Negotiators debated whether to remove a stand‑alone pension article from the collective bargaining agreement and where to record any language explaining pension contribution authority.

Union representatives proposed removing the pension article but adding a line in the recognition clause that would state that pension contribution levels “shall be negotiated between the employer and the pension board and or their designated representatives” and that changes in contribution percentages would “not constitute maintenance of standards.” The union argued that language was needed to make clear that pension contributions are handled outside routine bargaining so that pension-board members who are also union members may still participate in pension-board processes without that participation being deemed bargaining.

City negotiators said they were “not comfortable adding additional language to the recognition clause” and preferred instead to either retain the pension article or strike certain phrasing that previously led to the 18–20% dispute. A city negotiator said the aim was to avoid leaving the issue open to future grievances should contributions change.

Why it matters: The placement and wording determine whether contribution decisions are treated as part of the CBA bargaining framework or as a pension-board matter; the discussion also addresses potential conflicts when union members serve on the pension board.

Outcome: No final agreement was reached. The parties agreed to review language in caucus and to return with proposed edits; the union offered to remove the pension article if the recognition clause were revised so there is a clear memorialization of the parties’ intent.

Ending: Negotiators left the pension language unresolved and scheduled further caucus work and future bargaining sessions.