IN YOUR CORNER

 

Do you remember the good old days when Dad was a volunteer fireman and

Mom cooked pies for the annual fireman's picnic?  Much has changed since

then, but not always for the better.

 

Union membership, as a percent of the total workforce, has been

declining since the 1930's.  Back then, the worker felt exploited or

unable to represent himself and express his concerns to his boss.

Improved compensation packages, better communications and working

conditions coupled with more participatory management styles have

gradually combined to reduce the need for unions in the traditional

sense.

 

In response to these changes, the unions have sought out and found new,

nontraditional sources for membership among office and professional

employees, teachers and government workers, including fire fighters and

emergency personnel who, in Martin County, are represented by the

International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF).

 

IAFF influence is credited with fostering legislation that has had the

effect of gradually tightening specifications for job qualifications or

training that all but eliminate the participation of those workers who

do not fall into the category of certified, full-time career union

members.  Our career fire rescue personnel are a highly trained,

versatile  group of which the county can be justifiably proud, but

integration of volunteers with career personnel has been somewhat

hampered by legislation, politics, and the union.

 

Martin County's fire and rescue departments were entirely staffed by

volunteers from its inception until 1979, when a small cadre of

full-time career professionals were hired to assure that a base of

uniformly trained and certified emergency services personnel manned each

station.  Today, approximately eighty volunteers remain, eight to ten of

which are state certified.  Negotiated rules, legislation, and

collective bargaining have gradually reduced the role of the volunteer

which is now limited to such duties as fighting brush fires.

 

In the meantime, our Emergency Services Department has been plagued with

out-of-control overtime costs, ranging from $700,000 to over $1 million

annually over the past four years.  This is in spite of a 32% increase

in full-time personnel over the past three years, some of which are to

fill in for absentees and to offset the shortened work week obtained

through collective bargaining.  Other personnel are designated as

floaters throughout the county.

 

Commissioners have been generously throwing money at the problem in an

attempt to solve it.  Salaries and related expenses have increased 59%

from the audited 1999 statements to the forecasted fiscal year of 2003.

Part of this increase is a result of wage hikes totaling 11% per year

over the past three years (compounded), and the reduction of the work

week to 48 hours.  This is further complicated by the introduction of

'Kelly Days', which amounts to one paid off duty shift each seventh

shift worked.  In summary, emergency workers are not only well trained

and equipped, but very well compensated for their work.  In fact the ES

budget is increasing percentage wise and total dollar wise faster than

that of any other department in the county.  Management describes the

compensation package as comparable to area practice and driven by supply

and demand.

 

A common sense approach to reducing overtime costs would seem to be the

utilization of selected volunteers as fillers, but this alternative has

been legislated away by increasingly raising the bar on training

requirements.  A second alternative might be to utilize off duty ES

personnel from other jurisdictions.  (After all, many of these employees

have second jobs since their ES job typically consumes only two days (24

hour shifts) per week.)  This option has also been eliminated by such

legalistic barriers as 'jurisdictional liability' (our label) which

means if an emergency worker from another system gets injured while

working for our county, there is a question as to who pays for the

resultant workmen's compensation costs.  We wonder if other counties

have this problem.  Can't an agreement be worked out to offer reciprocal

coverage?  Apparently not.

 

Another means of reducing overtime is to redistribute available

personnel between stations.  This practice has acquired the label of

'flex' staffing.  Selectively reducing head count in one location to

provide for the needs of another has proved to be a tough sell.  When

proposed, it was perceived by the affected commissioner and his/her

constituents to be a reduction in their level of service (LOS), a term

which sometimes defies definition.  For example, if a station is

normally staffed with four ES personnel and a fifth is assigned, the LOS

is said to be raised and vice versa.  The tangible impact of flex

staffing can be quite nebulous until critical numbers are reached at a

specific location under specific circumstances.

 

There seems to be no limit to the number of barriers preventing a

logical solution to the problem of excessive overtime costs.  To the

degree that we taxpayers feel compelled to remind all involved that

OVERTIME IS NOT A BENEFIT, BUT SHOULD BE MANAGEMENT'S LAST RESORT WHEN

FULFILLING STAFF REQUIREMENTS.  With that said, our next step should be

to ask that ES management step up to the plate and employ their

management prerogative in reducing overtime.  However, that is a tall

order when the union, some commissioners, and some taxpayers prefer to

keep hiring floaters until, and if, the problem goes away.