DES MOINES — The state has proposed no wage increase over the next two years and a rain check on health insurance to workers represented by Iowa’s largest public employee union, leading the union’s top official to declare the governor is “trying to hurt” those public employees.

The state made its collective bargaining counteroffer Wednesday to leaders of AFSCME Council 61, which represents 18,500 public employees who work in education, corrections and mental health care, among others.

The union had proposed wage increases of 2.5 percent in 2017 and 2.25 percent in 2018. The state countered with a proposal of flat wages over the next two years.

The state also, as it did earlier this week with its proposal to the state patrol union, removed the section on health insurance, saying coverage would be provided “as determined by the state.”

It is a signal the state expects state legislators and the governor, all under Republican control for the first time in 20 years, to change the state’s collective bargaining laws in the coming legislative session.

“I don’t know what they’re going to do. I have an indication that what they’re going to do is do something with health insurance,” said Danny Homan, president of AFSCME Council 61. “They don’t want to let (public employees) have a seat at the table to determine what their health insurance benefits are. ... They want to put that out as the Iowa Legislature and the governor of this state deem appropriate.”

Homan said he fears the state will pass legislation that would strip public employees of their ability to bargain for their health insurance, then implement coverage that is cheapest to the state.

ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW ADVERTISEMENT

“This is a clear indication to me that this governor is going to try and hurt the people that work for the state and provide necessary and needed services, much like he has done with Medicaid privatization,” Homan said.

State Department of Administrative Services director Janet Phipps, who presented the counteroffer to the union on Wednesday, said she thinks state legislators and the governor may develop a master contract for public employees.

“I would assume (they are) going to have discussions during the Legislature,” Phipps said. “(The department will) leave that up to them as far as policy decisions are concerned.”

The union’s proposal would cost the state an additional $111 million, the department has estimated.

If the two sides cannot agree to terms, the proposals go to an independent arbitrator.

The new contracts begin July 1.

In addition to his concern about health insurance, Homan said he was disappointed the state offered no wage increases after it offered 1 percent increases each of the next two years to the state police. He also expressed concern with the state’s proposal to tie annual step increases in pay to performance evaluations, which he said places wage increases into an unfairly subjective process.

“It probably won’t be a pleasant Thanksgiving because now I get to try and figure out where we go from here on this,” Homan said. “But we will go somewhere. I just find it unfortunate.”