And
City
of
Fact
Findings
Arbitrator: John Cronin
Date
Issued:
Arbitrator:
Cronin; John
Case #: 01129-F-77-00056
Employer:
City of
Date Issued:
STATE OF
BEFORE
THE PANEL OF FACT-FINDERS
IN RE: )
THE CITY OF
)
Employer ) CASE
NO. 1129-F-77-56
)
and )
)
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF )
FIREFIGHTERS, AFL-CIO, )
)
________________________________ )
FACT-FINDERS' REPORT,
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
I. BACKGROUND
The Fact-finding Panel was
composed of John Cronin (Impartial
Fact-finder and Chairman),
Sharon Green (Employer's member), and
Larry Codiga
(
This fact-finding proceeding
arose out of an impasse in negotiations
between
the City of
hearing
was held pursuant to Section 41.56.440 of the Revised Code of
The current collective
bargaining agreement between the parties is
due
to expire on
A hearing in this matter was
held on
fighters
Local 864 was represented by Larry Weiss.
The Impartial Fact-
finder
wishes to express his appreciation to the other panel members
and
to the representatives of the parties for their cooperative and
expeditious
processing of this matter. Both parties
ably presented
evidence,
answered the panel's questions, and persuasively argued
their
positions. Both parties filed helpful
briefs which have been
duly
considered.
The Fact-finding panel met on
consider
the presentations. Listed below are the
issues in dispute,
some
of which bear the panel's unanimous recommendation. The remainder
bear
the impartial Fact-finder's recommendation.
II. MATTERS AT ISSUE
1.1 Proposal
Article
III of this existing collective bargaining agreement.
Firefighters would require the
City to fill all vacancies within
a
reasonable time.
1.2 Comment
The panel finds that this
matter is a safety factor already
covered
by the manning clause (Article XX).
1.3 Recommendation
The panel unanimously
recommends that the proposal be
rejected.
2.1 Proposal
Article IV, Section 1-B. City would change 40 hour week
to exclusive
of lunch period of headquarter's personnel.
2.2 Recommendation
The panel unanimously
recommends the proposal be accepted
provided
the parties have a further understanding that the
personnel
are ordinarily not subject to call, but if used in an
emergency
during their lunch period, will receive remuneration
at
the rate of time and one half.
3.1 Proposal
Article IV, Section 1-D. The City would change shift
hours
of fire suppression personnel to a 10/14 shift in which a
firefighter
would work ten hours a day for five days, take two
days
off, work fourteen hours a day for five days and take three
days
off.
3.2 Positions of the
Parties
The City argues that the
change will result in a more
efficient
allocation of manpower and will result in a 47.3 hour
week. The Firefighters argue that a change from the
current
24 hours on and 48 hours off,
at this time, would be disruptive of
1978 vacation schedules, and
is concerned that the conse-
quences of the change have not been fully explored.
3.3 Comment
The parties had apparently
agreed earlier in their nego-
tiations to a tentative clause similar to the
instant one. The
City backed off when it was
discovered that an additional ten
persons
would have to be hired. The City
understandably revised
their
proposal to obviate this additional expense.
The Fact-
finder
believes the City should not be unduly restricted in
seeking
more efficient scheduling of hours. I
note also that
similar
scheduling has already been introduced in
Tacoma, and Everett, three of this cities that the parties have
stipulated
as "comparable cities."
3.4 Recommendation
The Fact-finder recommends
that the parties adopt the
proposed
10/14 schedule; however, such a clause should include
a
provision to permit either party to reopen the issue after
one
year from the contract's initiation so that the parties may,
if they choose, meet
and negotiate whether the 10/14 schedule
should
be altered or replaced by the old schedule.
4.1 Proposal
Article IV, Section 1-D. The City proposes the extension
of
training hours.
4.2 Position of the Parties
The City believes it is unnecessarily
restricted by the
current
contract language limiting training hours from 0800 to
1630
exclusive of weekends. The
City complains that it is unable
to
schedule sufficient hours to maintain its training standards.
Moreover, the new schedule
would fit into the 10/14 shift
schedule. The Firefighters argue that the expansion of
training
hours
would subject the personnel to exhaustion, to the detriment
of
their firefighting readiness.
Furthermore, excessive drilling
could
be used as a means of harassment. In
regard to weekends,
the
Firefighters contend that traditionally, Saturday and Sunday
are
devoted to equipment maintenance.
4.3 Comment
It is obvious that given a
10/14 shift schedule, the parties
would
need a revised training schedule. On the
other hand, it
should
be no more disruptive of past practice than necessary.
Moreover, the Firefighters'
concern over one entire shift
being
subject to training is understandable
4.4 Recommendation
The Fact-finder recommends the
extension of the training
period
from 0800 to 2200 hours Monday through Friday; provided,
however,
that no more than six training hours be required of
any
one shift.
5.1 Proposal
Article VI, Section 1. The City proposes the elimination
of
conferences in good faith within the meaning of the Section.
5.2 Recommendation
The Panel unanimously
recommends the retention of existing
language.
6.1 Proposal
Article VI, Section 1. The City seeks a voucher system
for
uniform purchase instead of the current $350.00 lump sum
payment.
6.2 Comment
The Firefighters made a
counterproposal that if management
is
concerned about appearance, they would submit to periodic
inspection.
6.3 Recommendation
The Panel unanimously
recommends the retention of the
existing
uniform allowance, with additional language in the
paragraph,
to wit:
a. recognizing that there is an
existing dress code
promulgated
by the Fire Department.
b. providing that there be a
periodic inspection to
monitor
the appearance of uniforms worn by the employees.
c. the replacement of uniforms
the chief feels are sub-
standard
will be the responsibility of the employee.
7.1 Proposal
Article VI, Section 3. The Firefighters propose an increase
in
the premium pay schedule and the addition of the classification,
"Fire
Inspector," to the schedule. The City proposes the deletion
of
all premium pay except for Aid Car Personnel, with no increase
in
the latter.
7.2 Positions of the
Parties
The Firefighters produced
documents indicating that in the
past,
Driver Operators in the Fire Department received premium
pay
commensurate with the Police Department "Motorcycle Operator"
classification,
albeit the two positions are not identical.
Current figures show the
Motorcycle Operator receiving $55.00
per
month premium pay while the Driver Operator remains at $25.00.
The Police Training Officer
receives $55.00 per month, whereas
the
Firefighters Training Officer receives $40.00 per months. The
Firefighters argue that these
figures as well as the premium pay
for
relief Driver Operators and Aid Car Personnel should rise
with
the cost of living. The Firefighters
would add the Fire
Inspector category to the
premium pay schedule, arguing that they
require
special skills and bear extra responsibilities as do the
other
categories. The City would delete all the
premium pay
except
for Aid Car Personnel, contending that their skills are
no
different than other personnel of similar rank.
7.3 Comment
The Firefighters have
convincingly shown that the Driver
Operators have an abundance of
extra duties and responsibilities
warranting premium pay. The City has failed to show sufficient
justification
for removing this established practice.
Nor has
the City established
a case for deleting Training Officer,
a
position of obvious responsibility. In
the comparative cities
there
is no consistency in regard to premium pay, four out of
ten
having none at all, but two that do, include inspectors.
Consistency would dictate
their inclusion herein. Moreover, in
the
past, when inspectors worked out of the Fire Department in
Renton, they were
included. At this time Premium pay in
the
Fire Department is far behind
the Renton Police Department. In
determining
an appropriate premium pay the Fact-Finder must con-
sider the rise in cost of living since the last
contract was
negotiated.
7.4 Recommendations
The Fact-Finder recommends
that the parties adopt the
following
premium pay schedule:
A. Driver Operator -- %55.00
per month
B. Relief Driver Operator --
shift percentage of Driver
Operator premium
C. Training Officer -- %55.00
per month
D. Aid Car Personnel:
$3.50 per 14-hour shift
$2.50 per 10-hour shift
(or $6.00 per
24-hour shift)
E. Fire Inspector -- $25.00
per month
8.1 Proposal
Article VI, Section 4. The Firefighters propose to
compensate
firefighters at an Officers rate of pay when
assigned
as a temporary replacement.
8.2 Positions of the
Parties
The Firefighters contend that
the city has abused the
original
intent of Section 4 by using acting Officers on a
long
term basis when an opening arises, rather than limiting
the
practice to fill in for temporary absences due to sickness
or
disability. Thus the replacement
receives only two hours
overtime
per shift rather than the Officers rate of pay.
The City requests this issue
be set aside by the Panel, con-
tending
it was not part of the regular negotiations, and the
City was not prepared to make
a presentation.
8.3 Comment
The original contract clause
appears to cover temporary
situations
and the use of it to fill vacancies would be an abuse
of
the parties' intentions. Since this item
is a
latecomer
in the negotiations and the City was not prepared
to
proceed on it, the parties should discuss it further.
8.4 Recommendation
The Fact-finder recommends
this issue be set aside for
further
negotiations. The Fact-finder recommends
further,
however,
that the parties seek to limit potential abuse of
the
Article either by adopting the Firefighters' proposal or
by
limiting the duration of working out of classification at
the
current rate and moving to an hour for hour basis after a
given
number of shifts.
9.1 Proposal
Article VII. Both parties propose sick leave incentives.
9.2 Position of the Parties
The Firefighters would grant a
day off to employees who
use
three or less sick days per year. The
City agrees on an
incentive
principle, but only if it is tied to the 10/14
work
schedule.
9.3 Comment
The record shows that the
Renton Police already have such
a
term in their contract. Moreover, both
parties view it as
desirable
but the City would use it to sweeten the effect of
the 10/14 plan.
9.4 Recommendations
The Fact-finder recommends the
adoption of the Fire-
fighters'
proposal. If the shifts change to the
10/14 plan,
the
incentive day should be adapted to same.
10.1 Proposal
Article VIII. The Firefighters propose double-time for
working
on Thanksgiving and Christmas. The City
proposes
that
the days off for holidays in current contract be con-
formed
to the 10/14 schedule.
10.2 Positions of the
Parties
The Firefighters allude to the
fact that the Police
and
other City employees already have tis benefit. More-
over,
the fire suppression personnel spend the entire twenty
four
hours away from their families on these "family oriented"
holidays. The City argues that double pay is
unwarranted
because
firefighters get days off around the holidays.
10.3 Comment
The Renton Police receive a
day off in lieu of
Thanksgiving and Christmas
plus double time for working those
holidays. Other City employees have similar
benefits. No
justification
is seen in denying these benefits to the
Firefighters.
10.4 Recommendation
The Fact-finder recommends
that the parties adopt the
following
language:
Any employee who is required
to work the
following
listed holidays shall be paid double
the
base rate in addition to receiving a day
off
in lieu of that holiday:
A. Thanksgiving
B. Christmas
11.1 Proposal
Article IX. The City proposes to delete the educational
allowance.
11.2 Positions of the
Parties
The City considers it
undesirable to pay for tuition and
books
toward a fire-related degree and then to also pay the
educational
incentive for the degree (Article X).
The City
would
retain the incentive and delete the allowance.
The
Firefighters argue that
numerous firefighters take non-
matriculating
courses that help their skills but would not
qualify
them for an incentive.
11.3 Comment
The educational allowance and
incentive clauses are
relatively
new to the contract. The allowance cost
the City
about
$2000.00 during the past year. This is a
clause that
appears
to be of benefit to both parties and has hardly been
given a
chance to prove itself.
11.4 Recommendations
The Fact-finder recommends
retention of the existing clause.
12.1 Proposal
Article X. The Firefighters seek 1% incentive pay for
holders
of an EMT certificate.
12.2 Positions of the
Parties
The Firefighters believe that
adding the category of
Emergency Medical Technician,
or EMT, to the educational incentive
list
will encourage firefighters to gain or maintain an EMT
rating
and thus be of greater assistance to accident victims.
The City counters that
personnel assigned to the aid car crew
already
receive a shift premium, thus compensating many of the
EMTs since the latter is a
condition to assignment. Moreover,
the
City argues there is no shortage of EMTs and the City
is
not
seeking an increased number.
12.3 Comment
At first blush the
Firefighters' argument that increased
EMTs
would present profound benefit to the City seems convin-
cing, especially in cases where the aid car is
occupied else-
where
and only a truck is dispatched to a call.
It is routine,
however,
for an ambulance to be summoned when it appears there
is a
need. No doubt the EMT training is
helpful to the entire
crew,
and the contract provides free training for all who seek
the
certificate. However, the EMT is
primarily a requisite for
aid
car personnel and this report already recommends a fair
increase
for the premium pay in that category.
12.4 Recommendations
The Fact-finder recommends
retaining the existing language.
13.1 Proposal
Article XI. The Firefighters seek an established date for
intra-departmental
transfers and vacation scheduling.
13.2 Comment
The City assures the
Firefighters that 1978 vacation
schedules
will meet the November 15 deadline.
13.3 Recommendation
Based on the City's assurances
the Panel unanimously recom-
mends
the retention of the existing language.
14.1 Proposal
Article XIII. The Firefighters propose an increase in
longevity
pay.
14.2 Positions of the
Parties
The Firefighters seek to
change the existing lump sum
longevity stipends
to a percentage basis thusly:
Completion of 5 years:
1%
Completion of 10 years: 2%
Completion of 15 years: 4%
Completion of 20 years: 6%
The City resists any
percentage arrangement, preferring to
negotiate
each future longevity increase.
14.3 Comments
The percentage plan would mean
a slight decrease in the
existing
benefits ten years and below, but an increase to those
in
the fifteen and twentieth year categories.
The Firefighters
have
intentionally weighted the benefits toward the senior
years
as an incentive to career firefighters and to maximize
retirement
benefits. I note that among the
comparative cities,
five
others have initiated a percentage schedule.
The Seattle,
Spokane,
and Everett percentages at 2 - 4 - 6 and 8 per cent
are
considerably more generous than the Firefighters' proposal.
Tacoma will move to 2 - 4 - 6
- 8 in 1979. The Fact-finder
sees a
definite benefit to the parties' future bargaining in the
percentage
plan. Since one of the criteria in
resolving disputes
is a
consideration of fluctuation in the cost of living, and
presumably
salary adjustments will be thusly affected, a percentage
of
the latter would be a good guide to adjustment of the longevity stipend.
14.4 Recommendation
The Fact-finder recommends
that Article XIII A be amended
to
read:
Employees shall receive
longevity pay
in
accordance with the following scale:
Completion of 5 years:
1%
Completion of 10 years: 2%
Completion of 15 years: 4%
Completion of 20 years: 6%
15.1 Proposal
Article XV, Sections 1 and
3. The City proposes to "lid"
its
premium payment for medical and dental coverage at the
rate
en effect July 15, 1977, the employee to pay any increase
thereafter.
15.2 Positions of the
Parties
The City believes that
requiring the unit employees to
share
in the increasing cost of medical and dental insurance
will
increase their cost-consciousness and result in a "more
judicious"
filing of claims. The Firefighters
contend that
the
City's compensation level in regard to the Firefighters'
medical -
dental plans are below other employee units because
over
40% of the premiums are funded by the Firemen's Pension
Fund
rather than the City's General Fund.
15.3 Comment
The Firefighters' contentions
are well-founded especially
in
view of the fact that a majority of the comparable cities
offer
full or substantially full coverage, and virtually all
of
major industry in the Renton area does the same. Moreover,
no
other group of City employees receive a portion of their
medical -
dental funding from the state.
15.4 Recommendation
The Fact-finder recommends
retention of existing language
and
benefits.
16.1 Proposal
Article XVI. The City proposes to delete double indemnity
in
regard to dependant life insurance coverage.
16.2 Positions of the
Parties
The City seeks to delete
double indemnity from the insurance
clause
because it is unavailable. The
Firefighters propose an
alternative
of doubling the face value of the insurance.
16.3 Comment
The hearing record indicates
that double indemnity coverage
for
dependants has been unavailable from any carrier since the
inception
of the clause. Doubling the face value
of the term
policies
would not be an exact substitute for the double
indemnity. The City should be released from a term that
has
proved
impossible to fulfill.
16.4 Recommendation
The Fact-finder recommends
that Article XVI be altered to
delete
reference to double indemnity for each dependant.
17.1 Proposal
Article XX. The Firefighters seek to amend the Health
and
Safety clause by including equipment manning requirements
and
by requiring Captains at each of the satellite stations.
17.2 Positions of the
Parties
The City maintains that
equipment manning and the place-
ment and rank of officers is a management
function. The
Firefighters argue that the above
are safety matters and should
be
incorporated into the contract.
17.3 Comment
The placement and deployment
of personnel are, in a broad
sense,
management functions, unless or until it conflicts
with
an obvious working condition such as employee safety.
Adequate manning of equipment
in fire suppression is a safety
matter. I note from Firefighters' Exhibit 29 that on
October 12, 1977 the parties
were in temporary agreement on
such
measures. The terms appear fair and are
not an unwar-
ranted
impingement on management rights. On the
other hand,
the
Firefighters have failed to show how the presence of a
Captain on an engine or pumper is substantially safer than a
lieutenant.
17.4 Recommendation
The Fact-finder recommends
that Article XX shall be
amended
to read:
A. A minimum of twelve (12)
fire suppression
personnel
shall be assigned to each working
shift.
B. The fire suppression crews
will be assigned
on a
regular basis as follows:
1. Headquarters Station:
a. Engine or pumper. Four persons shall
be
assigned, one of whom shall be a
Captain, or a Lieutenant when
the
assigned
Captain is absent from duty.
b. Snorkel or Ladder Truck. One person
shall
be assigned.
c. Aid Car. Two persons shall be assigned.
2. Each Satellite Station (or additional
stations).
a. Engine or pumper. Three persons
shall
be assigned, one of whom shall
be
at least the rank of Lieutenant.
b. Aid Car. Two persons shall be
assigned.
C. The term
"assigned" shall mean the number of
personnel
who would normally respond to
emergency
calls on the indicated vehicle
Nothing in this Article shall preclude the
emergency
reassignment of available fire
suppression
personnel at the direction of
the
Chief or his designated representative.
18.1 Proposal
Article XXI. The City proposes to change the reference
of
"inclusive of lunch period" to "exclusive of lunch period."
18.2 Recommendation
The Panel unanimously
recommends the change in confor-
mance with Proposal 2, dealt with above.
19.1 Proposal
Article XXI, Section 2. The City seeks to delete the
sentence
in Section 2, "The City agrees to replace all vacancies
due
to illness or disability with overtime personnel."
19.2 Positions of the
Parties
The City argues that since
twelve has been established as
the
safety minimum for crew size, hiring replacements to effect
a
greater number is a management function.
The City points to
the
overtime costs of such replacements (%33,000.00 since
the
replacement clause as a safety factor.
19.3 Comment
The Fact-finder believes the
City's position is well
taken. They seek to exercise a management function
to enhance
the
City treasury. The safety aspect of this
matter is already
covered
in the manning clause and the recommended change
therein
regarding equipment manning (Article XX).
19.4 Recommendation
The Fact-finder recommends
that the sentence mentioned
above
in 19.1 be amended to read:
"The City agrees to replace all
vacancies due
to
illness or disability with overtime personnel
when
such vacancy results in a shift crew of less
than
twelve."
20.1 Proposal
Article XXII. The City proposes to delete the retention
of
benefits clause.
20.2 Recommendation
The Panel unanimously
recommends the retention of existing
contract
language.
21.1 Proposal
Article XXVI. The Firefighters propose the institution
of
an employee benefit trust.
21.2 Comment
The Firefighters in their
concern over recent legislative
changes
in retirement seek to set up a supplementary retirement
trust. The Panel feels there has been insufficient
background
work
on the specifics of the trust and the proposal needs con-
siderably more detail work before it will be viable
for negotiations.
21.3 Recommendation
The Panel unanimously
recommends that the trust proposal,
as
presently conceived, be rejected.
22.1 Proposal
Article XXVIV. The Firefighters seek a two year agreement.
The City wants a one year
agreement.
22.2 Positions of the
Parties
The Firefighters aver to the
lengthy negotiations between the
parties
to date as a reason for avoiding such time consuming efforts
on a
yearly basis. The Local requests a
contract opener in 1979
to
give them the option of further negotiations over the manning
level
of the new one hundred foot ladder truck.
It is a new piece
of
equipment to be delivered in 1978. The
City takes the position
that
it does not want to "lock itself in" to anything more than a
one
year contract.
22.3 Comment
I note that the expiring
agreement was a three year contract.
Union and City personnel have
put in many exhausting hours on ne-
gotiations, fact-finding and related matters to date,
and it would
appear
that if such will be the labor relations pattern for the
future,
the parties would be spared an annual ordeal by signing a
contract
for more than one year. More important,
however, the com-
munity at large will benefit from the stability of
a multi-year
contract.
22.4 Recommendation
The Fact-finder recommends a
minimum of two years duration for
the
upcoming agreement. A clause should be
included providing for
a
contract opener, upon proper notice, December 31, 1978 in
regard
to:
A. The 10/14 shift schedule
B. The manning of newly acquired equipment.
23.1 Proposal
Appendix A
- Salaries
23.2 Positions of the
Parties
Since the commencement of the
fact-finding procedures herein,
both
parties have altered their initial demands.
The Firefighters
seek
Consumer Price Index parity plus 3% (down from 5%) for 1978
and
Consumer Price Index parity based on November, 1977 through
November,
1978 plus 3% for the second year of the contract.
The City has, since the start of
fact-finding, raised their
offer
from 4% across the board to 8.8%. The
City also proposes
that
in future contracts, CPI adjustments be calculated on an
August to August basis since
official CPI figures for November
come
out on December 15.
23.3 Comment
The City does not claim a
financial inability to meet the
demands
of the Firefighters, but rather, that
salaries
and benefits are disproportionate among the comparable
cities,
and the City through current and future bargaining seeks
to
bring the salaries in line. The City
should be somewhat
reassured
in this regard b Firefighters' Exhibits 39 and 40
which
indicate the comparable cities are closing in on
lead. It is not undesirable that
forefront. This is recognized by the City (see
Firefighters'
Exhibit 36) as an asset in its
competition with other municipal-
ities for the most desirable personnel.
The City, in regard to salaries, minimizes
the impact of
the
CPI, considering it "only one of six criterion" to be con-
sidered.
(See RCW 41.56.460) It is however
a very significant
factor
in regard to salary adjustment. The
parties in their
bargaining
history have viewed it as a controlling factor.
Salary increases in the past
have usually been the CPI plus at
least
1% for uniformed personnel. The City's
most recent offer
is
reasonable in this regard. The City the
November
to
November CPI will be 8.8%, and has offered the same. The
Firefighters calculate that
the CPI will be 9.9%, apparently
based
on the increase seen in the first three quarters. Based
on
current economic trends the Fact-finder regards the Fire-
fighters'
figures as more accurate.
Although it has been traditional to grant
the Firefighters
as
much as 3% over the CPI, the Fact-finder does not believe it
warranted
herein if the parties effectuate the recommendations
herein
in regard to the premium pa and longevity increases.
Moreover, I note from City
Exhibit 5 that over the past contract
term
salary increases were very favorable in regard to the CPI.
Therefore the Fact-finder
believes a 10% increase across the
board
is fair and reasonable.
23.4 Recommendation
The Fact-finder recommends
that effective January 1, 1978,
all
classifications be increased by 10%.
The Fact-finder recommends further that
effective
January 1, 1979, all
classifications be increased in parity
with
the rise in the CPI, currently in use by the parties for the
period
of August, 1977 through August, 1978, plus one percent;
or
an across the board increase of five percent, whichever is
greater.
Dated November 17, 1977
John Cronin, Fact-Finder
311 1st Avenue
Room 463 Colman Building
Seattle, WA 98104