View original document

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

N OV 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 (See appendix A.) This new
3
*
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 x precent. The union also agreed to a city
k
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— 3 percent
a
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)— 7-percent general pay increase, a 2-year col­
a
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— 5-percent general wage increase.
a

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— percent general wage
5
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
414-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 X percent in 1970. The city offered 2Vi
A
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 x percent
h
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

Increases varied by class.
percent.

All general employees.

4 percent increase.

Pay period 1, 1961

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

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.

Pay period 1, 1970

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 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.

Pay period 1, 1970

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

1966

Change:
W e e k e n d differential increased to 12 cents
an hour.

1967

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.

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.

Change: Weekend differential increased
to 15 cents an hour.
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 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

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 — Change: Weekend differential pay was
eliminated for Police Department Officer personnel
formerly eligible for weekend differential.

1966

|
i
!
j
J

Police and Fire-Change: Weekend differential
increased to 15 cents an hour.

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

Applications exceptions, and related matters

Provisions

Year

1964

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.

1960

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

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.

1960

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

Applications, exceptions, and related matters

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:

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

Change: Leave not to exceed 15 successive calendar days
off with pay for such training.

Granted upon presentation of satisfactory evidence of military, air force
or naval authority to take such training.

Leave not to exceed 15 successive calendar days off with
full pay in addition to their military pay for such
training.

1964

Applications, exceptions, and related matters

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

$141.98
309.31
3,711.72

$147.17
320.61
3,847.32

_

$153.39
334.18
4,010.16

.

-

_

.

-

-

-

.

_

.

-

-

166.20
362.08
4,344.96

172.79
376.43
4,517.16

-

181.75
395.95
4,751.40

in

-

-

160.60
349.87
4,198.44

in

-

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.




8
1

Table 28. 1961-67 salary rates (Monthly), all city employees, Milwaukee1
Monthly salary rates

Pay
range

Step rates
Year
1

2

3

!

4

5

6

3

5

6

8

9

10

11

$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

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

2

1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967

1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967

1

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

2

3

4

!
!

5

6

1

1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967

27

1

$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

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

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

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

26

$377.00
377.00
377.00
388.31
400.81
418.19
435.57

1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967

25

$361.00
361.00
361.00
371.83
384.33
401.72
419.10

1961
1962
1963
19.64
1965
1966
1967

24

$345.00
345.00
345.00
355.35
367.85
385.23
402.61

1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967

23

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

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

11

See

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

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

_

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

.

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

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

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

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

10

17,280.00
17,280.00
18,000.00
18,540.00
19,096.20
19,669.07
20,259.06

1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967

9

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
8

15,840.00
15,840.00
16,560.00
17,056.80
17,568.50
18,095.66
18,638.46

1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967

6

$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

5

$19,800.00
19,800.00
20,700.00
21,321.00
21,960.63
22,619.57
23,298.21

1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967

4

$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

2

$18,000.00
18,000.00
18,900.00
19,467.00
20,051.01
20,652.48
21,271.94

1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967

1

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

2

3

4

5

6

January
July

1968
1969
1969

$161.55
181.55
189.55

$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

4

5

7

8

9

10

11

12

•

!

1
j

260.34
280.34
288.34

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

13

14

14(a)
15

16

17

17(a)

18

18(a)
19

20

21

21(b)

24

25

|

S ee fo o tn o te at end o f ta b le .




88

|
!

i

-

-

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

2

3

4

5

6

j

7

January
July 6,

1968
1969
1969

$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

26

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

39

40

!

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

2

3

4

5

6

7

-

January
July 6,

1968
1969
1969

$350.99
394.44
411.82

$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

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

4

5

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

141
15

16

17

171

18

18 (
19

20
January

21

21<

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

2

3

4

5

$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

January
July 6,

1968
1969
1969

$899.79
943.24
960.62

$933.64
977.09
994.47

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

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

44

1

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

3

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

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

-

$429.28
932.67
11,192.04

.
-

-

-

.
-

_
-

-

-

.
-

.
-

-

-

_

.
-

.
-

_
-

I
i
i
j

-

'

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

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

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

i

'
525.09
, 1,140.81
:13,689.72

Biweekly
Monthly
Annual

7

■ $502.92
1,092.65
,13,111.34

Biweekly
Monthly
Annual

6

24

24(a)

25

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
;13,111.84
j

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
1
!14,868.01

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

-

-

"
j
1
1
l
I

.
-

•

-

-

-

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

5

34(a)7

|

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

Biweekly salary rates

1966
1965

1968

and

to

Step rates

1 1

2/
1967 "

3/
1970

3

4

5

6

$732.46
754.43
777.06

2

1

$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

Biweekly salary rates
i
— --- ------------------------------------- — ---- -- ------------- — --------------------------- 1

1966
1965

U

1968

and

to

1967

&

Step rates

3/
1970 -

P-15

1

1965
1966

55
55
55

16
97
1967
55
55
55
55

- 1

1968

16 / /
99
1970
y

1970 5/

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

3

Pay range

i

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

to

Step rates

1968

and
1967— 7

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

Monthly salarv rates

1966
and

1965

1968
to

1967

*

Step rates
Year

3/
1970 "

3

2

1

_

_

.

-

-

-

-

-

-

.

_
-

53
53
53
53

1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1970

616.71
635.23
725.00
725.00
766.67
787.50
810.00

644.69
664.02
753.79
753.79
795.45
816.29
838.79

673.79
694.00
783.77
783.77
825.44
846.27
868.77

-

-

-

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

P-13
53
53

P-14
54
54
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/

$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

1966
y

to

_
-

Year

1970 3/

P-1

2

1

44
44

45
45

46
46

16,804.66
17,308.82
17,828.16

13,367.34
13,768.32
14,821.29
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

-

12.730.80
13,112.63
13,506.04
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

-

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

-

10,057.33
10,358.96
10,669.73

1965
1966
1967
1968-70

16,040.81
16.521.99
17,017.60

11,075.80
11,407.81
11,750.13

1965
1966
1967
1968-70

15,276.96
15,735.15
16,207.30

12,157.91
12,522.63
12,898.32

1965
1966
1967
1968-70

14,640.42
15,079.71
15,532.05
footnote 3/

12,730.80
13,112.63
13,506.04

1965
1966
1967
1968-70

$21,005.82
21,635.90
22,285.08

See

1965
1966
1967
1968-70

$20,051.01
20,652.48
21,271.94

See

43
43

$19,096.20
19,669.07
20,259.06

14,003.88
14,424.02
14,856.80

9,166.18
9,960.59
10,259.37

P-3

P-4

P-5

P -6

P-7
47
47

6

5

See

1965
1966
1967
1968-70

42
42

4

$18,332.35
18,882.23
19,448.76
footnote 3/

$17,568.50
18,095.66
18,638.46

P-2

3

See

1965
1966
1967
1968-70

41
41

|

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 .




.
-

Step rates

1968

and

19672/

-

-

Annual salary rates

Pay range

1965

-

-

101

i

!

-

-

Table 37. 1965-70 police service salary rates (Biweekly, Monthly, Annual), Milwaukee— Continued
Annual salary rates

Pay range

1966

1965

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

Step rates

Year

1

70

1967
1968

1969
1970

j

\9 7 0 -—

71

1966
1967
1968

1969

? /

1970-/
1970 -

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
289.70

302.78

336.83
346.41
356.00

349.28
358.87
368.46

362.73
372.32
381.91

73

273.16
288.32
312.95
329.15

284.94
300.77
325.37
341.61

297.52
314.08
338.79
355.06

74

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^

72

6

402.94

277.12

348.33

5

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

_
-

$466.47
-

-

-

Monthly salary rat es

Salary steps

1

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

_____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/

|
!

74

$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

|
!
I
1

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/

72

73

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.

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

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

-

$12,161.54
,

7,893.91

8,781.52
9,031.52
9,281.52

1
1

9,106.15
9,356.16
9,606.15

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

.

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

1

-

8,464.99
8,936.55
9,605.25
10,005.25
10,255.25
10,505.25

7,552.89

7,224.91

6

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

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 4
1
workers

V

2/
Monthly
earnings
(Mean)

i

£

' 5$0

$

5$o

$

*

U 7$

$

$

3

$

$

I

5

$00

$2$

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

\$ 0
and
U75

hours
(Standard)

&
$2$

$00

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

U
”1

$

3

_

_

3

2
_

"
_

3U

15
3

11
9

_
_

80

18

_

_

_
_

_

_

6
27
_

67
_

_

_

2
3

31
6

75
8
3

15
_

_

21
1

5

_

25

2

_

2?

7
11

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

1

_

5

_

_
_

_

_

_

1
u

i"o

_
U

2

_
_

8

,U

_

_
8

1

8
6
9

19

u

8

U

_
_

_
_
35

"
U

1

l

_ _

16
2

5"

5

_

1'

_
i
l 25T

"2

_
_

2

9

_
.

5

31

_

_

9"

U

1U

_

_

.

_

3

_

_

27

_

_

_ _
_ .
_
_

_

8

_

_
.

_
.

_

_

1

_
_
2U

8

3

_

1
_

11
13

1U

5

■
8

"5

5
7

*

2

_
_

2U
1

I
1

_
.

-

U

3
_

.
U

1

1

.

-

I
13

1
2

_

23
1

u

i

16
1

2

1

1
1

U

_
_

33

_

3
1

l

1

_

-

-

_1

8

7
31

1

i

i

|
i1

_
. _
_ .

_
11
|

i
1

28

1
bee fo o t n o t e s a t end o f ta b le,

15
2

1

7"
11

1

17

-

*

1
1

X

.
.

.
.

_

_

.
_

_

Table 39. Earnings of selected classes of municipal employees, Milwaukee, July 1970— Continued
M ilw a u k ee,

(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 ,

Av
Occupational group
and
Class title

Number
of
workers

y
Weekly
hours
(Standard)

e

r

a

g

8

7

W is co n s in , M u n icip a l G ov ern m en t)

e

NUMBER OF ..URKERS RECEIVING SlknlGHT-TlME MONTHLY F.ARNTNGS 0FTF
- T -=
TS
:2 0
o
1/ ' h L 5 o 3 o o $ 5 5 * 5 5T $o 7 6 5 '625 r o' -- ' 6 r * -$ - - *r t16?v - - 7 7 5n * o - s r 7- »I T-R -5- -o n0 "‘-- -n8 - r V5 * -0 9 n * s0 < - O?1,000- no 1 * , r 1 0 ,r * l 1 ~0 , 0 1 i 0 , 5i 2 o, 0 n1,300 15 , 0 l 3 , 5 L 0 o o
5
M o n t 1 andl y L 7 5 *
I e a r n im d egr s
and
n
( M e a n )
0
l0
0
5
L 7 3 5 o 3 o 2 5 3 5 5 0 7 600 625 6 5 6 0 7 7 5 0 7 0 5 8 0 0 8 0 5 9 0 0 950 L . 1.0 500 1 0 . l 1 . 0 1.20 0 5 i a $o o 1 * 3 .0 0 1 * 1 3 . 5 o L 0 v 0 e 0 r

NON-MANAGEMENT
WHITE-COLLAR (Continued)

L

o "
\
I
O
o
o
o

. O
. 819o
. o
.3 o9

1

L
L
0 L

o
o
o

. 7 oL
. 6 o9
. 6 o3

3
0
6

1

6 2
o . 6 oL
O ; . O
O ; . O
O . 6 O3
8 1
o . 8 o8
o . o
O . 6 O3
o . 7 o6
1
7 1
O . 6 O5
O . O

8
2

28

Library assistant ---------------------Licensed practical nurse -----------Physician ------------------------------Public health nurse I -----------------Public health nurse II --------------Public health physician I-------------Telephone operator --------------------

1

3

L
3
1
1

L
1
3
3

h
L
L
L

.

h O .O

-

o
3

;2

6

3

i

1

3
7

3

-

I

2

L

9

5

• 3 1 ?
1

,

7

2

1
2

2
1

2

L

2 3
2

0
1

1

3

-

6

V
-

7

1 3 _

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 ----------

3
7

2

3

1

1
7

6

8

0

1

9

hi
16
3

2

0

L
L
L
u

L
3 L
L
L
L 5
1 1 1
3 0 0
3h2
L
L
3 3
7

3

2

Ih

3
L o2 . L o L
L - O .7 O
- 2
2
1
L O . O

i
I2
2
1

7
6

9
8
8

L
3

-

7
5

6

9

L - O
L o
-

1

L
7

3 - 8

-6

O o
7 6

.
.
6

6

3
- 6
L
8 5 1 L - 28 3 !
3 L
! 7 3 2
9
1
1 3
3
2 -5
1 3

L

1

2

1
2

3

2

■

7

60

0

-

8

2

■

-

_

3

L -

L

6
8

-

1 1 L

-

5

2

2

22

5
7

L

3

-L

2

L

7

1
1

10 L

5

“

7

1

266
9

L

-

■

-

"

L

295

5

1

8

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 ------------

St footnotes
e-




at end of table,

1

3
3

0

3
6
2
8
6
6
7

L
L
L

o
o
o

L
2

2

L
L

o
o

6

1
0
1
2
3

1. , O
1. , o
1. , O
1. , o
. 9 o8
1. , o
1,62 2 o
.
1

1
3

1
1
1

O
o
O
o
o
o
o

1
3
1
3
1

3 1
1 2
6 7
6 9
L

9

3

L
L
L

o
o
o

L

o

,

8

. 9 o5
. o
. 9 o5
9 L
. o
1.,1 1 6 o
1. , o
1. , o
. 9 o8
1 ,
1. , o

6

9

o

L

.

o
L

o

6
L

o
1

,

.

U

o
-

-

L
0
9

2
L
5

o

-

8
--

8

7
3
7
9

3

o
.

-

8
L

9

o

.

o

1

7

"

"

~

.

■

"

* 3

“

5
5

5

2

“

6

L

0
7

3

8

5

“

1
-

'

1
1

6

0

- 6
1
-1

L

“

~

1
11
1

-

■

“ -

“
-■

1

■

10

--

“
■

'

- ■

"~

o

.

o

8

'

"
■

2

-

6
“

/
1

1

7/

~
L

/

3

9
0
9

- "
■ '

2

I

o

.

■

5

■
■

_

~
~

■

3
1

1

1

■

1
L

3

-

2

836

1
1
1

L
L
L
L
L
L
L

3

1

1

1
1

■
1

■
■

■

■
■

8
“

9

1

~
"

/
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)

A erage
v
Number
of
workers

y

wieUy

Monthly
earnings
(Mean)

hours
(Standard)

NUMBER OF WORKERS RECEIVING STRAIGHT-TIME MONTHLY EARNINGS OF-

$

kS *k75
o

and
under

$
5oo

525

550

525

55o

575

$

$

575

* z

$

600

625

625

650

%

650

$

675

&

700

$

$
„ * .
750 800 850

$

900

600

675

700

750

800

850

900

950

18

b75 5oo

8

$
f
$
$
$
$
$ „ $.
950 1,000 i,c 5 o 1,100 1,150 1,200 1,250 1,300 1,350

1,200 i,?5o 1,300 1,350 l,k00

123

23

$

1 I I

Occupational group
and
Class title

120

1,000 1,0 5 0 1,10 0 1 ,1 5 0

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

3

150

287 1,067
1

17

23

2

L

52

7U
-3
9

2

1

U

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

1.071
1,192
1,163
1,091
98U
1,053
1.071
1,132
1,15U

OO

ii

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.
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:
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)

Municipal employers, their officers and agents are prohibited from:
1.

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.

3.

(b)

Interfering with, restraining or coercing any municipal employe in the exercise of the right provided in sub.

2.

(2).

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.

2.

(c)

(4)

Coercing, intimidating or interfering with municipal employes in the enjoyment of their legal rights including those set
forth in sub. (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
(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)

(j)

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)

Note:

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)

(5)

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.

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
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

1966

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

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

1969

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

Staff Nurses' Council (City
Unit)

No change since 1964

Technicians, Engineers, and
Architects of Milwaukee

No change since 1965

AQ0

No change since 1968

Public Employees' Union #61,
Laborers' International Union
of North America, AFL-CIO, CLC

May 6 , 1969
For regular
employees in
the Department
of Central
Electronic Data
Services.

4,000

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

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.

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

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

THIRD CLASS MAIL
L

A

B

O

R

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