On the one hand, what do you expect Bobby Weist, President of the Davis Professional Firefighters Union, to say – after all, he is negotiating with the city’s negotiator for a new contract and locked in a standoff that appears likely to result in the imposition of the last, best, and final offer by the city. But on the other hand, his quote, featured in the article by Tom Sakash of the Davis Enterprise, is telling for its sheer audacity.
Mr. Weist told the paper that “he hopes it will not come to imposition.”
“I’m hoping that we can come to some type of an agreement,” Mr. Weist told the paper. “At this point right now the cuts that the city is proposing are just too draconian.
He added, “It’s more important for the two groups – the city and the union – to come to some type of an agreement whether both of us are happy about it or both of us think that it’s horrible. If we don’t and we get this imposed on us, morale is not good in the department right now as it is (in terms of the union’s relationship with management).”
The problem, as the paper alludes to, is that the rest of the bargaining units have already taken the deal – the same one that Mr. Weist is calling too draconian. And to make matters even more interesting, the agreements contain a “me too” clause which would mean that subsequent agreements with fewer concessions would result in all contracts being equalized in terms of impact on total compensation – concessions to fire would mean additional concessions to all bargaining units.
The clause was put in there to encourage the other groups to sign early, knowing that the firefighters and DCEA will not benefit from prolonging their contract negotiations. It also forces the city to stick to its guns, knowing that if they “cave” to the firefighters or DCEA it costs them on all contracts.
The city’s position was made clear in a press release sent out late on Friday.
“The City’s position is fundamentally different than that of both Local 3494 and DCEA regarding whether the City faces long-term financial problems and their magnitude,” the press release states. “The City believes there are long-term systemic cost issues that a change in the economic cycle and a potential uptick in future revenues will not address.”
“The City and DCEA attempted mediation without success,” the city updates the public. They are currently in the middle of the fact-finding process with DCEA.
The strategic nature of the city’s decision to add the “me too” clause is not lost on Mr. Weist, who naturally laments it as a hindrance toward his union getting a better deal for their employees than the other units in the city.
In 2004, the firefighters signed an MOU that gave the union a whopping 36% pay increase over the next five years ending in 2009. The same period saw the police take a healthy, but far less, 19% pay increase.
Mr. Weist told the paper that “the clause puts both the city and the labor groups in an awkward position because there is much more on the line for both sides than just a contract between the two parties.”
He added that “other city employees have approached firefighters to talk to them about that fact.”
“I kind of wish that we didn’t have this clause in the other contracts; it’s a burden on both the city and the union,” Weist said. “There may be ways for us to come to some type of an agreement that now we can’t (reach) because they put this clause in the other groups’ contracts. If we’re able to work things out and we get (a better deal), they have to give it to other people.”
He may only “kind of wish” but the decision was clearly made because the city needs to stick to their guns and get the kind of concessions that the council in 2009 failed to obtain in part because they aimed too low initially, and in part because they compromised from their modest goals.
City Manager Steve Pinkerton told the paper, on the other hand, that this issue was “just about ensuring that all employees are given the same deal.”
“The goal in every step in the process is to make sure that everyone is treated fairly,” Mr. Pinkerton said.
Mr. Weist would, of course, not elaborate what the union was seeking that was different from the offers that the other bargaining units signed.
The bottom line here is very clear.
First, the city is going to stick to their guns this time. Mr. Weist knows it and is not happy with it. However, the last few months have shown that, not only is his influence on the decline with the city council, he was really unable to mobilize the broader community to rally over the more daring cuts – cutting personnel.
While it appears that the entire council is backing the impasse proceedings, fire staffing only received a highly contested 3-2 vote.
Second, this process is going to impasse and the last, best, and final offer will be imposed. There will be no agreement. Neither side is willing to compromise.
Third, this will get replayed in the next council election, and with Mayor Joe Krovoza running for Assembly and Rochelle Swanson reportedly running for reelection, and both voting for the fire staffing cuts, this will be an interesting dynamic in a community that is finally beginning to grapple with its economic problems.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
do the other employees at the city actually like weist and think he’s healthy for the system.
Just as a little hypothetical exercise, I’ve thought what I’d do if were in Bobby Weist’s shoes. He has lost council majority support on the Council. Even his two nominal supporters have been singed with their recent Nay vote.
So no hope, ho help, there.
Then, there was the futile attempt to rally support from the general public. Public “informational” meetings were poorly attended. Poorly disguised website calls for support were exposed for what they were and generated virtually no support save a couple of responses who have their own agenda.
Result: The call to action to the public and the vain appeal for the need to maintain existing levels of public safety failed utterly.
What’s left? Before, Bobby could rely on support from his organizational superiors, specifically the Fire Chief. But that ally is now gone, replaced by two strong-minded veteran police administrators. Bobby has no markers to cash in with these guys.
That leaves Mr. Weist with only the negotiation process remaining, and that’s pretty grim as well. The City has boxed Bobby in and he does not like it. But you have to acknowledge the City’s leverage that resulted from the City skillful maneuver. Mr. Weist has to take the hit for not seeing that coming, although he never will admit it. His membership will tell him anyway.
The inference with Bobby’s latest public remarks is that “the last best offer” is going to be shoved down the throat of the firefighters. That would leave Mr. Weist’s leadership value very much in question. Bobby can go down with all flags flying, but he has a better option should he be able to recognize it.
The Fire Union should approach the City and seek a non-monetary concession in exchange for “reluctant” support of the cost-cutting measures. The Union might get the City to inert some non-binding wording in the agreement to the effect that “the City will revisit firefighter salary scale” at an agreed-upon future date. This would give the fire union some minor and ceremonial retention of relevance with its membership.
The Fire Union can’t win this battle. Will they recognize this reality or just entrench as long as possible, only the future will reveal. But if they entrench, they lose still more of their dwindling public support.
pretty good analysis there Mr. Coleman, i agree with your assessment.
Bobby Weist wrote:
> morale is not good in the department right now as it
> is (in terms of the union’s relationship with management)
It is hard to believe that “moral is not good” when the firefighters make (in many cases) twice as much as other city employees who spent(in many cases) twice as much time in college all while the firefighters work half as many days a month as most other Davis city employees…
P.S. Thanks to Phil for the well thought out analysis…
The Police have been pissed for years because the FF Union got a lot more money for its members than DPOA did. The FF will not get any favors from the current management.
I understand all of the issues, as I lived them back in the day when the FF Union used to pack CC chambers to try and intimidate me for saying we did not need the 4th Fire Station at Covell VIllage, that the 5 minute response time rule was manipulated by FF to make it look like large swaths of the city (especially up around CV) was outside that 5 min, and that we did not need the 4th crew member, and that the FF should stop going to obviously non-injury accidents.
However, at the end of the day, there is a perception on this Blog that the FF Union was improperly “taking” money from the City, or otherwise acting improperly.
WE THE VOTERS elect the CC members. It’s up to the CC to say NO to requests for more money by various public employee unions, including fire.
They have a right to organize, and they have a right to ask for more $$ … it is Bobby Weist’s job to ask for more … If he was my union boss, I would demand he ask for as much as possible …. it’s the law.
The CC failed in its fiduciary duty the taxpayers … Bobby Weist does not owe a duty to the taxpayers, sorry to say. In fact, if he split his loyalties, then he would be breaching his duty to the Union, and would and should be fired for that.
So you can complain about whatever, but Bobby Weist was singularly successful in getting pay and benefits for his members, for over 10 years.
Shame on the CC for not saying no to that 2005 raise, and beyond.
Where is Don Saylor when he is needed, and Sidney Vergis? Cannot they help these poor, put upon firemen? Actually, a fireman friend says, sotto voce, that he is embarrassed by the Mr. Weist position. I didn’t probe, but I’ll bet there are others who are of a similar mind.
Unions were born to counteract unreasonable treatment of labor by management. In the beginning the power balance was always lopsided, with management holding all the cards except one: the ability of the union members to withhold their labor (i.e. strike). Over time the power balance shifted in many cases, but with few exceptions the rank-and-file have never achieved parity, let alone dominance, over management.
Davis firefighters are an exception: their union gained so much power that it drove rank-and-file compensation up beyond a reasonable level when viewed in terms of market value. Now the union doesn’t know how to behave — it’s always been on a quest for more, but “more” just doesn’t make sense now. Weist is painting himself as a buffoon using words like “draconian.”
I greatly appreciate the skill and dedication of Davis firefighters. I want them to be able to have satisfying careers with the department and make an income that allows them to support their families, and I believe they have achieved that. But when firefighter compensation gets dramatically above that of other city employees with similar or greater investments in education and training, demands for more — particularly in a time of budget crisis like the present — are simply outrageous.
.
“On the one hand, what do you expect Bobby Weist, President of the Davis Professional Firefighters Union, to say…”
Exactly.
My father had a saying “Nobody likes to piss backwards.” By that he meant that nobody likes to give back their gains.
Teachers are no different, we don’t want to give anything back either, and austerity, a recurring advocacy position of David’s, is always draconian. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had teachers ask me “Why are they cutting us? Don’t we already give enough?” Of course our pension is 2% at 60 instead of 3% at 50 like the firefighters get even though our work is dangerous too. See Columbine, Stockton or Newtown. We don’t get to take home cash if our spouse covers our medical insurance either and most teachers i know haven’t had a raise since after Arnold got re-elected. So our morale is low and on top of it all our class sizes have gone up and every idiot thinks they know how we should do our jobs and wants us all fired because we are the problem. Ah, but I digress.
My point is that taking a cut is never easy so beating up on the union guy facing no good choices is David once again rubbing salt in the wound. Its nothing more than chest thumping in the victory of David’s personal issues with Bobby. Its also distasteful to read.
When jerry Brown won election in 2010 he brought in a union negotiator to work for the state and got contracts signed with a number of state bargaining units. It was all done without rancor. The unions made concessions but Jerry Brown and his negotiator didn’t rub the unions or workers noses in it. They simply addressed the budget realities as they existed. Contrast this with what Arnold did with his furloughs and special election initiatives or consider the acrimony that would have transpired if Meg Whitman had won.
So I wonder about the intransigence of the FF union. I wonder if there could be another way to negotiate the remaining contracts without all the hardball politics. I wonder if the remaining bargaining units are so insulted and feel so disrespected that they are willing to to upset the apple cart rather than make a deal. i wonder if the unions weren’t getting beat up every day by the anti-union types that populate Davis media would they be more willing to cut a deal? Maybe, maybe not, i don’t know, or do they figure they are going down with the ship? I know one road leads to settlement and the other leads to hell.
How do I know? I was on a picket line once. At the end of the process my union refused to back down even though the district had caved at the last minute. My union called a two week strike anyway because we were legally able to strike at that point and we were going to show them we were tired of their bullshit! The district was never the same after the strike. People who had been friends for decades never spoke again. Many people left taking jobs in other districts after serving there for decades.
I hope that cooler heads will prevail here in Davis and i wish that all this gloating would stop so that the chance for the process to work is enhanced. All the daily bashing does is cause entrenched positions to intensify creating a recipe for disaster and reducing the possibility for people to do the right thing.
This editorial and run of comments are huge! Mr. Toad’s insightful note on David’s tendency to advocate austerity, and no union bashing. Where is RR?
Mr. Toad: you and I just see this a little differently. Your view is, that I won, so I should stop gloating. My view is nothing has been won that can’t be unwon, so the pressure needs to stay on until everything is signed and oh by the way, there’s an election next year that can undo all of the gains potentially.