And
City
of
Interest
Arbitration
Arbitrator: Phillip Kienast
Date
Issued:
Arbitrator: Kienast; Philip
Case #: 04246-I-82-00092
Employer:
City of
Date Issued:
IN THE MATTER OP ARBITRATION
CITY OF
) of
) Arbitration Board
-and )
Conrad Clementson
)
Carolyn Gorud
)
Philip Kieuast, Chairman
________________________________ )
RE : Contract Terms
APPEARANCES
For the
Paul Harvey and Finley Young, Esq.
For the City
Deborah Hankins,
This proceeding is pursuant to RCW 41.56 and the rules of
the
American
Arbitration Association. A
hearing in this matter was held
on
December 9, 10 and 15, 1982 and the record closed on December 30,
1982 with receipt by the
Chairman of post hearing memorandum requested
by
the Board. The following issues were
stipulated for decision.
Duration
Hours
Salary
Uniform Allowance
Premium Pay
Medical Benefits
The Board met in executive session several times to
deliberate the
award
in this matter. The Board carefully
considered all the criteria
set
out in RCW 41.56.
Duration
The City proposed a one year agreement; the
ment with a wage reopener
in the second year. The Board initially
considered
the possibility of a two year agreement with a fixed per-
centage or CPI formula wage increase in the second
year. However, a
development
during the pendency of this proceeding required
discarding
this
possibility. In November the Bureau of
Labor Statistics (BLS)
reported
the CPI-W for
from
September 1982 and only a 2.9% rise since November 1981. By
contrast
the September 1982 CPI-W was 298.3--representing a 1.8%
increase
from July, 1982 and a 4.9% increase from the previous
September. In July 1982 the CPI-W for
senting a 1.4% decrease from May 1982, and a 5.4%
increase since the
previous
July.
In the Chairman's view such an erratic pattern of change
in the
CPI-W undercuts any attempts
to set second year wages based on its
estimated
or actual change by July 1983. The
stakes for both parties
are
too high to set wages for 1984 on the recent performance of the
CPI-W
for
The Chairman also rejects the idea of a two year contract
with a
wage reopener. In this
proceeding the
on
achieving an hours reduction through elimination of debit shifts.
The Chairman has concluded
that granting an hours reduction in the 1983
agreement
is not warranted for reasons that will be explained in more
detail
in the hours section of this opinion. He
believes that to
restrict
negotiations only to wages in the second year would improperly
deny
the parties an opportunity to agree to an hours reduction as part
of
an economic package settlement in the 1983 contract. In the Chairman's
view
leaving this and other matters open for discussion in bargaining
on a
contract to be effective
both
parties. It will reduce the potential
for impasse since the
parties
will have a wide range of issues from which to construct a
mutually
acceptable package. Leaving only wages
open increases the
potential
for a deadlock to occur in 1983 negotiations.
For the reasons set out above the duration of the
Agreement will
be
one year,
Hours of Work
Union proposal was for a
reduction to 42.9 in 1983. The City
pointed
out
that
among
the eight comparative cities as shown in Table 1. The City also
argued
that the proposed hours reduction would disrupt the work schedule
already
in place for 1983.
The Chairman finds that an hours
reduction is not warranted at
this
time primarily because
week
among the cities shown in Table 1. These
cities are the ones the
parties
have traditionally used in negotiations and accordingly were
given
the greatest weight in the Board's deliberations. But even
compared
with other cities in the Seattle-Everett area (C48) the work
week
in
Secondary reasons for rejecting the hours
reduction requested by
the
the
disruption it would cause in the 1983 schedule of the fire depart-
ment.
There was considerable disparity between the parties in the
estimated
cost savings achieved with the introduction of the 24 hour
shift. In the Chairman's view another year of
experience with the
schedule
will permit more accurate assessment of any cost savings and
hence
permit a more productive discussion of whether identified savings
could
be applied to an hours reduction. If
significant savings could
be
confirmed in the coming months perhaps an hours reduction could be
negotiated
in the 1984 agreement without requiring substantial con-
cessions
by the
Based on the evidence in the record of this proceeding,
the
Chairman made it clear in the
Board's discussions that any hours
Table 1
Monthly Salaries, Work Week, Hourly
Pates and Costs
______________________________________________________________________________
Urban
Hours Base
Family
Per Hourly Budget
City 1972 1982 Week Rate Index a
_______________________________________________________________________________
Average 1,035 2,139 53.9 9.32 101
(Excluding
(Comparative Ranking) (1) (1)
Overall percentage 138%
Increase 1971-1982
_____________________________________________________________________________
a Index of intermediate family
budget (BLS) Fall 1981.
__________
reduction
would require a commensurate adjustment in the wage-benefit
package,
especially in light of
of
hourly wage rates as shown in Table 1.
In the final analysis the
Chairman decided that the
record did not warrant any hours reduction in
the
1983 Agreement.
Salary
The Board has considered the factors set out in 41.56 in
arriving
at
its decision. Within that statutory
framework the Board weighed
heavily
the negotiating history of the parties and historic trends in
wages
and working conditions of fire fighters in comparable cities As
regards
the former, the record discloses that since 1972 the salaries
for
the
pattern in recent years has differed from the early 1970's. Between
1970 and 1975 salaries rose
faster than the CPI; but between 1976 and
1981 they rose slower than the
CPI-W. Accordingly, near term trends
indicate
the parties have previously found it reasonable to agree to
salary
increases less than the increase in the CPI.
The negotiating history of the parties also reveals that
the parties
have
found it reasonable to agree to salary increases that were the same
as
increases achieved by police officers.
Between 1950 and 1981 the
journeyman
salary for fire fighters and police officers has been
identical
(C73). The important point is not the
reasons why the
parties
agreed to salary increases commensurate to that of police
officers;
rather, it is that in the end they did agree to salary
increases
that were in tandem with those of police officers. Moreover,
past
reductions in fire fighter hours have not resulted in breaking
this
pattern of parity.
In light of the foregoing the Chairman finds that, absent
any
other
compelling reasons, the salary increase to be awarded as a result
of this
proceeding should be comparable to that negotiated by the City
with
police officers, namely, a 4.3% base salary increase retroactive
to
follows:
Fire fighter 30
Lieutenant 35
Captain 38
The City presented no persuasive evidence why its offer
of a 2.0%
increase
was reasonable in light of its past negotiating history. It
argued
from fiscal data that its ability to pay was severely limited,
yet
it agreed to a 4.76% pay increase for police based on the same fiscal
picture. It argued that on a per hour basis that its
fire fighters
were
the best paid in comparison with most other relevant cities. Yet,
it
took their agreements over time to make this happen. The City did
not
show by the evidence that conditions had changed so dramatically
as
to warrant a substantial change in its compensation policy for fire
fighters.
Likewise, the
increase
of salary in excess to that given police officers was warranted.
The
increased,
e.g. more inspections; that the skill and knowledge had
risen,
e.g. learn fire code and emergency medical care. Yet in the
final
analysis, the record suggests that prior negotiations have con-
sidered these changes.
An analysis of Table 1 discloses that in 1972
at
the bottom of the nine cities shown in Table 1; in June 1982 it
ranked
fourth. In terms of base hourly rate
Since 1972
for
the other 8 cities. Taken together the
data in Table 1 strongly
suggest
that the quality and quantity of work done by
fighters
has been accounted for in past salary adjustments.
Uniform Allowance
Regarding uniform allowances, the City proposed a $25
increase in
both
the initial and annual allowance. By
contrast, the
the
City purchase all clothing and protective equipment needed by a
fire
fighter and reduce the current allowance from $250 to $150.
In the Chairman's view the Union proposal calls for a
substantial
departure
from the status quo. In essence the
a
quartermaster system be instituted. When
a party proposes such a
departure
from past agreements it bears the burden of proving that the
change
is warranted and reasonable.
The evidence (U29 and C55) discloses that the main
difference
between
uniform
and equipment initially, but provides one of the highest annual
maintenance
allowances at $250. In light of this
evidence the Chairman
concludes
that the initial uniform allowance should be raised by $300
to
$650 and the annual replacement allowance from $250 to $290. This
would
make the initial uniform costs in
in
where a
substantial portion of initial costs are subsidized by the
State. It would also make the total annual costs
comparable to the
$50 per month increase
provided in the 1982 police agreement.
Premium Pay
The
schedules
in the agreement. The City contended no
improvements were
necessary. The weight of the evidence favors the City's
position in
the
Chairman's view. Overall,
specialties
enjoy premium pay and/or reduced work hours that compare
very
favorably to those enjoyed by fire fighters in cities to whom they
compare
(C62-65 and U30). No new premiums,
therefore, are awarded.
Holidays
on 6
of 11 designated holidays in the Agreement.
The
that
they be paid at 11/2 for all holidays worked.
The City contends
no
change is warranted, however, they did agree to adding one more
holiday
at 11/2 in their settlement with the police.
The Chairman
takes
the view that this agreement points to a similar award here.
When this additional item is
added together with the other items
awarded
above the economic package awarded would be comparable with
the
one the City agreed to with the police officers--a package repre-
senting approximately a 5.6% increase over 1982
compensation levels.
Medical Benefits
The parties are in agreement that the City continue to
pay 100%
of
the medical and dental premiums for the coverage set out in the
contract. However, the Chairman concludes that the
total package
awarded
here should not exceed that negotiated in the police contract.
He therefore denies this
request and related changes in the contractual
sick
leave policy.
AWARD
Duration: 1 year
Salary: 4.3% base salary increase retroactive to
Effective
$30 for fire fighters
$35 for lieutenants
$38 for captains
Medical and dental: 100% payment of medical and dental premiums
retroactive to
Uniform Allowance: Raise initial allowance to $650 and annual
allowance
to $290
fighter is to be
paid 1« when that holiday is worked.
All other proposals are
summarily denied by the Board.
Conrad Clementson
Carolyn Gorud
Philip Kienast, Chairman