— One of the highlights of this year’s city budget turned sour for Muskogee’s non-uniform employees.

The employee group, which lost then fought to restore its collective bargaining rights, continues dealing with the fallout from a decision made 14 months ago to let its contract expire.

This most recent issue arose about a week before 72 percent of the eligible employees turned out to recertify union representation. Ninety-five percent of those voters certified the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees as its bargaining agent.

Union backers attributed the overwhelming support among employees for the return to collective bargaining to frustration with what was sold as a 25-cents-an-hour pay raise. The raise, however, appears to have turned out to be a pay cut.

A portion of the revenue from a dedicated sales tax approved by voters in 2004 is being tapped to fund the 25-cent raise. In addition to the 2 percent raise given all employees from the general fund, non-uniform employees were given the extra quarter an hour in lieu of the lump sum distribution they would have received pursuant to an agreement that expired along with their former contract.

A notice non-uniform employees received along with the check for the first full pay period of this fiscal year stated the 25-cent raise amounted to an annual increase of $520. Matthew Jordan, deputy administrator of AFSCME Local 2465, said calculations he was provided indicated employees would have received a lump sum payment of about $1,200 each had the contract not been allowed to expire.

Ward III Councilor Derrick Reed, who was elected this year with the  backing of labor supporters, said the pay raise sounded appealing when the present budget was being considered. But he didn’t see it playing out the way it did.

“This was being sold as a raise, but it was actually money we owed them already,” Reed said, acknowledging employees’ frustration with the way the purported pay raise worked out. “To classify it as a pay raise was kind of misleading.”

Voters approved in 2004 a permanent, three-quarter-of-a-cent sales tax to fund a $1.63-an-hour raise for the city’s firefighters, police and non-uniform employees, benefits, and equipment needs.

Eighty percent of the revenue is distributed equally into accounts set up for each of the three employee groups. Ten percent helps fund the employee benefit plan, and the remainder is set aside for certain capital and equipment needs.

A subsequent agreement hammered out with non-uniform employees provided any surplus accumulated in excess of $105,000 during any given year would be distributed among the employees in equal shares.

City Manager Greg Buckley said the lump-sum distribution non-uniform employees anticipated this year was impossible after city councilors voted in 2011 to quit recognizing AFSCME. The agreement that provided for the lump-sum distributions, Buckley said, expired along with the union and its contract.

While the amount employees would have received under the former agreement was not confirmed, Buckley indicated it would have been greater than the $520 they will receive during the course of this year.

“If the contract hadn’t expired and we had maintained the union and we didn’t have this gap, this would have been a negotiated item,” Buckley said in defense of the 25-cent-an-hour pay raise. “But when that stopped, that option went away. We still have to abide by what the citizens decided: That money has to be used for salaries and wages.”

Buckley said the voters’ commitment is being honored still, but it’s being done “over an extended period of time.”

That decision, however, didn’t sit well with many non-uniform employees. Reed said he believes much of the employees’ frustration could have been avoided through improved communications.

“We have to do better about sitting down with them and improving communications,” Reed said. “I hope a resolution can be reached that somewhat mirrors the agreement that was in place in the past.”

Dustin Williams, AFSCME Local 2465 president, said union negotiators presented a proposed memorandum of understanding but declined to discuss details.

“We are not allowed to talk about it during negotiations,” Williams said.

Michael Bates, who is negotiating on behalf of the city, also declined to discuss ongoing negotiations.

City councilors, however, are expected to be briefed Monday behind closed doors about how contract talks are going with each of the three bargaining groups.

Reach D.E. Smoot at (918) 684-2901 or dsmoot@muskogeephoenix.com.