05/23/2005 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Special Council Minutes of S/23/2~5 the azbitrator's awazd does not draw its essence from the agreement. That is the city's ® position, that the awazd draws its essence from an agreement, but not from the collective bargaining agreement in each instance. It draws its essence from what management feels aze illegal agreements between the Fire Chief and the union. Councilman Nashaz asked if additional fire fighters to be added to the force was part of the agreement. Law Director Dubelko said it was not part of this agreement. Mr. Nashaz asked what the costs were for Mr. Johnson. Mr. Dubelko said that in 2004 Mr. Johnson was paid $60,000. We have had carryover into 2005, and Council appropriated an additional $30,000. He believes that has all been used. He does not plan to use Mr. Johnson this year for anything else other than to finish up the unfair labor practices that are still being processed. Councilman Limpert asked if this issue had been consistently found one way throughout the grievance process. Law Director Dubelko explained that a grievance process has typically four steps-azbitraton is the fourth step. Because of probably the seriousness of these two grievances, they passed step one and went right to step two. The Chief denied the grievances. The Safety Director, in each instance, denied the grievances and then it was appealed by the union to arbitration. In each instance, the arbitrator found in favor of the union. Councilman Tallon asked if the difference in the overtime calculated from 40 hours to 50.4 will cause a lazger sum to be paid and was this difference anticipated in the budget for 2005? Law Director Dubelko said absolutely, it's about a $10 per hour difference. He believes that in 2004 the direction given to the Fire Chief by Council and the administration was to rein in overtime. One of the things that the Fire Chief did to attempt to rein it in was to go back to what Mr. Mancini, the fact finder, gave to the city and tried to re-establish the two-tier rate as the city believed Mr. Mancini intended it. He thinks the budget in 2004 as well as 2005 was based on the expectation that we would have the benefit of that lower rate for most of the overtime. Mayor O'Grady commented that Council understands, as he does, that they are the keeper of the public checkbook and have a responsibility to look out for the welfare of our citizens and our taxpayers. This is a significant economic hit. The paying, as it was contemplated in exchange for moving from a 51.7 hour workweek to a 50.4 hour workweek, would reduce the cost of overtime by having the higher rate for overtime paid only in the case of true bona fide emergencies. What has happened with the finding of the azbitrator in this case, every call back is qualified as an emergency. Therefore, every call back and every overtime hour is now paid at the higher rate, which is an overturning of a concession that the city made. He believes the cost to the city will be about $60,000. And it is anticipated that we would have that same cost in 2005, if not higher. So there is a significant economic impact to this ruling. For that reason, he thinks we need to keep it out there-keep it in the courts. At a minimum, it allows more time for the administration and the fire fighters union to take another look at this and see if this is really the direction the fire fighters wish to go. Quite frankly, as he and Council know very clearly, we cannot continue to operate as we have in the past. We must reduce the 3