Renton Fire Fighters Local 864, International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO

And

City of Renton

Fact Findings

Arbitrator:      John Cronin

Date Issued:   11/17/1977

 

 

Arbitrator:         Cronin; John

Case #:              01129-F-77-00056

Employer:          City of Renton

Union:                IAFF; Local 864

Date Issued:     11/17/1977

 

 

STATE OF WASHINGTON

BEFORE

THE PANEL OF FACT-FINDERS

 

IN RE:                                                                        )

THE CITY OF RENTON                                          )

                                                                                    )

                        Employer                                            )           CASE NO. 1129-F-77-56

                                                                                    )

            and                                                                  )

                                                                                    )

RENTON FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 864               )           FACT-FINDERS REPORT

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF                )

FIREFIGHTERS, AFL-CIO,                                    )

                                                                                    )

                        Union                                                  )

________________________________                    )

 

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 (Union's member).

 

This fact-finding proceeding arose out of an impasse in negotiations

between the City of Renton and Firefighters Local 864.  The instant

hearing was held pursuant to Section 41.56.440 of the Revised Code of

Washington.

 

The current collective bargaining agreement between the parties is

due to expire on December 31, 1977.

 

A hearing in this matter was held on November 2, 1977 at Renton,

Washington.  The City was represented by Larry Tom Yok.  The Fire-

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 November 8, 1977 at Renton to

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 Seattle,

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