Imagine for a second a scenario where the Davis firefighters took the same agreement as all other bargaining units of the city of Davis and then, when the city of Davis proposed staffing cuts, the firefighters said, look, we’ve taken contract concessions, we understand that the city needs to find additional cuts, let’s create a subcommittee that can look at alternative service providing models.
Under that set of scenarios, it would be perfectly reasonable for the city of Davis to look at the firefighters as partners in the city’s efforts to cut costs, and to work with them on a solution that both sides could live with.
Instead, what has transpired for the last year has been the firefighters attempting to block every single change floated by the city of Davis. They have refused to take contract concessions, they participating in the public roundtable but their only proposal was for the status quo. When it became clear they did not have the numbers on council to stop the interim fire chief’s proposal, instead they attempted political pressure by having public meetings, creating the astroturf group, Friends of the Davis Firefighters, and walking precincts.
After that failed to move council and failed to move the community, they spent the last four weeks protesting out in front of city hall to no clear effect, they signed a no confidence vote in the interim fire chiefs, and they demanded a new full-time fire chief.
When the city found a full-time fire chief familiar with the city and close in proximity, they attempted to attack his credibility with a three-year-old complaint, apparently mostly based on a fabrication, about the official duties of the duty chief. When the city proposed a joint management model, the firefighters attacked that too.
There is a pattern here. First, every effort at change has been met by unequivocal opposition. There has been no effort by the firefighters to try to work with the city. Had the firefighters signed their contract, they might be in a position to bargain, but having not done that and having opposed every single effort to cut costs and reforms, they have now failed to obtain their policy goals at every step of the way.
Yes, they can complain that the city failed to file for a grant application, but why should the city go out of their way at this point to reward the firefighters for their intransigence?
For much of the past few years, the city’s other association and bargaining units have quietly gone about their business. Last December they each agreed with the city on a reduced compensation package to enable the city to remain fiscally solvent.
As we have noted numerous times, two bargaining units have failed to accept this deal and that has meant more than a million dollars in lost savings for the city.
But the other units are no longer sitting by quietly. One of the huge developments on Tuesday was the presence of dozens of DPOA (Davis Police Officers’ Association) members sitting on one side of the chamber wearing white shirts, in opposition to the black-clanned firefighters’ union.
Sgt. Mike Munoz, president of the DPOA, told the local paper that DPOA signed an agreement which made a series of concessions on benefits and retirement, while the firefighters’ union has refused.
The DPOA is now concerned that every day that the firefighters fail to agree to a contract, it is money out of the general fund.
The police officers are concerned about the rising crime rate in Davis, and the lack of availability of critical equipment that would enable the officers to better combat crime.
We have heard story after story about the impact of one less firefighter on a shift, but we have yet to hear the impact of fewer police officers. While the firefighters are staffed with 11 people, there are often only five police officers on duty in the city.
For each month that the firefighters hold out, along with DCEA (Davis City Employees Association), the city loses $114,000 according to the latest estimates by the city. Imagine what the city could do if it had that annual $1 million plus in the general fund and available for all groups.
The efforts by the firefighters have failed at every step of the way. Wiser union leadership might have considered a change in strategy in the wake of what can only be described as complete and total failure.
If the firefighters want to destroy themselves in a professional capacity, I’m sure few will suffer much heartache if the union collapses or if President Bobby Weist is forced to resign in disgrace, but that is hardly fair to the other city employees who have been cooperative with city efforts to cut costs and have quietly accepted their concessions and carried on their work professionally, with diligence.
Of course, we’re painted as anti-labor somehow, because we believe that firefighters, who make at least $175,000 apiece in total compensation, should take the same deals as everyone else in the city.
The firefighters need to understand that they have lost this fight. Every move they make has actually pushed them further from the goal. They failed to even delay the joint management proposal in a week when one of its strongest advocates, Rochelle Swanson, was unable to vote due to a snafu in a Washington hotel.
They have pushed the normally quiet and reserved DPOA into action. A weeks ago, firefighters’ union leadership was bragging that they had three votes in the bag to kill this joint management arrangement, but two weeks later they only mustered a single vote.
Failing tactically is one thing. Lying is another. Last winter we caught the union president in a lie when he insisted that the firefighters had been uninvolved and excluded from the audit process. The truth was that they chose not to participate after being given numerous opportunities.
Now we catch retired Fire Captain Neal Boysen in at least a mistatement. He writes of a 2010 incident that we have reported on a number of times: “Trauernicht had a duty to respond (an actual legal term), an obligation to respond as Duty Chief, instead HE SIMPLY CHOSE NOT TO SHOW UP.”
However, that statement was contradicted by both the UC Davis and City of Davis policies.
Chief Nathan Trauernicht told the Vanguard on Tuesday, “There is no such policy in the books at UCD and I have never seen one that stipulates that from the City.” Sources with the city of Davis told the Vanguard the same thing: “The Duty Chief has the discretion to respond or monitor on the radio as he or she sees fit based on the type of call, radio traffic, etc.”
Chief Trauernicht added, “As I mentioned in our conversation yesterday, going ‘monitoring’ on calls was a common practice for the old duty chief model and that is exactly what I did.”
So, when the retired captain says that he had “a duty,” “an actual legal term,” to respond, he was quite mistaken.
This was an effort to inpugn the reputation of the UC Davis Fire Chief and just one example of the below-the-belt tactics that the city of Davis firefighters’ union has sunk to in order to attempt to gain traction.
Over the summer, the union leadership signed a no confidence vote in the interim fire chief. It is too bad the public cannot sign a no confidence vote in the firefighters’ union leadership. Because, like the police officers – we have had enough.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
The firefighters saved my family and my home. They are on call 24 hours a day. Find the cuts somewhere else. Leave them alone.
David wrote:
> The firefighters need to understand that they have
> lost this fight. Every move they make has actually
> pushed them further from the goal.
I’m wondering if David has had Bobby Weist (or other firefighters) tell him what their “goal” is?
Bobby is close to retirement (like many of the firefighters I have known since High School) and the “goal” of everyone I know is to keep things the same as long as possible until they retire and lock in their $100K + pension.
JimmysDaughter wrote:
> The firefighters saved my family and my home.
> They are on call 24 hours a day. Find the cuts
> somewhere else. Leave them alone.
We all know most firefighters are nice guys and do a great job.
I’m wondering how much more than the police (who are also nice guys and do a great job) JimmysDaughter thinks the firefighters should get paid?
Should we pay them all double what the cops make (and let them retire at 40) just because they saved JimmysDaughter?
the point here is the firefighter union, not the firefighters. you need to make the distinction jd.
Why is the union opposed to the joint management proposal?
because they want a chief they can control like rose conroy or bill weisgerber.
“The police officers are concerned about the rising crime rate in Davis, and the lack of availability of critical equipment that would enable the officers to better combat crime.”
I support the cops but the idea that because the firefighters are sucking up too much money the cops can’t do their job is a stretch. Its sort of like the 4 on an engine argument the FF used. If we don’t get our way public safety will suffer.
Mr.Toad wrote:
> I support the cops but the idea that because the
> firefighters are sucking up too much money the cops
> can’t do their job is a stretch. Its sort of like the
> 4 on an engine argument the FF used. If we don’t get
> our way public safety will suffer.
It is a game that everyone in the public (and to some extent in the big corporate private) sector plays.
When you have more money and more staff it is easier to do your job so it is not a surprise that we hear “If we don’t get more money the kids will suffer” from the teachers year after year and “if we don’t get more money the trees and plants will suffer” from the parks department year after year.
To be fair to the firefighters, police, teachers and parks department they probably will do a better job with more money and more staff, but it is up to the city council to make the tough decisions and decide where the money will benefit the most people.
“I support the cops but the idea that because the firefighters are sucking up too much money the cops can’t do their job is a stretch.”
it’s a million dollars that has to come from somewhere else. that’s not chump change. i just find your arguments in-congruent.
[quote]The firefighters saved my family and my home. They are on call 24 hours a day. Find the cuts somewhere else. Leave them alone. [/quote]
So the firefighters did their [b]job[/b] for which they’re paid handsomely for. Other city workers do their [b]job[/b] too but they have been willing to take cuts in this time of our fiscal problems.
Change is hard.
easier than losing every single battle.
basically these very rich folks who are used to having their own way, have refused to take the concessions that people who make far less than they make have taken and then have obstructed all other reform efforts. i am glad they saved you, jd, but i have no sympathy for them.
I see Granda basically won his case against the school parcel taxes. How many here said that would never happen?
i don’t know why that’s on-topic. i’m sure david will cover this weekend, but granda lost. he was trying to use this to kill the parcel tax and failed.
sorry hit add comment too quickly. but basically no one counted on the school board capitulating like that when it’s not clear that they would have lost.
Why did the school board pay all his attorney fees and make all parcels now $204 regardless of units? Sounds like he basically won to me.
Firefighting can still be a dangerous job, but the advance of fire safety codes and practices, combined with more advanced building construction codes and materials, makes it much less so.
See the following.
[img]http://www.thesocialmisfit.com/ffdeaths.jpg[/img]
Out of these deaths, in 2012 about 49% were from heart attacks or strokes, and most of those were counted after the firefighter was already retired. That same statistical trick is not used counting duty deaths for police or other professions.
This information should provide some consideration against the notion that we should pay a premium to firefighters because of the danger they face on the job. There certainly is danger in firefighting, but it is significantly more dangerous to work in the construction industry and to drive a taxi. But those more dangerous careers tend to pay MUCH less than what we pay our Davis firefighters in total compensation.
We should reject all emotive arguments that firefighters should be paid handsomely because of the danger they face. Police face more danger on a routine basis. Teachers too face a level of danger. There are a lot of employees in both the private and public sector that face danger.
And we should also not get caught up in heroes worship. Firefighters and police both work in the public safety industry. They are paid to save us from harm in their respective disciplines. You can certainly feel grateful for their helpful service, but there is no justification to bankrupt a city by overpaying them because of that gratefulness. Firefighters are not victims. Like anybody they are capable of heroic actions, but they are not heroes just for having the job. Frankly, my tax accountant is often a bigger hero saving me from harm. I pay him the same rate no matter how much money he save me. And that rate is the market rate because he has to compete for clients from other qualified tax accountants.
“Why did the school board pay all his attorney fees and make all parcels now $204 regardless of units? Sounds like he basically won to me. “
well the way it works, is if the plaintiff prevails on any component of the case, they get attorney fees. why did they make all parcels now $204 regardless? because they panicked.
frankly: when was the last serious accident in davis by a firefighter?
[quote]The firefighters saved my family and my home. They are on call 24 hours a day. Find the cuts somewhere else. Leave them alone. [/quote]
JimmysDaughter is using the Fallacy of Argument known as “The Appeal to Emotion” rather than stating fact or refuting the position of others through sound argument.
[b]Sound Argument[/b]
Truthful statements, connected in a logically valid manner.
I’m sure there’ll be an opportunity to discuss the school district lawsuit soon. It’s off topic for this thread, please.
The power went out on Santa Rosa St in west Davis about 20 min ago. Has anyone on another street lost power, too?
“because they want a chief they can control like rose conroy or bill weisgerber.”
What are they saying is the reason? Are they against joint management or Chief Trauernicht specifically?
“Instead, what has transpired for the last year has been the firefighters attempting to block every single change floated by the city of Davis. They have refused to take contract concessions, they participating in the public roundtable but their only proposal was for the status quo.”
The Firefighters are as stubborn as the Vanguard.
There is no more dangerous job than that of being on active duty in the military. Firefighter and police pay and benefits should modeled on the same basis as the US military.
[quote]There is no more dangerous job than that of being on active duty in the military. Firefighter and police pay and benefits should modeled on the same basis as the US military.[/quote]
It is certainly hard to justify why firefighters and police should be paid more than members of the military.
But the most dangerous job of all is being a logger.
[url]http://money.cnn.com/gallery/pf/jobs/2013/08/22/dangerous-jobs/index.html [/url]
“”Yes, they can complain that the city failed to file for a grant application, but why should the city go out of their way at this point to reward the firefighters for their intransigence?””
Reward the Firefighters ? How about reward the taxpayers of the city ? Thats what a grant is for , free MONEY !
That the City passed up on !
Sgt. Mike Munoz, president of the DPOA, told the local paper that DPOA signed an agreement which made a series of concessions on benefits and retirement, while the firefighters’ union has refused .
Then why is it that the Police are getting a 5 % raise in there new contract ?