Loading...
Minutes 06-14-05 CONTRACTURAL NEGOTIATION MEETING BETWEEN IAFF LOCAL 1891 AND THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH HELD ON TUESDAY, JUNE 14, 2005 IN THE FIRE/POLICE TRAINING ROOM, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AT 9:00 A.M. Present: For the City: For the Union: Bill Bingham, Fire Chief Ray Carter, Deputy Chief of Operations John Jordan, Assistant Director of Human Resources (arrived at 9:20) Lt. Dean Kinser, President Lt. Robert Kruse, Vice President Lt. Larry Lederhandler, Treasurer Lt. Thomas Murphy, Jr., Secretary Firefighter J.C. Julia, Business Agent Firefighter Barkley Garnsey, Information Command Coordinator Call to Order Chief Bingham called the negotiation meeting to order at 9:07 a.m. A sign in sheet was circulated and provided to the Recording Secretary for inclusion with the minutes of the meeting. As was discussed at the last meeting, the intent is to reach a threshold today and to try to wrap up as much as possible so Chief Bingham could prepare the information he needs to go to the Executive Session, tentatively scheduled for July 5, 2005. The Executive Session would be held after the regular Tuesday Commission meeting. Chief Bingham would like to go through the items to see if any changes need to be discussed. One Article he would like to discuss is Compensatory Time. Also, there are some issues with physicals and immunizations. Chief Bingham has proposals for all Articles, with the exception of the group insurance, longevity and the VIBA plan. He will be explaining these Articles to the Commission to determine how they feel about them before moving forward. Chief Bingham is comfortable moving forward with the remainder of the information and feels, for the most part, the justification is there. He wants to pay particular attention to what the Commission would be interested in, which are the comparables. He will be developing a spreadsheet that will be easy to read and understand so the Commission would have a clear understanding of what has taken place at these negotiations, where they are at, and where they intend to go. Chief Bingham recommended the parties meet after July 5th, as soon as possible, so he can share the Commission's feelings on what was presented at the Executive Session, as well as their feelings on issues that Chief Bingham does not feel comfortable with providing counterproposals at this time. Meeting Minutes IAFF Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida June 14, 2005 Article 11 - Physical Exams & Immunization Chief Bingham presented the City's counterproposal to the Union and noted he did not have time to date stamp the counteroffers. Lt. Kinser noted at the last meeting the parties discussed various costs. Chief Bingham pointed out he was presenting a counterproposal, but it is open for discussion because it is still an outstanding issue. He noted no changes have been made to Section B since their last meeting. Chief Bingham pointed out that Section C should have been underlined that deals with Hepatitis - Type A since it was never included. Section C is new language that was requested by the Union in part and some discussion took place. Chief Bingham noted there was a cost associated with the Hepatitis A and the City expressed some concern after performing some research about the probability of someone getting Hepatitis A. He did note the Department has dive rescue, USAR, and confined space and at sometime in the future members may go to different areas and countries, in which case the City would not have a problem providing for the testing. It was pointed out that Hepatitis-Type B is covered under State Statute. If any member refused to be immunized, they could not claim it as a presumption. The presumption clause in the Statute does not specify Hepatitis A, B or C; it only states Hepatitis. Another issue under this Article was the Tetanus booster and Chief Bingham noted this was already provided. As a result, he did not see the need to put this in the Article. Also the MMR and Pneumococcal Immunization were not included. The City has agreed to the Union's proposal and has agreed to the fact that Hepatitis A is something the Department could expend funds for and this is the only significant change to this Article. Lt. Lederhandler acknowledged the Union was aware of what the Department was providing with regard to physicals, but wanted to make certain nothing was removed from their physicals, which is why they wanted it stated in the contract. Chief Bingham was not opposed to putting all the components into the Article, but did not think it was necessary because it would make the Article very lengthy. He further noted they complied with N.F.P.A. 1582 to the best of their ability and the Tetanus booster is part of this process. Chief Bingham asked if the Union had a problem with the wording for Hepatitis A in the Article or why the City was doing it this way. Lt. Lederhandler spoke with Tom DiBernardo who was recommended by Chief Bingham to contact and Mr. DiBernardo provided some ideas on how this could be addressed. Mr. DiBernardo recommended that new hires receive the Hepatitis series from the start, and there is a vile that contains the A and B at a cost of approximately $25. Lt. Lederhandler thought this was something the Department could initiate for new employees. Chief Bingham stated he 2 Meeting Minutes IAFF Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida June 14, 2005 would review Lt. Lederhandler's recommendations. Further, Chief Bingham will confirm with the clinic the information Lt. Lederhandler received from Mr. DiBernardo was accurate and if they have access to this. If the clinic did, Chief Bingham would make the appropriate change in the language and bring it back to the Union for approval. Chief Bingham pointed out the language in Section C of the Article that reads "members of specialized teams involved with a high risk of exposure" was taken from N.F.P.A. 1582. Mr. Garnsey questioned why this language was in the Article since they are receiving the 1582 physical. Chief Bingham responded it came in the form of a recommendation and was not mandated, which is why the language was included. The Union caucused at 9:23 a.m. The Meeting resumed at 9:31 a.m. Lt. Kinser stated the language was acceptable as presented, but the Union would like to do more research. The Union needs to find out if firefighters are being tested for Hepatitis A when they receive their physicals. Chief Bingham noted at the last negotiation session the Union was informed that Firefighters during their annual physicals are tested for Hepatitis A and B, which was confirmed by Dr. Wolff. Lt. Kinser also stated they want to be 100% clear on the presumptive clause. Deputy Chief Carter responded the Article addresses employees being offered protection against the disease and refuses that protection. Case law has proven if a person elects not to take the precaution available to him/her, their award under Worker's Compensation could be reduced. Chief Bingham pointed out if a person contracts Hepatitis, it is not a cut and dry presumption. The employee would have to do many things for the presumption to kick in. Chief Bingham read from the appropriate Statute that addressed this. Mr. Garnsey inquired if there was language in the contract that would go against the State Statute, because the Statute does not say whether it has to be offered. Lt. Lederhandler stated, for example, if an employee contracted Hepatitis B, but refused the shots, the onus would be on the Department to prove that he did not receive the disease on the job, after ruling out the causes recited by Chief Bingham. After that, it could be presumed he received it on the job. Chief Bingham explained the Department did not make a conscious attempt to add additional language and this language has been in the contract for the past six years. In his personal opinion he thinks the language is good. Chief Bingham restated the language is more benign than the way the Union is interpreting it. The language is there to state if an employee makes a conscious decision not to take the test, which the City is offering and paying for, then the presumption would not apply. Chief Bingham felt if the language was deleted from the contract, the same principle would apply. If someone refused to take the test, they cannot come back and claim the presumption, especially since the City is offering and paying for the test. Mr. Garnsey 3 Meeting Minutes IAFF Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida June 14, 2005 inquired if the language in the contract would supersede language in the State Statute. Deputy Chief Carter responded that contract language could not supersede the law. Lt. Lederhandler felt the way the language was being presented, if an employee refused to be tested, he/she would lose their right to the presumptive clause. Chief Bingham stated they would lose their right in a practical sense. Deputy Chief Carter asked how long the Union would need to check this out further. Lt. Kinser will forward something in a day or two. The Department will also check the law, as well as N.F.P.A. 1581. Chief Bingham also pointed out that 1581 is the N.F.P.A. standard for communicable disease. After researching 1581, they may be able to come up with some new language to replace the existing language that both parties could agree to. The parties next reviewed the contract from the beginning. Chief Bingham would like to be close to T A of the articles when they leave this meeting and after they next meet after July 5th. · The dates on the cover page were changed to October 1,2005 - September 30, 2008. · Article 1 - Recognition - No other changes · Article 3 - Payroll Deduction of Dues - No other changes Any changes made to what was previously discussed, Chief Bingham will bring to the Union's attention. · Article 4 - Union Business. The phrase, "no later than the preceding corresponding shift" in Section 1, last sentence, has been deleted. This same deletion was made in Section 3B. No other changes have been made. · Article 8 - Hours of Work - No subsequent changes have been made. · Article 10 - Uniforms and Safety Equipment Coveralls was changed to Jumpsuit. The boot language was changed and the cost of boots was changed from $65.00 to $125.00. There were no other changes. · Article 11 - Physical Exams & Immunizations - previously discussed · Article 14 - Wages Chief Bingham recommended coming back to this Article. He noted there were cross outs that were due to the transitionary language from the last contract. There may still be additional work needed on this Article, but it would not change the content of the Article. Chief Bingham felt a lot of things could come out because they no longer apply. 4 Meeting Minutes IAFF Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida June 14, 2005 · Article 16 - Exchange Time. Officers were changed to Shift Commanders. No other changes. · Article 17 - Sick Leave Family medical leave was extended on the last page of this Article. No other changes. · Article 18 - Compassionate Leave - No additional changes have been made Employees are required to provide a verifiable written notice of death, to which the Union has agreed. · Article 26 - Medical Certification This is the City's counterproposal. Chief Bingham offered to discuss this further. He noted the Union offered a proposal and this is the City's counterproposal. · Article 38 - Compensatory Time Chief Bingham requested to come back to this Article. The City has added some new language since the last meeting. · Article 40 - Duration The dates have been changed from 2002 and 2005 to 2005 and 2008. · Addendum "E" Both parties signed this on March 9, 2005, which is the updated Career Ladder. · General Rules and Regulations The paragraphs dealing with uniforms and employee contacts had changes. · Letter of Understanding dated May 12, 2005 At the request of the Union, No. 1 was taken out. The other two paragraphs were renumbered accordingly. There were no other changes. Addendum E - Career Ladder Lt. Lederhandler noted under "required to be promoted to Lieutenant," language stating a Firefighter III must have a minimum of one year to test for Lieutenant is not included. This language had been in the previous Career Ladder. The City will add this language back in. 5 Meeting Minutes IAFF Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida June 14, 2005 Chief Bingham asked for clarification of "test." Would "test" be at the start of the test or at the end of the test since sometimes these tests could run over a two-week period. The City will add language to read, "at the starting date of the test." Article 38 - Compensatory Time Chief Bingham pointed out new language has been added that is open to discussion. Chief Bingham felt compensatory time has advantages for Administration and as a result, things get done because of the availability of comp time. On the other hand, they have to be careful in increasing the allowable hours because in all cases it becomes an unfunded liability and in some cases it becomes an extensive unfunded liability for the City. He further pointed out that comp time, for all intent and purposes, could never go away. The City cannot mandate if comp time were not used by a certain date, it would simply disappear, which is against the law. If the comp time were not taken, a person would have to be paid at time and one-half of his/her salary or their time. Similar to sick and vacation time, comp time is a benefit that is earned at a certain rate and could conceivably be paid out at a significantly higher rate. Therefore, to say comp time is "at no cost" to the City is not accurate. The Union's proposal was to increase the number of comp time hours and this was looked at. Chief Bingham pointed out the Department needs to build in some guards for comp time, which is currently 60 hours. Currently, there are many firefighters that have gone over the allotted amount of time. Monitoring the time is not a problem, but there is no way it can be regulated. Administration could notify an employee that he/she is over the 60 hours, so please take a day off and the employee chooses not to do so. In that event, the City would have to write them a check for time and one-half. They have tried to come up with some safeguards. One would be to try to accommodate the Union's request for additional hours, and Administration sees the benefit in this, but there needs to be some kind of safeguard that the hours would not exceed a certain point. Lt. Kinser thought the Union's language was accurate. Chief Bingham explained the Union's proposal would not work because it states employees would be ineligible for compensatory time. If an employee worked an event or did a project, they would be paid overtime. Chief Bingham stated there were no safeguards built into the Unions' proposal. Lt. Murphy felt that vacation time was similar to comp time in that it is earned and if it is not used by a certain time, you loose it. Comp time involves a smaller amount of hours and once the maximum is reached, employees are being told to use it the next week or two or get paid. Lt. Murphy pointed out it is difficult to take time off when instructed to do so. He thought it would better if there was a bigger window in which to use comp time. Chief Bingham pointed out the City proposal gives employees 90 days to use comp time. Mr. Garnsey also noted time off goes by seniority and it could be more difficult to get a day off. 6 Meeting Minutes IAFF Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida June 14, 2005 Chief Bingham stated the City's proposal gives employees a 90-day window once a certain threshold is reached. Secondly, the City will allow employees to accrue leave during the 90-day period. This covers the issues raised by Lt. Murphy, i.e., the short period of time that an employee would have to take the time off and the employee is not being restricted to additional time. Chief Bingham further explained when an employee has been instructed to take a 24- hour shift time or take some time off to bring the comp time down to a certain level, employees would continue to accrue up to 96 hours. Theoretically, the way it is being presented, no one would ever get beyond 96 hours because three months previous the employee would have taken some time off. There is a mechanism in the Article that requires employees to hover between 72 and 96 hours. Therefore, an employee would never go over 96 hours. When 72 hours is reached, the 90 days would kick in and the employee would be asked to take some time off. However, the Department is not restricting employees from using additional time during that period. Chief Bingham reviewed the language in the City's proposal. Sixty (60) hours has been changed to 96 hours. This satisfies one of the Union's requirements that 96 is divisible by 24. Section 2 provides when an employee reaches 72 hours in his/her account, the following will occur. "From the date of the event or project that ceased the employee to reach seventy-two (72) hours, said employee must schedule and take a compensatory time leave day. In the event the employee fails to schedule and take a 24-hour comp time leave day during that 90 day period, the first available date after the ninety days will be assigned by fire administration as a mandatory 24 hour comp time leave day. During the referenced 90-day period of time, the employee will be allowed to continue accruing comp time. Should the employee accrue an additional 24 hours or more during this 90-day period, that employee will begin a new 90-day cycle that will require the use of another 24-hour shift leave day." The intent of this language is to make certain that no one would ever go over the maximum of 96 hours, because the trigger mechanism starts at 72 hours, which is 24 hours less than the 96 hours. Chief Bingham thinks there are about 12+ employees that use this on a reoccurring basis. This language will now provide that these people will always be in flux between 72 and 96, but at least Administration would have the assurance that no one would ever get to 96 hours or over. Administration will continue to monitor this and if an employee does not take the time within the 90 days they are allotted, a day would be assigned to that employee. Chief Bingham pointed out that employees could always request to be paid overtime instead of accruing comp time. Lt. Murphy thought that these 15+ employees like to perform projects and are aware of the budget issues, which is why he thinks comp time works well. He did not think these 7 Meeting Minutes IAFF Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida June 14, 2005 people were looking for comp time to be paid out at a higher rate. These are employees who are doing a lot of projects, resulting in comp time being earned. Chief Bingham acknowledged this, but also pointed out there are a lot of employees earning a lot of hours that are not budgeted for. When that person leaves, the money comes out of the Department's salary account and is an unfunded liability. Chief Bingham pointed out that under this section, an employee would select an available day off within the 90 days that would not generate overtime. If an employee after the 90 days did not take the time off, Administration would assign that employee a day off that would not generate overtime, which is the way comp time is designed to work. Mr. Garnsey felt mandating a person to take time off could create a problem and he was not certain that a person could actually be mandated to use his/her time within a certain timeframe. Chief Bingham felt if this were a contractual provision that the parties agreed to, it would be permissible. Chief Bingham noted vacation time must be taken within a certain date, otherwise the time is lost. Mr. Jordan confirmed what Chief Bingham stated. Deputy Chief Carter stated the only clarifying document would be FLSA and under the comp time section of FLSA, it specifies an employee can be mandated to take the time off within a certain amount of time. It also states time cannot be taken away from the employee, because it is time the employee has worked and the employee has earned money or a dollar value. The difference between this and vacation time is that the employee has not worked the vacation time, which is why the City can take vacation time away if it is not used within a certain time. This is the difference between comp time and vacation time. Comp time cannot be taken away because it is time worked and the employee is owed money for this time. Mr. Garnsey felt the comp time Article was becoming complicated because it has to also deal with people that work on a shift basis. Deputy Chief Carter pointed out a 40-hour week employee is not replaced when they take a day off, which means Mr. Garnsey would be able to take any day off within the 90-day period. Deputy Chief Carter stated the language would probably have to be changed to an eight (8) hour day. Chief Bingham noted by having comp time, people are encouraged to participate in special events by accruing time they could take off at a later time. Also, when the employee takes his comp time off, it does not result in the Department having to pay overtime. With regard to the eight hours, this could be handled by putting in the words "shift employee" where it says "an employee." Chief Bingham pointed out comp time actually does not affect daytime employees. Chief Bingham did not feel the Article would become more complex because of eight-hour employees that are not a relevant issue. He did not think it was necessary to include additional language for daytime employees. Lt. Kinser pointed out in Section 2 in the second sentence the words "their maximum" hours actually referred to 96 hours. Chief Bingham agreed this should be changed to 72 8 Meeting Minutes IAFF Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida June 14, 2005 hours, since 96 is actually the maximum number of hours. Therefore the sentence should be changed to read - "From the date of the event or project that caused the employee to reach 72 hours, said employee must schedule and take a compensatory time leave day." Lt. Kinser inquired what would happen if an employee cannot schedule a day off within the 90 days. Chief Bingham responded he/she would be assigned a day off. If it turned out that no day off can be found for any reason, at that point the employee would take any day off and the City would incur overtime, or the employee would be paid overtime for his time. Mr. Julia asked if the Department would let employees know when they are at their maximum time when they apply for vacation time off. Chief Bingham responded they had put in a section dealing with this that stated if an employee was over their maximum comp time hours, any vacation time applied for would be automatically applied to comp time, and the employee would be notified of this. Deputy Chief Carter noted comp time affects the Department's most active employees that perform all the extra details that the Department needs. Administration does not want to create a situation that would punish those employees for being active within the Department. Deputy Chief Carter explained why they decided to take the language out of the Article; however, the Department could advise employees when they are at their maximum time. Chief Bingham did not see a need to have it included in the contract. The Union requested to caucus at 10:29 a.m. The meeting reconvened at 10:34 a.m. Lt. Kinser reported they reviewed the City's proposal for comp time and acknowledged there are a certain number of individuals that reach the comp time threshold. These are firefighters that go out into the community, doing extra projects, conducting classes and supporting Fire Department functions. The Union agreed there needed to be some checks and balances in order to control the comp time situation. As a result, the Union is presenting a counteroffer of 120 hours instead of 96 hours as the maximum time allowed. This would also change the 72 hours to 96 hours. Chief Bingham reported administratively they would take care of Mr. Julia's concerns with the understanding that employees make sure they do not go over their vacation threshold because the Department is not going to be responsible for that. Lt. Kruse noted at the last meeting there was discussion of Article 25 (Educational Incentive) and it was not in the packet presented today by the City. Chief Bingham responded he should have included this Article with the three items he would be taking to the Commission, and actually there were four items he would be bringing to the 9 Meeting Minutes IAFF Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida June 14, 2005 Commission. This would be in addition to the three previous items that he would be bringing to the Commission - group insurance, longevity and the VIBA plan. Chief Bingham requested that Attorney Mierzwa put together the basic facts of the VIBA plan, along with some Q&A in a form that he could take to the Executive Session. Chief Bingham would appreciate receiving a brief synopsis of the plan, the types of plans available, and how other cities have dealt with it. He would like to have this information prior to the July 5th meeting. Lt. Kinser will follow through with this. Article 14 - Wages Chief Bingham stated the dates have been changed and a proposal has been put together in the form of minimums and maximums. There are two changes to the proposal. Deputy Fire Marshal has been stricken. In the third year of the contract, beginning October 1, 2007, there is a change in the paramedic incentive. This is in the medical certification article that has already been discussed as a counterproposal. Chief Bingham noted a lot of language has been stricken from this Article because the last contract contained a great deal of transition language. Section 2 (A), "Effective October 1, 2005, October 1, 2006 and October 1, 2007 each member of the bargaining unit shall receive a wage adjustment consistent with the increase in pay ranges identified in Section 1 (A, B and C)." Section 2 (B), On April 1 ,2006, 2007 and 2008, there will be a wage adjustment of up to 5%, based upon performance appraisal, which is the exact language from the previous contract. All the language dealing with the transition has been deleted. Therefore, Section (B) now reads, "Effective April 1, 2006, April 1, 2007 and April 1, 2008, a wage adjustment of up to 5% will be provided based on performance appraisal, unless the employee has reached their maximum salary cap, as noted in Section 1. Employees who reach and exceed the maximum salary cap shall receive no base-wage adjustment, but will receive a lump sum payment equal to the amount they would receive based on the criteria included herein." The table in Addendum C will be used as an administrative guide. Section 3 addresses performance appraisals and there has been no change to this language. Section 4 addresses maximum pay ranges and medical certification. This is language dealing with employees who are receiving above the current paramedic certification and will continue to receive that. They will revert back to the $7,488. Lt. Kinser noted there are only a few firefighters in the category. 10 Meeting Minutes IAFF Negotiations Boynton Beach, Florida June 14, 2005 Section 5 states any changes to the performance appraisal instrument will be made by Labor Management and Chief Bingham feels this language should remain in the Article. Section 6 has been entirely deleted, which was old transition language. The Union will review this Article. Chief Bingham stated he is doing some research of contracts that other cities have recently approved with regard to the educational incentive. Chief Bingham had nothing further to present today. Mr. Garnsey pointed out that the wage proposals submitted by the Union still does not bring them up to the comparables and when they were presented, they were presented with the longevity and the other outstanding items. Chief Bingham pointed out he has to make the Commission aware of these items. Chief Bingham noted they would have to make a decision on the number of hours in the comp time article. Mr. Jordan pointed out that most organizations limit comp time to the number of hours a person could earn in a week and could only accrue this number of hours. Lt. Kinser felt if this were the amount of time that could be limited to comp time, it would be detrimental to the Department because employees would have to be paid overtime to perform work they are doing as comp time. Chief Bingham also responded they could keep the current comp time hours and not make any changes. Next Meeting: Friday, July 8, 2005 from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. in the Police/Fire Training Room Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting properly adjourned at 11 :00 a.m. Respectfully submitted, ~t-h(~ fl,\, ~ ad",,- Barbara M. Madden Recording Secretary (June 21, 2005) 11