,787.43 7,308.86 7,517.44 7,054.67 7,576.10 7,784.67 7,340.15 7,861.58 8,070.15 7,664.74 8,186.17 8,394.74 8,012.79 8,534.22 8,742.79 - - - - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 7,054.67 7,576.10 7,784.67 7,340.15 7,861.58 8,070.15 7,664.74 8,186.17 8,394.74 8,012.79 8,534.22 8,742.79 8,374.66 8,896.09 9,104.66 - 1968 January 1969 July 6, 1969 7,340.15 7,861.58 8,070.15 7,664.74 8,186.17 8,394.74 8,012.79 8,534.22 8,742.79 8,374.66 8,896.09 9,104.66 8,764.17 9,285.60 9,494.17 17(a) January 1969 July 6, 1969 8,074.20 8,074.20 8,431.20 8,431.20 8,814.00 8,814.00 9,212.16 9,212.16 9,640.68 9,460.68 18 1968 January 1969 July 6, 1969 7,664.74 8,186.17 8,394.74 8,012.79 8,534.22 8,742.79 8,374.66 8,896.09 9,104.66 8,764.17 9,285.60 9,494.17 9,181.58 9,703.01 9,911.58 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 U 14(a) 15 16 17 - 18(a) July 6, 1969 8,896.09 9,285.60 9,703.01 10,044.02 19 1968 January 1969 July 6, 1969 8,012.79 8,534.22 8,742.79 8,374.66 8,896.09 9,104.66 8,764.17 9,285.60 9,494.17 9,181.58 9,703.01 9,911.58 9,598.72 10,120.15 10,328.72 1968 January 1969 July 6, 1969 8,374.66 8,896.09 9,104.66 8,764.17 9,285.60 9,494.17 9,181.58 9,703.01 9,911.58 9,598.72 10,120.15 10,328.72 10,016.12 10,537.55 10,746.12 1968 1969 January July 6, 1969 8,764.17 9,285.60 9,494.17 9,181.58 9,703.01 9,911.58 9,598.72 10,120.15 10,328.72 10,016.12 10,537.55 10,746.12 10,391.29 10,912.72 11,121.29 21(b) January 1969 July 6, 1969 9,640.68 9,640.68 10,099.68 10,099.68 10,558.56 10,558.56 11,017.80 11,017.80 11,430.36 11,430.36 24 1968 January 1969 July 6, 1969 10,016.12 10,537.55 10,746.12 10,391.29 10,912.72 11,121.29 10,797.48 11,318.91 11,527.48 11,203.67 11,725.10 11,933.68 11,740.75 12,262.18 12,470.75 1968 1969 January July 6, 1969 10,391.29 10,912.72 11,121.29 10,797.48 11,318.91 11,527.48 11,203.67 11,725.10 11,933.68 11,740.75 12,262.18 12,470.75 12,278.34 12,799.77 13,008.34 20 21 25 See fo o tn o te at end o f ta b le . 92 - _ - _ - - _ - - - - _ _ - - - - 6,061.61 6,583.04 6,791.61 . . - _ - - - - _ _ - - * - . _ - - - - _ _ - - - - _ _ - - - - - * . . _ _ - - . - - 10,099.68 10,099.68 $10,558.56 10,558.56 _ _ - - - - . _ - - - - _ . - - - _ - * 11,877.24 11,877.24 - 12,324.00 12,324.00 _ _ - - - - _ - - - - - Table 32. 1968-69 general salary rates (Annual), city employees, Milwaukee1— Continued Annual salary rates Pay range Step rates Year 2 1 4 5 6 7 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 $10,797.48 11,318.91 11,527.48 $11,203.67 11,725.10 11,933.68 $11,740.75 12,262.18 12,470.75 $12,278.34 12,799.77 13,008.34 $12,894.41 13,415.84 13,624.41 - - - - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 11,203.67 11,725.10 11,933.68 11,740.75 12,262.18 12,470.75 12,278.34 12,799.77 13,008.34 12,894.41 13,415.84 13,624.41 13,496.92 14,036.79 14,226.92 _ - - - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 11,740.75 12,262.18 12,470.75 12,278.34 12,799.77 13,008.34 12,894.41 13,415.84 13,624.41 13,496.92 14,036.79 14,226.92 14,178.42 14,745.56 14,908.43 - - 12,278.34 12,799.77 13,008.34 12,894.41 13,415.84 13,624.41 13,496.92 14,036.79 14.226.92 14,178.42 14,745.56 14,908.43 14,846.37 15,440.23 15,576.38 . - _ January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 - - 12,894.41 13,415.84 13,624.41 13,496.92 14,036.79 14,226.92 14,178.42 14,745.56 14,908.43 14,846.37 15,440.23 15,576.38 15,527.88 16,149.00 16,257.88 . January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 - _ - 13,496.92 14,036.79 14,226.92 14,178.42 14,745.56 14,908.43 14,846.37 15,440.23 15,576.38 15,527.88 16,149.00 16,257.88 16,196.35 16,844.21 16,926.35 _ . January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 14,178.42 14,745.56 14,908.43 14,846.37 15,440.23 15,576.38 15,527.88 16,149.00 16,257.88 16,196.35 16,844.21 16,926.35 17,008.74 17,689.09 17,738.74 - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 14,846.37 15,440.23 15,576.38 15,527.88 16,149.00 16,257.88 16,196.35 16,844.21 16.926.35 17,008.74 17,689.09 17,738.74 17,821.12 18,533.97 18,551.13 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 15,527.88 16,149.00 16,257.88 16,196.35 16,844.21 16,926.35 17,008.74 17,689.09 17,738.74 17,821.12 18,533.97 18,551.13 18,620.47 19,365.34 19,365.34 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 16,196.35 16,844.21 16,926.35 17,008.74 17,689.09 17,738.74 17,. 821.12 18,533.97 18,551.13 18,620.47 19,365.34 19,365.34 19,432.86 20,210.05 20,210.05 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 17,008.74 17,689.09 17,738.74 17,821.12 18,533.97 18,551.13 18,620.47 19,365.34 19,365.34 19,432.86 20,210.05 20,210.05 20,245.51 21,055.29 21,055.29 . - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 17,821.12 18,533.97 18,551.13 18,620.47 19,365.34 19,365.34 19,432.86 20,210.05 20,210.05 20,245.51 21,055.29 21,055.29 21,319.65 22,172.45 22,172.45 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 18,620.47 19,365.34 19,365.34 19,432.86 20,210.05 20,210.05 20,245.51 21,055.29 21,055.29 21,319.65 22,175.45 22,175.45 22,669.63 23,576.39 23,576.39 19,432.86 January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 20,210.05 20,245.51 21,055.29 21,055.29 21,319.65 22,175.45 22,175.45 22,669.63 23,576.39 23,576.39 24,018.82 24,979.56 24,979.56 January July 6, 1969 1969 21,055.29 21,055.29 22,175.45 22,175.45 23,576.39 23,576.39 24,979.56 24,979.56 26,383.50 _ 26,383.50 - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 21,319.65 22,175.45 22,175.45 22,669.63 23,576.39 23,576.39 24,018.82 24,979.56 24,979.56 25,368.80 26,383.50 26,383.50 26,718.78 27,787.45 27,787.45 _ - - - - January July 6, 1968 1969 1969 25,368.80 26,383.50 26,383.50 26,718.78 27,787.45 27,787.45 28,050.51 29,172.63 29,172.63 29,458.37 30,636.80 30,636.80 30,928.27 32,165.36 32,165.36 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 3 41 44 20,210.05 j See fo o tn o te 1, table 30. 93 . - . _ - - - - . - - - _ - _ - . - _ - - - . - - _ _ - - - _ . - - - - . - - _ - - _ . - - . . - _ _ - - - - 1970 n o n m a n a g e m e n t s a la ry ra te s (B iw e e k ly , M o n t h ly , a n d A n n u a l), c it y em p lo y e e s, a 1 Biweekly , monthly, and annual salary rates Step rates Interval 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2 Biweekly Monthly Annual $214.14 465.24 5,582.93 $219.83 477.60 5,731.28 $225.99 490.99 5,891.88 $232.63 505.41 6,064.99 $239.26 519.82 6,237.85 $245.90 534.24 6,410.96 4 Biweekly Monthly Annual 219.83 477.60 5,731.28 225.99 490.99 5,891.88 232.63 505.41 6,064.99 239.26 519.82 6,237.85 245.90 534.24 6,410.96 253.49 550.73 6,608.84 5 Biweekly Monthly Annual 232.63 505.41 6,064.96 239.26 519.82 6,237.85 245.90 534.24 6,410.96 253.49 550.73 6,608.84 261.07 567.20 6,806.46 Biweekly Monthly Annual 245.90 534.24 6,410.96 253.49 550.73 6,608.84 261.07 567.20 6,806.46 268.66 583.69 7,004.35 277.28 602.42 7,229.08 8 Biweekly Monthly Annual 245.90 534.24 6,410.96 253.49 550.73 6,608.84 261.07 567.20 6,806.46 268.66 583.69 7,004.35 277.28 602.42 7,229.08 9 Biweekly Monthly Annual 261.07 567.20 6,806.46 268.66 583.69 7,004.35 277.28 602.42 7,229.08 285.09 619.39 7,432.70 293.89 638.51 7,662.13 _ - _ - - - Biweekly Monthly Annual 251.94 547.36 6,568.32 261.99 569.21 6,830.52 271.09 588.98 7,067.76 281.36 611.28 7,335.36 292.16 634.76 7,617.12 _ Biweekly Monthly Annual 268.66 583.69 7,004.35 277.28 602.42 7,229.08 285.09 619.39 7,432.70 293.89 638.51 7,662.13 303.16 658.65 7,903.31 Biweekly Monthly Annual 277.28 602.42 7,229.08 285.09 619.39 7,432.70 293.89 638.51 7,662.13 303.16 658.65 7,903.81 312.93 679.88 8,158.53 ! Biweekly Monthly Annual 285.09 619.39 7,432.70 293.89 638.51 7,662.13 303.16 658.65 7,903.81 312.93 679.88 8,158.53 323.18 702.14 8,425.76 ! : - Biweekly Monthly Annual 293.89 638.51 7,662.13 303.16 658.65 7,903.81 312.93 679.88 8,158.53 323.18 702.14 8,425.76 334.13 725.93 8,711.24 : _ - Biweekly Monthly Annual 292.16 634.76 7,617.12 303.56 659.51 7,914.12 315.51 685.48 8,225.76 328.28 713.22 8,558.64 342.79 744.76 8,937.12 14 Biweekly Monthly Annual 303.16 658.65 7,903.81 312.93 679.88 8,158.53 323.18 702.14 8,425.76 334.13 725.93 8,711.24 346.58 752.98 9,035.83 - 15 Biweekly Monthly Annual 312.93 679.88 8,158.53 323.18 702.14 8,425.76 334.13 725.93 8,711.24 346.58 752.98 9,035.83 359.93 781.99 9,383.89 _ . - - Biweekly Monthly Annual 323.18 702.14 8,425.76 334.13 725.93 8,711.24 346.58 752.98 9,035.83 359.93 781.99 9,383.89 373.81 812.14 9,745.76 Biweekly Monthly Annual 334.13 725.93 8,711.24 346.58 752.98 9,035.83 359.93 781.99 9,383.89 373.81 812.14 j 9,745.76 388,75 844.60 10,135.26 17(a/ Biweekly Monthly Annual 328.28 713.22 8,558.64 342.79 744.76 8,937.12 358.36 778.57 9,342.84 374.54 813.74 9,764.88 391.96 851.59 10,219.08 [ 18 Biweekly Monthly Annual 346.58 752.98 9,035.83 359.93 781.99 9,383.89 373.81 812.14 9,745.76 388.75 844.60 10.135.26 404.76 879.39 10,552.67 1 ! 19 Biweekly Monthly Annual 359.93 781.99 9,383.89 373.81 812.14 9,745,76 388.75 844.60 10,135.26 404.76 879.39 10,552.67 420.76 914.15 10,969.81 20 Biweekly Monthly Annual 373.81 812.14 9,745.76 388.75 844.60 10,135.26 404.76 879.39 10,552.67 420.76 914.15 10,969.81 436.77 948.93 11,387.21 21 Biweekly Monthly Annual 388.75 844.60 10,135.26 404.76 879.39 10,552.67 420.76 914.15 10,969.81 436.77 948.93 11,387.21 451.16 980.20 11,762.38 Biweekly Monthly Annual 388.75 844.60 10,135.26 404.76 879.39 10,552.67 420.76 914.15 10,969.81 437.26 949.99 11,399.91 452.22 982.50 11,790.09 Biweekly Monthly Annual 391.96 851.59 10,219.08 410.63 892.14 10,705.68 429.28 932.67 11,192.04 447.96 973.24 11,678.88 464.73 1,009.68 12,116.16 3 3 9(a)4 10 11 12 13 13(a)" 16 17 21(a) fo o t n o t e s at end o f ta b le . 94 _ _ _ - - - - _ . 285.09 619.39 7,432.70 - _ - _ - _ - _ - - _ - j _ - \ - 358.36 1 778.57 i 9,342.84 \ _ _ - . * - - _ - . - - - . - _ - j 410.63 892.14 10,705.68 - . - - - . - _ - - - . - . - - - _ . - . - _ - Ii ji - ' $429.28 932.67 11,192.04 482.90 1,049.15 12,589.80 501.06 1,088.62 13.063.44 Table 33. 1970 nonmanagement salary rates (Biweekly, Monthly, and Annual), city employees, M ilwaukee1— Continued Biweeklyj, monthly, and annual salary rates Pay range Step rates Interval 1 1 3 2 4 5 Biweekly Monthly Annua1 $436.77 948.93 11,387.21 $451.16 980.20 11,762.38 $466.74 1,014.05 12,168.58 $482.32 1,047.90 12,574.77 ■ $502.92 1,092.65 ,13,111.34 Biweekly Monthly Annual 447.96 973.24 11,678.88 464.73 1,009.68 12,116.16 482.90 1,049.15 12,589.80 501.06 1,088.62 13,063.44 ' 525.09 , 1,140.81 :13,689.72 Biweekly Monthly Annual 451.16 980.20 11,762.38 466.74 1,014.05 12,168.58 482.32 1.047.90 12,574.77 502.92 1,092.65 13,111.84 25(a) Biweekly Monthly Annual 452.22 982.50 : 11,790.09 j 468.43 1,017.70 12,212.53 484.63 1,052.91 j12,634.98 26 Biweekly Monthly Annual ‘ 466.74 1 1,014.05 !12,168.58 482.32 1,047.90 12,574.77 27 Biweekly Mont.hly Annua1 482.32 1,047.90 12,574.77 502.92 1,092.65 13,111.84 27(a) Biweekly Monthly Annual 484.63 1,052.91 12,634.98 28(a) Biweekly Monthly Annual 29(a) 31(a)6 24 24(a) 25 7 i | 1 i i - - ■ • 523.54 1,137.45 ,13,649.43 - * " 506.05 1,099.46 13,193.53 527.50 ; 1,146.05 j113,752.62 . - - I 502.92 | 1,092.65 j;13,111.84 523.54 1,137.45 13,649.43 | 547.17 I 1,188.79 14,265.50 523.54 j 1,137.45 ;13,649.43 i 547.17 1,188.79 14,265.50 ; 570.28 | j 1,239.00 114,868.01 ! 506.05 1,099.46 13,193.53 527.50 1,146.05 13,752.62 552.07 1,199.44 14,393.34 ! 506.05 1,099.46 13,193.53 527.50 1,146.05 , 13,752.62 552.07 1,199.44 14,393.34 Biweekly Monthly Annual 527.50 1,146.05 13,752.62 ' ;| 552.07 1,199.44 14,393.34 Biweekly Monthly Annual 576.11 1,251.66 15,019.95 Biweekly Monthly Annual 657.12 1,427.67 17,132.15 5 34(a)7 6 - - " j 11 Il . 576.11 1,251.66 15,019.95 - - - - • - - - ■ 576.11 1,251.66 15,019.95 603.29 1,310.72 15,728.72 - - - - - 576.11 1,251.66 15,019.95 603.29 1,310.72 15,728.72 629.94 1,368.61 16,423.39 - - 603.29 1,310.72 15,728.72 629.94 1,368.61 16,423.39 657.12 1,427.67 17,132.15 683.79 1,485.61 17,827.35 683.79 1,485.61 17,827.35 716.20 1,556.02 18,672.24 748.60 1,626.43 19,517.13 781.08 1,696.99 20,363.90 1 ! - • - ii * - . - 1 T he sa la r y o rd in a n ce e s ta b lis h in g sa la r y r a te s f o r 1970 c o v e r in g g e n e r a l e m p lo y e e s p r o v id e d se p a r a te p a y p la n s fo r n on m a n ag em en t and m a n a g em en t e m p lo y e e s . (S ee ta b le 34 f o r m a n a g em en t s a la r y r a t e s . ) It a ls o p r o v id e d f o r a s e p a r a te pay pla n f o r n e a r ly a ll p o s it io n s c o v e r e d b y the T e ch n icia n s , E n g in e e rs , and A r c h it e c t s o f M ilw a u k ee (T E A M ) c o l le c t iv e b a r g a in in g unit. (S e e ta b le 36. ) P ay ra n g e s 1, 2, 6, 22, 23, 30, 32, and 33 w e r e n ot u sed . A se p a r a te pa y pla n having 5 p a y ra n g e s c o v e r e d f i r e s e r v i c e ra n k s o f F ir e fig h t e r th rou g h F ir e b o a t P ilo t . R anks o f F ir e Captain and a b o v e in clu d e d in m a n a g em en t pa y plan. (S ee ta b le 3 8 .) A se p a r a te pa y plan having 7 p a y ra n g e s c o v e r e d p o l ic e s e r v i c e ra n k s o f P o li c e M a tron th rou g h C h ief D ocu m en t E x a m in e r and R a d io M e c h a n ic F o re m a n . (S ee ta b le 3 7 .) Ranks o f L ieu ten a n t o f P o li c e and a b o v e in clu d e d in m a n a g em en t pa y plan. 2 C la s s e s in clu d e d in pa y ra n g e 3 in clu d ed C le rk I, C le rk S ten og ra p h er I, C le r k T y p is t I, K ey P u n ch O p e r a to r I, and L ib r a r y A id e I. 3 C la s s e s in clu d e d in pay ra n g e 4 in clu d e d B in d e r y S ew er I, C u s to d ia l W o r k e r I,E le v a t o r O p e r a t o r I, and L a u n d ry W o r k e r I. 4 S a la ry r a t e s in a ll pay ra n g e s e x ce p t 9 (a ), 13(a), 17(a), and 21(b) in clu d e d $ 8 .5 9 b iw e e k ly , $ 1 8 .6 6 m on th ly , and $ 2 2 3 . 95 a nnual C P I a d ju stm en t b a s e d on the B L S C on s u m er P r i c e Index f o r M ilw a u k ee. P a y r a n g e s 9 (a ), 13(a), 17(a) and 21(b) in clu d e d e n g in e e r in g d r a ft s m e n and te ch n icia n p o s it io n s and w e r e n ot s u b je c t to the C P I a d ju stm en t. Step r a t e s 6 and 7 f o r pa y ra n g e s 17(a) and 2 1(b) w e r e e s ta b lis h e d to r e c o g n iz e ed u ca tio n and length o f s e r v i c e . 5 C la s s e s in clu d e d in pay 6 C la s s e s in clu d ed 7 C la s s e s in clu d e d in pay in pay ra n g e 29(a) in clu d e d C h e m ist V and V ir o lo g is t I. ra n g e 31(a) in clu d e d P h y s ic ia n I. ra n g e 34(a) in clu d e d P u b lic H ealth P h y s ic ia n I. 95 Table 34. 1970 management salary rates (Biweekly, Monthly, and Annual), city employees, Milwaukee Biweekly , monthly, and annual salary rates Pay range Step rates Interval 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2 M-l Biweekly Monthly Annual $284.11 617.26 7,407.15 $293.89 638.51 7,662.13 $304.20 660.91 7,930.93 $315.01 684.40 8,212.76 $326.56 709.49 8,513.89 $339.70 738.04 8,856.46 $353.78 768.63 9,223.55 $368.43 800.46 9,605.50 M-2 Biweekly Monthly Annual 293.89 638.51 7,662.13 304.20 660.71 7,930.93 315.01 684.04 8,212.76 326.56 709.49 8,513.89 339.70 738 04 8,856.46 353.78 768.63 . 9,223.55 368.43 800.46 9,605.50 384.19 834.70 10,016.38 M-3 Biweekly Monthly Annual 304.20 660.71 7,930.93 315.01 684.40 8,212.76 326.56 709.49 8,513.89 339.70 738.04 8,856.46 353.78 768.63 9,223.55 368.43 800.46 9,605.50 384.19 834.70 10,016.38 401.08 871.39 10,456.73 M-4 Biweekly Monthly Annual 315.01 684.40 8,212.76 326.56 709.49 8,513.89 339.70 738.04 8,856.46 353.78 768.63 9,223.55 368.43 800.46 9,605.50 384.19 834.70 10,016.38 401.08 871.39 10,456.73 417.96 908.07 10,896.81 M-5 Biweekly Monthly Annual 326.56 709.49 8,513.89 339.70 738.04 8,856.46 353.78 768.63 9,223.55 368.43 800.46 9,605.50 384.19 834.70 10,016.38 401.08 871.39 10,456.73 417.96 908.07 10,896.16 434.85 944.76 11,337.16 M-6 Biweekly Monthly Annual 339.70 738.04 8,856.46 353.78 768.63 9,223.55 368.43 800.46 9,605.50 384.19 834.70 10,016.38 401.08 871.39 10,456.73 417.96 908.07 10,896.81 434.85 944.76 11,337.16 450.03 977.74 11,732.93 H-7 Biweekly Monthly Annual 353.78 768.63 9,223.55 368.43 800.46 9,605.50 384.19 834.70 10,016.38 401.08 871.39 10,456.73 417.96 908.07 10,896.81 434.85 944.76 11,337.16 450.03 977.74 11,732.93 466.47 1,013.46 12,161.54 1 |Biweekly (Monthly (Annual 368.43 800.46 9,605.50 384.19 834.70 10,016.38 401.08 871.39 10,456.73 417.96 908.07 10,896.81 434.85 944.76 11,337.16 450.03 977.74 11,732.93 466.47 1,013.46 12,161.54 482.91 1,049.18 12,590.15 jBiweekly Monthly Annual 384.19 834.70 10,016.38 401.08 871.39 10,456.73 417.96 908.07 10,896.81 434.85 944.76 11,337.16 450.03 977.74 11,732.93 466.47 1,013.46 12,161.54 482.91 1,049.18 12,590.15 504.64 1,096.39 13,156.69 Biweekly Monthly Annua1 401.08 871.39 10,456.73 417.96 908.09 10,896.81 434.85 944.76 11,337.16 450.03 977.74 11,732.93 466.47 1,013.46 12,161.54 482.91 1,049.18 12,590.15 504.64 1,096.39 13,156.69 526.39 1,143.60 13,723.74 M-ll Biweekly Monthly Annual 417.96 908.07 10,896.81 434.85 944.76 11,337.16 450.03 977.74 11,732.93 466.47 1,013.46 12,161.54 482.91 1,049.18 12,590.15 504.64 1,096.39 13,156.69 526.39 1,143.60 13,723.74 551.32 1,197.81 14,373.70 M - 12 Biweekly Monthly Annual 434.85 944.76 11,337.16 450.03 977.74 11,732.93 466.47 1,013.46 12,161.54 482.91 1,049.18 12,590.15 504.64 1,096.39 13,156.69 526.39 1,143.60 13,723.74 551.32 1,197.81 14,373.70 575.70 1,250.78 15,009.32 M-13 Biweekly Monthly Annual 450.03 977.74 11,732.93 466.47 1,013.46 12,161.54 482.91 1,049.18 12,590.15 504.64 1,096.39 13,156.69 526.39 1,143.60 13,723.74 551.32 1,197.81 14,373.70 575.70 1,250.78 15,009.32 603.28 1,310.70 15,728.37 M - 14 Biweekly Monthly Annual 466.47 1,013.46 12,161.54 482.91 1,049.18 12,590.15 504.64 1,096.39 13,156.69 526.39 1,143.60 13,723.74 551.32 1,197.81 14,373.70 575.70 1,250.78 15,009.36 603.28 1,310.70 15,728.37 630.31 1,369.42 16,433.08 M - 15 Biweekly Monthly Annual 482.91 1,049.18 12,590.15 504.64 1,096.39 13,156.69 526.39 1,143.60 13,723.74 551.32 1,197.81 14,373.70 575.70 1,250.78 15,009.36 603.28 1,310.70 15,728.37 630.31 1,369.42 16,433.08 657.89 1,429.34 17,152.13 M-16 Biweekly Monthly Annual 504.64 1,096.39 13,156.69 526.39 1,143.60 13,723.74 551.32 1,197.60 14,373.70 575.70 1,250.78 15,009.32 603.28 1,310.70 15,728.37 630.31 1,369.42 16,433.08 657.89 1,429.34 17,152.13 684.94 1,488.11 17,857.36 M - 17 Biweekly Monthly Annual 526.39 1,143.60 13,723.74 551.32 1,197.81 14,373.70 575.70 1,250.78 15,009.32 603.28 1,310.70 15,728.37 630.31 1,369.42 16,433.08 657.89 1,429.34 17,152.13 684.94 1,488.11 17,857.36 717.81 1,559.53 18,714.33 M-18 Biweekly Monthly Annual 551.32 1,197.81 14,373.70 575.70 1,250.78 15,009.32 603.28 1,310.70 15,728.37 630.31 1,369.42 16,433.08 657.89 1,429.34 17,152.13 684.94 1,488.11 17,857.36 717.81 1,559.53 18,714.33 19,571.56 M-19 Biweekly Monthly Annual 575.70 1,250.78 15,009.32 603.28 1,310.70 15,728.37 630.31 1,369.42 16,433.08 657.89 1,429.34 17,152.13 684.94 1,488.11 17,857.36 717.81 1,559.53 18,714.33 750.69 1,630.96 19,751.56 783.63 1,702.53 20,430.35 M-20 Biweekly Monthly Annual 603.28 1,310.70 15,728.37 630.31 1,369.42 16,433.08 657.89 1,429.34 17,152.13 684.94 1,488.11 17,857.36 717.81 1,559.53 18,714.33 750.69 1,630.96 19,571.56 783.63 1,702.53 20,430.35 817.81 1,776.79 21,321.48 M-21 Biweekly Monthly Annual 630.31 1,369.42 16,433.08 657.89 1,429.34 17,152.13 684.94 1,488.11 17,857.36 717.81 1,559.53 18,714.33 750.69 1,630.96 19,571.56 783.63 1,702.53 20,430.35 817.81 1,776.79 21,321.48 852.02 1,851.12 22,213.38 M-22 Biweekly Monthly Annual 657.89 1,429.34 17,152.13 684.94 1,488.11 17,857.36 717.81 1,559.53 18,714.33 750.69 1,630.96 19,571.56 783.63 1,702.53 20,430.35 2 M-8 M-9 M-10 f 817.81 1,776.79 21,321.48 ! ; ____ L______ L See fo o tn o te s at end o f ta b le . 96 852.02 1,851.12 22,213.38 750.69 1,630.96 j 897.22 1,949.32 23,391.81 Table 34. 1970 management salary rates (Biweekly, Monthly, and Annual), city employees. M ilw a u k e e 1— C o n tin u e d “ 1 Biweekly, monthly, and annual salary rates i Pay Step rates 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 M-23 Biweekly Monthly A n nua1 $ 684.94 1,488.11 17,857.36 $ 717.81 1,559.53 18,714.33 $ 750.69 1,630.96 19,571.56 $ 783.63 1,702.53 20,430.35 | $ 817.81 1,776.79 21,321.48 $ 852.02 1,851.12 22,213.38 $ 897.22 1,949.32 23,391.81 $ 954.04 2,072.77 24,873.19 M-24 Biweekly Monthly Annual 717.81 1,559.53 18,714.33 750.69 1,630.96 19,571.56 783.63 1,702.53 20,430.35 817.81 1,776.79 21,321.48 852.02 1,851.12 22,213.38 897.22 1,949.32 23,391.81 954.04 2,072.77 24,873.19 1,010.82 2,196.13 26,353.52 M-25 Biweekly Monthly Annual 750.69 1,630.96 19,571.56 783.63 1,702.53 20,430.35 817.81 1,776.79 21,321.48 852.02 1,851.12 22,213.38 897.22 1,949.32 23,391.81 954.04 , 2,072.77 j 24,873.19 1,010.82 2,196.13 26,353,38 1,067.63 2,319.55 27,834.64 M-26 Biweekly Monthly Annual 783.63 1,702.53 20,430.35 817.81 1,776.79 21,321.48 852.02 1,851.12 22,213.38 897.22 1,949.32 23,391.81 954.04 2,072.77 24,873.19 1,010.82 2,196.13 26,353.52 1,067.63 2,319.55 27,834.64 1,124.44 2,442.98 29,315.76 M-2 7 Biweekly Monthly Annual 817.81 1,776.79 21,321.48 852.02 1,851.12 22,213.38 897.22 1,949.32 23,391.81 954.04 2,072.77 24,873.19 1,010.82 2,196.13 26,353.52 1,067.63 2,319.55 j 27,834.64 1,124.44 2,442.98 29,315.76 1,180.49 2,564.76 30,777.06 M-28 Biweekly Monthly Annual- 852.02 1,851.12 22,213.38 897.22 1,949.32 23,391.81 954.04 2,072.77 24,873.19 1,010.82 2,196.13 26,353.52 1,067.63 2,319.55 27,834.64 1,124.44 2,442.98 29,315.76 1,180.49 2,564.76 30,777.06 1,239.74 2,693.48 32,321.79 Biweekly Monthly Annual 897.22 1,949.32 23,391.81 954.04 2,072.77 24,873.19 1,010.82 2,196.13 26,353.52 1,067.63 2,319.55 27,834.64 1,124.44 2,442.98 29,315.76 1,139.17 2,475.00 29,700.00 1,239.74 2,693.48 32,321.79 1,301.60 2,827.88 33,934.57 Biweekly Monthly Annual 1,067.63 2,319.55 27,834.64 1,124.44 2,442.98 29,315.76 1,180.49 2,564.76 30,777.06 1,239.74 2,693.48 32,321.79 1,301.60 2,827.88 33,934.57 1,327.12 2,883.33 34,600.00 1,435.01 3,117.73 37,412.76 1,506.76 3,273.62 39,283.39 Biweekly Monthly Annual 1,239.74 2,693.48 32,321.79 1,301.60 2,827.88 33,934.57 1,366.68 2,969.28 35,631.30 1,435.01 3,117.73 37,412.76 1,506.76 3,273.62 39,283.39 1,582.10 3,437.30 41,247.60 1,661.20 3,609.15 43,309.85 1,774.26 3,789.61 45,475.35 3 M-29 4 M-32 M-35 1 T he s a la r y o rd in a n ce e s ta b lis h in g s a la r y r a te s f o r 1970 c o v e r in g g e n e r a l e m p lo y e e s p r o v id e d s e p a r a te pay pla n s fo r m a n a g em en t and n on m a n a g em en t e m p lo y e e s . (See ta ble 33 f o r n on m a n ag em en t s a la r y r a t e s . ) It a ls o p r o v id e d f o r a se p a r a te pay pla n f o r n e a r ly a ll p o s it io n s c o v e r e d by the T e ch n icia n s , E n g in e e rs , and A r c h i t e c t s o f M ilw a u k ee (T E A M ) c o l le c t iv e b a rg a in in g unit. (S ee ta b le 35. ) The n ew ly e s t a b lis h e d m a n a g em en t m e r it r e v ie w pa y pla n ex ten d ed to a ll m a n a g em en t e m p lo y e e s w ho w e r e m 1969 pa y ra n g e s 13 and a b o v e . Step ra te 6 w as the m a xim u m ra te . Step r a te s 7 and 8, s p e c i a l m e r it r e v ie w r a t e s in ten ded f o r e x t r a o r d in a r y p e r fo r m a n c e , w e r e not a ctiv a te d d u rin g 1970. P a y ra n g e s 30, 31, 33, and 34 w e r e n ot u sed . A se p a r a te pay plan having 5 pay ra n g es c o v e r e d f i r e s e r v i c e ra n ks b e lo w F ir e C aptain. H ig h er ra n ks w e r e in clu d e d in m a n a g em en t pa y plan. (S e e ta ble 38. ) A se p a r a te pay pla n ha vin g 7 pa y ra n g e s c o v e r e d p o l ic e s e r v i c e ranks b e lo w L ieu ten a n t o f P o l i c e . ra n ks w e r e in clu d e d in m a n a g em en t pa y plan. 2 (S e e ta ble 37. ) H ig h er C la s s e s in clu d e d in pay ra n g e M -l in clu d e d B r id g e te n d e r F o r e m a n , C u s tod ia l W ork S u p e r v is o r I, a n d M u se u m G u ard III. C la s s e s in clu d ed in pa y ra n g e M -2 A r b o r is t III, A s s is ta n t D u plicatin g S e r v ic e s S u p e r v is o r , C u s tod ia l W ork S u p e r v is o r II, K e y P u n ch S u p e r v is o r , P a r k F o re m a n , P a rk in g R e p a irm a n III, S ch o o l C r o s s in g G uard S u p e r v is o r , S tre e t S e r v ic e s F o r e m a n I, and W a ter D is tr ib u tio n F o re m a n II. 3 C la s s e s in clu d ed in pay ra n g e M -29 in clu d ed C h ief E n g in e e r -F ir e , C h ief o f P o li c e , C ity A tto rn e y , City E n g in e e r, D eputy C o m m is s io n e r o f C ity D e v e lo p m e n t, D eputy C o m m is s io n e r o f H ealth, D eputy C o m m is s io n e r o f P u b lic W o rk s, M u n icip a l P o r t D ir e c t o r , and T a x C o m m is s io n e r . 4 C la s s e s in clu d ed in pay ra n g e M -32 in clu d ed C o m m is s io n e r o f H ealth, C o m m is s io n e r o f C ity D ev e lo p m e n t. 5 C la s s e s in clu d e d in pa y ra n g e M -35 in clu d e d M a y o r. 97 C o m m is s io n e r o f P u b lic W o rk s, and Table 35. 1969 salary rates for engineers and architects, city employees, Milwaukee Biweekly, monthly, and annual salary rates Pay range Interval Step rates 4 3 2 1 5 $353.34 767.68 9,212.16 $369.78 803.39 9,640.68 $387.38 841.64 10,099.68 $404.99 879.88 10,558.56 $422.60 918.15 11,017.80 Bweekly Monthly Annual 404.99 879.88 10,558.56 422.60 918.15 11,017.80 438.42 952.53 11,430.36 455.57 989.77 11,877.24 472.70 1,027.00 12,324.00 47 Biweekly Monthly Annual 455.57 989.77 11,877.24 472.70 1,027.00 12,324.00 495.37 1,076.24 12,914.88 518.04 1,125.51 13,506.12 544.03 1,181.98 14,183.76 48 Biweekly Monthly Annual 518.04 1,125.51 13,506.12 544.03 1,181.98 14,183.76 569.46 1,237.21 14,846.52 598.21 1,299.69 15,596.28 626.40 1,360.92 16,331.04 45 Biweekly Monthly Annual 46 Note: T a b le 3 6 . A separate pay plan having 4 pay ranges was established in 1969 to provide special salary rates for engineers and architects in positions included in the Technicians, Engineers, and Architects of Milwaukee (TEAM) collective bargaining unit. 1970 s a la ry ra te s fo r e n g in e e rs a n d a rc h ite c ts , c it y e m p lo y e e s, M ilw a u k e e Biweekly, monthly, and annual salary rates Pay range Step rates Interval 2 1 | 7 3 L 45 Biweekly Monthly Annual $374.54 813.74 9,764.88 $391.96 851.59 10,219.08 $410.63 892.14 10,705.68 $429.28 932.67 11,192.04 46 Biweekly Monthly A n nua1 429.28 932.67 11,192.04 447.96 973.24 11,678.88 464.73 1,009.68 12,116.16 482.90 1,049.15 12,589.80 501.06 1,088.62 13,063.44 47 Biweekly Monthly Annual 482.90 1,049.15 12,589.80 501.06 1,088.62 13,063.44 525.09 1,140.81 13,689.72 549.13 1,193.04 14,316.48 576.68 1,252.90 15,034.80 Biweekly Monthly Annual 549.13 1,193.04 14,316.48 603.62 1,311.44 15,737.28 634.11 1,377.67 16,532.04 48 * ! I | 576.68 1,252.90 15,034.80 | i 1 j 1 $447.96 973.24 11,678.88 663.98 1,442.58 17,310.96 ______________________l Note: Classes included in pay ranges 45 through 48 were not eligible for a cost-of-living adjustment in 1970. 98 Table 37. 1965-1970 police service salary rates (Biweekly, Monthly, Annual), Milwaukee Pay range 1965 Biweekly salary rates 1966 1968 and to Step rates 1 1 2/ 1967 " 3/ 1970 2 1 3 4 5 6 $732.46 754.43 777.06 $769.08 792.15 815.91 $805.70 829.87 854.77 - . 41 41 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 $673.86 694.08 714.90 42 42 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 537.14 553.25 569.85 561.55 578.40 1 595.75 See footnote 3/ 585.96 603.54 621.65 615.26 633.72 652.73 644.56 663.90 683.82 43 43 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 488.30 502.95 518.04 512.72 528.10 543.94 See footnote 3/ 537.14 553.25 569.85 561.55 578.40 595.75 585.96 603.54 621.65 44 44 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 466.33 480.32 494.73 488.30 502.95 518.04 See footnote 3/ 512.72 528.10 543.94 537.14 553.25 569.85 561.55 578.40 595.75 45 45 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 424.82 437.56 450.69 444.36 457.69 471.42 See footnote 3/ 466.33 480.32 494.73 488.30 502.95 518.04 512.72 528.10 543.94 46 46 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 385.76 397.33 409.25 405.29 417.45 1 429.97 See footnote 3/ 424.82 437.56 450.69 444.36 457.69 471.42 47 47 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 351.58 382.05 393.51 368.67 397.33 409.25 See footnote 3/ 385.76 417.45 429.97 405.29 437.56 450.69 424.82 - 48 48 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 336.93 366.12 377.10 351.58 382.05 393.51 See footnote 3/ 368.67 397.33 409.25 385.76 417.45 429.97 405.29 - 49 49 1965 1966 1967 1968 324.55 350.20 360.71 390.45 410.70 420.29 430.64 340.00 366.12 377.10 406.33 426.62 436.21 446.56 355.46 382.05 393.51 422.21 442.55 452.14 462.49 . - - - - - - 293.96 334.29 344.32 374.58 394.79 404.38 414.73 307.63 350.20 360.71 390.45 410.70 420.29 430.64 '322.28 366.12 377.10 406.33 426.62 436.21 446.56 336.93 - 351.58 - . - - - - 310.13 319.43 329.01 359.76 379.93 389.52 399.87 324.55 334.29 344.32 374.58 394.79 404.38 414.73 340.00 350.20 360.71 390.45 410.70 420.29 430.64 ! ' - - - j * - 296.73 305.63 314.80 346.00 366.13 375.72 386.07 310.13 319.43 329.01 359.76 379.93 389.52 399.87 324.55 334.29 344.32 374.58 394.79 404.38 414.73 . - - - - - • - 283.86 292.38 301.15 332.79 352.88 362.47 372.82 296.73 305.63 314.80 346.00 366.13 375.72 386.07 310.13 319.43 329.01 359.76 379.93 389.52 399.87 . - . - 226.57 234.57 242.57 275.41 295.34 304.93 315.29 239.03 247.03 255.03 286.89 306.85 316.44 326.79 249.34 257.43 265.34 302.19 322.19 331.78 342.14 P-1 P-2 P-3 P-4 P-5 P-6 P-7 P-8 P-9 49 49 49 49 P-10 50 50 50 50 50 50 P-11 51 51 51 51 51 51 P-12 52 52 52 52 52 52 P-13 53 53 53 53 53 53 P-14 54 54 54 54 54 54 1969 / / 1970 & 1970 U 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 4/ 1970 1970 5/ 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 / / 1970 & 1970 V 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 / / 1970 V 1970 5/ 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 , / 1970 1970 5/ 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 , / 1970 4/ 1970 5/ $703.16 724.25 745.98 See footnote 3/ I j S ee fo o tn o te s at end o f ta b le . 99 260.16 268.16 276.20 317.49 337.53 347.12 357.48 I J 466.33 480.32 494.73 - - 271.49 279.63 288.02 332.79 352.88 362.47 372.82 $ 283.86 292.38 301.15 - Table 37. 1965-70 police service salary rates (Biweekly, Monthly, Annual), Milwaukee— Continued Pay range 1965 U Biweekly salary rates i — --- ------------------------------------- — ---- --- ------------- — --------------------------- 1 1966 1968 and to 1967 & Step rates 3/ 1970 - P-15 1965 1966 55 55 55 1 967 1967 55 55 55 55 - 1 1968 1 969/ / 1970 y 1970 5/ 1 2 $176.90 184.90 192.90 196.41 207.35 227.09 236.68 247.04 $184.48 192.48 200.48 203.99 214.90 234.67 244.26 254.62 Pay range i 3 4 5 6 $192.07 200.07 208.07 211.58 222.47 242.26 251.85 262.21 $200.69 208.69 216.69 222.11 234.90 254.72 267.76 274.66 $208.50 216.50 224.50 231.84 246.51 266.36 275.95 286.31 - ‘ Monthly salary rates 1966 1968 and to 1967— 7 Step rates Year 1970 3/ 1 2 3 4 5 6 $1,591.35 1,639.09 1,688.26 $1,670.92 1,721.04 1,772.66 $1,750.49 1,802.99 1,357.09 - See $1,527.70 1,573.52 1,620.73 footnote 3/ 1,273.08 1,311.26 1,350.61 1,336.73 1,373.83 1,418.13 1,400.39 1,942.40 1,485.68 - See 1,220.04 1,256.64 1,294.34 footnote 3/ 1,166.99 1,202.00 1,238.07 1,220.04 1,256.64 1,294.34 1,273.08 1,311.26 1,350.61 - See 1,113.95 1,147.36 1,181.77 footnote 3/ 1,113.95 1,147.36 1,181.77 1,166.99 1,202.00 1,238.07 1,220.04 1,256.64 1,294.34 See 1,060.90 1,092.72 1,125.50 footnote 3/ 1,013.16 1,043.55 1,074.86 1,060.90 1,092.72 1,125.50 1,113.95 1,147.36 1,181.77 See 965.42 994.39 1,024.22 footnote 3/ 922.98 950.65 979.18 965.42 994.39 1,024.22 1,013.16 1,043.55 1,074.86 See 880.55 906.96 934.16 footnote 3/ 838.11 906.96 934.16 880.55 950.65 979.18 922.98 - See 800.98 863.25 889.14 footnote 3/ 800.98 863.25 889.14 838.11 906.96 934.16 880.55 - See 763.85 830.05 854.94 footnote 3/ 41 41 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 $1,464.04 1,507.97 1,553.21 42 42 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 1,166.99 1,202.00 1,238.07 43 43 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 1,060.90 1,092.72 1,125.50 44 44 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 1,013.16 1,043.55 1,074.86 45 45 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 922.98 950.65 979.18 46 46 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 838.11 863.25 889.14 47 47 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 763.85 830.05 854.94 48 48 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 732.02 795.44 819.29 49 49 1965 1966 1967 1968 705.13 760.85 850.62 850.62 892.29 913.12 935.62 738.70 795.44 885.21 885.21 926.88 947.71 970.21 772.28 830.05 919.82 919.82 961.49 982.32 1,004.82 638.66 726.28 816.06 816.06 857.72 878.56 901.06 668.37 760.85 850.62 850.62 892.29 913.12 935.62 700.19 795.44 885.21 885.21 926.88 947.71 970.21 673.79 694.00 783.77 783.77 825.44 846.27 868.77 705.13 726.28 816.06 816.06 857.72 878.56 901.06 738.80 760.85 850.62 850.62 892.29 913.12 935.62 P-1 P-2 P-3 P-4 P-5 P-6 P-7 P-8 P-9 49 49 49 49 P-10 50 50 50 50 50 50 P-11 51 51 51 51 51 51 1969 , / 1970 y 1970 5/ 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 L t y 1970 5/ 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 ,/ 1970 y 1970 5/ | ' S ee fo o t n o t e s at end o f ta b le . ! Year 100 ! . 732.02 - _ 763.85 - - . _ . . - _ - . . _ - - - i 1 Table 37. 1965-70 police service salary rates (Biweekly, Monthly, Annual), Milwaukee— Continued Pay range 1965 Monthly salarv rates 1966 1968 and to 1967 * Step rates Year 3/ 1970 " 3 2 1 - - - . _ - 53 53 53 53 - - - 1965 1966 1967 1968 492.26 509.57 600.00 600.00 641.67 662.50 685.00 519.33 536.70 625.00 625.00 666.67 687.50 710.00 541.72 559.10 658.33 658.33 700.00 720.83 743.33 $565.22 582.61 691.67 691.67 733.33 754.17 776.67 $589.84 607.53 725.00 725.00 766.67 787.50 810.00 $ 616.71 635.23 y 384.33 401.72 419.10 426.72 400.81 418.19 435.57 443.19 417.29 434.68 452.06 459.68 436.03 453.40 470.79 482.57 453.00 470.37 487.75 503.71 1 969 / / 451.72 493.38 514.22 536.72 468.19 509.85 530.69 553.19 484.68 526.34 547.18 569.68 511.74 553.40 574.24 596.74 537.04 578.71 599.54 622.04 54 54 54 54 y 1 969 / / 1970 1970 5/ 1965 P-15 55 55 55 19 6 6 // 1967 1967 5/ 55 55 55 55 1968 1970 1970 5/ - - - - . - _ - Annual salary rates Pay range 1966 1968 and to Step rates Year 1970 -3/ P-1 $17,568.50 18,095.66 18,638.46 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 14,003.88 14,424.02 14,856.80 43 43 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 12,730.80 13,112.63 13,506.04 44 44 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 12,157.91 12,522.63 12,898.32 45 45 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 11,075.80 11,407.81 11,750.13 46 46 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 10,057.33 10,358.96 10,669.73 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 9,166.18 9,960.59 10,259.37 P-2 42 42 P-3 P-4 P-5 P -6 P-7 47 47 2 1 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 41 41 3 4 6 5 $19,096.20 19,669.07 20,259.06 $20,051.01 20,652.48 21,271.94 $21,005.82 21,635.90 22,285.08 See $18,332.35 18,882.23 19,448.76 footnote 3/ 15,276.96 15,735.15 16,207.30 16,040.81 16.521.99 17,017.60 16,804.66 17,308.82 17,828.16 See 14,640.42 15,079.71 15,532.05 footnote 3/ 14,003.88 14,424.02 14,856.80 14,640.42 15,079.71 15,532.05 15,276.96 15,735.15 16,207.30 - See 13,367.34 13,768.32 14,821.29 footnote 3/ 13,367.34 13,768.32 14,181.29 14,003.88 14,424.02 14,856.80 14,640.42 15,079.71 15,532.05 - See 12.730.80 13,112.63 13,506.04 footnote 3/ 11,585.03 11,932.63 12,157.91 12,522.63 12,898.32 12,730.80 13,112.63 13,506.04 13,367.34 13,768.32 14,181.29 - | 1 12,290.59 - _ - . . . See footnote 3/ 11,075.80 11,407.81 11,750.13 11,585.03 11,932.63 12,290.59 12,157.91 12,522.63 12,898.32 . See 10,566.66 10,883.52 11,209.93 footnote 3/ 10,057.33 10,883.52 11,209.93 10,566.56 11,407.81 11,750.13 11,075.80 . See 9,611.75 10,358.96 10,669.73 footnote 3/ ! i S ee fo o tn o te s at end o f ta b le . - 673.79 694.00 783.77 783.77 825.44 846.27 868.77 54 54 19672/ . - 644.69 664.02 753.79 753.79 795.45 816.29 838.79 P-14 y _ 616.71 635.23 725.00 725.00 766.67 787.50 810.00 53 53 1965 _ - 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1970 P-13 $705.13 726.28 816.06 816.06 857.72 878.56 901.06 6 52 52 52 52 52 52 $673.79 694.00 783.77 783.77 825.44 846.27 868.77 5 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1970 1/ P-12 $644.69 664.02 753.79 753.79 795.45 816.29 838.79 4 101 i ! - - Table 37. 1965-70 police service salary rates (Biweekly, Monthly, Annual), Milwaukee— Continued Annual salary rates Pay range 1965 1966 1968 and to 1967 -2/ Step rates Year 1 1970 P-8 2 3 4 $9,166.18 9,960.96 10,259.37 footnote 3/ $9,611.75 10,358.96 10,669.73 $10,057.33 10,883.52 11,209.93 5 6 48 48 1965 1966 1967 1968-70 $8,784.25 9,545.27 9,831.54 See 49 49 1965 1966 1967 1468 8,461.56 9,130.21 10,207.45 10,207.45 10,707.45 10,957.45 11,227.45 8,864.40 9,545.27 10,662.51 10,622.51 11,122.51 11,372.51 11,642.51 9,267.36 9,960.59 11,037.83 11,037.83 11,537.83 11,787.83 12,057.83 7,663.94 8,715.42 9,792.66 9,792.66 10,292.66 10,542.66 10,812.66 8,020.40 9,130.21 10,207.45 10,207.45 10,707.45 10,957.45 11,227.45 8,402.33 9,545.27 10,622.51 10,622.51 11,122.51 11,372.51 11,642.51 8,085.48 8,328.00 9,405.24 9,405.24 9,905.24 10,155.24 10,425.24 8,461.56 8,715.42 9,792.66 9,792.66 10,292.66 10,542.66 10,812.66 8,864.40 9,130.21 10,207.45 10,207.45 10,707.45 10,957.45 11,227.45 _ - - - 7,736.28 7,968.21 9,045.45 9,045.45 9,545.45 9,795.45 10,065.45 8,085.48 8,328.00 9,405.24 9,405.24 9,905.24 10,155.24 10,425.24 8,461.56 8,715.42 9,792.66 9,792.66 10,292.66 10,542.66 10,812.66 . _ _ - - _ - . - _ _ - - - - 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1970 7,400.52 7,622.76 8,700.00 8,700.00 9,200.00 9,450.00 9,720.00 7,736.28 7,968.21 9,045.45 9,045.45 9,545.45 9,795.45 10,065.45 8,085.48 8,328.00 9,405.24 9,405.24 9,905.24 10,155.24 10,425.24 _ _ . - _ - _ . 1965 1966 1967 1968 5,907.09 6,114.79 7,200.00 7,200.00 7,700.00 7,950.00 8 ,220.00 6,231.96 6,440.43 7,500.00 7,500.00 8 ,000.00 8,250.00 8,520.00 6,500.64 6,709.22 7,900.00 7,900.00 8,400.00 8,650.00 8,920.00 6,782.64 6,991.31 8,300.00 8,300.00 8,800.00 9,050.00 9,320.00 7,078.08 7,290.35 8,700.00 8,700.00 9,200.00 9,450.00 9,720.00 $7,400.52 7,622.76 4,611.96 4,820.61 5,029.18 4,809.72 5,018.23 5,226.80 5,007.48 5,216.11 5,424.68 5,232.36 5,440.85 5,649.42 5,436.05 5,644.46 5,853.04 _ 5,120.61 5,420.61 5,920.61 6,170.61 6,440.61 5,318.23 5,618.23 6,118.23 6,368.23 6,638.23 5,516.11 5,816.11 6,316.11 6,566.11 6,836.11 5,790.85 6,140.85 6,640.85 6,890.85 7,160.85 6,044.46 6,444.46 6,944.46 7,194.46 7,464.46 P-9 49 49 49 49 P-10 50 50 50 50 50 50 P-11 51 51 51 51 51 51 P-12 52 52 52 52 52 52 P-13 53 53 53 53 53 53 P-14 54 54 54 54 54 54 P-15 1969 // 1970 & 1970 5/ 1965 1966 1967 1968 1 9 6 9 // 1970 4/ 1970 5/ 1965 1966 1967 1968 1 9 6 9 ,/ 1970 y 1970 5/ 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 / / 1970 y 1970 5 / 1 9 6 9 // 1970 y 1970 5/ 1965 55 55 1 9 6 6 // 1967 55 55 55 55 55 y 1967 1/ 1968 1969 1970 l! y 1970 2/ _ - $10,566.56 - . - - - - _ 8,784.25 - 9,166.18 - _ _ - _ - _ - - - . - . - _ _ - ' - . - _ . . - - - - - . - I________:______ 1 A s e p a r a te sa la r y sch ed u le having 15 pay r a n g e s (num bered P-1 through P -15) w a s adopted in 1965. P r io r to 1965 p o lic e s e r v ic e p o s itio n s w e r e a llo c a te d to the sa la r y sch ed u le c o v e rin g g e n e r a l e m p lo y e e s . (S ee ta b le s 26-29. ) 2 15 pay r a n g e s fo r m e r ly num bered P-1 through P -1 5 in 1965 ren u m b ered 41 through 55. 3 P ay r a n g e s 41 through 48 c o v e rin g m a n a g em en t p o s itio n s e lim in a te d in 1968. P o s itio n s in fo rm e r pay r a n g e s 41 through 48 w e r e r e a llo c a te d to pay r a n g e s in s a la r y sch ed u le c o v e rin g g e n e r a l e m p lo y e e s . (S ee ta b le s :5° - 3 2 *) In 1970, p o lic e s e r v ic e m a n a g em en t p o s itio n s (ra n k s of L ieuten ant and above), w h ich w e r e r e a llo c a te d m 1968 to the s a la r y sch ed u le c o v e rin g g e n e r a l e m p lo y e e s , w e r e a s s ig n e d to the new 1970 m a n a g em en t s a la r y sch ed u le (S ee ta b le 34 . ) 4 E ffe c tiv e pay p e r io d 1 through 13. 5 E ffec tiv e pay p e r io d 14 through 26. 102 Table 38. 1966-70 fire service salary rates (Biweekly, Monthly, A n n u a l), Milwaukee 1 — ! Biweekly salary rates Pay range 70 Step rates Year 1967 1968 1969 1970 j \9 7 0 -— 71 1966 1967 1968 1969 ? / 1970-/ 1970 72 73 74 1 2 3 4 $314.08 338.64 354.91 364.50 384.19 $327.90 352.43 368.73 378.32 401.08 $342.78 367.27 383.62 393.20 417.96 $358.74 383.18 399.57 409.16 434.85 $374.69 399.23 415.67 425.26 450.03 273.16 288.32 312.95 329.15 338.74 284.94 300.77 325.37 341.61 351.19 360.78 297.52 314.08 338.64 354.91 364.50 374.09 310.60 327.90 352.43 368.73 378.32 324.68 342.78 367.41 383.76 393.35 387.91 402.94 277.12 289.70 302.78 336.83 346.41 356.00 349.28 358.87 368.46 362.73 372.32 381.91 273.16 288.32 312.95 329.15 284.94 300.77 325.37 341.61 297.52 314.08 338.79 355.06 348.33 5 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970-^/ 1970 3/ 265.34 254.59 Pay range 72 not used in 1967 Pay range 72 not used in 1968 325.46 314.63 324.22 335.05 344.64 333.80 1966 1967 1968 1969 19701/ 252.16 266.12 290.82 306.96 262.41 276.95 301.62 317.79 316.54 327.38 338.74 351.19 1970 2^ 326.13 336.97 348.33 360.78 364.65 374.24 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 2/ 1970 3/ 242.39 255.79 275.41 295.34 304.93 315.29 252.16 266.12 290.82 306.96 316.54 326.13 262.41 276.95 301.62 317.79 327.38 336.97 273.16 288.32 312.95 329.15 338.74 348.33 284.74 300.77 325.25 341.75 351.34 360.93 6 _ - $466.47 - - - Monthly salary rat es Salary steps 70 1967 1968 1969 1 9 7 0 % . 19702' 71 1966 1967 1968 1969 ,/ 1970 ^ 1970 2/ 72 1966 1967 1968 1969 ?! 1970 f. 1970 2' 73 2 3 4 5 6 $682.35 737.75 771.09 791.92 834.70 $712.39 767.79 801.12 821.95 871.39 $744.71 800.12 833.45 854.28 908.07 $779.38 834.79 888.95 944.76 $814.03 869.76 903.09 923.92 977.74 - 593.48 626.39 681.79 715.13 735.96 756.79 619.08 653.44 708.85 742.18 763.01 783.85 646.41 682.35 737.75 771.09 791.92 812.75 674.83 712.39 767.79 801.12 821.95 842.79 705.42 714.71 800.44 833.77 854.60 875.44 602.08 629.41 657.83 731.79 752.63 773.46 758.85 779.68 800.51 788.07 808.91 829.74 576.48 553.13 Pay range 72 not used in 1967 Pay range 72 not used in 1968 683.56 707.10 704.40 727.94 725.23 748.77 868.12 1970 I' 1970 2' 547.86 578.16 633.56 666.90 687.73 708.56 570.13 601.70 657.10 690.44 711.27 732.10 593.48 626.39 681.79 715.13 735.96 756.79 619.08 653.44 708.85 742.18 763.01 783.85 646.41 682.35 738.07 771.41 792.24 813.07 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 l l 1970 3/ 526.63 555.72 600.00 641.67 662.50 685.00 547.86 578.16 633.56 666.90 687.73 708.56 570.13 601.70 657.*0 690.44 711.27 732.10 593.48 626.39 681.79 715.13 735.96 756.79 619.08 653.44 709.17 742.50 763.33 784.17 1966 1967 1968 1969 ,/ 74 1 _____L See footn otes at end o f ta b le . 103 $1,013.46 . - . - _ _ Table 38. 1966-70 fire service salary rates (Biweekly, Monthly, Annual), Milwaukee— Continued f Annual salary rates Pay Step rates Year 1 70 1967 1968 1969 1970 2/ 19702/ 71 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 2/ 1970 3/ 72 | ! 73 74 | ! I 1 2 $8,188.18 8,853.03 9,253.03 9,503.03 10,016.38 $8,548.58 9,213.43 9,613.43 9,863.43 10,456.73 7,428.91 7,841.30 8,506.15 8,906.15 9,156.15 9,406.15 7,121.79 7,516.67 8,181.52 8,581.52 8,831.52 9,081.52 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 i'' 197C ?J 6,911.79 6,637.53 Pay range 72 n ot used in 1967 Pay range 72 not used in 1968 8,202.76 8,485.25 8,452.76 8,735.25 8,702.76 8,985.25 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 l 1970 2/ 6,574.29 6,937.91 7,602.76 8,002.76 8,252.76 8,502.76 1966 1967 1968 1969 19701/ 1970 2/ 6,319.58 6,668.68 7,200.00 7,700.00 7,950.00 8,220.00 1 E ffe c t iv e June 12, b e lo w F ir e C aptain rank. 1 3 4 $8,936.55 9,601.40 10,001.40 10,251.40 10,896.81 $9,352.60 10,017.45 10,417.45 10,667.45 11,337.16 7,756.89 8,188.18 8,853.03 9,253.03 9,503.03 9,753.03 7,224.91 5 $9,768.38 10,437.08 10,837.08 11,087.08 11,732.93 8,097.91 6,548.58 9,213.43 9,613.43 9,863.43 10,113.43 8,464.99 8,936.55 9,605.25 10,005.25 10,255.25 10,505.25 7,552.89 7,893.91 8,781.52 9,031.52 9,281.52 11 9,106.15 9,356.16 9,606.15 9,456.88 9.7Q6.88 9,956.88 6,841.53 7,220.40 7,885.25 8,285.25 8,535.25 8,785.25 7,121.79 7,516.67 8,181.52 8,581.52 8,831.52 9,081.52 ! 1 | I 7,428.91 7,841.30 8,506.15 8,906.15 9,156.15 9,406.15 7,756.89 8,188.18 8,856.88 9,256.88 9,506.88 9,756.88 6,574.29 6,937.91 7,602.76 8,002.76 8,252.76 8,502.76 6,841.53 7,220.40 7,885.25 8,285.25 8,535.25 8,785.25 7,121.79 7,516.67 8,181.52 8,581.52 8,831.52 9,081.52 7,428.91 7,841.30 8,510.00 8,910.00 9,160.00 9,410.00 1966 fo u r pay ra n g e s n u m b ered 71 through 74 w e r e e s t a b lis h e d fo r f i r e 6 - $12,161.54 , . se r v ice person n el In 1967, a s e p a r a te pa y plan having fiv e pa y ra n g e s n u m b ered 70 th rou g h 74 w as e s t a b lis h e d f o r f i r e p e r s o n n e l c o v e r in g ra n ks o f F ir e fig h t e r through F n e Captain. 2 E ffe c t iv e pay p e r io d s 1 through 13, 3 E ffe c t iv e pay p e r io d s 14 th rou g h 26, 1970. 197 0 104 se r v ice Table 39. Earnings of selected classes of municipal employees, Milwaukee, July 1970 (A v e r a g e & tr a ig h t-tim e w e e k ly h o u r s and m onthly ea rn in g s fo r se le c te d c l a s s e s , M ilw a u k ee, W is co n s in , M u n icip a l G ov ern m en t) NUMBER OF WORKERS RECEIVING STRalGHT-TIME MONTHLY EaRNINGS OF- Average Occupational group and Class title N L “of 41 workers V 2/ Monthly earnings (Mean) hours (Standard) i £ \$ 0 and U 7$ $00 U75 $00 $2$ & $2$ ' 5$0 $ 5$o $ * $ $ 3 $ $ I 5 57$ 600 625 6$0 675 700 7$0 800 8$0 900 57$ 600 625 6$C 675 700 7$0 800 850 900 950 1 2 _ 5 _ 7 1 7 3 8 2 2 2 2 32 $ $ $ ^ $ $ T “— $ 1 9 5 0 1 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 5 0 1 , 1 0 0 l , i 5 o 1 , 2 0 0 1 , ? $ 0 1 , 3 0 0 l , ? 5 0 1 ,1 -0 0 arm 1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 5 0 1 ,1 0 0 i , i $ o 1 , 2 0 0 1 ,2 $ 0 V o o 1 ,3 5 0 l,U o o over NON-MANAGEMENT WHITE-COLLAR $ Accountant I ----------------Accountant II --------------Account clerk I -------------Account c lerk II -----------Administrative assistant I — Administrative assistant II Chemist I -------------------Chemist II __________________ Chemist III _________________ Chemist IV-------------------Chemist V _____________________ Civil engineer I -----------Civil engineer II -----------Civil engineer III ---------Civil engineer IV -----------Clerk I ---------------------Clerk II ---------------------Clerk III -------------------Clerk ^ ---------------------Clerk stenographer I -------Clerk stenographer II ------Clerk stenographer III ----Clerk stenographer IV ------Clerk typist I --------------Clerk typist II ------------Clerk typist III -----------Computer operator I -------ComputeT- op e r a to r I T -------------Compute- operator III ------Computer programmer I ------Computer programmer II ----Computer programmer III ----Draftsman I -----------------Draftsman II ---------------Draftsman IV ----------------Draftsman V -----------------Engineering draftsman I ----Engineering draftsman II --Engineering draftsman IV --Engineering technician I --Engineering technician II — Engineering technician IV — Engineering technician V --Engineering technician VI--jraduate nurse I -----------Keypunch operator I --------Keypunch operator II ------Keypunch operator III ------Librarian I -----------------Librarian II ----------------Librarian III --------------Librarian IV ----------------Library aide I ------------Library aide II ------------- 3 3 31 56 7 3 17 2 2 UO.O U o .o UO.O U o .o U o .o U o .o U o .o U o .o U o .o 763 891 635 718 818 926 818 Q82 1*018 1 U o .o U o .o U o .o 1 ,1 9 9 909 1 ,0 7 0 U o .o U o .o U o .o u o .o U o .o 1 ,2 3 2 1 ,U 2 7 506 585 6U1 25 29 29 16 10 20 37 31 59 80 U7 28 10U 18L 28 U 1 U U 2 3 17 19 23 12 12 25 7 3U 31 U2 32 10 UU 8 15 3 15 U9 30 3 100 1 U o .o U o .o U o .o U o .o U o .o U o .o U o .o U o .o U o .o U o .o U o .o u o .o UO.O UO.O UO.O u o .o UC.C U o .o u o .o UO.O U o .o U o .o U o .o u o .o u o .o u o .o U o .o UO.O UO.O U o .o U o .o U o .o U o .o UO.O UO.O U o .o I i j i : j i I 705 501 $82 655 736 U92 576 6U7 611 702 75U 619 75U 901 602 701 90S 1 ,0 6 3 6oU 6 96 910 608 682 916 1 ,C 7 3 1 ,2 3 0 733 U83 $ 72 653 690 739 878 1 ,0 2 9 5 03 602 2 _ _ _ u . 1 1 5 . i 11 I 1 2 2 2 2 - - - - - - - _ . - . l i lo 3 2 10 U 1 _ _ _ _ . _ _ 3 ■ _ 2i* _ _ 2 " _ 33 _ _ 80 18 _ _ _ _ U ”1 $ 3 _ _ 3 2 _ 3U 15 3 _ _ 6 27 _ 67 _ _ _ 11 9 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 _ 5 _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ 75 8 3 _ . _ 31 6 15 _ _ 2 3 21 1 5 25 2 _ 2? u U 7 11 I 13 1 u i"o _ U 2 _ _ 8 ,U _ _ 19 8 u 6 9 8 2 1 I U _ _ _ _ 35 - 2U 1 * 1U 1 l 3 "U 1 2 5" 5 U 1U _ _ 16 _ _ i l 25T _ "2 _ _ 2 5 9 31 _ _ . _ 3 _ 1' _ _ 9" 27 _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ 8 . _ _ . _ . _ _ 1 _ _ 1 _ 11 13 . U 5 ■8 "5 5 7 - 1 1 2 _ _ 23 1 1 1 1 i 16 1 2 U 8 1 2U 8 3 _ _ 3 1 l 1 _ - - 28 1 bee fo o t n o t e s a t end o f ta b le, 15 2 _1 8 7 31 | i 1 -1 i i | i1 _ . _ _ . _ 11 1 7" 11 1 17 - * 1 1 X . . . . _ _ . _ _ Table 39. Earnings of selected classes of municipal employees, Milwaukee, July 1970— Continued (A v e r a g e s t r a ig h t - t im e w e e k ly h o u r s and m on th ly e a rn in g s fo r s e le c t e d c la s s e s , Occupational group and Class title Number of workers A verage 'L5o / y 1 M o1 Weekly n t h l y and L 7 5 hours I e a r n i n g s (Standard) ( M e a n ) mder L75 3oo M ilw a u k ee, W is co n s in , M u n icip a l G ov ern m en t) 3oo * 5 T $ 55o *575 $6oo NUMBER OF ..URKERS RECEIVING SlknlGHT-TlME MONTHLY F.ARNTNGS 0F:- - - r - - - r - - - 1TS? - - - n s - - - nIs T- - - - n - - - rT*F- - - r r ~ n nT *= - ' ' 6 $ r t * * 6 7 5 v 7 o r » * 7 5 0 R o n "‘ 8 5 0 V 9 0 O * < ? 5 o 1,000 1 , 0 * 0 1 , 1 0 0 l , i 5 o 1 , 2 0 0 i , 2 5 0 '625 1,300 1 ,350 l,Loo and 323 550 575 600 625 650 675 2 9 700 750 800 850 900 2 12 22 30 16 13 950 L.000 1.0 5 0 1.100 l.l5o 1.20 0 i a $ o 1 * 3 .0 0 1*350 1.L00 over NON-MANAGEMENT WHITE-COLLAR (Continued) Library assistant ---------------------Licensed practical nurse -----------Physician ------------------------------Public health nurse I -----------------Public health nurse II --------------Public health physician I-------------Telephone operator -------------------- 28 13 LL 31 13 13 L o . o ;" 6 2 3 \ 387 - II h O . O i •31? Lo.o 819 Lo.o 1,721 Lo.o 391 h O .O 3 7 3 - 2 1L 5 L - V ' - 13_ ■ ~ 7 NOM-MANAGEMENT BLUE-COLLAR Automotive me c hanic-------------------Bridge nngrator -----------------------City 1 • rer (regular)-----------------Custodial worker I ------------------Custodial worker II - city laborer---Custodial worker III ------------------Maintenance mechanic ------------------Museum guard I ------------------------Museum guard II -----------------------Operating engineer I ------------------Operating engineer II ----------------Sanitation laborer -------------------Sewer laborer ------------------------special equipment operator -----------fruckdriver (under 3 % tons) ---------Fruckdriver (3^ tons and over) ------Truckloader (combustiole)-------------W a t e r system trench laborer ---------- 33 Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o LO.O Lo.o LO.O LO.O uO.O LO.O Lo.o Lo.o LO.O Lo.o LO.O Lo.o LO.O LO.O 3 3 10 3 6 2 8 6 6 11 3 16 17 2 1L 12 1 0 1 13 2 3 LO.O Lo.o LO.O Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o Lo.o 31 77 260 38 101 19 hi 16 3 20 7 323 Ih L5 111 300 3h2 i ! ! I; ; 1 1 7L3 690 636 3L2 628 6L2 72L 623 639 818 888 638 637 765 691 71L 657 676 - 2 LL 7 2 3 9 -2 1 L 85 7 1L8 10 3 2 73 1 2 13 23 2 13 - - 3 6 6 L2 ■ 60 ■ 1 5 _ 8 32 3 - - - LL - - - - 1 - - - L5 2 -6 8 22 266 9 1 57 5 10 L 27L 3 5 L8 7 1 1 ■ " ■ ■ ■ " ' - ~ ~ ■ " ~ 2 L “ ■ LL 295 1 MANAGEMENT Accountant III ------------------------Accountant IV--------------------------Administrative assistant III --------Administrative assistant IV ---------Automotive mechanic f o r e m a n ---------Automotive mechanic supervisor-------Civil engineer V ---------------------Graduate nurse II ---------------------Librarian V ----------------------------Management accountant I --------------Management accountant I I -------------Management administrative assistant IHanagement administrative assistant II Management chemist I I -----------------Management civil engineer I V ---------Management librarian IV -------------Museum guard III ----------------------Physician II --------------------------Pnysician III ------------------------Public health nurse III -------------Public health nurse IV --------------Public health physician II ------------ Set- footnotes at end of table, 1,131 1,312 1,167 1,369 98L 1,198 2 1 ,1 1 6 738 1,729 1,9L9 985 1,080 1,9L9 ■ " " 5 _ 1 1 1 1,62 2 836 1,369 852 956 856 957 9L3 1,U50 - ■ 3 1 1 ■ 7 ■ . ■ 2 *3 “ I / 8_ - - - - - - - “ “ 1 - - - - - - - 3 3 5 6 L - ' 1 10 - 6 1 L ~ 1 11 1 - 1 ■ “ 1 “ “ - “ ~ ■ ■ ' ■ 10 ■ ■ ' " " 2 ' 6/ _ “ 11 7/ ~ 3 1 11 1 ■ 1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ " ~ 9 1 8/ ' “ 3 T a b le 3 9 . E a rn in g s o f se le c te d cla s s e s o f m u n ic ip a l em ployees, M ilw a u k e e , J u ly 1970— C o n tin u e d (A v e r a g e s tr a ig h t -t im e w e e k ly h o u r s and m onthly ea rn in g s fo r se le c te d c la s s e s , M ilw au kee, W isc o n sin , M unicipal G overnm ent) Average Number of workers y wieUy Monthly earnings (Mean) hours (Standard) NUMBER OF WORKERS RECEIVING STRAIGHT-TIME MONTHLY EARNINGS OF- $ kSo *k75 and under b75 5oo $ 5oo 525 550 525 55o 575 $ $ 575 600 * z $ 600 625 625 650 % 650 675 $ 675 700 & 700 750 $ $ „ * . 750 800 850 800 $ 900 850 900 950 18 8 123 23 120 $ $ f $ $ $ $ $ „ $. 950 1,000 i,c 5 o 1,100 1,150 1,200 1,250 1,300 1,350 1,000 1,0 5 0 1,10 0 1 ,1 5 0 1,200 i,?5o 1,300 1,350 l,k00 1 I I Occupational group and Class title POLICE SERVICE OOOOOOO Police sergeant ----------------------P o l i cewoman---------------------------- iiiiiii Lieutenant of detectives ------------- 2L 11:9 21 26 1,578 1L6 15 $ 1 1,212 882 1,012 1,009 772 895 777 150 287 1,067 7U 1 -3 9 1 U 3 23 2 52 2 L 17 FIRE SERVICE Firefighter --------------------------Motor pump operator ------------------ HOr-tHOHi-l Battalion chief ---------------------Fire alarm dispatcher Fire captain Fire lieutenant F-ipehnst. pi 1 r>+. _ . _ 25 12 56 no 5 728 102 1,216 827 17 1U 96 93 5 618 Hourly ii 1.071 1,192 1,163 1,091 98U 1,053 1.071 1,132 1,15U OO 38 2L 6.16 6.86 6.69 6.28 5.66 6.06 6.16 6.51 6.6L OOOOOOO OO 26 U 12 ioU 38 7 27 9 13 iiiiiiiii ........ Pointer Pointer, bridge and iron .^ue)* ifiaenn Tractor, bulldozer, end loader, or grader operator (over U0 H.P.)----Tractor operator (under U0 H.P.)---- 2 870 1,013 772 813 Prevailing Hourly Construction Trade Rate Classes Carpenter ..... 0 arpenter foreman Crane operator ---------------------Electrical mechanic ----------------F.^rtrl manhani n helper 20 1 u 12 1,008 1,121 6.L5 l,0k3 6.00 26 "u - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12 - ioU 38 _ 7 27 - - - - : : - - - 9 13 38 2U - - Standard hours reflect the workweek for which employees receive their regular straight-time salaries (exclusive of pay for overtime at regular and/or premium rates). The mean is computed for each class b y totalling the monthly salaries of all workers and dividing b y the number of workers. Excludes premium pay for overtime and for work on weekends, holidays, and late shifts. Workers were distributed as follows: 1U at $1,L00 to $1,U50* Workers were distributed as follows: 1 at $l,k50 to $1,500} 2 at $1,550 to $ 1 ,600; and 10 at $1,750 to $1,800. Workers were distributed as follows: 1 at $1,550 to $ 1 ,600} and 7 at $1,600 to $1,650. Workers were distributed as follows: 2 at $l,k00 to $l,k50} and 9 at $1,U50 to $1,500. Workers were distributed as follows: 1 at $l,k50 to $1,500} 1 at $1,700 to $1,750, and 7 at $1,750 to $1,800. Workers were distributed as follows: 3 at $1,900 to $1,950. NOTE: Dashes indicate no employees reported in class. Appendix A. Section 111.70 Introductory Statement The Wisconsin State Legislature has enacted the following statute establishing the rights of municipal employees to organize and join labor organizations, and of public employee labor organizations to confer and negotiate with municipal employers. The provisions of this statute fall within the jurisdiction of the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission, still referred to herein as the "Wisconsin Employment Relations Board." This statute applies to the City of Milwaukee and provides the legal basis for negotiations between the City and its organized employees represented by certified collective bargaining agents. CHAPTER 111 EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS SUBCHAPTER IV. RIGHT OF MUNICIPAL QiPLOYES TO ORGANIZE AND JOIN LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; BARGAINING IN MUNICIPAL EMPLOYMENT 111.70 (1) Municipal employment. DEFINITIONS. When used in this section: (a) "Municipal employer" means any city, county, village, town, metropolitan sewerage district, school district or any other political subdivision of the state. (b) "Municipal employe" means any employe of a municipal employer except city and village policemen, sheriff's deputies, and county traffic officers. (c) "Board" means the Wisconsin employment relations board. (2) RIGHTS OF MUNICIPAL EMPLOYES. Municipal employes shall have the right of self-organization, to affiliate with labor organizations of their own choosing and the right to be represented by labor organizations of their own choice in conferences and negotiations with their municipal employers or their representatives on question of wages, hours and conditions of employment, and such employes shall have the right to refrain from any and all such activities. (3) PROHIBITED PRACTICES. (a) (b) (c) (4) Municipal employers, their officers and agents are prohibited from: 1. Interfering with, restraining or coercing any municipal employe in the exercise of the right provided in sub. 2. Encouraging or discouraging membership in any labor organization, employe agency, committee, association or representtion plan by discrimination in regard to hiring, tenure or other terms or conditions of employment. (2). 3. Prohibiting a duly authorized representative of an organization certified pursuant to sub. (4) (d) or (j) from appearing before any governmental unit or body but nothing herein shall prevent the enactment of reasonable rules adopted by the employer necessary to maintain continuity of public service or the adoption of a negotiated agreement on the subject. Municipal employes individually or in concert with others are prohibited from: 1. Coercing, intimidating or interfering with municipal employes in the enjoyment of their legal rights including those set forth in sub. (2). 2. Attempting to induce a municipal employer to coerce, intimidate or interfere with a municipal employe in the enjoyment of his legal rights including those set forth in sub. (2). It is a prohibited practice for any person to do or cause to be done, on behalf of or in the interest of any municipal employer or employe, or in connection with or to influence the outcome of any controversy, as to employment relations, any act prohibited by pars, (a) and (b). POWERS OF THE BOARD. The board shall be governed by the following provisions relating to bargaining in municipal employment: (a) Prevention of prohibited practices. under this subchapter. (b) Mediation. The board may function as a mediator in disputes between municipal employes and their employers upon the request of both parties, and the parties may select a mediator by agreement or mutual consent. (d) Collective bargaining units. Whenever a question arises between a municipal employer and a labor union as to whether the union represents the employes of thO employer, either the union or the municipality may petition the board to conduct an election among said employes to determine whether they desire to be represented by a labor organization. Proceedings in representation cases shall be in accordance with ss. 111.02 (6) and 111.05 insofar as applicable, except that where the board finds that a proposed unit includes a craft the boardshall exclude such craft from the unit. The board shall not order an election among employes in a craft unit except on separate petition initiating representation proceedings in such craft unit. (e) Fact finding. Fact finding may be initiated in the following circumstances: 1. If after a reasonable period of negotiation the parties are deadlocked, either party or the parties jointly may initiate fact finding; 2. Where an employer or union fails or refuses to meet and negotiate in good faith at reasonable times in a bona fide effort to arrive at a settlement. (f) S a m e . Upon receipt of a petition to initiate fact finding, the board shall make an investigation and determine whether or not the condition set forth in par. (e) 1 or 2 has been met and shall certify the results of said investigation. If the certification requires that fact finding be initialed,the board shall appoint from a list established by the board a qualified disinterested person or 3-member panel when jointly requested by the parties, to function as a fact finder. Section 111.07 shall govern procedure in all cases involving prohibited practices 109 Appendix A. Section 111.70—Continued (5) Note: (g) S ame. The fact finder may establish dates and place of hearings which shall be where feasible in the jurisdiction of the munici pality involved, and shall conduct said hearings pursuant to rules established by the board. Upon request, the board shall issue subpoenas for hearings conducted by the fact finder. The fact finder may administer oaths. Upon completion of the hearings, the fact finder shall make written findings of fact and recommendations for solution of the dispute and shall cause the same to be served on the municipal employer and the union. (h) Parties. 1. Proceedings to prevent prohibitive practices. Any labor organization or any individual affected by prohibited practices herein is a proper party to proceedings by the board to prevent such practice under this subchapter. 2. Fact finding cases. Only labor unions which have been certified as representative of the employes in the collective bargaining unit or which the employer has recognized as the representative of said employes shall be proper parties in initiating fact finding proceedings. Cost of fact finding proceedings shall be divided equally between said labor organization and the employer. (i) Agreements. Upon the completion of negotiations with a labor organization representing a majority of the employes in a collective bargaining unit, if a settlement is reached, the employer shall reduce the same to writing either in the form of an ordinance, resolution or agreement. Such agreement may include a term for which it shall remain in effect not to exceed one year. Such agree ments shall be binding on the parties only if express language to that effect is contained therein. (j) Personnel relations in law enforcement. In any case in which a majority of the members of a police or sheriff or county traffic officer department shall petition the governing body for changes or improvements in the wages, hours or working conditions and designates a representative which may be one of the petitioners or otherwise, the procedures in pars, (e) to (g) shall apply. Such representative may be required by the board to post a cash bond in an amount determined by the board to guarantee payment of one-half of the costs of fact finding. (k) Civil service exception. Paragraphs (e) to (g) shall not apply to discipline or discharge cases under civil service provisions of a state statute or local ordinance. (l) Strikes prohibited. Nothing contained in this subchapter shall constitute a grant of the right to strike by any county or muni cipal employe and such strikes are hereby expressly prohibited. (m) Local ordinances control. The board shall not initiate fact finding proceedings in any case when the municipal employer through ordinance or otherwise has established fact finding procedures substantially in compliance with this subchapter. PROCEDURES. Any municipal employer may employ a qualified person pal employer in conferences and negotiations under this section. from may, during the term for which he is elected, be eligible to during said term has been created by or the selection to which is thereto. to discharge the duties of labor negotiator and to represent such munici In cities of the 1st class a member of the city council who resigns there the position of labor negotiator under this subsection, which position vested in such city council, and s. 66 .11 (2 ) shall be deemed inapplicable Section 111.70, Subsections (1), (2), and (3) were enacted by the 1959 Legislature; Subsections (1) (c) and (4) were enacted by the 1961 Legislature; Subsections (4) (f), (g), and (k) were amended by the 1963 Legislature; Subsection (5) was enacted by the 1965 Legislature; and Subsections (3) (a) and (4) (b) were amended by the 1967 Legislature. 110 Appendix B. Certified or recognized collective bargaining units, 1963-70 Year Bargaining Representative Bargaining Unit Approxi mate number of workers covered Date of certification or recognition of bargaining representative GENERAL EMPLOYEES Building Service Employees' International Union, AFL-CIO, Local 17 All regular employees having the classifications of Natatorium Supervisor, Fireman, and Natatorium Assistant in the various Natatoria in the Bureau of Bridges and Public Buildings. 34 April 16, 1963 City of Milwaukee Garbage Collect All regular employees having the classification ion Laborers Independent Local of Garbage Collection Laborer in the Bureau of Garbage Collection and Disposal. Union 348 April 30, 1963 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 195 All regular employees having the classifications of Bridgetender and Boat Operator employed in the Division of Bridges and Viaducts in the Bureau of Bridges and Public Buildings. 105 April 16, 1963 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers AFL-CIO, Local 494 All regulars employees having the classifications of Blacksmith, City Laborer, Laborer (Electrical Services), Machinist, and Mechanic Helper in the Machine Shop in the Division of Street Services of the Bureau of Traffic Engineering and Electrical Services. 11 April 16, 1963 International Brotherhood of Fireman and Oilers, AFL-CIO, Local 125-B All regular employees having the classifications of Boiler Repairman, Clerk II-Field (who are scalemen), Craneman, Furnaceman, Incinerator Plant Main tenance Worker, Garbage Disposal Laborer, Machinery Operator, Maintenance Mechanic, Maintenance Mechanic Foreman, and Garbage Collection Laborers (who are employed six months or more in the Incinerator Plants) in the Disposal Division of the Bureau of Garbage Collection and Disposal. 85 April 16, 1963 Milwaukee District Council 48 (and its appropriate affiliated L ocals), American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO All regular employees in the various bureaus in the Department of Public Works of the City of Milwaukee excluding all craft employees, confident ial employees, supervisors and executives and also excluding employees in the other five certified collective bargaining units. 1963 Milwaukee Fire Fighters' Associ ation, International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 215 All regular employees employed in the various bureaus of the Fire Department of the City of Milwaukee, excluding craft employees, confidential employees, supervisors and executives and also excluding the Fireboat Pilots and Marine Engineers employed in the Fire Fighting Service and the Fire Alarm Dispatchers employed in the Bureau of Fire Communications. 1964 Association of Physicians and Dentists All regular employees having the classifications of Public Health Physician I, Public Health Physi cian I (% time), Physician I (full time), Physician I (% time), Dentist I, Dental Hygienist (3/4 time), employed in the Health Department. 22 April 30, 1964 Association of Scientific Person nel A H regular employees having the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s of Chemist III, II, Virologist III, I, Medical Lab oratory Technician, Bacteriologist II, I, Chemical Laboratory Technician employed as Scientific Person nel in the Bureau of Laboratories of the Health Department. 13 April 30, 1964 Building Service Employees' International Union, AFL-CIO, Local 17 No change since 1963 34 City of Milwaukee Garbage Col lection Laborers Independent Local Union No change since 1963 348 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 195 No change since 1963 105 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 494 No change since 1963 11 2,821 May 6 , 1963 FIRE AND POLICE SERVICE PERSONNEL 920 October 16, 1963 Granted recogni tion as the exclu sive bargaining representative by the Common Counci] by resolution on this date. GENERAL EMPLOYEES in Appendix B. Certified or recognized collective bargaining units, 1963-70— Continued Year Bargaining Representative Bargaining Unit Approxi mate number of workers covered J------------------j Date of j certification or recognition of bargaining representative GENERAL EMPLOYEES 1964 International Brotherhood of Fireman and Oilers, AFL-CIO, Local 125-B No change since 1963 Milwaukee District Council 48 (and its appropriate affiliated L ocals), American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO No change since 1963 except the addition of all regular employees in the Department of Building Inspection and Safety Engineering, the Election Commission, the Harbor Commission, the Health Department's Bureau of Environmental Sanitation, the Public Library, the Public Museum, and the Tax Department. Staff Nurses' Council of the Milwaukee Health Department All regular employees having the classifications of Public Health Nurse II, I, Junior Public Health Nurse,and Graduate Nurse I employed in the Health Depar tment. 85 3,528 175 April 30, 1964 For regular employees in the listed departments bureaus and com missions outside of the Department of Public Works. April 30, 1964 FIRE AND POLICE SERVICE PERSONNEL 1964 Milwaukee Fire Fighters' Associ ation, International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 215 No change since 1963 920 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 494 All regular employees having the classification of Fire Alarm Dispatcher employed in the Bureau of Fire Communications in the Fire Department. 17 January 6 , 1964 Uniformed Pilots and Marine Engineers Association, Inter national Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 1037 All regular employees having the classifications of Fireboat Pilots and Marine Engineers employed in the Fire Fighting Service in the Fire Department. 10 January 6 , 1964 GENERAL EMPLOYEES 1965 No change since 1964 22 A H regular employees.. .employed as Scientific Personnel in the Bureau of Laboratories of the Health Department of the City Milwaukee, excluding all other employees, confidential employees, super visors, and executives. 18 Building Service Employees' International Union, AFL-CIO, Local 17 No change since 1963 34 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO Local 195 No change since 1963 105 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 494 No change since 1963 11 Association of Physicians and Dentists Association of Scientific Personnel International Brotherhood of Fireman and Oilers, AFL-CIO, Local 125-B All regular employees having the classifications of Boiler Repairman, Craneman, Furnaceman, Garbage Disposal laborer, Incinerator Plant Maintenance Worker, Machinery Operator, Maintenance Mechanic, and Maintenance Mechanic Foreman in the Disposal Division; of Plant Tipping Floor Attendant (for merly Garbage Collection Laborer employed six months or more in the Incinerator Plants) in the Collection Division; and of Scaleman (formerly Clerk II-Field employed as Scaleman) in the Gen eral Office Division of the Bureau of Garbage Collection and Disposal. 85 Journeyman Plumbers and GasFitters Union, AFL-CIO, Local 75 All regulars employees having the classifications of Plumbing Inspector and Plumbing Plan Examiner I employed in the Bureau of Plumbing Inspection and in the Meters and Services Division of the Water Dep artment 18 112 July 30, 1965 Granted recog nition as the exclusive bar gaining rep resentative by the Commoi. Council by resolution on this date. Appendix B. Certified or recognized collective bargaining units, 1963-70— Continued Bargaining Unit Approxi mate number of ,-worleers covered Year Bargaining Representative 1965 Milwaukee District Council 48 (and its appropriate affiliated locals), American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO No change since 1964 3,528 Public Employees' Union # 61, Laborers' International Union of North America, AFL-CIO, CLC (formerly City of Milwaukee Garbage Collection Laborers Independent Local Union) No change since 1963 348 Staff Nurses' Council of the Milwaukee Health Department No change since 1964 175 All regular professional engineering and arch itectural employees, including Engineering Technic ians IV, V, and VI, employed by the City of Milwau kee, excluding all other employees, confidential employees, supervisory employees, and excutives. 204 Date of certification or recognition of bargaining representative GENERAL EMPLOYEES Technicians, Engineers and Architects of Milwaukee November 1, 1965 (recertification) May 24, 1965 FIRE AND POLICE SERVICE PERSONNEL 1965 Milwaukee Fire Fighters' Associ ation, International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 215 No change since 1963 920 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 494 No change since 1964 15 Uniformed Pilots and Marine Engineers Association, Inter national Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 1037 No change since 1964 10 Professional Policemen's Protective Association Police Service Detective Sergeant, Detective, Detective Legal & Administrative, Police Sergeant, Police Sergeant (Garage), Police Patrolman, Policewoman, Police Matron, Police Identificiation Technician, Gunsmith & Range Officer, Chief Document Examiner, Assistant Document Examiner, Police Alarm Operator, Custodian of Police Property and Stores, Assistant Custodian of Property and Stores, Radio Mechanic Foreman, Radio Mechanic, Administrative Police Sergeant Civilian Clerks III & IV; Clerk Stenographers I & II, Clerk Stenographer III (except one position each in Administration School); Clerk Stenographer IV; Clerk Typists I, II, & III; Custodial Worker IICity Laborer; Duplicating Equipment Operator II; Elevator Operator II; Garage Attendant; Key Punch Operators I ’& II; Law Stenographer III, Maintenance Mechanic; Police Aide (except one position in Per sonnel Bureau); Tabulating Equipment Operators I & II 113 Although not officially certfied nor offici ally granted rec ognition as a collective bar gaining unit, the City considers there to be an un official collect ive bargaining unit based on a WERB represent ation hearing and order dated March 19, 1965. Appendix B. Certified or recognized collective bargaining units, 1963-70— Continued Year Bargaining Represen ta t ive Bargaining Unit Approxi mate number of workers covered Date of certification or recognition of bargaining representative GENERAL EMPLOYEES 1966 Association of Physicians and Dentists No change since 1964 22 Association of Scientific Per sonnel No change since 1965 IB Building Service Employees' Inter national Union, AFL-C10, Local 17 No change since 1963 34 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 195 No change since 1963 105 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 494 No change since 1963 1L International Brotherhood of Firei man and Oilers, AFL-CIO, Local 125-B No change since 1965 83 Journeyman Plumbers and GasFitters Union, AFL-CIO, Local 75 No change since 1965 13 Milwaukee District Council 48 (and its appropriate affiliated Locals), American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO No change since 1964 3,523 Public Employees Union #61, Laborers♦international Union of North America, AFL-CIO, CLC No change since 1965 343 Staff Nurses' Council of the Milwaukee Health Department No change since 1964 17 3 Technicians, Engineers, and Architects of Milwaukee No change since 1965 204 FIRE AND POLICE SHIVICE PERSONNEL 1966 Milwaukee Fire Fighters' Associ ation, International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 25 No change since 1963 920 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 494 No change since 1964 15 Uniformed Pilots and Marine Eng ineers Association, Internation al Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 1037 No change since 1964 10 Professional Policemen's Protec tive Association No change since 1965 2,150 GENERAL EMPLOYEES 1967 Association of Municipal Attor neys of Milwaukee All regular professional attorneys in the City Attorney's Office, excluding all other employees, confidential employees, supervisory employees, and executives. 20 Association of Physicians and Dentists No change since 1964 22 Association of Scientific Personnel No change since 1965 18 Building Service Employees' International Union, AFL-CIO, Local 17 No change since 1963 34 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 195 No change since 1963 105 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 494 No change since 1963 n 114 August 24, 1967 Appendix B. Certified or recognized collective bargaining units, 1963-70— Continued Bargaining Representative Year Approxi mate Bargaining Unit number of workers covered Date of certification recognition of bargaining representative GENERAL EMPLOYEES International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers, AFL-CIO, Local 125-B No change since 1965 85 Journeyman Plumbers and GasFitters Union, AFL-CIO. Local 75 No change since 1965 18 Milwaukee District Council 48 (and its appropriate affiliated Locals) American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO No change since 1964 3,528 Public Employees Union #61, Laborers International Union of North America, AFL-CIO, CLC No change since 1965 348 Staff Nurses'Council of the Milwaukee Health Department No change since 1964 175 Technicians, Engineers, and Archi tects of Milwaukee No change since 1965 204 FIRE AND POLICE SERVICE PERSONNEL 1967 Milwaukee Fire Fighters' Associ ation, International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 215 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 494 Sheet Metal Workers' Union, AFLCIO, Local 24 No change since 1963 except for loss of one employee represented by Sheet Metal Workers Local No. 24 No change since 1964 All Fire Equipment Repairmen II who perform sheet metal work more than fifty percent of their working time 920 15 1 Uniformed Pilots and Marine Engineers Association, Inter national Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 1037 No change since 1964 10 Professional Policemen's Pro tective Association No change since 1965 2,150 Association of Municipal Attorneys of Milwaukee No change since 1967 Association of Physicians and Dentists No change since 1964 25 Association of Scientific Personnel No change since 1965 20 Building Service Employees' International Union, AFL-CIO, Local 17 No change since 1963 30 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 195 No change since 1963 100 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 494 No change since 1963 15 International Brotherhood of Fireman and Oilers, AFL-CIO, Local 125-B No change since 1965 90 GENERAL EMPLOYEES International Union of Operating Engineers, AFL-CIO, Local 317 20 All Firemen employed in the Technical and Main tenance Division, Department of City Development 115 4 February 24, 1967 (The only eligible employee resigned November 17, 1967, since that time, the Fire Department has contracted out all sheet metal work). Appendix B. Certified or recognized collective bargaining units, 1963-70— Continued Year Bargaining Representative Bargaining Unit Approxi mate number of workers covered Date of certification or recognition of bargaining representative GENERAL EMPLOYEES 1968 20 Journeyman Plumbers and Gas Fit ters Union, AFL-C10, Local 75 No change since 1965 Milwaukee District Council 48 (and its appropriate affiliated Locals), American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO No change since 1965 except the addition of all regular employees in the Department of City Develop ment's Planning and Programming Division, in the Real Estate Division and in the Technical and Main tenance Division except for Firemen represented by Local 317, IU0E; the addition of all regular employ ees in the Police Department's Building and Grounds Division, and the loss of all regular employees rep resented by Local 242 of the Teamsters Union. Municipal Truck Drivers Local Union 242, affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Ware housemen and Helpers of America All regular employees employed in the Operations Division of the Bureau of Municipal Equipment, ex cluding craft employees, confidential employees, supervisors,and executives. 400 Public Employees' Union #61, Laborers' International Union of North America, AFL-CIO,CLC No change since 1965 except new title of Truck Loader (Combustible); (Formerly Garbage Collection Laborer) 380 4,000 Staff Nurses' Council (City Unit) No change since 1964 170 Technicians, Engineers, and Arch itects of Milwaukee No change since 1965 200 FIRE AND POLICE SERVICE PERSONNEL Milwaukee, Professional Fire Fighters'Association, Inter national Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 215 No change since 1963 1,000 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 494 No change since 1964 15 Uniformed Pilots and Marine Engineers Association, Inter national Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 1037 No change since 1964 10 Professional Policemen's Protec tive Association No change since 1965 2,150 GENERAL EMPLOYEES Association of Municipal Attor neys of Milwaukee No change since 1967 20 Association of Physicians and Dentists No change since 1964 25 Association of Scientific Personnel No change since 1965 30 Building Service Employees' In ternational Union, AFL-CIO, Local 17 No change since 1963 25 International Brotherhood of .Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 195 No change since 1963 90 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 494 No change since 1963 15 116 (l)March 6 , 1968 For regular employees in the Technical and Maintenance Divi sion except Fire men. (2) August 2,1968 Granted rec ognition as the exclusive bar gaining repre sentative for regular employ ees in the Pro gramming and Planning Divi sion and in the Real Estate Divi sion by the Com mon Council by resolution this date, (3) August 16, 1968 For regular employees in the Police Depart ment's Building and Grounds Divi sion* September 13,1968 Appendix B. Certified or recognized collective bargaining units, 1963-70— Continued Year Bargaining Unit Bargaining Representative 1 1 . Approxij mate j number of j workers covered j Date of * certification | or • recognition I of bargaining ! representative . ! i_____ 1 GENERAL EMPLOYEES 1969 110 International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers, AFL-CIO, Local 125-B No change since 1965 International Union of Operating Engineers, AFL-CIO, Local 317 No change since 1968 4 Journeyman Plumbers and Gas Fitters' Union, AFL-CIO, Local 75 No change since 1965 20 Milwaukee District Council 48 (and its appropriate affiliated Locals), American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO | No change since 1968 except the addition of all regular employees in the Department of Central Electronic Data Services. Municipal Truck Drivers Local Union 242, affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Ware housemen and Helpers of America No change since 1968 Public Employees' Union #61, Laborers' International Union of North America, AFL-CIO, CLC No change since 1968 Staff Nurses' Council (City Unit) No change since 1964 Technicians, Engineers, and Architects of Milwaukee No change since 1965 May 6 , 1969 For regular employees in the Department of Central Electronic Data Services. 4,000 AQ0 1 ] i ! i 1 ; 380 170 200 FIRE AND POLICE SERVICE PERSONNEL 1969 1,000 Milwaukee Professional Fire Fighters' Association, Inter national Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 2i5 No change since 1963 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 494 No change since 1964 Uniformed Pilots and Marine Engineers Association, Inter national Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 1037 No change since 1964 10 Professional Policemen's Protective Association No change since 1965 2,100 Association of Municipal Attorneys of Milwaukee No change since 1967 24 Association of Physicians and Dentists No change since 1964 24 Association of Scientific Personnel No change since 1964 24 i ! i1 15 GENERAL EMPLOYEES Building Service Employees' International Union, AFL-CIO, Local 17 | Decertified April 28, 1970 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 195 No changes since 1963 30 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 494 No change since 1963 15 International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers, AFL-CIO, Local 125-B No change since 1965 110 | : 117 i ] Appendix B. Certified or recognized collective bargaining units, 1963-70— Continued Bargaining Representative Year Bargaining Unit Approxi mate number of workers covered Date of certification or recognition of bargaining representative GENERAL EMPLOYEES International Union of Operating Engineers, AFL-CIO, Local 317 No change since 1968 4 Journey Plumbers and Gas Fitters' Union, AFL-CIO, Local 317 No change since 1965 20 Milwaukee District Council 48 (and its appropriate affiliated Locals), American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO No change since' 1969 except the addition of all regular employees in the remaining divisions of the Department of City Development. 4,000 Municipal Truck Drivers Local Union 242, affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Ware housemen and Helpers of America No change since 1968 400 Public Employees' Union #61, Laborers' International Union of North America, AFL-CIO No change bince 1968 380 Staff Nurses' Council (City Unit) No change since 1964 177 Technicians, Engineers, and Architects of Milwaukee No change since 1965 200 October 6 , 1970 Granted recog nition as the exclusive bargain ing representative for these addition al employees by the Common Council by resolution on this date. FIRE AND POLICE SERVICE PERSONNEL Milwaukee Professional Fire Fighters' Association, Inter national Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 215 No change since 1963 980 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 494 No change since 1964 14 Uniformed Pilots and Marine Engineers Association, Inter national Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 1037 No change since 1964 10 Professional Policemen's Protective Association No change since 1965 except the loss of Detective Sergeants due to the recognition of supervisory status as Lieutenants of Detectives in the Management Pay Plan L,814 In 1966, following a representation election, the WERB certified a joint bargaining representative of District Council 48 and Local 139 of the International Union of Operating Engineers (AFL-CIO) to represent approximately 60 prevailing wage equipment operators. The two unions jointly petitioned for representation after an AFL-CIO referee recommended this arrangement as a means of settling a jurisdictional dispute that dated back to early 1964. The bargaining unit included all regular employees employed by the City in its various departments and divisions classified as Trench Machine Operator, Clamshell Operator, Crane Operator, Hoist Operator, Hydraulic Hammer Operator, Roller Engineman, Enginaman (Asphalt Plant), Roller Repairman, Tractor Operator (over 40 h.p.)- Bulldozer Operator (over 40 h.p.)- End Loader (over 40 h.p.), and Tractor Operator (under h.p.)- Bulldozer Operator (under 40 h.p.), excluding all other employees, supervisors, and department heads. Prevailing wage employees are outside the scope of this report. 118 ☆ U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1971 O - 484-786 (33) B U R EA U O F LA B O R STATISTICS R EG IO N A L OFFICES Region V Region I 1 60 3-A Federal B uildin g 219 S o u th D e a rb o rn St. G o v e rn m e n t C enter B osto n , Mass. 02203 C hicago, III. 60604 P h o n e : 3 53 -72 30 (A re a C ode 312) P h o ne : 223 -67 62 (A re a C ode 617 Region V I Region II 341 N in th A v e ., R m . 1025 1100 C om m e rc e S t., R m . 6B 7 N e w Y o r k , N . Y . 10001 Dallas, T e x . 75202 P h o ne : 97 1 -5 4 0 5 (A re a C ode 212 ) Ph o ne : 749 -35 16 (A re a C ode 214) Region III Regions V I I an d V I I I 406 Penn Square B uild in g Federal O ffic e B uildin g 1317 FMbert St. 911 W a ln ut S t., 10th F lo o r P h ila delphia, Pa. 19107 Kansas C it y , M o. 64106 P h o n e : 597-7796 (A re a C ode 215) P h o ne : 374-2481 (A re a C ode 816) Region I V Regions IX an d X 450 G o ld e n Gate A ve . S uite 540 1371 Peachtree S t. N E . B ox 36017 A tla n ta , G a. 30309 San Fra ncisco, C a lif. 94102 P h o ne : 5 26 -54 18 (A re a C ode 404 ) * P h o ne : 5 5 6 ^ 6 7 8 (A re a C ode 41 5 ) * Regions V I I a n d V M M ** Regions IX and X w ill be serviced b y Kansas C it y , serviced b y San Francisco. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR B U R E A U O F L A B O R THIRD CLASS MAIL S T A T I S T I C S W A S H I N G T O N , D .C . 20212 P O S T A G E A N D F E E S P A ID O F F I C I A L B U S IN E S S PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300 U .S . D E P A R T M E N T O F L A B O R