Minutes 05-28-08
CONTRACTURAL NEGOTIATION MEETING BETWEEN IAFF LOCAL 1891
AND THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH HELD ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 28,2008
AT 8:30 A.M. IN THE FIRE/POLICE TRAINING ROOM
CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
Present:
For the City: For the Union:
Bill Bingham, Fire Chief Lt. Dean Kinser, President
Ray Carter, Deputy Chief of Operations Lt. Robert Kruse, Vice President
Sharyn Goebelt, Director, Human Resources Lt. Larry Lederhandler, Treasurer
Lt. Thomas Murphy, Jr., Secretary
Miguel Reyes, Executive Board Member
Adam Turey, Executive Board Member
Opening
Bill Bingham, Boynton Beach Fire Chief, opened the session at 8:37 a.m. Self-
introductions were made.
Chief Bingham distributed articles based on his notes and the minutes for review. He
explained further changes could be made to the documents, but the handouts would
depict what was discussed and keep the articles current. The following articles were
distributed:
Article 10. Uniforms and Safety Equipment. The update replaced language in Section 2
pertaining to the manner in which specialized uniforms and safety equipment for certain
teams would be provided. It was noted new language would be put in red in the future.
Article 11 , Phvsical Exams and Immunization. The update was included in Section 1A
pertaining to the most current edition of N.F.P.A. 1582 as approved by the Labor
Management Team and the inclusion of the Hepatitis A Vaccine added to Section 4.
Article 14. WaQes. The update was included in Section 4B to make the article
consistent with the performance appraisal instrument.
Article 17. Sick Leave. The update was included in Section 3 and pertained to the
employee being responsible for requesting time be added to his/her vacation. The
language never applied, and it would be removed.
Article 20. Personal Time. New language was added depicting the increments that may
be used for personal time.
1
Meeting Minutes
IAFF Negotiations
Boynton Beach, Florida May 28, 2008
Article 40. Supplemental Retirement Insurance. The change in this article was to
correct a typographical error in Section 1, changing the word "retiree" to "retire".
It was noted Article 38. the Comp Time Article, submitted by the Union was not
distributed. The article had been discussed; however, Chief Bingham had not heard
back from Legal on the matter. Ms. Goebelt advised she had not been able to find
anything in the Fair Labor Standards Act (FSLA) that referred directly to transferring
time to the Union Time Pool. A legal opinion would be forthcoming.
The following articles were discussed further:
Article 17. Sick Leave. The City's proposed new language for Article 17, pertaining to
restrictive sick leave, was still pending. Both parties considered the City's IBB for Article
17 as open and under discussion.
Article 14. WaQes. Lt. Kinser spoke about a preliminary 2007 wage survey for different
classes of firefighters from surrounding areas. He explained the survey was not
complete but reflected minimum and maximum wages. The pay scale for the captains
was forthcoming.
Article 40. Supplemental Retirement Insurance. The Union, in the last contract,
established a post retirement insurance fund to supplement retiree insurance once the
employee separated from service. The fund was a 501 (c)(9) fund, which was active,
but not currently making disbursements because the trustees determined the fund
needed to mature for a period of time before disbursements would be made. The
members involved were from 2005 and forward. The monetary compensation came
from prior negotiations and was in lieu of salary adjustments. The Union was not aware
of any other fund, such as this, existing elsewhere in the City. The Union proposed a
half percent be added to the October 1, 2009 contract and another half percent be
added to the October 1, 2010 contract, thereby deferring the second and third year of
the .5% raises. The City had no liability to the fund or any legal responsibilities to it, as
it was a Union fund, run by a board of trustees. Due to the IRS Tax Code, this was the
only manner in which the fund could be supplemented. To date, there were three years
of contributions to the fund, which commenced in 2005. The investment option return
was currently 8%.
Chief Bingham felt there was an indirect relationship regarding what would be deposited
into the fund as opposed to receiving the October salary increase. He explained the
financial impact would need to be researched further and was considered presumptive
since it was unknown what the salaries would be in 2009 and 2010. Deputy Carter
would report back with a pro-forma based on percentage of pay raises. It was noted
Human Resources would assist.
2
Meeting Minutes
IAFF Negotiations
Boynton Beach, Florida May 28, 2008
Lt. Kinser explained currently, there was 1 % deferred from October 1 of 2006 and 2007,
respectively. Chief Bingham advised that aspect would need to be researched, and he
inquired when the funds would be deposited into the account. Lt. Kinser explained the
process was specified in Article 40, and there was a window when payment would be
made. Each employee's amount was calculated and a request for disbursement made.
The fund was receiving the 2% in lieu of wages.
Chief Bingham pointed out that effective September 30, 2008, if the contract was not
approved, there would be no codifying document to effect that transaction. Lt. Kinser
responded if the new contract was not ratified by October 1, 2008, or the City asserted
the contract was in Duration, in lieu of wages being paid, the Union members would
have received a 2% pay cut. The parties discussed the Savings Clause in the contract
allowed for the continuation of the program if the contract was not codified. The Union
noted Article 41 clarified if the issue was not resolved, the agreement would remain in
force and effect.
The Union's proposal was to combine section 2 and 3 under section 2, A, to create a
new section B to read" Beginning October 1, 2005, and every October 1st thereafter, the
City of Boynton Beach will make, on behalf of each employee, a contribution equal to
1 % of the current gross annual payroll of active department members. The new
language section would read: "Effective October 1, 2009 the City of Boynton Beach will
increase its contribution in this section from 2% to 2.5%, effectively representing a .5%
contribution to the fund from years past.". and, "Effective October 1, 2010 the City of
Boynton Beach will increase its contribution in this section from 2.5% to 3%, effectively
representing a .5% contribution to the fund from years past."
Chief Bingham was not certain the provision would fall under the statute being referred
to, and the Florida Statute differentiated between criterions constituting automatic salary
increases. After further discussion, Chief Bingham and Deputy Carter would calculate
the figures for Article 40, using percentages, and would provide the median figures and
make a note of the financial impact. He explained this item needed to be balanced with
the fact that monies were being deferred.
Article 11, Physical Exams and Immunizations. Lt. Kinser distributed this article. There
were three separate issues identified. One issue pertained to additional duty related
diagnostic testing for existing employees. The Union proposed the City bear the
expense for this provision. The City contracts with the clinic for this but felt some issues
have been dropped. Under Wellness/Fitness, there were certain prescribed diagnostic
criteria listed in N.F.P.A. 1582. The idea was an employee would be examined and if
something was found, the employee would not be cleared for duty until additional follow-
up testing was given. In prior years, because the concept was to identify latent or early
conditions, follow-up tests were covered by the City. Currently, it is the employee's
responsibility to pay for the additional tests. Lt. Kinser did not know when that benefit
ceased. Additionally, if an employee had been identified as having a condition, it was
3
Meeting Minutes
IAFF Negotiations
Boynton Beach, Florida May 28, 2008
thought the employee would be labeled. He explained the insurance industry could
track these histories.
Lt. Kinser explained if the City bore the cost, it would be considered as part of their
annual physical, and not part of their personal medical history. He explained the Union
was receptive to defining what additional testing criteria would be acceptable. He
suggested reviewing N.F.P.A. 1582 to determine what would be considered as
additional diagnostic tests.
Chief Bingham noted the list could be fairly substantial. Additionally, Deputy Carter
inquired at what point they would limit additional diagnostic testing and what kinds of
illnesses or conditions they would be confined to. He explained if any employee was
examined and had an injury that was not noted as duty related, if the injury would
prevent the employee from working, he would not be covered under a presumptive
clause. Lt. Kinser advised the Union was open to discuss, critique and limit
presumptive issues.
The next issue was seeking and receiving a second opinion and was an extension of
language added to Article 11, Section 1, that N. F. P.A. 1582 would be adopted by the
Labor Management Committee. The language would clearly identify the procedures to
follow when an employee chooses to obtain a second opinion. Then, if needed, a third
opinion would be binding.
Chief Bingham explained it should be made clear to the physician, by the employee that
medical examinations would be made in accordance with N.F.P.A. 1582 standards. He
explained in the past, a legal issue arose involving an employee. The employee did not
share any information with the physician, and the physician signed a statement
indicating he was cleared for duty when there was no conversation whatsoever about
N.F.P.A. 1582. Chief Bingham explained in that instance had the employee advised the
physician of the N.F.P.A. 1582 standard, the system would have worked fine.
Deputy Carter explained the City's proposal contained language in Section 1.A outlining
the exam would be conducted in accordance with the most recent version of N.F.P.A.
1582, as approved by the Labor Management Committee. He explained the added
language annulled some of the language proposed by the Union. Lt. Kinser responded
the problem with the language was it identifies a secondary physician but it did not
identify specific procedures to it. He explained 1582 had a lot of components and was
subject to misinterpretation. He explained language was needed to clarify the Union's
and Administrations methods and requirements regarding the way second opinions
would be handled. By adding language, there would be no misinterpretation.
The Union criteria listed in items 1-4 would specify the qualifications of the third party
physician. Discussion ensued regarding medical records from second and third party
physicians being sent to the office for the Fire Department physician. Chief Bingham felt
4
Meeting Minutes
IAFF Negotiations
Boynton Beach, Florida May 28, 2008
reports sent to the department should not include medical data and the decisions made
about the employee would be in accordance with the 1582 standards.
Deputy Carter expressed concern if they included lengthy language in the article that it
may conflict with the first section that indicated the current version of NFPA 1582 as
adopted by Labor Management would be used. He expressed 1582 had to be the
continuing theme. There was discussion as to how explicit the Union wanted to be.
Chief Bingham thought there was another way to accomplish what the Union was
seeking, but he did not think bringing second and third opinions into the picture with the
City paying for them was appropriate. He thought by doing so, the document could be
diluted and there were cost and employee issues involved which could turn into
administrative hassles that could drag for months.
Lt. Kinser pointed out 1582 allowed for second opinions. Chief Bingham explained Fire
Department physicians have no objections to second opinions, as long as the second
physician indicated they read N.F.P.A. 1582, understood the provision, and met the
standards of N.F.P.A. 1582.
Lt. Kinser explained the second physician must have the same qualifications as the Fire
Department physician. He inquired what would happen if the second opinion differed
from the one made by the Fire Department physician. Chief Bingham explained he
would accept the second opinion. The second opinion would override the first physician,
as long as the employee was honest and did what was required of him/her.
Deputy Carter did not see the need to consult with a third physician. He explained in
addition to the expense of the consultation, the cost of replacing the employee when
absent and other associated issues while the employee was moving through the
medical opinion process the cost would be high.
Lt. Kinser explained the third party physician would only apply when discrepancies
arose and would clarify a condition or procedure. He agreed N.F.P.A. 1582 was a
lengthy document, but noted some decisions by the Fire Department physician could be
career ending.
Chief Bingham explained if two physicians agreed an employee should not be returned
to duty, then the employee should not be returned to duty. He pointed out there are
liability issues associated with it to the public, co-workers and the department. For the
record, Lt. Kinser agreed with Chief Bingham's point but asserted the Union's main
concern was that under the provisions of 1582, the second opinion criteria was not
clear.
The parties agreed to work on language for the article at the next meeting. The Union
reiterated their position was the second physician criterion was not clear and advised
5
Meeting Minutes
IAFF Negotiations
Boynton Beach, Florida May 28, 2008
they would be agreeable to the City deleting the language relating to the third
party opinions. Chief Bingham responded they would develop clear language for this
issue.
Adam Turey left the meet at 9:45 a.m.
Article 11. Physicals. Section 4, was discussed and would have a revised last sentence.
Lt. Kinser explained the problem with listing the statute is that the statute numbers
change. Since the intent of the statute would not change, adding the language "or
current edition of revised statute", or "the current edition of the revised Florida State
Statute identification number." to Section 4 would suffice. It was discussed Chapter
112.181 was referenced twice in section. Lt. Kinser had other changes pertaining to
statute numbers. Additionally, the last sentence in Section 4 referencing Section 3.A.
and 3.B., would be changed to "Section 3.A. and 3.C." which pertained to
immunizations.
The Union proposed offering full body CT scans to department employees and
explained this was fairly new. Two 17 -year members of the department passed away
from cancer discovered in the late stages. The scans were initiated under the
Well ness/Fitness provisions since firefighters have a greater exposure to hazardous
fumes and chemicals, and were being performed at University hospitals. This procedure
would be optional to the employee and the Union was amenable to formulating when
they would occur, or other criteria on the use of scans. Lt. Kinser suggested a first year
trial run and thought in the future, they may become part of the physical exams. The
members advised they wanted to live to reach retirement age and beyond.
The price of the scans was costly; however, Lt. Kinser pointed out one fire department
provided the service to its firefighters and two employees were found to have very early
cancers. Consequently, the firefighters were able to be treated. The Union members
negotiated a very good price for the scans and the City and Union discussed
approaching the County and combining personnel to further reduce the cost of the PET
scans.
Article 7, Rules and ReQulations, Section 3. Lt. Kinser explained the article stated
three employees would be appointed by the Union for the Regulations Committee.
Since the Labor Management Committee was formed, a Regulations Committee was
not established. The proposal was to replace the language, "and three employees
appointed by the Union" with, "and three employees appointed by the Executive Board."
Article 33, Grievance Procedure. Lt. Kinser explained there was no Union Grievance
Committee and the Executive Board was the sole entity in charge of dealing with the
Union. He suggested this be reviewed by the legal staff. The Union's proposal was to
change the language in Article 33 in Step 1, from ". . . and signed petition to the Union
6
Meeting Minutes
IAFF Negotiations
Boynton Beach, Florida May 28, 2008
Grievance Committee." with, "and signed petition to the Union Grievance Committee
which is made up of the Executive Board."
Article 14. WaQes Lt. Kinser explained the Special Operations Team was established in
1997. Florida recognized and required team members to annually recertify with the
State through the Florida Urban Search and Rescue Team, (FLUSAR 746) program,
through a 40-hour recertification class. There were also five classes the
employee needed in order to meet the requirements to be a part of the FLUSAR Team.
The initial pay of the Special Operations Team has not changed since inception;
however; a comparison of other departments was taken and the Union proposed a
wage towards the lower end of the scale. For the last six years the pay differential was
48 cents per hour and the increase was proposed for 75 cents. Presently, there were
no forty hour employees within Special Operations, which was comprised of 18
members, and 12 Dive Team members. The financial impact would be about $20K on
top of the current salaries. The new total would then be $56,160.
Lt. Kinser explained the majority of the numbers were percentage based. Chief
Bingham was not in favor of percentages. The Unions proposal was to insert new
language as Section 5 indicating employees currently assigned to a Technical Rescue
Team would receive $1,872 per year. The amount would equate to an hourly rate of
$.75 over and above the base rate of pay, which would not be included in the
employees maximum. Assignment pay shall be considered a salary disbursement
included in W-2 holdings for the purpose of pension calculations. The current Section 5
would be renumbered as Section 6. Chief Bingham suggested changing the title of
Article 26 to "Certification Incentive Pay". which the Union thought that was acceptable.
It was noted the Dive Team was not created at the time the contract went into effect.
Honor Guard was suggested to be included in Article 26 or 14. The concept was the
Honor Guard had been in existence for quite some time, and served without
compensation. Boynton Beach had become the key Honor Guard for West Palm Beach
and was called upon often because they have a good team. Most other departments
compensate their Honor Guard Team. The Union proposed those members receive a
sum of $50 maintenance subsidy per month because functions arise suddenly requiring
the members take time in the middle of the day to attend the event. The members also
have to prepare the Uniform and equipment. While parades or Holidays can be
planned, funerals can not. There were nine members on the Honor Guard Team and
the fiscal impact would be $5,400 per year. It was noted any retiree serving on the
Honor Guard would not receive compensation. Chief Bingham would obtain a cost
comparison.
Article 14, Sick Leave. Annual Evaluation. Lt. Murphy noted there was prior discussion
pertaining to employees using too much sick leave. One aspect of the discussion
pertained to excessive leave which would impact their evaluation. Deputy Carter
explained this tied article 3B to the performance manual. The Manual would clearly
7
Meeting Minutes
IAFF Negotiations
Boynton Beach, Florida May 28, 2008
state excessive use of sick leave constituted a less than satisfactory leave, however this
was not set forth in the contract. The additional language would indicate the employee
would lose the opportunity to receive his/her pay raise, thereby avoiding receiving two
pay raises.
The Union's proposal was to payout accrued sick leave at the time of retirement at
three different compensation levels based on how many hours the employee was
eligible to accrue and how many hours remained. This would allow for compensation at
25% for those having 0-719 hours unused, 50% compensation for those having
between 720-2131 hours unused, and paying 75% for employees having 2160 unused.
The percentages would be calculated on years actually served and would exclude any
sick leave permitted by FMLA. The Union anticipated there would be a financial impact
and would bring back a calculation. There was discussion the City's proposal would
gain the attention of the employee; however, the Union felt their proposal was a change
in philosophy, and by using a proactive approach, the employee would be rewarded for
doing the correct thing.
Chief Bingham explained employees who did not abuse sick leave would receive a
higher pension than that of their peers who abused the sick leave. He explained there
was an array of issues that arise when an employee decides not to come to work, such
as overtime, employees working too many hours and others. The City would review the
document but explained it was a cost item. Deputy Carter would review the histories of
retired employees accumulated hours when they separated from service and would give
the item consideration and perhaps make a counter proposal.
The next meeting was scheduled for June 17, 2008 at 8:30 a.m. in the Fire Police
Training Room. The City would offer counter proposals, and would try to reconcile the
numbers on the pay charts. The Union would have survey information available and
additional information regarding the CT scans.
The meeting closed at 10:51 a.m.
~~Ch>>uf
Catherine Cherry
060108
8