International Association of Fire Fighters, Local 315

And

City of Hoquiam

Interest Arbitration

Arbitrator:      Paul D. Jackson

Date Issued:   03/19/1980

 

 

 

Arbitrator:         Jackson; Paul D.

Case #:              02468-I-79-00065

Employer:          City of Hoquiam

Union:                IAFF; Local 315

Date Issued:     03/19/1980

 

 

 

IN ARBITRATION BEFORE PAUL D. JACKSON

 

In re:                                                                           )

THE CITY OF HOQUIAM, WASHINGTON         )

and                                                                              )           DECISION AND AWARD

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF                )

FIREFIGHTERS, Local 315                                     )

 

Date of Hearing: February 14, 1980

Place of Hearing: Hoquiam, Washington

 

Representing City of Hoquiam:  Cabot Dow

                                                      Cabot Dow Associates

                                                      Seattle Trust Building

                                                      10655 N.E. 4th Street

                                                      Bellevue, WA 98004

 

Representing Local 315:             Larry R. Johnson

                                                      2407 Aberdeen Avenue

                                                      Hoquiam, WA 98550

 

Arbitrator                                     Paul D. Jackson

                                                      926 Lakeside Avenue South

                                                      Seattle, WA 98144

                                                      (206) 325-0650

 

 

BACKGROUND

      The City of Hoquiam is located in Grays Harbor County, Washington,

approximately 115 miles from the state's only metropolis, Seattle; 65 miles

from the State Capitol of Olympia; and immediately adjacent to the City of

Aberdeen with which it shares the Pacific port in Grays Harbor. Hoquiam has

a population of approximately 10,400 and ranks 37th in that regard within the

State. It is 23rd in per capita assessed valuation, and is dependent

principally upon the wood products industry. Aberdeen, ranks 23rd in population

having, in 1979, approximately 19,000 residents. It is a maritime and industrial

city and also a residential and retail shopping center.

      For 12 years Hoquiam has had a collective bargaining relationship

with Local 315 of the International Association of Firefighters, the Union

representing Fire Department employees of the City. Their most recent agreement

was for two years and terminated on December 31, 1979. The City and the Union

commenced negotiations for a new agreement in July, 1979, in accordance with

Washington State Labor law. The parties held seven meetings up to September

24, 1979, when, arriving at an impasse, the Union requested mediation of the

Public Employment Relations Commission. At the conclusion of mediation six

Contract issues remained unresolved. Arbitration is required by law in such

case (RCW 41.56) and the undersigned was selected to be the Arbitrator.

 

ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED

 

1. Salary

2. Longevity pay (Union's proposal)

3. Departmental changes (City's proposal)

4. Grievance procedure (City's proposal)

5. Seniority (City's proposal)

6. Duration and zipper clause (City's proposal)

 

Issue No. 1 - Salary

      The Union demands, for the first six months of the year 1980, an

across-the-board increase of 11.3% which is the percentage increase in the U.S.

Department of Labor's Consumers Price Index for the Seattle Area-Urban Wage

Earners and Clerical Workers, from July '78 to July 1979; for the second six

months, the Union proposes an increase equal to whatever the percentage increase

is in the CPI from July 1979 to July 1980.

      Additionally, the Union demands a 1.5% across-the-board increase

as a "catch-up" payment towards the equalization of the salaries of Hoquiam

firefighters with those in other Washington cities which the Union believes are

comparable, and most particularly with its neighbor, Aberdeen.

      The Union also proposes a 2% premium immediately for all employees

having an EMT I (Emergency Medical Technician) Certificate. (24 out of 25

firefighters in the unit have such certificate.)

      For the second year of the contract, beginning January 1, 1981,

the Union demands that across-the-board increases be given based upon the total

percentage increase in the Consumers Price Index from July 1980 to November

1980, plus an additional 2.5% across-the-board "catch-up" increase.

      In July of 1981, the Union proposes that there be another across-

the-board increase based upon the percentage increase in the Consumer's Price

Index from November 1980 to July 1981.

      The total specifically ascertainable demand of the Union for the

first half of 1980 therefore is for across-the-board increases of 14.8%. The

proposed increase for the second half of 1980 is not known at this time but

based on recent experience it could be an additional eight or nine percent.

Likewise, the total increases demanded for 1981 are unascertainable but could

run to over 17 percent based upon the past year's CPI experience.

      The City's counter proposal for a two year contract is: For the

first year, an 8% across-the-board increase plus a 1% premium payment to

holders of an EMT Certificate. For 1981, the City proposes a 6% across-the-

board increase, PLUS the percentage by which the Consumers Price index from the

period July 1979 to July 1980 exceeds 9%. Thus, if the percentage increase

was 13%, the salary rise would be 10%.

 

Contentions

      The Union's principal argument on behalf of its demands are

founded on the contention, first, that its members' economic position is

substantially below than that of firefighters in comparable communities within

the State of Washington, thereby justifying the "catch-up" increases of 4%

to put them on a par with such communities, and, second, that a fair and

equitable wage policy requires that the real income of the employees be

maintained in the face of the unprecedented inflation and that this can only

be achieved by raising salaries point by point with the increases in the

Consumers Price Index since that index is an accurate reflection of the decline

in the value of the dollar.

      Additional justifications include the need for a special considera-

tion for these employees because of the greater risk of death or injury on the

job; the increase in service and productivity each year as demonstrated by

certain tables showing the total "runs" of equipment from 1977 to 1979; the

greater work pressures by the taking over of private ambulance service,

from which time "runs", and responsibilities have greatly increased.

      The Union contends that the increase of Hoquiam's assessed property

values per firefighter, from 1979 to 1980, was approximately $700,000 making

the demands of the Union entirely feasible financially, inasmuch as for each

percentage Point salary increase the cost to the City is below $6,000.

      The Union also argues that there is a substantial differential

between the hourly wages of skilled and non-skilled labor in private industry,

and of other City employees of Hoquiam compared to the hourly wages of its

members, showing for example, a senior firefighter to have an hourly wage of only

$5.62 (based on a 56 hour week) as compared to a non-skilled worker whose

average hourly wage (based on a 40 hour week) in 1979 was $7.95 or as compared

to a Hoquiam longshoreman whose wage was $10.07 per hour; or as compared to

the wages of a skilled laborer whose average wage was $11.83.

      The Union asks the Arbitrator to note the difference between the

hourly wage of the firefighter compared to other Hoquiam City employees (who

work 40 hours a week) whose average wage is $7.51 an hour.

      The City denies that there is any justification for "catch-up"

salary increases. There is wide disagreement between the City and the Union

as to what are comparable cities which state law enjoins arbitrators to

consider in reaching their award, but in any event it contends that its salary

levels are competitive with other cities and the internal organization

of the Hoquiam Fire Department and its special job classifications make its

salary opportunities for senior firemen levels fair, reasonable and equitable.

      The City states that, as a result of past increases, the salaries of

its firefighters have outpaced the rise in the Consumer Price Index during the

same period and it rejects the Union's argument for "the indexing of salaries"

with the Consumers Price Index, pointing out that such an approach toward

achieving fair salaries is not justified because the Index is purely hypothetical,

is not applicable to the situation of any particular firefighter and national

economic policy rejects as unwarranted and economically unsound indexing with

the CPI as showed by the national voluntary guidelines and wage settlements

generally throughout the country and within the State, which have a range

substantially below the actual rises in the CPI.

      The City states that the inherent risks attached to the job of

firefighter have been recognized and compensated for by the special benefits

of the firefighters' Collective Bargaining Agreement and their special health,

welfare and pension benefits. With regard to comparisons based on hourly wages,

the City rejects this also as an invalid argument, noting that the Union arrives

at a purported 56 hour work week by totally ignoring the special characteristics

of a firefighter's job which traditionally requires a 24 hour shift and

variations thereof whereunder firefighters are obliged to remain at the station-

house on duty around the clock, which includes sleeping and attending to their

own needs much of that time unless a fire emergency arises, and are engaged in

routine regular work within a time frame of only eight hours, during the day.

Thus, according to the City, the alleged 56 hour week referred to by the Union

and made its benchmark for measuring other jobs is totally unrealistic and

misleading.

      A major argument of the City, is that its counter proposal is the

maximum it can offer under anticipated revenues for 1980. The City is presently

taxing at its authorized limits under state law. Estimated expenditures,

according to the City budget, are already calculated to exceed anticipated

revenues due to personnel related costs which have continued to exceed

projections as a result of recent contract negotiations.

      This "inability to pay" argument was supported with the introduction

of the City's 1980 budget based upon a projected 7.5% across-the board salary

increase for firefighters.

      The "inability to pay" argument is rejected by the Union, princi-

pally on the grounds that actual experience over the past several years has

shown that the City, each year has continued to have ever larger end of year

surpluses appropriated as a revenue for current year expenses, from 6.2% in

1978 to 14.1% in the current year. The current surplus is almost $300,000.00.

This was possible because revenue exceeded expenses because of the conser-

vative estimate of revenues. For the year 1979 receipts exceeded estimates

by over $200,000.00. At the end of 1979 there was an unencumbered, unspent

balance of $84,229 for all departments. Both long and short debt of the

city was substantially reduced in 1979.

 

Discussion, Findings and Award

      The arbitrator, by State law, is required in contract arbitrations,

to take into consideration certain facts in arriving at an award affecting a

municipality and its uniformed employees (RCW 41.56.460).

      None of the factors required by law to be considered including a

comparison of "comparable" cities, are mandated to be controlling or pre-eminent

in the arbitrator's ultimate conclusions. The weight he gives to various

factors is a subjective determination, of which, certainly of primary

importance is the validitity of the economic data and arguments presented

and their relative pertinency to the case at hand.

      Of immediate interest in applying the statutory mandate is the

circumstance that the parties themselves have not been able to agree upon

"comparable cities"; note is made also of the fact that no city outside of

the State of Washington was compared although the statute would go beyond

the State for comparison purposes. These comments are motivated by the

importance placed by the parties on this item of consideration and by the Union's

demand for 4% across-the-board "catch-up" increases. The Union particularly

urged upon the Arbitrator the need for comparison with the City of Aberdeen.

      The law speaks of "cities and counties respectively of similar size"

but does not define "size". Arbitrators have frequently defined it in terms of

population which is one reasonable approach, although population size may be

less relevant than other kinds of sizes. Thus "size" may mean the area covered

by cities within their fire control jurisdiction; or the size of the tax base, inclu-

ding total property valuations and sales, excise and other tax sources, which in

turn make pertinent other factors such as the nature and character of the cities

themselves, including whether they are inland or maritime, industrial, agricultural,

commercial or primarily residential. These considerations may greatly affect

the support given a city's fire department, its productivity, the services

required of it and the city's ability to pay. To determine whether the employees

in this instance are at a salary disadvantage compared with those of comparable

cities this Arbitrator, has selected his own list of "comparable cities", and not

only with regard to population size but also considering the overall charac-

teristics of the cities selected and their financial resources. Aberdeen is

included, not because it is comparable but because the Union urges that Hoquiam's

salaries should equal Aberdeen's.

__________

 

 

 

CITY                     POPULATION        PER CAPITAL             LAND AREA       POPULATION

                                                               ASSESSED VALUE     & SQ MI.             PER SQ. MI.

Aberdeen              19,075                      14,515                            10.0                       1908

Anacortes             8,870                        20,000                            7.4                         1199

Hoquiam               10,400                      15,219                            3.8                         2737

Kelso                    10,925                      9,446                              6.0                         1821

Mt. Vernon           12,600                      16,131                            6.6                         1909

Shelton                  7,020                        15,608                            3.9                         1800

(Employer's Exhibit 11-1980 Citizens Guide to Local Government-Washington

State-Research Council, 10/15/79)

__________

      Of the above cities, all of them, (except Aberdeen) are within six places above or

below Hoquiam in population size on the complete list of Washington cities.

Several cities closer in population size have been omitted because of substan-

tial differences in the nature and character of the city, topographically and

demographically.

__________

1977 CITY REVENUES (Amounts in thousands)

CITY                                                       GENERAL PROPERTY TAX     TOTAL

Aberdeen                                                658.2                                4,636.2

Anacortes                                                627.7                                2,124.4

Hoquiam                                                  503.2                                2,358.2

Kelso                                                       295.7                                2,153.7

Mt. Vernon                                             548.2                                2,412.3

Shelton                                                    298.9                                1,175.6

_____

                                             1979 BUDGET EXP.       1979 MO. SALARY

CITY                                    FOR FIRE CONTROL   FOR FIREFIGHTER      POLICE OFFICER

Aberdeen                                      $1,028,948                    $1,536                               $1,419

Anacortes                                     468,147                         1,351                                 1,314

Hoquiam                                       486,909                         1,366                                 1,325

Kelso                                            412,505                         Unav.                                Unav.

Mt. Vernon                                   Unav.                            1,292                                 1,259

Shelton                                          212,731                         1,160                                 1,150

__________

      In reviewing the above tables above, note should be made of Shelton's

position which shows a tax base of approximately one-half of the other cities,

and of its substantially lower salary scale. Also noteworthy are the revenues

of Aberdeen compared to the other cities. The 100% difference is attributable

in part to the fact that it is a commercial center as well as an industrial

city and its sales tax revenues greatly exceed the other cities. The budget

of Aberdeen's Fire Department is more than twice that of the other cities; the

population is almost that much greater.

      With regard to the four other cities to which comparison has been

made, another factor has been urged by Hoquiam in support of its position that

its firefighters are reasonably and fairly compensated, that is, the circumstance

that Hoquiam has a special firefighter classification of "Driver" the salary

for which in 1979 was $1,434 per month. Twelve of a total of 18 journeymen

are Drivers and this position is available after three years in the Department

by passing a test, and positions are assigned by seniority. None of the other

cities above (excluding Aberdeen) has this classification. Therefore, two-

thirds of the firefighters of Hoquiam can progress to a salary considerably

above the base firefighters salary of the comparable cities.

      Examination of all of the evidence submitted by the parties, and

careful consideration of their contentions leads to the writer to conclude that

the salaries of Hoquiam firefighters are not grossly disporportionate to those

of comparable cities.

      Aberdeen is not deemed a "comparable" city. It is next door to

Hoquiam and it shares jointly in firefighting control by virtue of written

agreement. A top journeymen firefighter's monthly salary for Aberdeen in 1979

was $1,536 (Employer's Exhibit No. 14). The journeyman salary in Hoquiam was

$1,366. However, proximity of cities does not, ipso facto, justify equalization

of their employees' salaries with neighboring cities. For example, of eight

cities adjoining Seattle, all of them had firefighters salaries ranging from

$45 to $89 a month below that of Seattle and in one case, a much smaller

city had a salary $72 per month higher than Seattle. (Employer's Exhibit

No. 13-1979 Survey of Washington State Council of Firefighters). The