Published Saturday, November 8, 2025 in The Everett Herald
‘At Any Cost’: Snohomish Bargaining to Replace Union Pensions
The city wishes to exclude the retirement trust workers have been contributing to since 2023.
By Taylor Scott Richmond
During ongoing bargaining sessions, Snohomish officials have made it clear they wish to exclude a union pension from the city workers’ next contract, a Teamster representative said.
The city has 38 employees represented by Teamsters Local Union No. 763. As part of their 2023 contract, employees are required to contribute to the Teamsters Pension Trust, which funds monthly retirement payments for life.
“Early in bargaining, when the city proposed withdrawing from the Teamster pension, we were stunned,” said Tammy Ayers, a Teamsters’ business agent, during a City Council meeting Oct. 28.
“My perception of what they’re doing is that they are intending to get rid of Teamsters pension at any cost,” she said in an interview.
Snohomish Mayor Linda Redmon and Human Resources Director Rebekah Park presented Ayers with a list of reasons why the city hopes the Teamsters pension will not be included in the new bargaining agreement.
Some employees are frustrated with how much money is deducted from their paychecks to contribute to the pension, the statement says. “Staff have asked if they could opt out or decrease the amount being contributed. This is not allowed based on the Trust rules.”
To obtain pension payments after retirement, workers must contribute $1.25 for each hour worked. The city contributes 25 cents per hour.
When asked whether The Herald could interview one of the frustrated workers, City Administrator Heather Thomas-Murphy said in an email that the workers were hesitant, and the city didn’t “want to put employees in uncomfortable situations.”
On the other side, the union had received no requests to eliminate the pension, Ayers wrote in an email.
“The Union has received numerous calls and emails strongly in support of keeping the pension,” she said.
In an interview, Thomas-Murphy also said that reporting to the Teamsters Pension Trust takes place outside the city’s usual payroll system, making it time-consuming and more difficult than the city expected.
“We admit we made a mistake in going with the Teamsters Trust and are trying our best to correct our error as soon as possible,” Redmon and Park said in their statement.
“The city’s interest is in getting out of the pension now because it’s much, much more problematic if they wait,” City Attorney Dan Swedlow said in an interview.
Thomas-Murphy added that waiting to switch would make it “cost prohibitive.”
In response, Ayers wrote, “If the City now considers choosing the Teamsters Trust a mistake, employees should not be the ones to pay the price by losing their retirement investment.”
The Teamsters pension is secondary to the workers’ primary pension through the Washington State Department of Retirement Systems, to which employees also contribute, city spokesperson Shari Ireton said in a release.
“The City is not looking to take away their primary pension,” she said. “This program has been in place for decades, and the City is not making changes to this primary pension.”
As a replacement, Snohomish officials have proposed a deferred compensation program — a retirement account that “offers immediate vesting and all money contributed belongs to the employees themselves upon deposit,” it says in the city’s proposal. An employee can contribute as much or as little as they would like into the account, and the city will match up to $120 a month.
“The deferred compensation program allows some flexibility,” Thomas-Murphy told The Herald. “If financial situations change, either where they need to reduce their contributions or they can increase their contributions.”
The account would have a finite amount of money, based on contributions from the employee and the employer, unlike the Teamsters pension that offers monthly payments for life. However, Thomas-Murphy said in an email that deferred compensation funds could be used to purchase an annuity from the state at retirement.
An annuity does guarantee a monthly income payment for life, according to the state. However, the state’s website says to speak with a tax advisor before making the commitment.
For employees who have already contributed to the Teamsters pension, the city would make additional monthly payments based on each employee’s hire date. If the worker was hired before Jan. 1, 2023, they would earn an extra $163 per pay period into the deferred compensation account, according to the city’s proposal. Employees hired in 2023 would earn $122 per pay period; employees hired in 2024 would earn $81 per pay period; and employees hired in 2025 would earn $41 per pay period.
“The deal is, we’re basically structuring a system so everybody basically gets paid back what has already been put into the pension,” Swedlow said. “So nobody would really be losing anything.”
However, this offer is contingent on ratification of a new contract and expires at the end of 2025, according to the proposal. Swedlow confirmed that adding this contingency is an attempt to get the deal done sooner rather than later.
The new program would cost the city more money, Thomas-Murphy said. Matching contributions up to $120 would result in $1,440 in employer contributions per month, compared to the $540 the city currently contributes.
The city is looking at costs from both a short-term and a long-term view, Thomas-Murphy said.
Switching now is much less expensive than switching later, she said. Also, switching programs would save administrative time in the city’s payroll department, thus also saving money.
Instead of paying more for the deferred compensation plan, Ayers said in an email, the city should maintain the Teamsters pension while directing additional city funds toward living wages for employees and offsetting the required pension contributions.
“This way, members keep their retirement security, and the City demonstrates it values their workers’ contributions,” she wrote.
‘We earned it, we deserve it’
The Teamsters union held rallies on Oct. 28 and Tuesday while City Council meetings were underway.
During the October meeting, city employees gathered before the council wearing orange and holding signs that read “We earned it, we deserve it.”
“The pension was established with your support,” Snohomish Parks Division Lead James Pullen said to the council during public remarks. “Abandoning that agreement would take away something that workers like me have been counting on and investing in for years.”
Liz Brown, an Edmonds resident, read a statement written by a Snohomish employee who wished to remain anonymous due to fear of retaliation.
“It is the healthiest pension plan in the country. It’s one of the major reasons many of us chose public service in the first place,” the statement said. “A pension offers stability and a safety net, and once you’re vested, it provides a guaranteed benefit for life.”
During bargaining on Nov. 4, city representatives presented Ayers with a proposal that included the Teamsters pension and a condition that the trust would allow employees to opt out, Ayers said in an email.
“The City knows the Union cannot accept this proposal, and they’re also aware that the trust doesn’t permit opt-outs,” she wrote. “So while it may look reasonable on paper, it feels manipulative in my opinion.”
If the two parties are unable to reach a deal, the city is entitled under the law to make its “last, best and final” offer, which the union can accept or reject, Swedlow said.
If rejected, either party may request assistance from a state mediator, according to state law. “If a collective bargaining agreement previously negotiated under this chapter should expire while negotiations are underway, the terms and conditions specified in the collective bargaining agreement shall remain in effect for a period not to exceed one year from the expiration date stated in the agreement,” the law says.