VIRGINIA, MINN. — Dozens of Virginia city employees shivered, shouted and waved signs Wednesday morning, March 6, outside of Virginia City Hall.
Many of them had been awake for hours in preparation for the first day of a strike after failed contract negotiations between the union and city. Scott DaRonco, president of AFSCME Local No. 454, said he arrived at 5:40 a.m. to picket at the city public works facility and made signs at 4:30.
Union members unanimously approved the strike Tuesday night. As a result, the garbage won't be picked up, the city library will be closed, the fire department won’t have mechanics, and no one will be monitoring the city’s aging sewer infrastructure.
The union notified the city of its intent to strike Feb. 21 after a third mediation session. Local 454 said the city has proposed cutting benefits in the new contract, including overtime, insurance contributions and worker protections.
The city, meanwhile, has said it's dealing with budget constraints after public pressure to keep the property tax levy low. It has pushed back on a number of the union's claims, calling some misleading and others incorrect. Requests for comment from Virginia city officials were not returned Wednesday.
The strike is the latest action as public tension between union members and the City Council rises. Last week, the Council passed an emergency ordinance banning targeted residential picketing and a councilor presented union members with a bucket of pacifiers. Union members said this is the first strike since the 1980s.
Behind the strike
Local 454 represents Virginia’s library, public works, parks and recreation, event center and administrative employees. Sixty-two full-time and 17 part-time employees are on strike.
The union’s previous contract expired Dec. 31, 2023, and contract negotiations with the city began in November. Local 454 almost immediately filed for mediation, and there have been four mediation sessions since Jan. 2.
DaRonco, a heavy equipment operator, has been with the city for nine years and the union president for five. He said this is the third contract he’s negotiated, and it has been by far the worst.
“It’s just turned into a nightmare,” DaRonco said. “They just keep pulling the rug out from underneath us. ... They’ve pushed us into this corner to the point where we almost feel like they want us to go on strike to balance their budget.”
The City Council approved a 4% levy increase for 2024, which some councilors voted against, saying it wasn’t enough to properly run the city.
AFSCME Council 65, which represents Local 454, said in a Tuesday news release that the city of Virginia has repeatedly made offers and then walked them back.
DaRonco said this happened Tuesday. The city presented an offer Feb. 27 after 14 hours of mediation. The union was expected to vote Tuesday night, and DaRonco said the offer likely would have been accepted. But Tuesday afternoon, the city attorney notified the union the offer was withdrawn.
“My heart just sunk,” he said. “I was like, ‘This is ridiculous.’ Everybody was upset, and everybody doesn’t know what to do. You’ve got people with young families that just had newborns.
“ ... They’re affecting not only us, but they’re affecting our families. They’re affecting the citizens. It affects a lot of people.”
Withdrawals of offers have happened throughout negotiations, DaRonco said. Council 65 said it is filing an unfair labor practice charge against the city through the Public Employment Labor Relations Board.
“It is clearer than ever that the city never intended to negotiate fairly and honestly with its workers,” stated the AFSCME news release.
Watching the budget
An update to the city’s strike information page Wednesday said the city wished to continue negotiations after learning more about the offer in a closed session meeting Tuesday, citing potential effects to department budgets and staffing levels due to wage increases in the offer.
According to the city’s website, the Feb. 27 offer from the city negotiating committee included base wage increases of a cumulative total of 10.5% over the next three years.
“In 2024, the wage increases for AFSCME would have resulted in an increase of $140,925 to [the] overall city budget,” according to the update. “In 2025 and 2026, the City would have needed to allocate an additional cumulative total of $323,000 for AFSCME staff wage increases.”
The city maintains it will continue to negotiate in good faith with the assistance of the State Bureau of Mediation Services.
In a January post on its website, the city offered detailed responses to several assertions made by the union that it said are misleading or false. This includes claims about scheduling, loss of seniority rights, and overtime pay.
"The intent of the City asking for any change in payment of benefits is simply due to budgetary constraints, not a punishment nor a 'slap in the face to these dedicated public service workers,'" the post states. "It is our belief that if we all pitch in a little, the burden does not have to be borne by one."
According to the post, current practices mean unqualified employees are being promoted and overtime pay is incorrectly calculated in some instances because of vague contract language. The overtime miscalculations, according to the city, cost in excess of one full-time employee salary. Changes to how the city fills internal job postings and clarifying the application of overtime pay would result in cost savings, according to the response.
AFSCME pointed to the council’s own compensation as a source of potential cuts in a news release. According to the union, the city budgeted $151,000 in 2023 for its six part-time councilors and the mayor. These individuals receive the same benefits as the full-time police, fire, supervisory and AFSCME employees, the release further stated.
During December’s truth in taxation hearing, Amanda Metsa, a labor representative with AFSCME Council 65, noted the cost of health care benefits for council members. She said eliminating them would have a notable impact on the city’s budget like it did in Hibbing, where that move resulted in “huge budget savings.”
DaRonco said the union has tried to work with the city, but it seems like “they’ll come up with something new.”
“It’s almost like they wanted us to go on strike,” he said. “You wouldn’t think so, but I’m thinking they did, to save their budget.”
Residential picketing and pacifiers
AFSCME Council 65 said Tuesday’s contract withdrawal was “the latest in a string of ridiculous, childish, and incompetent actions.”
Last week, Councilor Julieanne Paulsen publicly apologized after presenting union members with a bucket of pacifiers after a City Council meeting, saying she was “caught up in the heat of the moment.”
The city also passed an emergency ordinance last week banning targeted residential picketing. The ordinance states the action causes “emotional distress to the dwelling occupants, obstructs and interferes with the free use of public rights-of-way and has as its object the harassment of the dwelling occupants.”
Those striking outside city hall Wednesday morning said the ordinance was passed after the union conducted three 30-minute or shorter silent pickets in front of Council members’ homes. Union members said they feel the ordinance violates their First Amendment rights.
Outside city hall
At Wednesday's picket, union members chatted and smiled, cheering whenever a passing vehicle honked in support.
“I hate to say it, but people are having fun, enjoying each other, communicating, joking around,” DaRonco said. “Because that’s all we have left right now. You have to stay positive.”
DaRonco said public support of the union has been strong, and they can’t make yard signs of support fast enough to keep up with demand.
DaRonco said the lack of garbage pickup will be the first thing people notice, but he hopes the strike won’t impact the public too much. The city and the union are expected to meet for another mediation session Wednesday or Thursday.
“Hopefully, we can get this settled in a quick hurry,” he said. “That’s our main goal right now. We don’t want to be here, just like they don’t want us to be here.”
News Director Chelsey Perkins contributed to this report.