Westlake Market has been struggling to stay afloat in a tough economy as a small neighborhood grocery store. Those hopes have been dealt a blow, as they became victims of an unknown boycott by the Davis Firefighters union.
Mr. Nelson had pointed out, “For the first few months after the store was open the FD personnel did their grocery shopping and bought lunches at Westlake, but then they stopped cold turkey and we could not figure out what happened.”
“Apparently the Vanguard had done an article that was not fire union friendly and their local union president decided to blackball Vanguard advertisers,” said Mr. Nelson in his email.
The West Davis Fire Station is located immediately across the street from the market.
According to Eric Nelson, the fire department personnel that the store manager and owners spoke with said “that they liked having a convenient grocery and appreciated the extra attention they received at Westlake.”
Among Mr. Nelson’s concerns is that fact that firefighters, instead of walking across the street to the neighborhood market, are using city fire trucks to drive to Safeway or Nugget to buy their lunch and groceries.
Apparently the market’s owners made arrangements to settle their differences with the firefighters, which included an effort to bring over tri-tip beef. However, all efforts have been rejected by the union president.
The Vanguard spoke with Mayor Joe Krovoza, who informed the Vanguard, “Upon receiving the note on June 30th, I wanted to fairly discharge my duty as a fiduciary, being in possession of these accusations.”
The Mayor wrote City Attorney Harriet Steiner and asked for a review of the issues raised by the email.
“Specifically I asked them to consider whether staff on duty participating in a boycott raised an issue. Also, I wanted to know if any city dollars were associated with the alleged boycott,” he said.
“I was also interested in whether this raised an issue of our staff being inappropriately involved in the suppression of free speech and whether it was appropriate for a union leader to be directing staff when staff is on the clock for the city,” he added.
He noted that staff and legal counsel addresses these issues for Mayor Pro Tem Swanson and himself and directed the Vanguard to ask all further questions of staff or legal counsel.
According to the city’s position, the firefighters have the right during their shift to purchase food and can do so at any place they choose.
As City Attorney Harriet Steiner put it, “The City does not regulate where the firefighters purchase their groceries, which they pay for with their own money.”
Furthermore, “The City does not have any written policies regarding where city employees stop to buy groceries or other personal items. It is my understanding that the long standing practice is for fire crews to stop at the store of their choice when time permits, consistent with their work duties, often en route to or from their assigned station.”
Acting Chief Bill Weisgerber also told the Vanguard that there is no written policy for meals.
However, he said there is “a generally understood and long-standing practice that allows the engine companies to shop for provisions (e.g., groceries, take-out food, incidental sundries) during their 24-hour shift.”
He wrote in an email last week, “This usual and customary practice is acceptable as long as the engine company remains in-service (available for response); and, to the extent possible, incorporates shopping into other activities (e.g., training, inspections or returning from an alarm).”
“This is not substantially different from other City field crews stopping for a coffee break or meal during their shift,” he added.
The city thus does not consider this a matter of city business.
“The City has not, and does not currently, look into or regulate what stores its employees use for their personal needs or how often they patronize or do not patronize any particular store,” Ms. Steiner said.
She added, “It is unlikely that the City could impose such a rule. Even if the City were to consider such a rule, the scope of the City’s involvement in such a matter would be confined to issues within the City’s purview such as how long the stops while on duty could be, or how often, etc.”
Furthermore, as Harriet Steiner noted, the city does not “supervise or regulate” the activities of the union “except as those activities relate directly to the City and its employee-employer relations.”
These comments, however, do not exonerate the firefighters here, as they simply suggest that the city considers itself not to be a party.
Ms. Steiner noted, “If the IGA or someone else believes that the Union is engaging in improper activities, there may be other avenues for them to pursue for a remedy such as the District Attorney, or the courts.”
The Vanguard’s view is that this constituted a secondary boycott which is defined in the legal dictionary as: “A group’s refusal to work for, purchase from, or handle the products of a business with which the group has no dispute.”
“Generally a secondary boycott is considered an Unfair Labor Practice when it is organized by a labor union,” the dictionary notes. “Congress limits the right of labor unions to conduct secondary boycotts because such activity is considered basically unfair and because it can have a devastating effect on intrastate and interstate commerce and the general state of the economy.”
In this case, Westlake is a struggling local market that took out a six-month advertisement with the Vanguard as they attempted to establish their newly-opened grocery store in Davis.
Ironically, in the last four months, as an effort by the Vanguard to help Westlake, we have run their advertisement as a donation to the local business.
The Vanguard believes it is unacceptable for the union to target the Vanguard’s advertisers for retribution due to the Vanguard’s critical article on union activity and employee compensation.
Contrary to the city’s stated policy, the city employees are on the clock, using city equipment. The Vanguard has observed fire engines parked outside of Safeway, motor running, while firefighters purchase their food for their meals.
A follow-up email dated July 1 from Eric Nelson told the Mayor that the owners said “they do want to create a public issue, but think that appropriate questions should be asked of the FD Chief as to the current policy or common practice regarding the purchasing of personal and crew food/supplies and the use of city trucks/fuel/time to do so.”
He added, “It would also be appropriate to let the union rep know that the city management has been advised of inappropriate political demands made by the union on the FD personnel to not support merchants who have advertised in publications that have distributed negative editorial comment regarding the FD or the union.”
Mr. Nelson asked why the union president did not simply approach store management with his concerns.
“It seems to me that this union boss has overreached and to assume that an advertiser has editorial control over the content of any publication is ridiculous,” he wrote.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
I understand the Veolia does firefighting contracts as well as the others that Davis is contemplating. Perhaps Davis should ask Veolia for a package deal. My preferences are for small, local grocery stores.
“I understand the Veolia does firefighting contracts as well as the others that Davis is contemplating. Perhaps Davis should ask Veolia for a package deal.”
That’s funny GreenandGolden. So would the liberals in this town boycott the fire dept. when their house is burning if Veolia ran the DFD?
Mayor Krovoza’s public statement as reported, while following the city’s legal adviser, could have expressed some personal discomfort/displeasure at this “secondary boycott” that just doesn’t pass the “smell test” with regard to Davis values. The absence of any such statement speaks volumes about our new, politically unknown mayor about whom we are rapidly learning.
If I were a firefighter in Davis, I’d be concerned about my union president’s priorities . Petty stuff like this distracts the members from dealing with substantive issues and makes their bargaining position weaker .
The fire fighters, like everyone else, have the right to shop where they want, including the right to avoid businesses that they see as not supporting their interests. Personally, I plan to stop in the store and do a little shopping–the rest of us need to pick up the slack and vote with our dollars too.
I don’t know why the firemen are so determined to alienate the people who pay their salaries.
This is exactly why so many Davis businesses are reluctant to put their names out there in support of the referendum to repeal the huge water rate hikes: the City CC, staff, and others can be very punitive withough being overt about it.
We saw this with Measure X and Covell Village, too; other businesses were supporting the No on X position, but not being public about it.
However, once in the privacy of the voting booth, people vote their hearts and their wallets.
And the CC knows what is going to happen if this gets on the ballot. That’s why not one of them seconded Sue’s motion to put it on the ballot.
BTW, Sue, I am proud of you for making that motion to put the water rates hikes on the ballot. It shows you fully support local democracy in our little city.
I agree with biddlin – demanding a boycott is counter productive.
However, the real problem with that store is that too many other people are doing the same thing the firefighters are doing – shopping elsewhere.
Michael: “[i]the City CC, staff, and others can be very punitive withough being overt about it.”[/i]
This is an article about the firefighters union president, yet you’ve managed to bring up the water issue and malign city staff and council members all at the same time.
This is just another of a long list of examples for the public unions’ actions damaging the citizenry.
What we need A one-sentence ballot initiative, to amend the California constitution, that simply says that public employees cannot form unions.
I also think the Vanguard should use the freedom of information act to request mileage and food shopping records from the fire department to see if more public money was spent during their boycott.
One more thought. The largest volunteer fire department in the country is in Pasadena, Texas. It includes 200 active, and 45 semi-active firefighters. A Facebook description includes the following:
[quote]The command structure of the fire department includes a paid (career) Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief, as well as a District Chief, Captain, and Lieutenant for each station. The PFD’s administrative staff officers consist of an Executive Board, Pension Board, Secretary, Treasurer, and an Assistant Secretary/Treasurer. The department also maintains a training staff, medical officer, supply officer, and Reporter-Historian. Rounding out its support staff are the safety staff, chaplain corps, public liaison officer and information technology officer. PFD is also a sister organization to the Pasadena Fire Marshal’s Office, which conducts inspections, fire prevention, and origin and cause investigations.[/quote]
I think we should be looking at a new more affordable model for municipal firefighting that includes a percentage of volunteers. As I understand how some of these programs work, volunteers are paid something for rotations, and for duty; however, there are not on any regular payroll. The city or county also pays for all training and certification of volunteers. In these programs there is a smaller subset of full-paid fire department employees.
Where do I sign?
I agree that firefighters are free to shop/eat where they so choose. However, what we have here is an attempt to coerce all firefighters in a station to participate in a boycott to punish a store for advertising in a blog sometimes critical of the Fire Dept., whether all firefighters agree with the union’s position or not. “Union solidarity” is being used as the big stick to punish any firefighter who would disagree w the union. Seems to me this was an issue for the fire department that sparked a Grand Jury investigation some time ago, if I remember rightly (someone correct me if I am wrong here).
Let us just say this latest development will not help the Fire Dept.’s image/cause, and very well may backfire on them. What is a shame is that this may not represent the feelings of all the firefighters, but union tactics like this is what troubles the public about unions themselves and their coercive nature. I went through much the same thing in a teacher’s strike, in which I was unwilling to go along with union tactics. Things got very ugly for those of us who were unwilling to go along with the teacher’s union illegal strike.
[quote]Mayor Krovoza’s public statement as reported, while following the city’s legal adviser, could have expressed some personal discomfort/displeasure at this “secondary boycott” that just doesn’t pass the “smell test” with regard to Davis values. The absence of any such statement speaks volumes about our new, politically unknown mayor about whom we are rapidly learning.[/quote]
I understand your frustration, but it appears there is nothing illegal about what the firefighters have chosen to do. So I am not exactly sure what you expected the Mayor to say – he immediately discharged his fiduciary duty to see if there was anything illegal about this, found there wasn’t, so what more could he have said that would have been appropriate? He cannot tell the firefighters where to shop…
[quote]This is exactly why so many Davis businesses are reluctant to put their names out there in support of the referendum to repeal the huge water rate hikes: the City CC, staff, and others can be very punitive withough being overt about it. [/quote]
Exactly why? I am not following your analogy here…
what drugs are you on ?
Where is the anti-gang strike force when we need them?
David, if I remember right didn’t the Graduate have an advertisement on here at about the same time? Did the FD boycott them too? Was it too political?
[quote]“Contrary to the city’s stated policy, the city employees are on the clock, using city equipment.” [/quote] Meaning? Hasn’t everyone claimed there’s no policy violation?
When you quote Ms. Steiner, is she writing you or the mayor? Just wondering if she would have been considering her analysis would get revealed publicly?
Does Mr. Nelson’s complaint identify his source or include adequate documentation of his charges? Did you interview him? Just wondering how we’re sure that his initial report is more than just the kind of gossip that circulates within groups with a cause.
Is Mayor Krovoza concerned that the city attorney’s response doesn’t deal well or at all with his “specific” questions of her? Is this an organized, on-duty boycott that would “raise issues”? Were “any city dollars associated”? Is it “appropriate” for the union leader to be directing where on-duty fire-fighters eat?
Based on your report, I’m disappointed about how our mayor is handling this. Why does he see this as only a “fiduciary” duty when he should be concerned about the management issues as well?
Once Attorney Steiner blows off any legal issues being involved, why has Mayor Krovoza “directed the Vanguard to ask all further questions of staff or legal counsel”? I’d like to hear from him what he plans to do about what he’s learned here.
How does the mayor feel about city employees boycotting a local store if he knows that it’s happening? Should firefighters get to crank up an engine to pick up takeout food or other shopping now that we know there’s “no written policy” and a questionable “long-standing practice” underway?
Sending the [u]Vanguard[/u] to Harriet to respond certainly is no profile in political courage. I’d hope the mayor re-thinks his stand about his “no comment” approach as well as his satisfaction that he doesn’t need to question the practice anymore?
For Acting Chief Weisgerber to claim that this practice “is not substantially different from other City field crews stopping for a coffee break or meal” is taking his justification a step too far.
A crew pulling pulling their pickup or truck into a restaurant 500 feet off the route is much different than making special shopping trips with a fire engine, driving miles when the same food or “sundries” are available next door. One costs us pennies and is reasonable; the other costs many dollars and is outrageous.
[i]”… the city employees are on the clock, using city equipment. The Vanguard has observed fire engines parked outside of Safeway, motor running, while firefighters purchase their food for their meals.”[/i]
It’s amazing and outrageous how much we pay the firefighters for doing nothing. They sure get a lot of holidays and vacation time for people who get 20 days a month off.
We, the taxpayers of Davis, pay the firefighter their full wages (70% regular time and 30% overtime) to conduct union business. They call this union bank hours. We pay them for 1,104 hours per year. During that time, they can organize boycotts against businesses in Davis. While organizing those boycotts, we are paying them. … It was our City Council (the one with Mike Harrington, by the way) which approved union bank hours. Thanks, City Council!
My recommendation to the current council, in light of this boycott Mr. Weist has organized on our dime, is to make at a bare minimum these 5 changes to the next fire contract:
[b]1. Get rid of all union bank hourse.[/b] If the union wants to organize boycotts, let them do that on their own time;
[b]2. Stop paying the firefighters to sleep.[/b] They are on the clock for 24 hours for 9 days out of each 27-day duty cycle. It is legal (under federal and state labor laws) to not count the time they sleep. We should simply pay them for 16 hours out of 24. That would save us millions of dollars per year–probably more than they are costing Westlake IGA;
[b]3. Cap their medical cash-out at $500 a month.[/b] Currently, the firefighters get the largest monthly medical benefit of any of the city’s labor groups. They receive $1,694.76 contributed to their 125 plan: $186.98 (full family dental) + $11.40 (life insurance) + $17.00 (long term disability) + $1,479.37 (health insurance).
They can now cash out of that $1,333.08 per month ($16,000 per year!!!). If they want to boycott Davis businesses, then limit their monthly cash-out to $500, which is the amount all new hires in other bargaining groups, including the police, are limited to.
[b]4. Reduce the pension formula to 2% at 55[/b] for newly hired firefighters. We cannot survive as a City with 3% at 50; and
[b]5. Return our fire staffing to 3 men on a truck[/b], the same as Vacaville and most other cities have. That will save us $1.4 million per year. We can obey all OSHA rules with 9 fewer full time firefighters.
One quick addendum: Jeff calls for more volunteer fire services. The mayor told me once he wants to look into that. My view is we should train our police patrol officers in firefighting, such that when we have a structure fire which requires 2 men to enter the burning building and 2 men must be on duty outside, the first arriving police officer will be able to be one of the 2 men on the outside until a second fire truck arrives on scene. We face this type of situation roughly once per year. We are paying $1.4 million more than necessary for that rare occassion.
[quote]Michael: “the City CC, staff, and others can be very punitive withough being overt about it.”
Don: “This is an article about the firefighters union president, yet you’ve managed to bring up the water issue and malign city staff and council members all at the same time.”[/quote]For someone who claims not to be spokesperson for the water referendum, Mr. Harrington certainly has mastered public relations techniques, finding ways to slip in his name and cause at every (sometimes seemingly unrelated) opportunity. Look for him to show up in Yolo Judicial Watch postings before the campaign is over!
[quote][i]”We pay them for 1,104 hours per year.[/i][/quote]How does the “union bank” work? Does this allow Bobby Weist to devote half-time to handling union business or all fire-fighters to attend meetings and charge the time (like sick leave) to the bank or what?
Justsaying: no, I am not the campaign spokesperson. I suggest you go ask all of those seniors who are calling and asking us to deliver the petition to their homes because the residents simply cannot pay the higher rates.
I have no idea what the rules are about firefighters or city employees driving around in city vehicles to get food, but what I do know is that the punitive conduct in the past by some city leaders if someone challenges them is well known. They put projects on the slow boat to China. But when those residents/business leadedrs get into the voting booth … watch out.
Don Shor: who is maligning? Why do you sit there and accept the fact that this huge project was deliberately kept off the ballot by the CC majority? Don’t you think that the CC not putting this on the ballot is the biggest back-handed slap that a city leader can possibly give to the voters?
This is why the FF giving a financial slap to Westlake Village, and the CC back-handing the voters and ratepayers, are all tied together.
Connect the dots …..
Rich Rifkin: I am strongly opposed to your suggestion that the FF not be paid for sleeping time. They are required to be in the firehouses. Also, as I have said before, I live and work next to the main firehouse. Those guys and gals are constantly being called out on runs throughout the night. The FAA and NTSB and NASA and AF research clearly shows interrupted sleep is practically no sleep. The FF should be paid when they are on duty, whatever they are doing from moment to moment.
That said, Rich, I think most of your columns and ideas are spot on.
[i]”How does the “union bank” work?”[/i]
Here is the contract language: [quote] “CITY agrees to deposit 24 hours per year ( on July 1, or first business day thereafter) for each participating Firefighter and Fire Captain for deposit in the Union Hour Bank.”[/quote] There are 46 members of the union. So 46 x 24 = 1,104 hours. [quote]“70% of time use of Union Hour Bank time shall not incur overtime except with the approval of the Fire Chief.”[/quote] So that means at least 30% of the union bank hours are paid overtime!!! [quote] “The CITY will provide to the UNION 30 day advanced notice on [b]special training[/b] needs and UNION members agree not to schedule Union Hour Bank business during the identified [b]special training[/b]. The CITY concurs that course selection and location is at the prerogative of the UNION and they shall provide 24-hour notice to the department for any Union Hour Bank absences. Absences will be charged at straight time. UNION agrees that total Union Hour Bank accrual and carry over shall not exceed two years worth of Union Hour Bank contributions.”[/quote] Keep in mind that this “special training” we are paying for is not firefighting training or EMT training. It is training to make the union a stronger union, so that it can extract more and better pay and benefits. Thanks for giving us that provision, City Council! You really are looking out for the taxpayers of Davis! [quote] “The purpose of this Union Hour Bank is solely to provide educational training and development opportunities to UNION members and should not involve conducting or participating in other agencies’ unions activities.” [/quote] I was told by a retired firefighter–some 5 or 6 years ago–that what happens is that Weist controls all the 1,104 union bank hours. He uses up most of the union bank hours when he attends conferences and that sort of thing*. Or if that does not work out with his work schedule, he will assign one or two of his union assistants to go to Sacramento or Las Vegas or Washington, D.C., in his place.
*When the Yolo County Grand Jury investigated the corrupt practices of the Davis Fire Department some years ago, they looked into allegations that Weist was using the union bank hours to engage in political fundraisers and the like on behalf of members of the Davis City Council. My recollection is the YCGJ found this to be true, and since the fire chiefs have been told to stop letting the union approve those activities. (Never forget that our fire chiefs have long been, figuratively speaking, in bed with Weist.)
[i]Ironically, in the last four months, as an effort by the Vanguard to help Westlake, we have run their advertisement as a donation to the local business.[/i]
Business must be pretty slow at Westlake if this well-run, neighborhood focused regional store can’t pay for an advertisement on the Vanguard.
I live near Arroyo Park, which is close to the West Davis fire station. I hope to heck there have been and will be no delayed responses in my neighborhood because the firefighters are out shopping elsewhere because of this boycott.
Rich R.
“”””There are 46 members of the union. So 46 x 24 = 1,104 hours.””””
Rich , with your in-depth investigating , what is the early amount of hours that are actually used ?
[i]”Rich , with your in-depth investigating , what is the early amount of hours that are actually used?”[/i]
Every hour over zero is theft of the taxpayers’ money, Ava.
Rich
“”””Every hour over zero is theft of the taxpayers’ money, Ava.””””
So what your saying by your statement above , is that the actual number of hours used , is very small ?
Or that 2 columns a month, keeps you so busy that you can’t check your facts , which seems to happen a lot with yourself and your columns .
[i]”I hope to heck there have been and will be no delayed responses in my neighborhood because the firefighters are out shopping elsewhere because of this boycott.”[/i]
I doubt their shopping at Safeway–which by way of Shasta Drive is about equidistant to Arroyo Park–has endangered anyone.
However, I think we need to question why the firefighters (from all three stations) take so much heavy firefighting equipment out on a grocery shopping run. (I am not blaming the firefighters who do this. I am questioning our city’s policy.)
It seems to me a better approach would be for the City to buy a fuel efficient Toyota Camry hybrid for each station-house:
[img]http://www.philsautoonline.com/Portals/philsautoonline.com/800px-Toyota_camry_hybrid.jpg[/img]
One or two firemen could then hop in the hybrid and drive to the grocery store, when needed. If an emergency takes place while they are out of the firehouse, they could get back in the car, drive to the call’s address, and meet their colleague(s) who would be in the fire truck(s). That way, the DFD would not be driving all over town in those giant trucks, wasting fuel and causing wear and tear, except when necessary.
A high-ranking member of the Davis Police Department suggested another good use for a smaller civilian vehicle like a Camry hybrid: instead of taking one or two fire trucks fully loaded with fire-fighting gear to medical calls, the fire stations should deploy their Camrys to those calls, sending only one or two people each time. This would save tens of thousands of gallons of fuel–keep in mind almost all calls the fire department responds to are medical calls–and it would make Davis roads safer for everyone else.
Like with the supermarket situation, the people in the civilian car could, if necessary, be redeployed to a more serious emergency, such as a fire. They would simply drive in the Camry to the fire and meet up with the others who stayed at the firehouse and drove the fire truck.
[quote]David, if I remember right didn’t the Graduate have an advertisement on here at about the same time? Did the FD boycott them too? Was it too political? [/quote]
I don’t know, since Councilmember Swanson’s husband owns it, my guess at this point is that the firefighters don’t go there. The difference is I don’t know if they ever went to the grad, whereas Westlake Market is literally across the street from the West Davis Fire Station.
“Hasn’t everyone claimed there’s no policy violation? “
Everyone has claimed that this is not a city issue. One the other hand, there are liability concerns, so we are checking into it.
“When you quote Ms. Steiner, is she writing you or the mayor? Just wondering if she would have been considering her analysis would get revealed publicly? “
Harriet directly addressed my comment, she knew full well what was going to happen with it, and frankly it’s a public record anyway – fact that she knows as well as anyone.
“Does Mr. Nelson’s complaint identify his source or include adequate documentation of his charges? “
Yes. And no one at the city disputed that it occurred.
“Did you interview him?”
I spoke to him. He told me at one point to run the story but never agreed to an interview.
“Just wondering how we’re sure that his initial report is more than just the kind of gossip that circulates within groups with a cause.”
I’m positive and not one person has stepped forward and said this did not happen, not when I was talking to city staff and not today and you know the city is reading it.
“Is Mayor Krovoza concerned that the city attorney’s response doesn’t deal well or at all with his “specific” questions of her?”
Not sure what you are asking here.
“Is this an organized, on-duty boycott that would “raise issues”? Were “any city dollars associated”? Is it “appropriate” for the union leader to be directing where on-duty fire-fighters eat? “
These are the questions that I am asking right now.
“Based on your report, I’m disappointed about how our mayor is handling this. Why does he see this as only a “fiduciary” duty when he should be concerned about the management issues as well? “
I’ll just say that Joe was very careful with what he said on the record. He has to worry about legal issues. I wouldn’t read too deeply into that statement.
“I’d like to hear from him what he plans to do about what he’s learned here.”
Hopefully we’ll have an answer to that one soon.
“For Acting Chief Weisgerber to claim that this practice “is not substantially different from other City field crews stopping for a coffee break or meal” is taking his justification a step too far.
A crew pulling pulling their pickup or truck into a restaurant 500 feet off the route is much different than making special shopping trips with a fire engine, driving miles when the same food or “sundries” are available next door. One costs us pennies and is reasonable; the other costs many dollars and is outrageous. “
I agree.
[i]”So what your saying by your statement above , is that the actual number of hours used , is very small?{/i]
One thousand one hundred and four hours does not strike me as small.
The real issue here is why the City Council gave you guys any taxpayer paid hours to conduct union business (speciously called “training”)? Every taxpayer in Davis–I realize most of the firefighters who bought members of the City Council don’t live in Davis–should be outraged that they are paying one dime to the firefighters for union hours.
We don’t pay PASEA members for this dubious usage of taxpayer time. We don’t pay department heads or management employees for union hours or anything equivalent. We don’t pay the Davis Police Officers Association for anything like union hours.
Yet shockingly, our City Council member who took tens of thousands of dollars in contributions from members of the fire union, decided it was good for the taxpayers of Davis to give the firefighters 1,104 hours for union training?!!!
This could be the most outrageous benefit of all the benefits our bought and paid for council ever agreed to. One hundred percent of the union bank needs to be eliminated starting July 1, 2012.
Here were the figures we found back in 2009 for the 2004 to 2008 years:
[img]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_9pR-0mkLeic/SW8-_IgLdPI/AAAAAAAAFQY/kVl9jW0ZzWM/s400/union+hours+bank.jpg[/img]
Here’s by firefighter:
[img]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_9pR-0mkLeic/SW8-_fAeOGI/AAAAAAAAFQg/lTuJ0DJTwBk/s1600-h/Union+hours+bank+list.jpg[/img]
Here’s David’s link.
[url]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_9pR-0mkLeic/SW8-_fAeOGI/AAAAAAAAFQg/lTuJ0DJTwBk/s1600-h/Union+hours+bank+list.jpg[/url]
This two interesting report about Scottsdale and a Ward in Chicago merging the police and fire departments as the Public Safety Department.
Sounds feasible to me.
[url]http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/Scottsdale-police-fire-departments-merging-to-save-money-116592603.html[/url]
[url]http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/Fire-and-Police-Merging-to-Save-Money-Source-130432583.html[/url]
[quote]“Is Mayor Krovoza concerned that the city attorney’s response doesn’t deal well or at all with his “specific” questions of her?”
[u]Not sure what you are asking here.[/u]
“Is this an organized, on-duty boycott that would “raise issues”? Were “any city dollars associated”? Is it “appropriate” for the union leader to be directing where on-duty fire-fighters eat? ”
[u]These are the questions that I am asking right now.[/u][/quote]Those also are the questions you reported the mayor already asked of the city attorney. It appears she wasn’t responsive regarding the points he found significant enough to specifically state to you as his purpose for contacting her in the first place.
I’m just asking how he possibly could have been satisfied with her response. Now, I’m hoping that you’ll be more successful at getting to these facts that the mayor was. (I’ll provide you with one of the answers: Yes, city dollars are associated with this boycott, although I don’t know how much it costs to get a fire engine back and forth to Nugget or Safeway.)
I don’t think the mayor was satisfied with her response. We’ll see what comes of this.
David. Did the CC renew Harriet’s contract? She has been in the spotlight with the DACHA mess too.
I’m curious how much of this display of generosity was related to the general, positive feelings everyone developed about our “first responders” after 9/11.
I’ve also started wondering lately about how Brown Act requirements contribute to official decisions that don’t really get full consideration by our elected leaders, as well as to the overall working relationships and communications of bodies such our council.
How can we expect great decision-making when proposals routinely first get to councilors in current packets with some data dropped on the dias and with the expectation that the council will evaluate and decide during that meeting?
Granted that most contract discussion would get done in closed sessions, it still seems that the law might be so restrictive that council members might not build much of an effective system for evaluating issues as a group. There are lots of recent examples, not limited to the present council, where members have appeared to be rushed to decisions before the everything’s been considered. Maybe we’re all getting used this level of governing.
“a generally understood and long-standing practice that allows the engine companies to shop for provisions (e.g., groceries, take-out food, incidental sundries) during their 24-hour shift.”
Wow! You mean they are paid overtime not only to sleep but also to go shopping?
It’s a wonder that Davis isn’t going broke with policies like this.
[i]Here’s David’s link ([url]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_9pR-…k+list.jpg[/url]) [/i]
I had never seen that before. However, it perfectly matches up with what I was told by my source, a retired Davis firefighter. The same guy also explained to me how Bobbie twists everyone’s arms when it comes time for the members of the union to “voluntarily” contribute to the candidates for City Council that Bobbie has decided are the most maleable and willing to say, “I sure love those union bank hours, Mr. Weist! Perhaps I could get some more paid holidays for you guys?”
Were there any firefighter donations during the last election cycle?
No, none of the candidates would take them.
But it is not as if the fire union did not try to buy influence. I heard from one candidate who told me that after the candidate turned down an offer of thousands of dollars from the firefighters, Bobbie Weist approached this candidate, rather brusquely, and told the candidate something to the effect of, “I run this town! You will not cross me. You are either with me or against me, and it will cost you to be against me.” I heard this long after the election was over. If I had heard it during the campaign, I would have used it in my column.
I think maybe 3% from my column, 94% from the Vanguard and 3% just from the general disgust of the activities of the fire union in Davis, it is now widely known and widely accepted that any candidate for City Council in Davis who takes firefighter campaign money or door-to-door support from that organization is going to get much more of a negative than a positive response. … It was not the only reason, but I think the fact that Sydney Vergis was seen as a complete tool of the firefighters in her first run for office redounded to hurt Vergis in her second run (when she knew taking Weist’s corrupting dollars would make it even worse for her).
[quote]Those also are the questions you reported the mayor already asked of the city attorney. It appears she wasn’t responsive regarding the points he found significant enough to specifically state to you as his purpose for contacting her in the first place. [/quote]
If in fact the city attorney “wasn’t responsive” (and we don’t know that for sure, since from a legal standpoint I don’t think there is much the city can legally do), there are various ways the matter can be handled otherwise… citizens might just have to wait a bit to see the fallout…
OK. Let me get this straight. First, D.G., a self-professed pro-labor liberal, and the liberals that comment here condemn the Fire Department Union for acting like a union. Then I see he and those same liberals frothing at the mouth and crying, “Foul, unfair labor practice!” over the Fire Department Union’s tactic of secondary boycott. Yet they all would probably roll out the red carpet, and embrace and hoist Caesar Chavez onto their shoulders for his success in bringing about change to benefit those he organized and advocated for. Have they forgotten that Mr. Chavez’s primary protest and labor group influence tactic was the secondary boycott. Hmmm…hypocrisy with the libs again. Not surprised.
[quote]“If in fact the city attorney “wasn’t responsive” (and we don’t know that for sure, since from a legal standpoint I don’t think there is much the city can legally do)….”[/quote]From David’s reporting, it certainly appears the city attorney did not deal with the specific questions the [u]Vanguard[/u] quotes the mayor as asking about this. His questions aren’t as limited as I think you’re taking them.
David comments that he, himself, still is asking the questions the mayor did–my knowledge is limited to the [u]Vanguard[/u] reports.
David also suggests there’s no doubt that the Davis firefighters intentionally were boycotting the Davis business following instructions from the union rep. But, he offers no documented support or any concessions that any official takes the boycott allegations as true.
I’d feel more comfortable if the city had made some effort to find out whether the charges are accurate and to determine if the alleged boycott continues.
I’d feel better about our our city’s leaders (elected and otherwise) if they could see just how wrong it is to: 1.) drive firetrucks around town to get meals and other food and sundries that are available across the street from the firehouse and 2.) to increase this practice in order to boycott a store because they advertise in the [u]Vanguard[/u].
Since, three months later, no one involved has yet suggested any need to deal with the issues, I don’t hold much hope that the city will take any action to keep this from happening again. Is this appropriate (or legal) union leader activity?
Should our firefighters get some kind of awareness training to discourage their boycotting of Davis businesses? Should any management judgment be exercised in deciding how to how much to spend on transportation to shop for food and sundries?
The mayor has signaled his interest in not getting involved by refusing future comment and by sending David to our attorney (who has signaled her interest in not getting involved with her response). The acting chief has signaled similar attitude with his response.
To ignore the issues here–trying to limit the discussion to whether it’s okay to stop along the way to eat lunch and how crews need to be ready to roll wherever they happen to be and how driving around on shopping trips is “long-standing practice”–shows unseemly arrogance and avoidance of responsibility.
[i][quote]“…the liberals that comment here condemn the Fire Department Union for acting like a union. Then I see he and those same liberals frothing at the mouth and crying, ‘Foul, unfair labor practice!'”[/quote][/i]I’d suggest most of the past criticism is directed at those who deal with the unions. City council, legislatures, Congress–those that take money and give back laws and benefits that seem beyond reasonable (and generated by political fear and greed) to non-union people.
In this case, however, the Davis firefighters and their union rep. are under fire for being jerks.
How much damage is the union causing its reputation by spending city funds to boycott our businesses (secondarily or not) at the very time the firefighter operation is being targeted for high budget costs?
Is it really good for union public relations for every responsible official in town to claim now that nothing should be done because of long-standing (wasteful) practices, lack of public and management policies and personal freedom to eat where one wants to go?
The union, business and city government–all were hoping to make this episode completely disappear before it leaked to the public.
Given the time that’s gone by, and the somewhat serendipitous nature of its exposure, they likely would have been successful but for the [u]Vanguard[/u] and its snoopy editor. Good on David.
Andrew: I don’t believe your historical interpretation is accurate. The secondary boycott for Chavez would be boycotting stores that sold the grapes and wine in question, but as I recall the boycott was the refusal to purchase the grapes and wine of companies that practiced unfair labor practices. That is not a secondary boycott in my reading of the law.
I also think JustSaying is correct that the main problem here that the firefighters are being criticized for is being a jerk. They advertised as a way to gain publicity for their new store not because they agreed with anything that the Vanguard had to say. In fact, they have attempted to avoid political issues in this community and focus on their business.
Andrew
I don’t think it requires hypocrisy to make a distinction between people organizing for a living wage, availability of water and shade in a worl place with temperatures over 100 degrees and those organizing to protect and expand upon already generous compensation and benefits packages.
[quote]I’d feel better about our our city’s leaders (elected and otherwise) if they could see just how wrong it is to: 1.) drive firetrucks around town to get meals and other food and sundries that are available across the street from the firehouse and 2.) to increase this practice in order to boycott a store because they advertise in the Vanguard. [/quote]
I’m just curious – so are you advocating for a rule that says the firefighters, in the interest of economy, must shop at the nearest grocery store and eat at the nearest restaurant at all times if on the clock, regardless of personal preference/desire for variety?
[quote]I’m just curious – so are you advocating for a rule that says the firefighters, in the interest of economy, must shop at the nearest grocery store and eat at the nearest restaurant at all times if on the clock, regardless of personal preference/desire for variety? [/quote]
A very good point Ms. Musser
[quote]The Vanguard believes it is unacceptable for the union to target the Vanguard’s advertisers for retribution due to the Vanguard’s critical article on union activity and employee compensation.[/quote]
Couple of points:
1-As HPierce would say “The Vanguard – i.e. David Greenwald”
2 – And I believe that this is America, and America is still a free country where [b]EVERYONE[/b]has the freedom and the right to spend their own money however and wherever they choose to do so. And that their reasons are not subject to anyones approval. And absolutely no one has the right to dictate otherwise to anyone. Just as many businesses reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, so too does the consumer have the right to refuse to give their business to anyone. And for those of you bagging on them from up on high I will just say that it’s their money and as such it’s none of your business where they spend it. I would also like to reitterate a point made by HPierce that this is a business that offers discounts to UCD Faculty and Staff, College Students, and DJUSD employees but absolutely nothing for city employees. I would argue that that is reason enough for any and all city employees to spend their money elsewhere.
[quote]Andrew
I don’t think it requires hypocrisy to make a distinction between people organizing for a living wage, availability of water and shade in a worl place with temperatures over 100 degrees and those organizing to protect and expand upon already generous compensation and benefits packages.
[/quote]
That’s not hypocrisy, it’s just a double standard.
[b]Novice Question[/b]
Why would you pay fire fighters to sleep, alluded to in comments by both Rifkin and Mr. Harrington?
Why would you not schedule two 12 hour shifts per 24 hours? Wasn’t the Davis Police on a two shift schedule in the early 2000’s? I don’t know if they still are. Sutter nurses are, 8am-8pm and 8pm-8am.
For fire fighters, the day shift could concentrate on safety inspections and training in their non emergency time, the night shift could concentrate on equipment maintenance and training in their non emergency time. Pay a shift differential for nights and rotate employees so every one has to do night shifts at some point.
We didn’t pay police to sleep… they don’t pay nurses or doctors to sleep. You can’t give me any valid argument as to why police can work 12 hour shifts but fire fighters are special and need 24 hour shifts for multiple days on so we can have the privilege of paying them to sleep…
Pingback: Sunday Commentary: Conversations About Firefighters in a Public Restroom | .:Davis Vanguard:.