International
Association of Fire fighters, Local No. 451
And
City
of
Interest
Arbitration
Arbitrator: M. Zane Lumbley
Date
Issued:
Arbitrator: Lumbley; M. Zane
Case #: 11866-I-95-00253
Employer:
City of
Date Issued:
IN THE MATTER OF ) INTEREST
ARBITRATION
INTEREST ARBITRATION ) OPINION AND AWARD
BETWEEN ) OF
)
)
and ) FOR
THE
) ARBITRATION
PANEL
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF )
FIREFIGHTERS, LOCAL NO.
451 ) AAA Case No. 75 L 3900021896
) PERC
Case No. 11866-1-95-253
Hearing:
Record Closed:
Arbitration Panel: M. Zane Lumbley, Neutral Chairman
Michael
Guerin, City-Appointed Member
Michael
McGovern, Union-Appointed Member
Appearances:
For the City: Otto
G. Klein, III, Esq.
Summit
Law Group, PLLC
For the
7th
District Vice President
International
Association of Firefighters
Issues: Wages, Hours of Work
and Overtime
Date Neutral Chairman's
Initial Opinion and Award Issued:
Date Neutral Chairman's
Amended Opinion and Award Issued:
Date Final Interest
Arbitration Panel Opinion and Award Issued:
INTEREST ARBITRATION OPINION
BACKGROUND
Procedural Matters
An Interest Arbitration Panel was convened pursuant to the
procedures specified in
RCW
41.56.450. The City-appointed Arbitrator was Michael
Guerin and the
appointed
Arbitrator was Michael McGovern. The undersigned Neutral Chairman of the
Panel was selected by the
parties through the offices of the American Arbitration
Association.
A hearing was conducted before the Interest Arbitration Panel
on
"City") was
represented by Otto G. Klein, III, Esq. of the Summit Law Group, PLLC.
Appearing as witnesses on
behalf of the Employer were Employer labor Relations
Consultant Nancy Dombrowski,
Centralia Fire Chief Dana
Murphy. International Association of Firefighters Local No. 451
(hereinafter
the "
Firefighters
7th District Vice President. Appearing as witnesses on
behalf of the
Union President/Centralia
Firefighter Driver/Engineer Richard Mack, Centralia Fire Captain
Robert
Denman and Retired Centralia Fire Captain Alfred Gray.
At the hearing, testimony was taken under oath and the parties
presented documentary
evidence.
No court reporter was present. Instead, the Neutral Chairman tape recorded the
proceedings
in order to supplement his personal notes. The parties agreed upon the filing
of
posthearing briefs and timely briefs were received by
the Neutral Chairman on June 23,
1997,
and mailed to the party-appointed members on
panel conferenced by telephone call to consider the evidence.
Relevant Statutory
Provisions
RCW 41.56.030 specifies, in relevant part:
__________
41.56.070
Definitions. As used in this chapter:
...
(7) "Uniformed
personnel" means:
...
(e) fire
fighters as that term is defined in RCW 41.26.030;
...
__________
Thereafter, RCW 41.56.465 specifies:
__________
(1) In making its
determination, the panel shall be mindful of the legislative
purpose
enumerated in RCW 41.56.430 and, as additional standards or
guidelines
to aid it in reaching a decision, it shall take into consideration the
following
factors:
(a) The
constitutional and statutory authority of the employer;
(b) Stipulations of
the parties;
(c) (i)...
(ii) For
employees listed in RCW 41.56.030(7)(e) though (h),
comparison
of the wages, hours, and conditions of employment of personnel
involved
in the proceedings with the wages, hours, and conditions of
employment
of like personnel of public fire departments of similar size on the
west
coast of the
comparable
employers exists within the State of
employers
may not be considered;
(d) The average
consumer prices for goods and services, commonly
known
as the cost of living;
(e) Changes in any
of the circumstances under (a) through (d) of
this
subsection during the pendency of the proceedings;
and
(f) Such other
factors, not confined to the factors under (a) through
(e) of
this subsection, that are normally or traditionally taken into
consideration n
the determination in the determination of wages, hours, and
conditions
of employment. For those employees listed in RCW
41.56.030(7)(a)
who are employed by the governing body of a city or town
with a
population of less than fifteen thousand, or a county with a population
of
less than seventy thousand, consideration must also be given to regional
differences
in the cost of living.
...
__________
Bargaining History
The
collective
bargaining agreement was facially effective from
1994. Eventually, when they
were unable to reach agreement after some fourteen months of
negotiations,
the Executive Director of
Commission certified a list of
eleven issues for interest arbitration on September 21, 1995.
By the time the undersigned
was notified of his selection as the Neutral Chairman of the
Arbitration Panel in October
of 1996, the parties had pared down the list of issues in dispute
to
the three on which evidence eventually was taken at the
wages,
hours of work and, to the extent it is affected by the decision with respect to
hours of
work,
overtime compensation.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
Approach of the Neutral
Chairman
The approach of the Neutral Chairman will be to quote the
language appearing with
respect
to each issue in the parties' last Agreement and then to set forth the parties'
current
proposals
and their arguments in support thereof. I shall then discuss and decide the
hours
of
work/overtime issue and the wage issue separately, commencing with hours of
work/overtime,
a decision regarding which will affect the analysis of wages for the
remainder
of 1997.
Hours
of Work/Overtime
Relevant Provisions of the
Collective Bargaining Agreement
The 1992-1994 collective bargaining agreement contained the following
hours of work
provisions:1
1
The parties' agreement does not contain a true overtime provision but only a
set of detailed call back provisions in
Article XI. However, the
parties are in agreement that overtime pay is appropriate after performance of
the current 42-hour
work
week and would apply equally after performance of the work week found
appropriate pursuant to this proceeding.
_____
__________
ARTICLE II DEFINITIONS
(a) Full-Time Employees.
An employee who is regularly scheduled to
work
an average of forty-two (42) hours per week.
...
ARTICLE X WORK SCHEDULE
(a) The normal work day
or shift for employees shall consist of
twenty-four
(24) hours commencing at 0800. The normal work schedule for
said
employees shall consist of one shift on and three shifts off.
Positions of the Parties
The Employer seeks to increase the work week from forty-two to
forty-five hours by
requiring
each employee to work one debit day every eight weeks.2 It argues
such an
increase
is necessary to allow the Department to reduce the amount of overtime pay it
currently
is required to pay and to improve its ability to train firefighters. It
contends the
increase
sought is more than justified in comparison to comparable jurisdictions, any
selection
of which demonstrates that City firefighters work far fewer hours than the
average
municipal
firefighter.
2 In the course of a year the 2190 currently
scheduled hours of work are spread over approximately 52.14 weeks,
making
the
average work week 42 hours.
_____
The
week
was agreed to by its members more than thirty years ago in lieu of a wage
increase and
should
not have to be given back now no matter what is occurring in comparable
jurisdictions.
The
wage
increase for the 7% increase in hours it seeks. In the
trimmed
its initial bargaining demand for a fifty-three-hour work week to a request for
forty-
five
hours with a corresponding 7% wage increase during negotiations, the parties
might
have
been able to resolve that issue short of interest arbitration. Finally, the
is
inappropriate to grant in interest arbitration the kind of novel result sought
by the City.
Wages
Relevant Provisions of the
Collective Bargaining Agreement
The 1992-1994 collective bargaining agreement contained the
following wage
provisions:
__________
APPENDIX A
EMERGENCY MEDICAL TECHNICIANS
The City of
dollars
per month to all Certified Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs)
employed
by the
[sic]
be included in computing the hourly wage for overtime purposes.
APPENDIX B WAGES
Classifications and Ranges
Captain 16
Driver/Engineer 14
Firefighter 13
Effective
receive a
cost-of-living adjustment equivalent to ninety percent (93% = 4%)
of
the 1991 second half of the
earners (
month
of December 1992 a six hundred dollar ($600.00) premium pay.
Employees covered by this Agreement who hold the rank of
Captain shall not
receive a
current salary schedule step increase.
Effective
receive a
cost-of-living adjustment equivalent to one hundred percent (100%)
of
the 1992 first half of the
(
four
percent (4.0%) nor more than six percent (6.0%). Said adjustment shall
be
in addition to any step increases received by the employee.
Effective
the
rank of Captain shall receive a current salary schedule step increase.
Effective
receive a
cost-of-living adjustment equivalent to one hundred percent (100%)
of
the 1993 first half of the
(
four
percent (4.0%) nor more than six percent (6.0%). Said adjustment shall
be
in addition to any step increases received by the employee.
CITY OF
This salary schedule shall become effective on January 1, 1992.
This salary schedule
reflects a
four percent (4% ) base wage increase and shall become part of the 92-94
Salary
Range A B C D E F G
1 1066 1103 1142 1181 1224 1265 1309
2 1142 1181 1224 1265 1309 1354 1401
3 1225 1265 1309 1354 1401 1449 1499
4 1309 1354 1401 1449 1499 1550 1604
5 1401 1449 1499 1550 1604 1657 1715
6 1499 1550 1604 1657 1715 1774 1836
7 1604 1657 1715 1774 1836 1898 1965
8 1715 1774 1836 1898 1965 2032 2102
9 1836 1898 1965 2032 2102 2174 2248
10 1965 2032 2102 2174 2248 2325 2407
11 2102 2174 2248 2325 2407 2487 2575
12 2248 2325 2407 2487 2575 2662 2755
13 2407 2487 2575 2662 2755 2849 2947
14 2575 2662 2755 2849 2947 3047 3153
15 2755 2849 2947 3047 3153 3259 3374
16 2947 3047 3153 3259 3374 3488 3611
17 3153 3259 3374 3486 3611 3733 3864
18 3374 3488 3611 3733 3864 3994 4134
19 3611 3733 3864 3994 4134 4274 4424
20 3864 3994 4134 4274 4424 4573 4734
21 4134 4274 4424 4573 4734 4892 5065
22 4424 4573 4734 4892 5065 5235 5417
23 4734 4892 5065 5235 5417 5604 5800
REVISED CITY OF
***
Salary A B C D E F G
RANGE ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______
Hourly 10.88 11.25 11.65 12.04 12.45 12.88 13.33
9 Monthly 1,985 2,053 2,126 2,198 2,173 2,351 2,432
Annually 23,820 24,636 25,512 26,376 27,276 28,212 29,184
Hourly 11.65 12.04 12.45 12.88 13.33 13.78 14.26
10Monthly 2,126 2,198 2,273 2,351 2,432 2,515 2,603
Annually 25,512 26,376 27,276 28,212 29,184 20,180 31,236
Hourly 12.45 12.88 13.33 13.78 14.26 14.73 15.26
11Monthly 2,273 2,351 2,432 2,515 2,603 2,689 2,785
Annually 27,276 28,212 29,184 30,180 31,236 32,268 33,420
Hourly 13.33 13.78 14.26 14.73 15.26 15.78 16.33
12Monthly 2,432 2,515 2,603 2,689 2,785 2,879 2,980
Annually 29,184 30,180 31,236 32,268 33,420 34,548 35,760
Hourly 14.26 14.73 15.26 15.78 16.33 16.89 17.47
13Monthly 2,603 2,689 2,785 2,879 2,980 3,082 3,186
Annually 31,236 32,268 33,420 34,548 35,760 36,964 38,256
Hourly 15.26 15.78 16.33 16.89 17.47 18.06 18.68
14Monthly 2,785 2,879 2,980 3,082 3,188 3,296 3,410
Annually 33,420 34,548 35,760 36,984 38,256 39,552 40,920
Hourly 16.33 16.89 17.47 18.06 18.68 19.32 19.99
15Monthly 2,980 3,082 3,188 3,296 3,410 3,525 3,649
Annually 35,760 36,984 38,256 39,552 40,920 42,300 43,788
Hourly 17.47 18.06 18.68 19.32 19.99 20.67 21.40
16Monthly 3,188 3,296 3,410 3,525 3,649 3,773 3,905
Annually 38,256 39,552 40,920 42,300 43,788 45,276 46,860
__________
Although the copies of the collective bargaining agreement
given the undersigned did
not
contain a separate wage table for year 1993, it is clear that all steps of the
salary range
were
increased by 4% in January 1993. Not only was this the recollection of Employer
Chief Negotiator Dombrowski it is confirmed by application of the provision
quoted above
increasing
that year's wages by... one hundred percent (100%) of the 1992 first half of
the
less
than four percent (4.0%) nor more than six percent (6.0%)... "
and the fact the
relevant
index reflected a 3.5% increase.3
3 City Exhibits No. 36 and 37 report that
wages were increased 3.87% in 1993 and 3.88% in 1994. Performing the
math
on the 1992 and 1994 schedules provided confirms the increase was actually 4%
in both 1993 and 1994. As Ms.
Dombrowski
testified, the 3.87% and 3.88% were arrived at by computing the change from
1992 to 1993 and from 1993 to 1994
employee
wages after addition of the $100 per month EMT stipend to their base wage.
In this connection, I note the City, on page 22 and note 13 of
its brief, attempts to correct a similar oversight in City
Exhibit No. 37 which also
reports that firefighters received a 3.87% wage increase in 1992.
Unfortunately, in doing so, the
city
mistakenly refers to the year "1991" on line 19 of page 22 rather
than 1992 as intended. Interestingly, if the above-cited
contractual
language regarding the agreed-upon increase for 1992 had been applied, i.e.
"... ninety percent (93% = 4%) of
the
1991 second half of the
increase
would have been 3.87% inasmuch as the 1991 second half CPI-W was 4.3%. However, it is clear that Ms.
Dombrowski
testified correctly, and thus the city properly asserts at note 13 of its
brief, that firefighters actually received a
4% increase when one compares
the 1992 schedule reproduced above with the rates set forth in the 1990
schedule of wages
contained
in the 1990-1991 contract provided the Neutral Chairman as part of Union
Exhibit No. 1. While no schedule of 1991
wages
is contained in the exhibits, the 1990-1991 agreement notes at Appendix B on
page 14 that the increase to be applied to
the
1990 salary schedule in 1991 was "... 100%
more
than six percent (6.0%)...." Because City Exhibit No. 39 reflects the 1990
have
received a 6% increase in 1991. Applying this knowledge to the top-step wage of
a Range 13 firefighter confirms the 4%
increase
received in 1992 since $2674 (1990 wage) x 1.06 (1991 wage) x 1.04 (1992 wage)
leads to a 1992 wage of $2947,
precisely
the amount set forth in the 1992 schedule of wages reproduced above. In any
event, because the requisite math
confirms
the correction sought by the City on brief, City Exhibit No. 37, as well as
city Exhibit No. 36, since it contains the
same
numbers, are hereby corrected.
_____
Positions of the Parties
The Union seeks the following wages for 1995 through 1997:
Effective January 1, 1995, a percentage increase in wages equal
to
100% of the Seattle area
CPI-W, mid-year 1994, plus an additional 2%
effective
July 1, 1995;
Effective January 1, 1996, a percentage increase in wages equal
to
100% of the Seattle area
CPI-W, mid-year 1995, plus an additional 2%
effective
July 1, 1996; and
Effective January 1, 1997, a percentage increase in wages equal
to
100% of the Seattle area
CPI-W, mid-year 1996, plus an additional 2%
effective
July 1, 1997.
It argues the CPI-based
increases are necessary in order to continue the historic practice of
the
parties of giving annual cost of living increases and to maintain the historic
position of
the
bargaining unit relative to those other jurisdictions the Union presented the
Interest
Arbitration
Panel for comparison. It asserts the separate 2% mid-year
adjustments are
necessary
in order to compensate City firefighters for the significant increase in
productivity
experienced
over the last decade.
The City contends the following wages are appropriate for the
term of the
replacement
agreement:
1995: No change;
1996: No change; and
1997: Effective January 1, 1997, base salaries to be increased
3 5%.
The City contends its
recommended wages are justified in light of the assertedly
much higher
net
hourly pay received by its Firefighters when compared to any set of comparables
provided
by
either party. In the City's view, this position is also supported by the need
for continuing
internal
equity between firefighters and police officers, the City's stagnant economic
condition
and recent increases in the CPI.
Decision of the Neutral
Chairman
Having now had the opportunity to consider carefully the entire
record in this case,
including
the oral testimony, numerous economic exhibits, opinions of other neutrals and
arguments
of the parties in support of their respective positions, I have determined that
I
must
adopt the City's position as to hours of work/overtime but that I cannot adopt
either
party's
proposal with regard to wages.
As both parties advised on brief, Professor Carlton Snow noted
at page 14 of his
interest
arbitration opinion rendered in Seattle Police Management Association and
City of
Seattle,
PERC Case No. 6502-I-86-148 (unpub. 1988), Attachment
B to the City's brief and
Attachment 2 to the Union's
brief:
... the goal of interest arbitration is to
produce a final decision that will, as
nearly
as possible, approximate what the parties themselves would have
reached
if they had continued to bargain with determination and good faith.
To reinforce this point, both
parties chose to quote yet another decision of Arbitrator Snow
wherein
he held:
In interest arbitration, it is
the task of an arbitrator to render an award
that
applies statutory criteria. If the process is to work correctly, it should not
produce a
result that is substantially different from what would have been
obtained
had the parties resolved the dispute at the bargaining table. Interest
arbitration
is an extension of the bargaining process, and it is not a forum in
which a
party should expect to obtain a novel result...
...
As an extension of collective
bargaining, the parties are under an
obligation
to proceed in the utmost good faith. In interest arbitration, the
requirement
of good faith means that an arbitrator should exclude unreasonable
positions
and should expect the parties to submit a clear-cut, defensible
rationale
for particular requests.
International Association
of Firefighters, Local 1758, and City of Ellensburg
Washington (unpub. 1992), sl. op. at 6. I
agree with the approach suggested by Professor
Snow.
In the case at hand, whereas I believe the hours of work position advanced by
the
City is reasonable and should
be adopted; I believe the wage positions advanced by both
parties
are unreasonable.
Selection of Comparable
Jurisdictions
It is beyond cavil that I am bound by statute, as Professor
Snow found, to apply
certain
criteria in reaching my decision in this dispute. Foremost among those, from
the
perspective
of an interest arbitrator, is the matter of comparability, i.e. a comparison of
the
wages
of the employees at issue with those of employees performing similar work in
similar
jurisdictions.
As Arvid Anderson, past president of the National
Academy of Arbitrators has
said:
The most significant
standard... in the public service is comparability.
Comparability relates to the
subject matter at bargaining and the question of
with
which employers and employees the comparison should be made.
3 The Labor Lawyer 745, 750
(1987). While there is still plenty of room for argument, the
field
of comparison has been narrowed in Washington State to:
... like personnel of public fire departments
of similar size on the west coast
of
the United States. However, when an adequate number of comparable
employers
exists within the state of Washington, other west coast employers
may
not be considered.
RCW 41.56.465(1)(c)(ii). In this connection, although the Union is correct
that this
comparison may
include fire districts as well as city fire departments, assuming the requisite
size
variable is met, I choose not to include fire districts for the reasons that
they have very
different
tax bases, purposes and authorities from those of cities as defined by statute
and, in
my
view, should only be used where it is impossible to devise an adequate list of
city
comparators.
Especially in view of the fact that, unlike cities, which exist to provide a
panoply
of services to their citizenry, fire districts are single-purpose entities
whose sole
responsibility
is the provision of fire protection services, they simply do not provide
meaningful
comparisons for city fire departments.4 The key to the selection
process thus
becomes
the matter of "similar size."5
4 If there ever was justification for
including fire districts in the list of fire departments to be compared to the
city, that
justification
disappeared with the demise of the mutual, or automatic, response agreement
between the City and Lewis County
Fire District No. 12 in recent
years. As Union President Mack candidly testified, the Union did not seriously
expect its original
list
of eleven comparables, which included, inter alia,
two King County, Washington, fire districts, to be adopted. Accordingly,
although
it presented data regarding all the jurisdictions on its original list in the
interest of a complete record herein, it pared
down
its list to a "short list" of six municipal fire departments at
hearing.
5 Neither party either contended I should
consider out-of-state fire departments or provided any data with respect to
such
departments.
_____
The parties approached the question of size in somewhat similar
fashion, beginning
with a
selection of cities with populations and assessed valuations from 50% smaller
to 100%
larger
than Centralia.6 For the City, this resulted in a list of twenty
comparables from
across
the state after jurisdictions without fire departments were excluded. Viewing
this list
as
too large, the City attempted to restrict its bands, both population and
assessed valuation,
to
those cities from 25% smaller to 50% larger than Centralia. After excluding the
City of
Enumclaw because it employed
no shift workers and thus did not appear comparable, the
City's list shrank to six
cities assertedly satisfying the selected parameters,
namely
Anacortes, Tumwater, Aberdeen,
Ellensburg, Moses Lake and Sunnyside.7 Although
preferring
its list of six cities, in the event the Interest Arbitration Panel preferred
more than
six
comparables or perhaps a greater number of Western Washington cities, the City
provided
data with respect to two more cities slightly outside its preferred bands,
namely
Port
Angeles and Mt. Vernon.
6 Initially, of course, in line with its
first approach of attempting to combine Centralia and Lewis County for purposes
of
the selection of comparables, the Union made its selections on the basis of the
larger totals provided by that combination.
7 Unfortunately, as will be seen shortly,
three of the cities do not fit.
_____
Beyond its stated initial approach, the Union's methodology is
not completely clear.
Thus the record does not disclose
exactly how the cities and fire districts falling within the
50% smaller-100% larger band
which appeared on the Union's first list actually were
selected.
However, Union President Mack conceded that only Western Washington
jurisdictions
were considered and that there "undoubtedly" were more cities falling
within the
selected
parameters than appeared on the Union's list. It is also clear that the Union
left in
certain
cities that it considered "close to" meeting the selected parameters.
The Union's
resulting
list of six cities included Port Angeles, Snohomish, Mt. Vernon, Shelton,
Tumwater
and
Camas.8
8 While the record contains data for the
City's much smaller Lewis County sister city Chehalis, neither party proposed
using
Chehalis as a comparator.
_____
My approach has been to attempt to find an adequate number of
cities which I believe
are
most comparable to Centralia among those suggested by the parties.9
In doing so, I
agree
with the City that its second tier of cities with populations and assessed
valuations from
25% smaller to 50% larger than
those of Centralia provides comparators which satisfy the
statutory
mandate of "similar
size." While the range of
selection could be restricted further
in
order to retain cities even more comparable in size, to do so would provide too
few
comparators.
In fact, as will be seen below, after removing cities which simply do not fit
the
selection range and thus apparently were placed on the Employer's list in error
and after
considering
regional differences in the cost of living, as I am required to do by RCW
41.56.465(1)(f),
I must remove a number of cities from the Employer's list, with the result
already
being too few cities. On the other hand, to use the much wider approach of
selecting
all
cities between 50% below and 100% above Centralia's population and assessed
valuation
provides
too much variation for the cities on such a list to be called
"comparable."10
Accordingly, what I shall do
is apply the parameters assertedly used by the City
and then
expand
slightly on the list arrived at thereby in order to develop a selection of
jurisdictions
which
both satisfies the statutory criterion of similar size and provides a
sufficient number of
comparators
to make the act of comparison meaningful.
9 While it is certainly possible, if I were
to compile a list sua sponte, that it would
include other cities not relied on
by
either party, the record does not contain sufficient evidence with regard to
such cities to make such a determination here.
10 I was not provided the necessary evidence
with regard to most of the cities which would fall within the expanded range,
in
any event.
_____
To reiterate, the City would use the cities of Anacortes,
Tumwater, Aberdeen,
Ellensburg, Moses Lake and
Sunnyside and possibly add Port Angeles and Mt. Vernon,
whereas
the Union would use the cities of Port Angeles, Snohomish, Mt. Vernon, Shelton,
Tumwater
and Camas. The 1996 populations and assessed
valuations of these cities and the
Employer taken from Employer
Exhibit No. 17 as well as the variations from the Employer
figures
are set forth in the table below in descending order of population:
__________
City population Var. A. V. Var.
Port Angeles 18790 + 46% 980,756,365 + 113%
Aberdeen 16700 + 30% 491,032,261 + 6%
Ellensburg 13210 + 27% 466,925,569 + 1%
Anacortes 13140 + 22% 927,343,777 + 101%
Moses Lake 13130 + 21% 464,598,738 + 1%
Tumwater 11790 - 8% 697,799,480 + 51%
Sunnyside 11720 - 9% 307,400,875 - 33%
Camas 8810 - 31% 942,572,392 + 104%
Snohomish 7780 - 40% 371,935,509 - 19%
Shelton 7705 - 40% 251,992,434 - 45%
__________
A review of this table reveals, inter alia,
that of the six cities proffered as most
comparable
by the Employer, only Aberdeen, Ellensburg, Moses Lake and Tumwater, the
last
of which the Union would also use, actually fall between approximately 25%
below and
50% above both the population
and assessed valuation of Centralia.11 While Anacortes and
Sunnyside fall well within the
population range, they have assessed valuations outside the
selected
range. The assessed valuation of Anacortes is slightly more than twice
Centralia's
and
that of Sunnyside is approximately 33% lower than Centralia's. As for Port
Angeles and
Mt. Vernon which the Union
would use and the Employer is willing to add, Port Angeles
falls
within only the selected population band but substantially outside the assessed
valuation
parameters
whereas Mt. Vernon falls slightly outside the former and well outside the latter
band.
None of the remainder of the Union's suggested list falls within either band.12
While Camas comes close at 31%
below Centralia's population, its assessed valuation, like
those
of Anacortes, Port Angeles and Mt. Vernon, is just over twice Centralia's. As a
result,
strict application of the 25% below-50% above standard leads to the selection
of only
four
cities, namely Aberdeen, Ellensburg, Moses Lake and Tumwater.
11 As can be seen, of
course, Tumwater's assessed valuation actually is 51% higher than Centralia's.
However, since
it
is impossible to apply absolute surgical precision to this analysis which
necessarily involves a certain amount of judgment,
I shall consider it within
range.
12 As shown above,
Employer Exhibit No. 17 shows that Snohomish has an assessed valuation of
$371,935,509.
Employer Exhibit No. 1A, which
was entered in evidence at mediation by the Union, and Union Exhibit No. 3
here, both of
which
reference 1994 values, give a vastly different number of $1,068,000,000.
Similarly, Union Exhibits No. 6 and 12, the
second
of which addresses the Union's short list of cities from which I understood all
fire districts had been removed, both report
a
figure of $1,303,195,920 for 1997. I infer those much larger valuations
mistakenly continue to refer to Snohomish Fire
District No. 4 rather than to
the City of Snohomish. However, for reasons set forth in note 14, infra, the
City' of Snohomish
will
not be selected as a comparator in any event.
_____
Moreover, I believe that the consideration of regional
differences in the cost of living
mandated
by RCW 41.56.465(1)(f) may require the elimination of those Eastern Washington
cities
on the Employer's list. Although the record does not contain precise cost of
living
data
for the cities in question, it is clear from Employer Exhibit No. 9 reporting
wage data
from
all Washington counties for 1994 and 1995 that wages in general, which relate
to cost
of
living, are considerably lower in Grant, Kittitas and Yakima counties, where
Moses Lake,
Ellensburg and Sunnyside,
respectively, are located than those paid in Lewis County. In
fact,
that exhibit demonstrates the wages in those counties lagged from 14 to 19%
behind
Lewis
County in the reported years. Therefore I must either
adjust the wages for those cities
in
order to use them as comparators or remove them from the list. My preference is
to
remove
them initially. The possible list of four thus becomes a list of two since
Sunnyside
was
removed earlier. Because two comparators are simply not enough, I must find a
way to
put
some of the proffered cities back on the list.
Because Anacortes fits neatly into the population band and
fails to meet only the
assessed
valuation test, it appears to be a candidate for reinsertion. The same is true
of Port
Angeles.
Moreover, Port Angeles shows up on the Union's list and on the Employer's
alternate
list.13 Similarly, Sunnyside meets the population test and only
barely fails to
satisfy
the assessed valuation test. Although it is an Eastern Washington city and thus
subject
to the regional cost of living differences referenced above, it is clear from
Employer
Exhibits No. 10 and 11 which
report median household income and per capita income by
county
that, in contrast to the counties containing Ellensburg and Moses Lake, Yakima
County where Sunnyside is
located experienced median household incomes which lagged
behind
Lewis County by an average of only 2% in 1994-1996 and per capita income which
was
only 1.6% lower in 1994.14
13 Mt. Vernon also appeared on both lists.
However, I believe it is simply too large as to both population and assessed
valuation
to be considered a city of similar size.
14 Of the remaining
cities, Shelton has both a population and assessed valuation which are far too
small to be comparable
whereas
Snohomish has a population which is too small. In this connection, I have
adopted the city's figure of 7780 for the
1996 population of Snohomish
because the Union's much higher figures of 26800 and 21000 for 1994 and 1997,
respectively,
do
not coincide with any publicly-recognized census I am aware of and thus
apparently refer to Snohomish County Fire District
No. 4 rather than to the city
of Snohomish as I found in note 12, supra, was the case with respect to the
assessed valuations
reported
for "Snohomish" by the Union. Lastly, Camas presents something of an
enigma in that its population is only roughly
two-thirds
that of Centralia while its assessed valuation is more than twice the size of
Centralia's, perhaps because of its close
proximity
to the Portland, Oregon-Vancouver, Washington, metropolitan area, thereby
making its use unreliable as well.
_____
Before making a Final decision, however, I believe the
potentially comparable cities of
Aberdeen, Tumwater, Anacortes,
Port Angeles and Sunnyside should be compared to
Centralia one more time on the
basis of per capita assessed valuation, as the Employer
suggested
on brief. While this might appear at first blush to be an additional and
unnecessary
step, it will confirm whether the relationship between the two indicia which
causes
the cities being examined to appear to be comparable actually exists. Using the
same
numbers
appearing in the table above, that comparison appears as follows:15
__________
City population Var. A. V. Per
Cap. Var.
Aberdeen 16700 + 30% 491,032,261 29,403 - 18%
Anacortes 13140 + 22% 927,343,777 70,574 + 97%
Centralia 12860 ----- 461,213,339 35,864 -----
Tumwater 11790 - 8% 697,799,480 59,184 + 65%
Sunnyside 11720 - 9% 307,400,875 26,229 - 27%
__________
Clearly, only two of the
cities, namely Port Angeles and Aberdeen, exhibit per capita
assessed
valuations which also fall within the 25% below-50% above band selected as
preferable
for the two individual components of population and assessed valuation.
However, Tumwater and
Sunnyside are close to fitting these parameters. Anacortes, on the
other
hand, which the Employer would include as a comparator, is simply off the
chart.16
As the Employer concedes on
brief:
... if
two jurisdictions are roughly the same size, but one has an assessed
valuation
that is twice as large as the other, that jurisdiction will be
substantially
better off from an economic point of view. Since significant tax
revenues
are generated by property values, this can be an important indicia in
terms
of assessing comparability.
Accordingly, I cannot find
Anacortes comparable to Centralia and I shall use only the cities
of
Port Angeles, Aberdeen, Tumwater and Sunnyside as comparators. While I would
prefer
a
greater number that fit the selected parameters, four will provide adequate
data. Clearly, it
is
preferable to use a shorter list of cities which appear very comparable rather
than a longer
list
which includes substantially less comparable cities added merely to lengthen
the list.
15 Several of the figures shown for assessed
value per capita differ slightly from those reported by the City on brief.
However, with the exception of
the number for Anacortes, the differences appear to be the result of rounding
and all are
insignificant.
16 Had Camas been included in this table, it
would have ended up even farther off the chart than Anacortes.
_____
Hours of Work/Overtime
The following table illustrates the hours of work of Centralia
unit employees and
comparator
employees:
__________
City Weekly
Contract Hours
Port Angeles 51.0
Aberdeen 50.2
Tumwater 49.8
Sunnyside 49.4
Average 50.1
Centralia 42.0
Variation -16%
__________
I agree with the City that the hours worked by Centralia
firefighting employees are
out
of line with hours worked by employees of comparable jurisdictions. In fact, as
the
various
exhibits placed in evidence by both parties make clear, it really does not
matter what
other
jurisdictions are selected for this comparison. By any comparison, the
scheduled hours
of
unit employees here are extremely low. While I appreciate the Union's point
that its
members
acceded to Employer demands that it work these hours in lieu of a wage increase
over
thirty years ago, collective bargaining is a fluid relationship. This is so for
the labor-
management
community in general as well as for individual bargaining relationships. The
hours
worked by firefighting employees in other jurisdictions demonstrates
conclusively that
the
contract hours in Centralia are out of touch and that the City's demand for a
modest
increase
in those hours is reasonable.
I am not inclined to find otherwise because the City waited
until interest arbitration to
reduce
the earlier unrealistic proposal for an increase to fifty-three hours advanced
in
negotiations.
I must evaluate those proposals which the parties bring to the interest
arbitration
table. Nor am I convinced the Employer's proposal should not be adopted simply
because
it may be a proposal less commonly advanced than many others that come to mind.
While Arbitrator Snow
certainly cautioned against the expectation of a novel result from
interest
arbitration, he uttered that caution in the context of explaining his view that
interest
arbitration
should not "... produce a result that is substantially different from what
would
have
been obtained had the parties resolved the dispute at the bargaining
table."
International Association of
Firefighters Local 1758, and City of Ellensburg
Washington, supra, at 6. In
doing so, he quoted with approval the following observation of
the
Illinois State Labor Relations Board made in Will County and Sheriff of Will
County v.
AFSCME
Council 31. Local 2961, (Nathan, Chair, 1988):
Interest arbitration is
essentially a conservative process. While, obviously,
value
judgments are inherent, the neutral cannot impose on the parties
contractual
procedures he or she knows the parties themselves would never
agree
to.
As Union President Mack
conceded at hearing, had the City sought this modest increase in
hours
and offered a commensurate wage increase during bargaining, the Union would
have
"taken
a close look." Accordingly, leaving aside for the moment the failure to
offer an
equivalent
increase in wages, a matter to be addressed in the next section of this
decision, the.
City's request for a 7%
increase in contract hours, standing alone, cannot be deemed an
unreasonable
position.
Moreover, as Arbitrator Wilkinson opined in Pierce County Fire
District No. 2 and
International Association of
Fire Fighters, Local 1488, (unpub. 1988), Attachment
J to the
Employer's brief:
I would caution against casting too heavy a burden on the party
seeking
change.
If that were to occur, the status quo would be perpetuated indefinitely
and
interest arbitration would cease to be a viable means for resolving
differences
regarding employment.
Id.,
sl. op. at 14. This is consistent with the
view of Professor Snow expressed in the
above-cited
Ellensburg opinion to the effect that a party seeking change must substantiate
its
position
with a "clear-cut, defensible rationale. " In this case, I believe
the City's reasons of
reducing
the amount of overtime pay from the 1996 level of an average of $11,400 per
firefighter
and enhancing its ability to conduct firefighter training satisfy that
requirement.
As I have already found, it is clear that the increase sought
is justified in light of the
hours
worked in comparable jurisdictions. Even after increasing the weekly hours of
work to
forty-five,
Centralia firefighters will continue to work 10% fewer scheduled hours than
their
contemporaries
at the cities found comparable. Moreover, the impact of the added work, as
the
City argues, will be minimal, requiring one additional day of work every eight
weeks, or
six
and one-half additional days per year. Put another way, as the City did on
brief, instead
of
forty-two days off out of every fifty-six, firefighters will have only
forty-one days off
after
implementation of the increase. Accordingly, I shall order that the new work
week be
forty-five
hours, with overtime at the contractual rate paid for all hours thereafter, the
scheduling
of individual debit days aimed at accomplishing the increase in hours to be
negotiated
by the parties, with the first such debit day to be worked no sooner than eight
weeks
after issuance of the Final Award in this matter.17
17 As the City
recognized at hearing, at the rate of three hours per week, it will be eight
weeks before any employee will
owe
the city a full debit day of twenty-four hours. That will give the parties
ample opportunity to negotiate and reach
agreement
with regard to the details of scheduling of those debit days, the various
approaches to which need not be explored
here.
_____
Wages
For purposes of determining the appropriate wage to appear in
the parties' next
contract,
I shall compare 1994 Centralia wages to the 1995 wages paid by the selected
comparators.
I intend to make these comparisons for top-step firefighters with ten years
service.18 I
shall not do a separate analysis of the driver/engineer position because there
is
only
one comparator, Aberdeen, which has such a classification. Instead, I intend to
continue
to apply the existing 7% differential to the Range 13 wages eventually arrived
at in
order
to formulate the Range 14 driver/engineer wages. Nor do I intend to perform a
separate
analysis for captains because, although I agree with the City that Centralia
captains
would
fare even better than Centralia firefighters if I made the same comparisons
regarding
them
as I shall make for firefighters below, the record contains insufficient
evidence of the
basis
on which the parties have arrived at the differential paid to captains over and
above the
firefighter
wage for me to entertain any thought of upsetting that relationship. As a
result, as
in
the case of driver/engineers, I shall continue to apply the existing
differential, in this case
22.5%, to the Range 13 wages
eventually arrived at in order to formulate the Range 16
captain
wages.
18 According to
Employer Exhibit No. 5, average length of service for the fourteen department
employees on the payroll
as
of the date of the hearing was 9.86 years.
_____
With two exceptions, I also decline to add any additional
values to the top-step
firefighter
wages compared even though both parties have attempted to include a mix of
benefits
and additional compensation in their analyses. I do so for the reasons stated
by
Arbitrator Beck in his
decision in City of Bellingham and International Association of Fire
Fighters, Local No. 106, (unpub. 1991), Attachment G to the Employer's brief, i.e.
because
it
makes an "apples to apples" comparison difficult if not impossible.19
The two exceptions
are
holiday pay and EMT pay. As a careful comparison of Employer Exhibits No. 6 and
7
with
the 1994 contractual wage schedule makes clear, both are received by all unit
employees,20 albeit holiday pay is received by employees
in varying amounts depending on
the
number of holidays actually taken.21 Although I am somewhat
concerned about the
effect
of adding EMT pay since Aberdeen was the only comparator to pay a separate EMT
stipend
in 199522 and the record does not disclose how many of its
firefighting employees
are
EMT-certified, because both parties included it in their calculations, I shall
do likewise
so
that my eventual decision makes sense in light of the parties' positions.
Lastly, I am
convinced,
as are both parties, that the wages being compared have meaning only in the
context
of the relative net hours, defined as base contract hours minus vacation and
holiday
hours,
worked by the employees under scrutiny.23 That computation will lead
to a "net
hourly
compensation" for Centralia and the comparators which will become the
principal
basis
for my final determination of the 1995-1997 wages I believe are appropriate
under the
circumstances.
19 In this connection,
I shall not follow the weighting approach taken by Arbitrator Krebs in City of
Spokane and
International Association of
Fire Fighters, Local No. 29, (unpub. 1988),
Attachment F to the Employer's brief, since in that
case,
unlike here, the parties agreed the separate wage paid to "equipment
operators" should be taken into consideration in
arriving
at the wage for firefighters. In this case, only the City would add the
driver/engineer premium to arrive at a weighted
firefighter
wage. In all the Union's comparisons, the unadulterated top-step firefighter
wage is used.
20 The one exception may be Firefighter Foglesong, whose "base wage," as that term is use
on Employer Exhibits No.
6 and 7,
is not so easily susceptible of the same analysis in light of the 1994 wage
structure as are the wages of other employees.
Thus it is not entirely clear
whether Foglesong receives EMT pay. Additionally, of
course, paramedic-certified employees
LeBoeuf
and Fisher receive a higher level of compensation for their certifications but
their pay may be presumed to include pay
for
the EMT certification.
21 When employees take a holiday, they receive
straight time pay for the holiday. Because shifts are scheduled around
the
clock, everyone cannot take all eleven holidays set forth in Article XII of the
parties' last contract. If employees work on
a
holiday, they receive a premium of time and one-half in addition to straight
time pay for the day.
22 Sunnyside began paying a separate monthly
EMT stipend of $45.00 in 1996.
23 The parties are in agreement that the figure
for net annual hours worked is arrived at by subtracting 144 vacation hours
received
by employees with six to twelve years' service and twenty-four holiday hours
received by all employees from the 2190
total
contract hours. Union exhibits consistently take that approach. For some
reason, however, whereas Employer exhibits
placed
in evidence in support of its wage arguments do so as well, Employer exhibits
received in connection with its hours of
work
case take only the vacation hours into consideration and ignore holiday hours.
I have taken both vacation and holiday
hours
into consideration for all purposes.
_____
The following table compares the 1995 top-step Firefighter
annual base wages, annual
EMT and holiday pay, net hours
worked and resulting net hourly compensation at the
comparators
with the same 1994 variables at Centralia as well as the percentages by which
Centralia exceeded or lagged
behind the average base wage, net hours worked and net hourly
compensation
paid by the comparators:24
24 The figures I have used do not agree in all
cases with those provided by the parties. Each one ultimately selected
either
appeared to be the correct parry-supplied number or came from an examination of
the relevant collective bargaining
agreement
or other evidence in the record.
_____
__________
FF EMT Holiday Net Hours Net
City Base Pay Pay Worked Hourly
Port Angeles $40,920 $0 $1636 2400 $17.73
Aberdeen 39,876 798 0 2320 17.53
Tumwater 39,048 0 1991 2422 16.94
Sunnyside 31,944 0 0 2373 13.47
Average 37,947 - - 2379 16.42
Centralia 38,256 1200 2844 2022 20.97
Variation + 0.8% - - -15.0% +27.7%
__________
Thus it can be seen that the
1994 net hourly wage of Centralia top-step firefighters was
27.7% higher than the 1995 net
hourly wage of top-step firefighters at the comparables.
Even if Sunnyside, which pays
a much lower net hourly wage than the other comparables,
were
omitted and the comparison were restricted to the three Western Washington
comparables,
the 1994 net hourly wage of Centralia top-step firefighters would remain
20.5% higher than the 1995 net hourly wage of top-step firefighters at
those comparables.
To reiterate, the Union has
proposed increases retroactive to January 1 of 1995, 1996
and
1997 equivalent to the previous mid-year Seattle area CPI-W (3.5%, 3.2% and
2.9%,
respectively)
and an additional 2% retroactive to July 1 of 1995, 1996 and 1997, whereas the
City has proposed no increases
for 1995 and 1996 and a 3.5% increase retroactive to
January 1, 1997. Additionally,
of course, the Union believes that the increase in the work
week
should be accompanied by a corresponding increase in base wages and the City
disagrees.
I believe an intermediate result is appropriate in the
circumstances present here and
thus
will order that the City's recommended approach of no increase for years 1995
and
1996 and a 3.5% increase in
base wages effective January 1, 1997, be adopted but that the
Union's request for a 7%
increase in compensation for the increase in the work week from
forty-two
to forty-five hours also be adopted effective on the date the Interest
Arbitration
Panel's Award becomes final.25
I believe this Award is appropriate for the reasons which
follow.
25 The 7% wage increase will be calculated
after addition of the 3.5% increase in base wages effective January 1, 1997,
i.e.
via the following formula: 1994 base wage x 1.035 x 1.07.
_____
Principally, although I can appreciate the Union's argument
that it believes Centralia's
position
as a wage leader should not be disturbed here, as the net hourly wage
comparisons
above
make abundantly clear, Centralia is simply too far out in front. The demand
that this
trend
continue is one of the two reasons the parties ended up in interest
arbitration; the
Employer could not and would
not agree to continue so far ahead of the pack. Thus it is
appropriate
that Centralia firefighter wages be frozen in 1995 and 1996 in order that
comparable
jurisdictions be allowed to make up a bit of the difference. On the other hand,
the Union
was in no position to accede to the City's demand that it agree to an increase
in its
members'
hours of work with no accompanying increase in wages. This was the second
reason
the parties found the statutory interest arbitration process unavoidable. While
I have
agreed
that the gap between Centralia and the comparators should be narrowed, a
reduction
in
the net hourly compensation received by Centralia firefighters is not the
desirable way to
accomplish
that goal.
Lest the decision of the Neutral Chairman be viewed as a
"splitting of the difference"
at
odds with the opinion of one of the deans of Pacific Northwest arbitration,
Arbitrator
LaCugna,
expressed in his decision in Kent Police Officers' Guild and
The City of Kent,
(unpub. 1980), Attachment A to the City's brief, let
me assure the parties it is nothing of the
sort.
Rather, it is the result of a diligent effort to fashion a case-specific ".. final decision
that
will, as nearly as possible, approximate what the parties themselves would have
reached
if
they had continued to bargain with determination and good faith." Seattle
Police
Management
Association and City of Seattle, supra, at 14.
It is a reasonable result which,
on
balance, serves the needs of both parties.
For example, it will assure that the City continues to attract
and retain qualified
firefighters,
thereby keeping turnover at the relatively low level historically experienced
in
Centralia, a consideration
noted by other interest arbitrators.26 See, e.g., Arbitrator
Lehleitner's
interest arbitration opinion in Teamsters Local 58 representing Cowlitz County
Corrections Officers v.
Cowlitz County, (unpub. 1996) and Arbitrator Axon's
opinion in
Mount Vernon Police Services
Guild and City of Mount Vernon, Washington, (unpub.
undated
Ca. 1993). Low turnover is a factor which serves the interests of both parties
as well
as
the interest of the public because it assists in ensuring the presence of a
qualified
firefighting
force familiar with the environs it is called on to protect.27
26 The reduction in the net hourly wage of
Centralia firefighters which would have occurred had I adopted the City's
request
to increase hours without a corresponding increase in base pay might well have
led to an increase in turnover.
27 Low turnover obviously also saves the City
training dollars.
_____
The result arrived at also survives internal equity comparisons
vis-a-vis City police
officers
whose base wages have increased by 15.27% since 1991 compared to the resulting
increase
of 15.5% for firefighters, disregarding the 7% increase awarded for the
3-hour-per-
work-week
increase and without taking into account any resulting compounding. A direct
comparison
of base wages paid police officers and firefighters leads to a similar result;
whereas
police officer monthly wages were $2174 in 1986, $2834 in 1991 and $3294 in
1997, firefighter wages, after
properly subtracting the stipend paid for the separate EMT
certification,
stood at $2117 in 1986, $2834 in 1991 and $3300 as of January 1, 1997.
Additionally, I am convinced the increases are within the realm
of reason in terms of
the
City's economic condition. In this regard, the City does not claim an inability
to pay.
As Arbitrator Snow recognized,
"... unlike employers in the private sector, public
employers
ordinarily cannot put forth a persuasive 'inability to pay' argument. " Seattle
Police Management Association
and City of Seattle, supra, at 11. The
City asserts instead
that
the stagnant economy and the deterioration of the average wage and per capita
income in
Lewis County vis-a-vis the state average during the last two decades demand restraint.
While the evidence in the
record substantiates that average wages in Lewis County declined
significantly
in the 1980s and that both personal and per capita income rose less than
statewide
averages during the 1970s and 1980s, average wages in Lewis County began the
same
upward climb as the rest of the state in 1992 and Lewis County came in above
the
median
of counties in 1994 and 1995 monthly wages and near the median of counties in
1994
per
capita income.28
28 It may be argued that medians provide a
better gauge than means inasmuch as the latter are susceptible to skewing by
a
few counties such as King and Snohomish which have much larger industrial and
population bases. In this regard, while the
City is correct that Lewis
County is considered a "distressed" county based on its recent
unemployment figures, so are nineteen
of
the thirty-eight other Washington counties, sixteen of which had unemployment
figures equal to or higher than Lewis County
as
of April 1, 1996.
_____
Moreover, although City Manager/City Attorney Nelson testified
without
contradiction
regarding the substantial expenditures soon to be required in areas such as its
sewer
treatment plant, the combination of wage and hours of work increases found
appropriate
herein are not perceived as placing an onerous burden on the City, particularly
in
view
of the substantial savings in overtime payments to be realized as a result of
the
increased
work week, not to mention what may be regarded as the equivalent of savings
resulting
from the 1995-1996 wage freeze. 29
29 Although the City will be paying base wages
and benefits to a greater number of firefighters, additional overtime wage
savings
will be realized by the hiring of the new firefighters aimed at providing the
greater coverage desired by the City Council.
_____
Both parties argue that the results they seek are supported by
the CPI, although they
contend
different indices should be applied. While I have studied carefully all the CPI
data
placed
in the record, I am not convinced that either the "All
the
City or the "Seattle-Tacoma" index urged upon me by the
Centralia well.30
Moreover, although the parties historically have tied wage increases to the
Seattle CPI-W, as evidenced by
their 1992-1994 contract, I am of the view that the specific
use
of CPI data in the circumstances of this case is outweighed by other factors
brought to
my
attention by the parties.
30 Whereas the All U.S Cities index showed
increases of 2.7% for 1994, 2.5% for 1995 and 3.3% for 1996, the
index
recorded gains of 3.7%, 3.0% and 3.3% for the same periods.
_____
I wish to make clear at this juncture that I have not forgotten
the
request
for 2% extra pay in return for the increased productivity of its members.
Without
question,
as Union Exhibit No. 21, the outline of the Chief's April 1996 remarks to the
City
Council, make clear, 1995
building inspections were up 2.8% over 1990 and a substantial
475% over 1985, 1995 fire
responses had increased 9% since 1990 and 46% since 1985,
1995 medical responses were up
27% over 1990 and 116% over 1985, and 1995 service
calls
had
increased by 19% since 1990 and 59% since 1985. The 1995 combined increases for
fire,
medical and service calls amounted to 22.7% since 1990 and 91% since 1985.
However, the City is in the
process of returning the number of staff from the recent low of
eleven
in 1994 to the historic high of sixteen; at the time of the hearing, fourteen
firefighters
were
on board; with the goal of sixteen soon to be realized. Accordingly, as the
City
argues,
relief from the significantly increased individual productivity required in the
last
several
years is on the way and I am of the view that an additional wage increase tied
to
production
is not appropriate.31
31 In so concluding, I have not relied on the
general finding of Arbitrator Krebs in City of
Association of Fire Fighters,
Local No. 29, supra, with respect to the increase in certain kinds of responses
during the decade
prior
to his 1988 decision therein. While he undoubtedly had the data before him on
which to base such a finding, that data
is
not contained in the record before me. However, I note that Union President
Mack conceded on cross examination that the
entire
industry is experiencing an increased number of calls.
_____
The following table demonstrates the precise difference a wage
freeze in 1995 makes
by
comparing 1995 figures at the comparators to 1995
1995 holiday pay experienced
by the City taken from Employer Exhibit No.6:
__________
FF EMT
City Base Pay Pay Worked Hourly
Port Angeles $40,920 $0 $1636 2400 $17.73
Tumwater 39,048 0 1991 2422 16.94
Sunnyside 31,944 0 0 2373 13.47
Average 37,947 - - 2379 16.42
Variation + 0.8% - - -15.0% +26.5%
__________
As can be seen, with no wage
increase in 1995 and actual 1995 holiday pay slightly reduced
from
1994 levels,
employed
by comparable jurisdictions in net hourly pay received.
Another table will serve to demonstrate the difference the
combined 1995 and 1996
wage
freezes make by comparing 1996 figures at the comparators to 1995 Centralia
figures
which
use the actual 1996 holiday pay experienced by the City taken from Employer
Exhibit
No. 7:32
32 As in the preceding
table, the figures shown do not agree in all cases with the numbers suggested
by the parties. Those
selected
either appeared to be the correct party-supplied number or came from an
examination of the relevant collective
bargaining
agreement or other evidence in the record.
_____
__________
FF EMT
City Base Pay Pay Worked Hourly
Port Angeles $45,792 $0 $1831 2400 $19.84
Aberdeen 41,076 822 0 2320 18.06
Tumwater 40,416 0 2061 2422 17.54
Sunnyside 35,220 540 0 2236 15.99
Average 40,980 - - 2345 17.86
Centralia 38,256 1200 3030 2022 21.01
Variation 6.6% - - -13.8% +17.6%
__________
It is clear from this table
that the wage freeze in 1995-1996 closes the unrealistic gap
between
Centralia and the comparators seen in 1994 while preserving the negotiated historic
position
of Centralia as a wage leader since Centralia firefighters continue to receive
a net
hourly
wage 17.6% higher than their fellow firefighters.33
33 Even if Sunnyside, which closed its own gap
significantly in 1996, were removed from the equation, City firefighters
nevertheless
would stay 13.7% ahead of comparator employees.
_____
The following table compares the 1997 figures at the
comparators34 to expected 1997
Centralia figures which
include the 3.5% base wage increase effective January 1, 1997:35
34 The record does not contain 1997 data for
Aberdeen and Sunnyside. Accordingly, the table continues to use 1996 data
for
those two cities along with updated 1997 figures for Centralia, Port Angeles
and Tumwater.
35 The 1997 Centralia annual wage was arrived
at by multiplying the 1994 hourly rate of $17.47 by 3.5% and
multiplying
that product by 2190 hours. The 1997 Centralia holiday pay figure was estimated
by averaging the Employer's
actual
1994-1996 holiday pay experience and multiplying that number by 3.5%. An
estimate was necessary because the
Employer's actual experience
in 1994-1996 does not follow any expected formula and thus I cannot predict
accurately what
impact
the increase in the number of employees to fourteen and eventually to sixteen
will have on holiday pay.
_____
__________
FF EMT Holiday Net Hours Net
City Base Pay Pay Worked Hourly
Port Angeles $45,792 $0 $1831 2400 $19.84
Aberdeen 41,076 822 0 2320 18.06
Tumwater 41,832 0 2133 2422 18.15
Sunnyside 35,220 540 0 2236 15.99
Average 40,980 - - 2345 18.01
Centralia 39,598 1200 2902 2022 21.61
Variation -3.4% - - -13.8% +20.0%
__________
Accordingly, after a two-year
freeze and a 3.5% increase on January 1, 1997, Centralia top-
step
firefighter net hourly wages are 20.0% ahead of similar wages at the
comparables, thus
preserving
the wage leadership role the parties themselves have developed over the years
while
reducing the runaway differential seen as of 1994.36
36 If an increase occurred in the net hourly
compensation of firefighters at Aberdeen and/or Sunnyside in 1997, the
relative
difference between Centralia and the comparators would, of course, drop below
20%.
_____
When the 7% increase in hours and the corresponding wage
increase found
appropriate
for Centralia are factored in subsequently, the comparison changes as follows:
__________
FF EMT Holiday Net Hours Net
City Base Pay Pay Worked Hourly
Port Angeles $45,792 $0 $1831 2400 $19.84
Tumwater 41,832 0 2133 2422 18.15
Sunnyside 35,220 540 0 2236 15.99
Average 40,980 - - 2345 18.01
Variation + 3.4% - - - 7.1% +18.5%
__________
The bottom line is that Centralia top-step firefighters
continue to be paid ahead of
those
employed at the comparators, but by 18.5% rather than the 27.7% previously
seen.
Notwithstanding the City has
realized the modest increase in hours it sought and forestalled
any
wage increase until 1997, the Union has been able to accommodate the City's
needs
without
its members assuming any additional hours of work for which no extra pay is
received.
This is precisely the sort of accord which the parties might have reached
themselves
had face-to-face bargaining continued in good faith.
AWARD
It is the Award of the Neutral
Chairman of the Interest Arbitration Panel that:
A. No wage increase shall
be given for years 1995 or 1996;
B. A 3.5% increase in
base wages shall be given retroactive to January 1,
1997;
C. The 7% differential
between Range 13 Firefighter base wages and
Range 14 driver/engineer base
wages and the 22.5% differential between
Range 13 firefighter base
wages and Range 16 captain base wages appearing in
the
parties' 1992-1994 collective bargaining agreement shall continue to apply;
D. The work week shall be
increased from forty-two to forty-five
hours
effective on the date of issuance of the Final Award in this matter, with
overtime
at the negotiated contractual rate to be paid for all hours thereafter
and
the scheduling of individual debit days aimed at accomplishing the increase
in
hours to be negotiated by the parties, with the first such debit day to be
worked
no sooner than eight weeks after issuance of the Final Award in this
matter;
and
E. A 7% increase in base
wages shall be given effective on the date of
issuance
of the Final Award in this matter.
Initial Award
Amended Award
Signatures of Party-Appointed
Panelists
In the Matter of Interest
Arbitration
between
and
International Association of
Firefighters,
Local No.451
AAA Case No. 75 L 390 00218 96
PERC Case No. 11866-1-95-253
Michael Guerin, City-Appointed
Member:
I Concur X I Dissent _____
/s/
Signed
Date
Michael McGovern, Union-Appointed
Member:
I Concur _______ I Dissent X
/s/
Signed
Date