Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Collective Bargaining Group C topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Vermont game warden urges separate Group C law‑enforcement bargaining unit to secure 20‑year retirement steps
Summary
State game warden Kelly Price told the House General and Housing Committee that many Group C law‑enforcement officers cannot reach accelerated step increases within the 20‑year retirement window and urged creation of a separate bargaining unit so the issue can be negotiated.
Kelly Price, a state game warden based in Brattleboro, told the House General and Housing Committee on April 23 that game wardens and other non‑trooper Group C law‑enforcement employees have been unable to complete an accelerated step progression within the 20‑year retirement window under the current Group C retirement arrangements. “We subsidize the troopers group C system by hundreds of thousands of dollars over the 20 year period,” Price said, describing the disparity between a 30‑year pay plan and a 20‑year retirement window for non‑trooper Group C members.
Price said attempts to negotiate the change through VSEA bargaining and the larger NMU bargaining unit — which she said includes roughly 6,000 state employees — have failed to secure an accelerated step process for non‑trooper Group C members. She asked the committee to consider legislative help to permit a separate Group C law‑enforcement bargaining unit, saying, “we need our own unit to bargain our own issues particularly this chronic issue of the accelerated steps so that we can fully achieve our retirement within our 20 year working retirement window.”
Committee members asked procedural and technical questions about certification and fragmentation, noting past denials by the Vermont Labor Relations Board on grounds a proposed unit would be too small. Price estimated the proposed law‑enforcement unit would include “roughly about 80” members across categories including airport firefighters, game wardens, liquor control, DMV investigators and state’s attorney investigators. She said a previous labor‑board denial cited concerns about fragmentation, but she noted that other small units (for example, some state’s‑attorney or sheriff units) exist.
Price asked the committee to consider statutory language that would allow a Group C law‑enforcement bargaining unit while retaining membership in VSEA. She also offered to answer follow‑up questions and to provide contact information for committee members seeking more detail.
The committee did not vote on any change during the session; members discussed the feasibility of legislative language and the labor‑board certification process and indicated they would consider draft language.
