December 28, 2007 Contact: Sue Baker
For Immediate Release 738-2000,
Avedisian announces plan to pursue
less expensive options for crossing guards
Move could save as much as $339,000 in the next five years
WARWICK – Mayor Scott Avedisian announced today that the city has decided to pursue two less expensive options to provide crossing guards at city schools, rather than opt to privatize those services.
Avedisian said that the city has prepared notices for the current crossing guards, to be mailed next week, informing them that they will be laid off effective February 15. On January 3, the city will advertise the open positions and will accept applications until January 16. New guards will take over responsibilities on February 25, when classes resume after winter break.
Avedisian said the guards would be hired on a per-diem basis, and would not receive health or pension benefits. It is still being determined whether 23 or 18 guards will be employed; however, either option stands to save the city considerably more money than if it were to privatize services. At a minimum, over five years, the city would save $145,000 and, with the 18-guard option, as much as $339,000 in the same period of time than if it opted to privatize the crossing guards.
According to estimates provided by Personnel Director Oscar Shelton, the proposed contract between the crossing guards and the city, which was ultimately rejected by the City Council, would have cost $269,366 annually. (This amount, Avedisian said, is less than what private firms previously said they could provide the services for). NESCTC, the only firm to submit a bid for privatization, said it could provide 23 guards, at an annual cost of $212,282.
In contrast, hiring 23 guards on a per-diem basis, even factoring in a $5,000 allowance for safety vests and other incidentals, would cost $183,268 annually. To keep the number of guards at the current complement of 18, with the $5,000 factored in, would cost $144,514 annually, Avedisian said.
Whether the city were to go back and re-negotiate a new agreement with the crossing guards’ union, choose to privatize, or go with either per-diem option, it is still required to pay health insurance costs for crossing guards who are currently retired.
Avedisian said that whether the city chose privatization or the in-house, per-diem option, the crossing guards’ union has legal recourse it can pursue.
“No matter what option we choose, we anticipate that the union will take the city to court,” Avedisian said. “We are prepared to defend our decision. With all costs being equal relative to either option, the decision to hire guards on a per-diem basis and to reject the bid to privatize will save our taxpayers a considerable sum each year.”
Avedisian also noted that although the city is moving forward with plans to hire crossing guards in-house, that does not preclude the city from continuing talks with crossing guard union representatives.
Note: A time frame for the in-house process follows
-- 30 --