16:46 on 2012/10/20 Reply  

• Steve Quilliam 09:38 on 2012/10/21 Permalink

  The city has no balls. It is still contributing 55% for the workers pension plan and in order to make up for the tiny loss, they are giving them a salary hikes !!!

  I would like the city to contribute 55% to my pension plan (if I could only afford one).

• Chris 13:54 on 2012/10/21 Permalink

  Steve, then organize a union and fight for what you want!

• Kate 13:58 on 2012/10/21 Permalink

  I look at it this way: if we don’t pay old people a reasonable pension, they will become sick and immobile even sooner, and we’ll have to look after them anyway at greater expense. It’s cheaper and more conducive to the collective good to pay old people enough for them to live on their own as long as possible, with enough cash to eat proper food, than to starve them, feed them cheaply on industrial-grade institutional food that barely keeps them functioning, and pay people to look after them in bed for years while they drain away medical resources. They will be happier, their families will be happier, and our society will benefit from having alert, healthy older people around.

• Tantastic Ted 16:29 on 2012/10/21 Permalink

  What Steve said. Tremblay’s administration trumpeted the deal as a triumph but they should know that bending over to blue collar unions is not something that impresses voters. At least Bourque worked hard to hold the line on salaries.

• ant6n 16:30 on 2012/10/21 Permalink

  @Kate
  I feel that this standard applies/has applied/will apply to only very few generations.

• Kate 18:05 on 2012/10/21 Permalink

  Ted: Tremblay won’t be voted back in again anyway so it’s academic whether this is popular.

  What I’d like to see is more conditions encouraging city employees to live in town. Most of the money Tremblay is giving the workers will just bleed right off the island into the suburbs around it.

  ant6n: I sort of hope you don’t mean what I think you mean, but I suspect you do. (Within 100 years it will probably be considered a noble virtue to end one’s life once one ceases to be a “productive” member of society.)

• Jack 20:12 on 2012/10/21 Permalink

  @Kate I totally agree. Sadly an employee took Longueuil (I believe, 20 years ago) all the way to the Supreme Court and won when they tried to enforce a residency requirement for municipal employees. The best way to get municipal workers to live in Montreal is simple: stop providing free parking. Check out Firehouses and Police stations and what those folks drive to work, you could only park some of those mastodons in a three car garage.

• Kate 20:16 on 2012/10/21 Permalink

  If we ever get a Projet city administration we might actually see that free parking begin to vanish. Otherwise I wouldn’t expect it.

• ant6n 21:09 on 2012/10/21 Permalink

  @Kate
  What I mean is that past generations used to be on their own when it came to retirement, and it appears that future generations will be as well.

• Steve Quilliam 00:05 on 2012/10/22 Permalink

  I agree with Jack entirely. Stop providing free parking for municipal workers such as firefighters, police officers and other high ranking officials.

  The same could be said at the Quebec level. per example, why would Maka Kotto and his staff all live on the south shore when they are representing a Montreal district ?

Reply Cancel reply

Required fields are marked *

Name *

Email *

Website