International
Association of Fire Fighters, Local No. 437
And
City
of
Interest
Arbitration
Arbitrator: Joseph A. Sinclitico
Date
Issued:
Arbitrator: Sinclitico; Joseph A.
Case #: 00591-I-76-00035
Employer:
City of
Date Issued:
In the Matter of the
Arbitration )
)
between )
)
CITY OF
)
and )
)
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF )
FIREFIGHTERS,
LOCAL NO. 437 )
__________________
OPINION AND AWARD
__________________
Arbitrator:
Joseph
A. Sinclitico
I. INTRODUCTION
This proceeding involves an impasse arbitration between
the
City of
Local No. 437, PERC Case No.
591-1-76-35.
The City of
City'
and the Association Firefighters as "the
Mr. Gary R. Hulbert served as representative for the City
and
Mr.
Jerome L. Rubin for the
The parties held a hearing on
in
Bremerton Conference Room on the second floor.
Dean Joseph A. Sinclitico was
appointed to act as Chairman of
the
Arbitration Panel (hereinafter referred to as the Arbitrator).
The other members of the panel
were Mayor Glen Jaarstad and F. Donald
Deitch,
President of the Union Local.
The parties stipulated that the Arbitrator has
jurisdiction to
resolve
the issues in this dispute.
No reporter was present to produce an official record of
the
hearing
but the Arbitrator tape recorded the hearing for his personal
use
in lieu of notes.
This impasse arbitration was conducted pursuant to the
provisions
of
RCW 41.56.450 of the Public Employees Collective Bargaining Act.
Extensive negotiating sessions
had been previously held by the parties.
After impasse was reached, the
parties waived mediation and submitted
the
matter to the fact finder pursuant to RCW 41.56. James Irwin,
Public
Employment Relations Commission, acted as Fact Finder. The
parties
agreed on the following ten cities for comparison in the event
of
fact finding or arbitration:
II.
ISSUES
At the hearing, the parties
presented the following for issues:
1. Wages
2. Dependant
medical
3. Dependant
dental
4. Overtime
5. Manning
requirements
The issue of the minimum manning schedule was tentatively
ruled
as
not timely received and therefore was not addressed at the hearing.
This issue was first introduced by the
arbitration
hearing. RCW 41.56.450 defining the
powers and duties of
the
arbitration panel provides that:
"Reasonable notice of such hearing shall be given to
the
parties who shall appeal and be
heard either by person or
by counsel or other
representative."
The purpose of providing the party with reasonable notice
of the
time
of an arbitration hearing is to provide them with an opportunity
to
gather, order and present their views with maximum clarity. This
issue
requires extensive preparation, consideration and evidence. The
City had no opportunity for
preparation.
In addition, the parties should be bound by the issues to
which
they
stipulated. Therefore, in fairness to
the City this issue was
not
considered. It is to be emphasized that
this issue was rejected
on
procedural and not substantive grounds.
This issue was not rejected
on
the grounds that it was inappropriate subject matter under RCW 41.56.
II. POSITION OF THE PARTIES
The position of the City is to deny issues 2 through 4
and to
grant a
5% wage increase to be applied to each bargaining unit
classification
effective
The
bargaining
unit classification effective
dependant
medical and dental plan through the
Service Inc. effective January
1, 1977. In addition, the Union requests
that
all overtime work shall be compensated at a rate of pay computed
as
though the scheduled rates of pay were computed on a 40-hour week
basis (Jt. Ex. #1), overtime of time and one-half to begin after a
56-hour
work week.
IV. DISCUSSION
Both parties to this dispute presented numerous exhibits
in
support
of their positions. The Arbitrator has
closely examined all
of
the exhibits. Both parties presented
several exhibits comparing
tile
population per firefighter and the per capita cost of the ten
sample
cities to that of
that
the population figure used by the
budget. This figure was 37,095 for the population of
figure
is an inflated figure which includes the PSNS area. The
population
of
figure
to use when comparing
fact
that the population of PSNS is used for one purpose by the City
does
not necessarily mean than it should be used for all purposes.
The population of PSNS is used
in the budget to acquire additional
federal
funds. It is obvious that this
population does have an impact
upon
the
Facility does have its own
firefighters and that the
was
the second line. The Navel Yard and
by a
mutual aid pact. This is similar to that
which exists in many
of
the comparable cities. If the Arbitrator
were to consider the
statistics
based on the addition of the PSNS area then it follows
that
other areas bound by a mutual aid pact should be taken into
consideration
when evaluating population and property valuation
figures. Therefore, only the figures of
to
population and property evaluation should be considered.
The Arbitrator also notes that the City exhibits do not
include
any
of the 1977 settlements. These
settlements are valuable criteria
for
aiding the Arbitrator in reaching a decision.
Where the settlement
figures
are available, they must be closely examined.
The most salient factor in addition to the above
considerations
is
the ability of the City to pay. Each
city is sui generis in
terms
of its financial situation. Each of the
comparison cities and
the
City' of Bremerton have peculiar budgetary problems which force
them
into limitations in terms of revenue.
Disparities between the
cities
is to be expected. However, where there
is a patent gross
disparity
in compensation of benefits, then it should be recognized
and
taken into consideration.
An examination of the statistics presented by the parties
makes
it
manifestly clear that based on the 1977 settlement of the comparable
cities,
a minimum increase of 5.3% would be appropriate.
Mayor Glen Jaarstad of the City
of Bremerton indicated at the
hearing
that the issue was not whether the firefighters merited a
substantial
increase in pay but whether the constraints of the budget
would allow
a substantial increase.
The evidence certainly sustained the Union's contention
that their
productivity
and work product have increased since 1969 (Union Ex. 5-7).
The Seattle CPI Index for 1976 given to the Arbitrator at
the
hearing
was 5.3%. It should be noted that the
November Seattle Index
ranging
from November, 1975 to November, 1976 which is based on the
urban
wage earners and clerical workers Seattle-Everett area was 5.1%.
The Arbitrator has reconstructed the statistics on an
annual
basis. Because of the greater number of hours worked
by the Bremerton
firefighters,
the relative difference in annual take-home pay, percentage
wise,
is significantly not as disparate as shown in Union Exhibit #1
based
upon the hourly rate. For example, if
one computes the hourly
rate
there is a difference of 33% between Everett and Bremerton, but
when
one considers the difference between the same two cities based
upon
the annual take-home pay, the difference is only 11%. The
National average is 5%. Therefore, based upon the statistical
information
given
the Arbitrator in Union Exhibit #1 and #10 and City Exhibit #6, a
wage
increase in the range of 5% to 6% is appropriate.
The statistical information presented to the Arbitrator
regarding
the
family medical and dental plan shows that all ten of the comparative
cities
do have medical programs available.
Eight of the ten provide
100% coverage, the other two
providing 50% to 100% and 90% to 100%
coverage
respectively.
The dental program based on the 1977 settlement figures
indicated
that
nine of the ten provide 100% coverage; only Longview has no
coverage. included in these
figures referred to by the Arbitrator
is
the City of Everett which has the coverage available at city group
cost. (Union Exhibit #9 and #10) Bremerton is the other other
city
without
the benefit of both medical and dental care for dependants.
Money must he made available
to take care of this benefit. Health
benefits
are a primary concern and should be the first cost applied
against
the City's budgetary parameters.
Finally, a variety of statistical information and
testimony was
presented
upon tile overtime issue. However, the
Arbitrator notes
that
only one other city bases overtime rate upon a 40-hour week.
That city is Richland. While the Arbitrator is of the mind td grant
the
request for overtime, budgetary constraints forbid it. Further,
in
light of the other issues presented to the Arbitrator (the wages
and
health benefits) the issue of overtime does not retain the same
degree
of importance.
The major concern in this arbitration is what amount of
money
is
available to be applied to tile Union's requests. The City indicated
that a
total of $279,000.00 is available to be applied to all of the
City's increased costs. The City further produced testimony that it
had
cut its budget expenses and increased their revenue to the maximum
for
the fiscal year of 1976.
The Arbitrator notes that the 1977 budget costs are based
upon
the
predicted budgetary costs in 1976, not what they actually were
in
1976. The City would prefer to start
1977 with the same level of
balance
on hand as they had in 1976. However, if
necessary, a portion
of
this balance could be sacrificed in order to provide the employees
of
the City with adequate benefits.
City Exhibit #4 indicates the fire department budget is
currently
20.9% of the total general
fund budget. This exhibit also indicates
that
the average percent devoted to fire departments in the comparative
cities
is 22.5%. Applying the Bremerton figure
of 20.9% to the total
available
funds for cost increases which would give the firefighters
the
same portion of the budget surplus they now have of the total general
fund,
it would provide $58,368.20 to which the proposed increase in
wages,
medical and dental costs can be applied.
The only figures presented to the Arbitrator on the cost
of the
medical
and dental programs were presented by the City.
This indicates
that
full family medical and dental, covering spouse and the children,
will
cost the City $22,137.12. This leaves
the City with $36,231.08
which
could be applied to the wage demand of the Union. The City
computed
that the 15% wage demand would cost $104,389.99 (City Ex. #9).
The Arbitrator notes that a 1%
wage increase is equivalent to
approximately
$7,000.00. Application of the total
left-over of
$36,231.00 would allow the
Union a 5.2%
wage increase. In light
of
the November to November CPI Index, the Fact Finder's recommendation
and
the increases indicated by the other comparison cities 1977
settlement, an
increase of 5.3% is not out of line.
This would simply
result
in the City either increasing very slightly the firefighter's
percentage
of the total surplus or result in an inconsequential dip
into
the balance available to the City to
carry over for the year
of
1977. It is preferable that the City
reduce slightly the balance
available
to come in the year of 1978.
Finally, it should be pointed out that the decision of
this
Arbitrator is in accord with
that of the Fact Finder except in the
case
of the dependant dental benefit.
V. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, after thoroughly examining the testimony
of the
parties,
exhibits presented by both the City and the Union and the
recommendations
of the Fact Finder, the Arbitrator, pursuant to
RCW 41.56.460 directs:
1. That the
Union is to receive a 5.3% across the board increase
from
January 1, 1977 to December 31, 1977.
2. Union
members are to receive full coverage for dependents
medical
and dental care beginning January 1, 1977.
The City of
Bremerton is directed to pay
the premium to provide this coverage
in
accordance with the plans that were proposed at the hearing."
3. The
overtime computation will remain unchanged.
Rendered and prepared at
Tacoma, Washington January 21, 1977
________________________
Joseph
A. Sinclitico
Arbitrator
Prepared and rendered at
Tacoma, Washington January
21, 1977
_____________________ _________________________
Mayor Glenn K. Jarstad Concurs Dissents
Prepared and rendered at
Tacoma, Washington January
21, 1977
_____________________ _________________________
F. Donald Deitch Concurs Dissents
For the Union