Spokane7
50°
November 19, 2010 in City
Deal with firefighters would preserve jobs
Council, union must approve agreement
Spokane firefighters avoid layoffs under a tentative agreement accepted this week by Mayor Mary Verner.
If the deal is approved by union members and City Council, Local 29 of the International Association of Fire Fighters would become the first of the city’s bargaining groups to strike a deal this year to save jobs.
“The tentative agreement makes changes of a permanent nature,” said City Administrator Ted Danek. “There is nothing in here that would harm future budgets.”
The mayor has asked all unions to give up their 2011 cost-of-living raises and to agree to pick up any increased costs of employee medical benefits above 4 percent a year. She has said those departments with unions that make concessions would face 3 percent cuts instead of 9 percent, thus preventing layoffs.
It’s unclear how close the agreement comes to Verner’s request. Danek declined to give specifics, saying he wants to give union members and City Council members a chance to examine the deal.
But he said the 13 firefighters who got layoff notices would remain employed, and of the 15 vacant firefighting jobs, only seven would be eliminated.
Approval of the deal would end talk of closing a fire station. Fire Chief Bobby Williams has said closing the station at 1722 S. Bernard St., was one way to deal with the layoffs.
Under Local 29’s contract, the union is entitled to a 2 percent raise on Jan. 1 and an additional 1 percent boost on July 1.
The president of the firefighter union, Mark Vietzke, did not return calls seeking comment. Dan Brown, president of the Spokane Fire Officers Association, which represents the city’s battalion chiefs, said the tentative deal also would affect his members because they also are part of Local 29. He said the agreement is being presented to union members this week.
City Council members expressed cautious optimism when given Danek’s description of the tentative deal.
“If it’s like you describe it, I’d say, ‘yee haw,’ ” said Councilman Jon Snyder.
Councilwoman Nancy McLaughlin has been among the most vocal on the council in pushing for union concessions.
“On first blush, that’s terrific news, and we’re anxious to hear the full details of it,” she said.
Last year, Verner gave unions wide latitude in finding ways to prevent layoffs, but administrators this year have held firmer ground, saying they had little – if anything – to give in return for accepting her request.
The fire union’s concession last year involved pushing forward on a cheaper medical plan that it already had agreed to pursue in an earlier contract, and the creation of incentives to entice higher-paid firefighters to retire. Officials say the program has lowered the city’s costs, though in some cases it has caused unexpected boosts in overtime.
Facing a $13 million deficit, the mayor has sent notices to 70 city workers that they will be out of work as of Christmas – the last day of the final pay period in 2010. The city also plans to eliminate around 50 jobs that are currently vacant.
City leaders have warned that time is running out for unions to save jobs.
There are signs that other agreements are possible. Spokane Police Guild President Ernie Wuthrich was at City Hall late Thursday afternoon dropping off the guild’s concession proposal. He declined to discuss details before administrators reviewed it.
MAC faces angry crowd 
hawken on November 19 at 7:15 a.m.
Since I have little respect for unions, I’ll wait to see what the final outcome shakes out to be. Yesterday’s article implied this was a done deal. Apparently, not.
misjustice on November 19 at 8:18 a.m.
NO, the article clearly stated that the proposal had to be voted on by the membership…
liarsinnews on November 19 at 8:31 a.m.
The story talks about medical coverage but fails to disclose the money the employee pays into the plan and the amount it costs the taxpayers. Brunt also reports Verner is abolishing vacant positions. Really. If a position isn`t filled what does that have to do with saving money and what does that have to do with union concessions? Certainly the city doesn`t guarantee a job stabilization plan do they??
bdr on November 19 at 8:45 a.m.
When we hear pay details of firefighters who earn 60-140k per year………why don’t we ever stop to think….the county could actually lay-off all the firefighters except for a handful
Take the millions saved and just rebuild the burned buildings.
a 1500 square foot house built to its studs only costs 52,000 bucks. why are we paying more than the house costs to squirt water on its ash pile….the 1/2 burnt hulks the firefighters save has to be demolished and rebuilt anyway due to smoke.
Just let them burn.!
lewis8457 on November 19 at 9:12 a.m.
BDR good idea and the insurance companies have to pay to rebuild so it is a win win for the city. Make the insurance companies pay the fire fighters wage if they want the house saved.
honestly if my house ever burns down i will take the insurance money and get the hell out of Spokane. sounds like a win win for me too.
I guess i have lived in Spokane too long. there is no way this deal will keep my property rates from going up. And we will see the firefighters keep their gravy train.
Just another smoke screen, like i have already said give back the 340 grand paid out in OT and then i might believe they actually care.
west on November 19 at 9:19 a.m.
“Most of the Spokane Fire Department’s nine battalion chiefs have earned nearly $40,000 each in overtime pay so far this year, pushing the annual earnings of most of them to about $170,000 or higher, city budget documents show.” Nice paychecks,$10,000 and more each month. Can you see why the worker foreman are getting up to $90,000 a year?Gotta stop this year after year upwards spiral of wages bennefits. ‘Its only 4 percent raise! Ya, 4% of $120,000 is a nice $480. a month pay raise..gravy. And…not paying them anything next year or much later will result in payback time in a couple of years…10% pay raises city will have to come up with. Best to pass a $100,000,000 bond to pay citiy employees..let the common folk pay it out of their measly $32,000 a year wages. They protect life and property so the sky is the limit and the city has no power at all to reduce these bloated perks and salaries…powerless.Get them property taxes up by $600 a year for each Spokane home owner….to pay city people. It will never end…..like the Eveready Bunny…..keeps going and goin, and goin! ha..
johnclarke on November 19 at 10:35 a.m.
Simply hilarious. They collect overtime. My hat is off to anyone that is lucky enough to land one of these jobs aka tax payer funded gravy train. How noble they made these HUGE consessions. I’m not quite sure how they are going to squeak by.
Whatever Spokane, you just voted in yet another levy for these guys so they can continue EMS which is actually code for “wearing out our fire engines so we get new ones.”
johno on November 19 at 10:40 a.m.
I salute the firefighters for making concessions to save jobs! Let’s hope the rest of the unions in Spokane follow suit.
Lulubelle on November 19 at 11:20 a.m.
Make concessions……..don’t make concessions…the bitchers won’t be happy either way. As a former City employee (no…not Spokane) my experience has been the folks the cry and moan the most do so because they jealously covet those city jobs, but can’t make the grade.
Spokane_PI on November 19 at 12:54 p.m.
@Lulubelle Typical Liberal, instead of argue the facts you assassinate the character of those you agree with. Are you kidding me? $40K in overtime!
Spokane_PI on November 19 at 12:55 p.m.
I meant don’t agree with. ;)
Dazzeetrader11 on November 19 at 12:55 p.m.
Lulu…most wouldn’t want those confining jobs.
These firemen and their unions have guaranteed salaries.
Nobody is jealous over institutional jobs.
SO what’s the problem? None really..except for this: who has to pay for these jobs. It’s not the job..it’s the COST to the taxpayer. Unions run the cost up by a full third…but what’s the “value added”? There is none. SO the public pays for bloated salaries and supports the unions without consent.
Solution: rid Spokane of the unions, save money in hard times and save money in better times. Nobody doubts the fire dept serves a good purpose. an essential purpose to be accurate.
It’s the money spent for nothing extra even though the unions are too expensive. Those firefighters would stand in line to get their jobs back at the same salary…to each man/woman. Same duties, same trucks, same everything.. the only difference is cost of the unions which are tucked into the salaries as it stands now.
Decert the unions and nobody would know the difference in terms of service. Verner would know…she just struck a deal with the unions to support her. That’s the only logical reason she’s re-signing. She needs to be re elected. Same with the police unions who will fall in place soon. Verner can say she bargained hard when the fix was in from the beginning.
What does the public get from all this? Unions use their money to re-elect this incompetent mayor. Nothing changes if nothing changes. This is nothing but the mayor using public money passed through the unions for their support. It’s a ruse. To me, it looks like a big “hustle”. Spokane gets nothing but a lousy mayor (again). And the beat goes on…
johnclarke on November 19 at 1:55 p.m.
Whatever Lulubelle, I was raised on the east coast in an area much more densly populated than Spo-corn. We used (and still to this day) largely volunteer firefighters and it’s not like houses are burning down left and right. There is simply no justification for the SFD in it’s current form. Seriously, nine battalion chiefs making as much $170,000 a year ? In Spokane?
jddavis on November 19 at 4:02 p.m.
Come on johnclarke! Paying a Battalion Chief $19.40 an hour is a bargain! Oh wait…err…make that $19.40x24x365…$170K per year.
As a comparison, the Commander of Fairchild AFB makes approx 120K per year, and has a heck of a lot more responsibility…not to mention being in charge of thousands of personnel AND an entire fire dept. I know it is apples to oranges, however, look at the level of responsibility vs compensation.
johnclarke on November 19 at 6:02 p.m.
fine point jddavis….but obviously you can’t convince anyone in this town. Why else would they vote yes on these absurd levys time after time.
marlerr on November 19 at 7:21 p.m.
Allow me to shed some insight into how deals like this have worked out in other cities. I am a Vancouver Fireman/Local 452 and last year as we saw our city being decimated by the same Tim Eyman initiatives that have totally slaughtered your local police and fire department budgets, we voluntarily voted as a union to give back our pre-negotiated raises and cost of living increase so that the city could save close to a million dollars and spare some of the other city jobs that had been going away in parks and city ops. The fire department wasn’t even on the chopping block, as we were already running at numbers far less than the standard. It was a good thing to do for other jobs. Now allow me to fast forward to the present day…My fire station is getting closed at the first of the year and we’ve lost over 20 positions in the fire department; some of those were lay-offs, not just open positions. The money we saved the city in order to save jobs went directly to an outside lawyer the city hired to fight us in our current contract negotiations, in lieu of the lawyer already on salary — not just some of that money…all of it. Yes, nearly a million dollars used to hire an outside lawyer.
Times are tough right now but firefighters are running more calls every year and are receiving less in health benefits due to the constant erosion that comes with each contract renewal. Losing firefighters means doing more with less people. No fireman should be faced with the guilt that his or her salary will result in the loss of another person’s job. It should not be a firefighter’s responsibility to balance the city’s budget.
johnclarke on November 20 at 9:06 a.m.
marlerr - I’m not following your logic. Perhaps if firefighters and their unions didn’t demand unreasonable compensation in the first place we would not have a problem. Hello, I don’t call 170k a year for a mid level manager reasonable. I don’t really know what the median income is in Vancouver, but here in Spokane the per capita is 19k and household 37k. Now. this is normally the point when the statistics get marched out - and here is the solution. Firefighters can stop performing EMS calls. We already pay a contractor for that. That leaves like 70(ish) structure fires a year. I think a mix of paid and volunteer firefighters could handle that.
lewis8457 on November 21 at 7:43 a.m.
25 thousand EMS calls a year versus 70 fires a year. We aren’t paying them to fight fires as much as EMS calls that can be taken by American Ambulance.
Imagine a 10 grand a month paycheck, that is what i make in a year. But I get still get to pay the 110 dollar annual increase in my property taxes year after year.
marlerr on November 21 at 4:54 p.m.
Johnclarke, you clearly are ignorant and have no idea what you are talking about, so I am not even going to volley this back and forth after this response. Those people you are talking about from the fire department that you feel are making extraordinary salaries are not the union members that this article was even referencing for passing up cost of living increases. The people being asked to pass that up are not making anywhere near that amount of money, so you are not even using the correct group in your argument. The fire department union members are not the battalion chiefs. Your solution for fire fighters to stop running aid calls is also ignorant because the fire department still has to staff sufficiently to handle the demands and safety standards for fighting fires and I’m pretty sure if it was your emergency and you were the one holding your breath waiting for someone to come help, you would be more than happy to see the fire department show up on your door and save your life. A cardiac emergency takes more than a two person ambulance crew pal, but i wouldn’t expect you to know that since you have so many other facts messed up. As a former volunteer myself I can tell you that it was great experience for me, but what I learned when i became a full time firefighter is that I had no idea how much I didn’t know as a volunteer. I thought I was dialed in, but there is no comparison to the knowledge difference between full time firefighters and volunteers. Clearly you don’t care about the facts. So I will not waste any more of my time jawing with you, in fact i’m pretty embarrassed to have even thought i might shed light on such deep ignorance anyway.
johnclarke on November 22 at 11:28 a.m.
Well Mr. Marlerr, if you are going to start name calling - I will be more than happy to give YOU an education. Let’s talk about those poor union members. I happen to know a couple, and they are nice guys. They work 24 hours on, and 72 off. They both have other full time jobs. They both collect overtime. They both make triple the median HOUSEHOLD income for Spokane. You can spare the life saving crap, seriously. You make it sound like society is going to fall apart without the almighty Firefighters protecting us mere mortals. I wonder how my neighborhood back in the Philly area has survived to this day with volunteer firefighters, yet it is more densly populated than Spokane? Also, you might want to read the report on Spokane’s web site. The contractor is more efficient at responding than the Fire Department to aid calls. Black and white amigo, those fire engines do not need to roll on aid calls. The contractor has paramedics. Perhaps you can explain why we pay for the contractor, and then a levy for EMS? I’ll tell you why, for the money. Plain and simple - and sorry I do not see any difference between the union members and the chiefs. All part of the same problem we can’t afford in a town like Spokane.
johnclarke on November 22 at 11:30 a.m.
Lewis - again i find myself agreeing. I love how everyone says “oh it’s just a little amount a year” - that little amount on your taxes can make a big difference to many, many people.