collective bargaining agreement that defines the benefit in specific dollar amounts rather than a percentage. See Teamsters Union Local 340 v. City of Augusta, M.L.R.B. No. 93-28 at 24-26 (Jan. 13, 1994). [¶ 19] Here, the health insurance premium contribution for retired employees was set at 100% by the contract. That retiree benefit, established by the collective bargaining agreement as a future benefit for current employees, cannot be reduced by the City, here to 0%, without constituting a unilateral modification. In other words, to preserve the status quo, an employee whose status changed from active to retired would be entitled to receive benefits in place for retirees as set forth in the expired agreement. Cf. Appeal of Town of Rye, 140 N.H. 323, 666 A.2d 948, 950, 952-53 (1995) (<HOLDING>); Appeal of Alton Sch. Dist., 140 N.H. 303, 666
holding that interpretation of a constitutional provision begins with examination of the provisions explicit language and that a court must endeavor to construe the provision in a manner consistent with the intent of the framers and voters holding that unlike stepincrease provisions a provision for the buyback of accumulated sick leave upon leaving employment must be maintained during the status quo period holding in the context of the 90day period during which a plaintiff must bring suit after receiving a right to sue letter that in the absence of a recognized equitable consideration the court cannot extend the limitations period by even one day holding that the hearing provisions of the ina supersede the provisions of the apa holding that the court can only consider evidence of other acts of harassment of which a plaintiff becomes aware during the period of his or her employment