By JIM BARON

PROVIDENCE — The Carcieri administration has agreed not to implement the executive order announced Thursday that would impose health insurance changes on unions that had rejected them.

That move gives a Superior Court judge time to mull Council 94's request for a judicial order that would halt the governor's directive permanently.
Judge Patricia Hurst heard the request for a temporary restraining order filed just before the close of court business Friday. She asked for more time to familiarize herself with the issue, and lawyers for Gov. Donald Carcieri agreed to the delay.
Hurst called for memorandums of law to be submitted by Monday and scheduled a conference for 2 p.m. on Wednesday.
Council 94, an umbrella group comprising several public employee unions, asked the court to grant “temporary and permanent relief, preventing the governor from implementing changes to the terms and conditions of the union members' employment” as well as attorney's fees and costs.
The motion for the restraining order notes that Carcieri wants to change the way employees pay for health care from a percentage of their salary to a percentage of insurance premium. “Under the terms of the executive order,” the motion states, “union members' health care co-share will be significantly increased to their detriment.” It also notes that co-pays for doctor's office visits and emergency room care will also be increased significantly.
The union argues that it was acknowledged by all parties that the discussions that led to the proposed memorandum of settlement that Council 94 members rejected “did not constitute collective bargaining negotiations” as the term is defined in law. It asserts that only after Council 94 members rejected the proposed settlement did the state allege that the discussions were actual negotiations.
Carcieri repeated on Thursday that the discussions – 30 meetings over six months – were indeed negotiations. He contends that the state made multiple concessions during the course of those talks, bringing down the expected savings from the personnel changes from $60 million to $33.5 million.
Also on Friday, Council 94 filed an unfair labor practice charge against the state alleging that the terms and conditions of Council 94 contracts had been changed unilaterally by the governor's executive order. That follows a July 25 unfair labor practice filing in which Council 94 complained to the state Labor Relations Board that:
the governor announced by press release that he would not continue negotiations with Council 94 and he ignored the group's request for negotiations.
Carcieri doesn't deny that his action is unilateral. He argues that he informed Council 94 in June that their contract would be terminated as of June 30, so he has a right to change the health insurance co-shares and co-pays as outlined in his executive order.
Carcieri spokesperson Amy Kempe noted that earlier this week, Judge Judith Savage issued a ruling in a unrelated case concerning the layoff of sheriffs that said the governor has the authority to order cost cuts in dire fiscal times.
Savage wrote: “When the budget gets out of balance – as it is in Rhode Island today – the governor has the ability and indeed the responsibility to make necessary cost cuts so as to enable the departments of state government to function as efficiently and effectively as possible.”
Council 94 Executive Director Dennis Grilli said Friday he had not had an opportunity to read Savage's decision.
Declaring that because “I am duty bound both constitutionally and by statute to balance the budget,” Carcieri said, “I am forced to take immediate and unilateral actions to fulfill my responsibilities.”
Asked how the budget balancing might be affected if the executive order is put off for at least one pay period, Kempe said, “We're going to see what happens early next week.”