Michigan Association of Fire Fighters

Arbitrator awards Burton City Paid-On-Call Fire Fighters pay increases, rejects subcontracting

Burton City Paid-on-Call Fire Fighters were awarded two years of pay increases and had their position against subcontracting fire services with other municipalities upheld by an Arbitrator after MAFF filed an Act 312 arbitration on their behalf.

Both parties submitted their Last Best Offers (LBO) Jan. 7, 2013 after failing to reach an agreement on a new four-year contract from July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2016. There were three issues up for resolution: wages for all four years of the contract; a retirement appreciation bonus; and subcontracting of fire services.

The City’s position was no wage increases for the entire four-year contract; a $100 increase in the retirement appreciation bonus for every year of service in excess of 30 years; and subcontracting with other municipalities to provide fire services in connection with the closure of one or more of the City’s Fire Stations.

MAFF Labor Relations Specialist Jim Steffes sought one-time bonus payouts for years one and two of the contract and wage increases for the last two years of the contract. The Union was opposed to subcontracting services and sought retirement bonuses of $125 per year for each additional full year of service in excess of 20 years.

The Arbitrator ruled in MAFF’s favor awarding the Paid-On-Call Fire Fighters wage increases in years three and four of the contract as follows: 2 percent for all steps and classifications in the bargaining unit for the period of July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015; 3 percent increase for all steps and classifications in the bargaining unit for the period of July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016.

The Arbitrator also ruled in the Union’s favor to maintain the status quo language of the Management Rights clause. The City sought to add a section to the clause giving them the right to contract with other municipalities or entities to provide fire services and allow for the closure of one or more City Fire Stations.

“Since this issue was brought up, according to the Union, on the eve of the 312 conference call, at the very least it was not fully explored in negotiations,” the Arbitrator said. “As well, the City maintains it has the right to consolidate services in its sole discretion under MLCA 423.215(11) which provides that decisions as to whether a public employer will enter into an inter-governmental agreement to consolidate one or more functions or services is a prohibited subject of bargaining. In view of these two factors, there is no pressing reason to memorialize the City’s proposal at this time.”