Lockport NY

Both the Buffalo News (briefly) and the LUSJ reported again on the LDP looking for compensation on acquiring the LPD dispatch duties last year:

The police officers’ union has hit the city with a improper practice charge over its failure to compensate members for taking over fire call dispatching duties last year.

The charge, filed by the Hickory Club through the state Public Employment Relations Board, is a device for getting the Common Council to “negotiate impact” on police personnel when Lockport Police Department took over fire-call dispatching duties from the fire department as of May 2010, according to Hickory Club President Todd Chenez.

“The impact is mainly money issues; it’s compensation,” Chenez said. “When you take work load on, there’s an impact. There are liability issues with communications, we have more work that we’re doing. ... (These) things should be negotiated.”..

As posted here in Jan '10 I was suspicious when Eggert said:

“I’m kind of hoping you give it to us. It’s easy. . . . We could do it for no cost.”

So why now the cost?

Here is the agenda for tonight's initial meeting of the Fire Task Force talked about ealier this week here: Fire Task Force.

The LUSJ reported that 4-th Ward Alderman Chapman has chosen the panel for his fire task force:

Eight city residents have been named to a task force being formed by 4th Ward Alderman Andrew Chapman to study possible alternatives to a full-time, paid, professional fire department...

...The task force’s first meeting will be held Feb. 17 at City Hall. Chapman said he hopes to be able to arrange twice-monthly meetings on Thursday nights for up to five months or so...

...The task force’s mission, as he envisioned it, is to asses the long-term costs of a paid-professional fire department and alternative service models. The volunteers will look at the pros and cons, costs and benefits of status-quo firefighting operations versus alternatives in place around New York state, including “hybrid” and all-volunteer operations, and present its findings to the Common Council later this year....

This information gathering task is worthwhile as it will hopefully give us some firm data on which we can discuss the issue. I value the full time paid force though I believe it could most likey be done with less man power depending on the number of calls that are currently recieved. This was discussed here during the budget process last fall. 

The LUSJ reported that the council approved the Fire Truck Bid Spec with 2 desenting votes. The LFD appearently did the bare minimum to "clean" the specifications.

"Over the objections of two aldermen, the Common Council on Wednesday OK’d a revised call for proposals on a custom-built fire pumper truck.

The bid specification, which virtually repeats a spec previously tossed out by the city attorney, was published last week.

Fourth Ward Alderman Andy Chapman tried getting the Council to pull it back for further revisions this week, claiming the new spec is still too similar to the old one that got tossed because it skirted rules of fair competition for the city’s business.

The new spec “is not changed enough. There needs to be additional sanitization,” Chapman said.

With Fire Chief Tom Passuite and 13 firefighters standing around the seated councilmen, Chapman aired his suspicion that the revised spec is still largely the work of a truck manufacturer’s representative that bid on the previous spec. He said he compared the old and new computer files and found them “exactly the same ... except for 109 words.”..."

Below is a document that was handed out at the meeting showing the specifications similarity to the manufacturer's web site specs for their equipment, the minimum number of changes that were done to the last spec and higlighting FEMA's rules : (click on link below pic for PDF file) . Draw your own conclusions.



I feel the document deserved to be questioned. I can also see why people would get frustrated when the way "something has always been done" gets questioned. But why not do it right the first, second or third time? It may only be one fire truck purchase that people want to get over with but if it highlights culture of the city departments some friction may be called for.

Last blog post on topic: Pumper Saga Continues

The Buffalo News and the LUSJ reported on the continuing quest for a new LFD Pumper.

...Passuite met with the Council last week to discuss two bids received on the city’s latest call for a pumper truck. Churchville submitted the more expensive bid, for $530,000, while Gorman Emergency Vehicles of Elma offered to build a truck for $450,000.

Passuite endorsed Churchville’s bid, saying it was the only one that met all of the requirements outlined in the bid specifications. Gorman Emergency Vehicles offered a lower price but also a number of “exceptions,” or alternative versions of truck features demanded in the specifications. Then Passuite turned up the pressure on the Council by noting a $247,000 grant the city recently received for a pumper truck would be in jeopardy if it didn’t make a deal with a vendor by July 16. The granting entity, Federal Emergency Management Agency, set a series of “benchmarks,” or deadlines for steps in the process of acquiring a truck, he said.

The pressure tactic didn’t sit well with Chapman. He told the Council on Wednesday that, over the past week, he spent about 20 hours poring over the bid specifications and talking to truck vendors and a FEMA official about the situation. He claims several vendors told him the specifications were written by Churchville, and in such a way that no other vendor could meet them as fully.

For instance, Chapman said, the specifications call for a Hercules foam unit. Hercules is a brand trademarked by Pierce fire apparatus — of which Churchville Fire Equipment is the regional dealer.

“These are proprietary specs; other suppliers won’t bid on them,” Chapman said. “These specs did not give a fair playing field (to) other bidders.”...

 
I thought the whole point of the current re-bidding was to make the specifications more generic. It appears that was not done and we are right back where we started the last time the purchase was denied.

The city is still trying to replace a 1987 pumper and a grant is helping it along.

During the budget process a couple years back council members were questioning if a cheaper (and or smaller) one was available. While it may seem nice to have the biggest toy on the block, the fire department and their requests heavily reflect our infrastructure. Throughout the country a lot of residents find themselves up against fire departments and their excessive road width requirements. This can be accomplished by requiring new larger road widths (ever seen the excessive size of some cul-de-sacs?), banning parking on certain streets etc.

The attempt to shorten response times by making it easier to maneuver large equipment. It is a noble thought but not without other implications. This ends up putting fire rescue times over injury prevention. Wider streets are statistically tied to an increased number of accidents and their severity due to higher speeds and overall lack of attention. Increased street widths also make it harder for pedestrians to cross safely. Many more people are injured in these automobile related accidents than in fires. Seeing that a fire department has to respond to both, the onus should be put on prevention.

Buy a properly sized truck to move through the city efficiently while preserving street structures that reduce accidents in the first place.

It seems most of the council agrees that the city was mislead when the LPD solicited the LFD dispatch duties. Buffalo News and LUSJ reported.

I say give the police union a week to agree to accept the duties as solicited or move quick to turn it over to the county to ensure the transition prior to the "due by" date from the LFD negotiations.

Sort of related:

A nice article about retiring detective Yotter in the LUSJ the other day. Some quotes caught my eye:

…Yotter, a 1970 graduate of Wilson High School, said he started out as a “true beat cop,” walking the streets downtown for two years before he got into a patrol car…I miss that. I think they respected you more back then,” Yotter said….

It was probably because they knew a beat officer better (at all). Not only does walking a beat let the officer know intricacies of the area and people in it much better, but is conversely allows the people to get to know the officers better. Meeting and talking to an officer at a “good time” is much better for mutual respect than only meeting under ticketing/intervention/arrest circumstances.

Most citizens only know officers as the faces inside the car who only reluctantly come out to deal with you or worse. They are not going to have respect for them besides their power to detain. If you get to know each other as “neighbors” first, odds are there will a lot more friendliness. No different than a parent who only interacts through punishment: lack of respect is the least of the issues.

Officers in cars are a great reactive measure. Officers on their feet are a great preventive measure. Bring back the beat cop. Make each officer get out of their cars for a certain portion of their shift. Not only will we be safer, but we will also have a better relationship with each other. Or will that cost us 5% more a year?

The Buffalo News reported today that the council is negotiating with the Hickory Club PBA over compensation for taking on the responsibility of dispatching fire calls. I posted a while back that I was suspicious of entities clamoring for the responsibility while claiming willingness to do it at no additional cost. I thought the county would be the more likely culprit and that the timeline would have been longer for a surprise “bill”. It seems like we are on that path anyways with our own entity the LPD.

From an old Buffalo News Article:

“Police Chief Lawrence M. Eggert urged the Common Council last week to turn Fire Department dispatching duties over to the Police Department.

For you to hand it to us now would be extremely simple. We could do it tomorrow,” Eggert said Wednesday. “I’m kind of hoping you give it to us. It’s easy. . . . We could do it for no cost.”

I'm curious what compensation will be equal to "no-cost".

The Buffalo News reporting that both the LPD and the County sheriff's office both want the fire dispatch.

Police Chief Lawrence M. Eggert urged the Common Council last week to turn Fire Department dispatching duties over to the Police Department. “For you to hand it to us now would be extremely simple. We could do it tomorrow,” Eggert said Wednesday. “I’m kind of hoping you give it to us. It’s easy. . . . We could do it for no cost.”

But Niagara County Chief Sheriff’s Deputy Thomas Beatty said much the same thing Friday, adding that the city would not be charged for dispatching services. “The phone connection we put in a couple of years ago, waiting to see how the legal thing came out, we’ve been maintaining at our cost,” Beatty said...

Two agencies vying for more work at no costs?

LUSJ reported :

The Lockport Professional Firefighters Association and the City of Lockport have agreed to move dispatching duties away from the fire department and reduce the minimum staffing level. In return, firefighters will receive a one-time $1,000 bonus, a 4-percent retroactive pay raise for 2009, and 2-percent raises every six months starting today and running through 2012....

...Under the new contract, the city can keep a minimum staffing level of nine firefighters per platoon, per shift and a maximum of three on vacation at one time. The previous level was 10 firefighters per platoon, per shift with a maximum of four on vacation at one time...

Would anyone here not be happy with a guaranteed 4% raise a year in our current economy?In return the city gets help on the overbearing overtime. It is nice to see that vacationers alone can no longer require overtime to be initiated. The minimum shift manning is now set at nine though I recall quotes saying that the city was hesitant to put a number in the contract. Maybe that's part of the trade off.

The Buffalo News and LUSJ reported:

...The Lockport Professional Fire Fighters Association ratified a new five-year contract with the city Monday night, but union President Randall Parker and Mayor Michael W. Tucker continued to refuse to publicly disclose its terms until the contract is formally signed...

 When will we find out what is in it?

The Buffalo News reporting:

LOCKPORT—City Hall was buzzing Friday over the belief that Fire Department Capt. Michael Collette, who is off work and receiving workers’ compensation benefits because of a back injury, has a bit part in “Henry’s Crime,” the Keanu Reeves movie now filing in Buffalo.
A photo on The Buffalo News Web site and a snippet of videotape aired by WIVB-TV, Channel 4, both show a man who might be Collette, apparently playing a security guard in a bank robbery scene shot Wednesday.

Reached by phone Friday, Collette and his wife, Linda, both refused to answer when asked if he was appearing in the movie.....

 also:

Collette said he underwent a discectomy in late September, and just Monday, his doctor cleared him to lift up to 30 pounds as long as there wasn’t a lot of repetition.
“There’s no light duty at the Fire Department,” Collette said. “I can’t come back to work until I can lift 80 pounds.”

 What do the dispatchers have to lift? Or is he ineligible to dispatch?

But what's in it?

The Buffalo News and the LUSJ reporting.

The city may have a new labor contract with Lockport Professional Firefighters Association.Members of the Common Council voted unanimously to ratify the proposed pact Wednesday night.Mayor Michael Tucker said terms won’t be disclosed until after LPFA conducts an up-or-down vote on the proposal. Neither he nor the city’s labor counsel, David Blackley, would confirm whether the proposal settles any of a number of outstanding legal issues between the city and the union. At last count, the union still had about 30 grievances pending against the city, as well as a new lawsuit filed last week seeking court enforcement of an arbitrator’s order regarding minimum shift manning.

Fire and Police boards were also enlarged.

In other business, the Council voted to change the city charter and increase membership of the fire and police boards to five a piece. The vote was held after a public hearing that drew two speakers, one in favor and one critical of the increases.In police board business, Police Chief Larry Eggert said, the 2-2 split of a four-member body is not uncommon. A fifth voting member would avoid deadlocks, he said; and “greater community involvement allows greater vision” by the body that’s in charge of monitoring day-to-day operation of Lockport Police epartment.

LUSJ reporting that Mayor Tucker is taking some heat for desiring to increase the size of the police and fire boards.

Mayor Michael Tucker’s attempt to keep a retiring Common Council member on the fire board is drawing criticism from either side of the political aisle.

The Council will hold a public hearing this month on a proposal to increase membership of the police and fire boards by one each.

The proposal is by Tucker, who says he’d value “an extra set of eyes” on both boards, but primarily wants room made on the fire board for 4th Ward Alderman Patrick Schrader, who lost his bid for re-election last month.

 The public meeting on the requested change is on the 16th.

Since it is a no-pay appointed position I do not see a major offense in adding another spot and I can see the benefits of having an odd numbered board for voting purposes. As for how we feel about who he appoints, I guess that is another issue.

LUSJ reporting that Judge Kloch determined the issue is one for an arbitrator and not for the courts.

...If there’s a dispute between the union and the city about what their collective bargaining agreement says about dispatch, settling it is the job of an arbitrator, not a judge, Kloch added.

Lockport Professional Firefighters Association filed a lawsuit aimed at stopping a dispatch transfer in August 2007, three months after the fire board directed Fire Chief Tom Passuite to facilitate the transfer. The union got a temporary restraining order in October 2007, good until a court hearing on the permanent request. The hearing ended up being postponed repeatedly over the past two years, leaving the city subject to the temporary restraining order the whole time...

-----

...The union’s contract with the city includes provisions for one firefighter on every shift to act as the dispatcher, that is, the staff member who takes incoming calls and summons rescue personnel.

The question of whether to turn that duty over to a third party is tied up in the Lockport Fire Department’s personnel expenses. Supporters of a dispatch transfer point to required shift staffing minimums and high overtime costs, and say a transfer would take some financial pressure off the city. Alderman at Large Joe Kibler and retiring 4th Ward Alderman Pat Schrader have argued for years the city should use central dispatch because residents help pay for it, in a special tax applied to landline and cell phones.

A succession of union leaders have said they’re not disagreeable to a dispatch transfer but the city is obligated, by the contract, to “negotiate” it first...

My first thought is why does this decision take 2 years? Are our courts this backed up?

As for the "negotiate", here is how I would envision it: City: "We would like to remove the dispatch requirement and put the firefighter back on the street. There is no loss of man hours since the platoon sizes will not be affected. It will more efficiently provide services to the taxpayers." LFD: "Well some of our personnel may lose overtime pay but it should not be expected anyways. We agree that the benefits of having another person available for manning the trucks plus helping out the taxpayers are worth it "

No need for lawsuits, lawyers, etc. ;) If anyone thinks the negotiation should go differently, if other facts pertain, etc, please comment.

UPDATE 12/5: LUSJ reporting arbitration on the subject expected this Friday.

The Buffalo News and the LUSJ reporting that the city council is not happy with the current negotiated fire department pact.

The firefighters union announced Monday that its members have proposed five-year labor contract with the city.

The Common Council has not agreed to the deal, however, and according to Council President John Lombardi III, isn’t likely to.

“What’s on the table is a good start, but there are some things we absolutely do not want to be locked into,” Mayor Michael Tucker added.

LUSJ has an update on the recent arbitration ruling on the fire dept. minimum staffing requirement.

To have guaranteed minimum staffing of 10 firefighters per shift, as the arbitrator ordered, would require the city to hire nine more firefighters, Chief Thomas Passuite said. Barring that, it would have to more than double its annual overtime allowance for the fire department.

--------

Property owners won’t foot the bill, Mayor Michael Tucker vowed. The city will petition state Supreme Court for review of the arbitrator’s decision, and if the decision is upheld, the cost will be covered by fire service and/or staff cuts, he said.

“I hear through the grapevine some of (the union officers) are bragging, ‘We beat the city’ in arbitration. They’d better hope they lose in court, because if they don’t, the (stuff) is gonna hit the fan. Enough is enough,” Tucker said.

 -------

The 50-man fire department is organized into four platoons that take turns manning 10- or 14-hour shifts. Given time-off privileges granted the men in the LPFFA contract, even the nine-man shift minimum isn’t being met without calling firefighters in on overtime.

Here’s why: The LPFFA contract allows for up to four firefighters per platoon to be off duty at any time. Three platoons have 12 firefighters while another has 11. Subtract up to 4 from either number; also subtract the number of “unscheduled” absences on a shift, due to sick call-in, injury or military duty; then figure out how many men have to be called in from other platoons, at 1.5 times their hourly pay rate, to meet the minimum manning number.

--------

The big issue seems to be the number allowed off a shift at any time (according to article that number does not include "unscheduled" time off: sick, injury, etc).  A third of the scheduled work force? It seems excessive. Freeze the minimum number at 9 (no injuries or potential threats due to reduced manning in the last 3 years per article). Trade the minimum off to 2 (would allow for 1 unscheduled absence per shift without invoking overtime) for the hiring of an additional firefighter to round out the last platoon to 12 like the others.

I also offered this up in a comment to a post last week:

Perhaps instead of full over time you have "on-call" situations. Pay someone a small rate to be on call on a one or two person short shift night (a bit like a volunteer). If a fire event happens where they need to respond to a scene and are called they can receive the overtime pay for that shift. The city of Lockport is small. They can arrive close to the responding vehicle.

Like most of the corporate world does, why not benchmark other similar sized NE cities that have the same good safety record yet do it with less money and/or overtime? No need to reinvent the wheel on our own.

Any other ideas? How about public referendums on budgets on public employee contracts? Or even a public comment period on them (is there one already?) It's always surprising to find out whats in some of them.

The city will require all new firefighters to become certified paramedics before they are hired, the Fire Board decided Thursday.

Accepting the recommendation of Fire Chief Thomas J. Passuite, the board asked the city Civil Service Commission to add the requirement to job specifications before the next examination for firefighter jobs is given in June.

“We’ll be opening that up to a statewide exam so we get the highest possible quality of candidates,” said Peter P. Robinson, who was re-elected president of the board Thursday. “We’re just trying to provide a better level of care for our citizens.”

Passuite said this is a first in Niagara County. Lockport firefighters must move into Niagara County within six months of being hired.

More than half of the city’s 51 firefighters already carry paramedic ratings. Passuite said candidates without that status will be allowed to take the civil service exam, but they must obtain paramedic certification before they can be hired.....

On another topic, the board formally asked the Common Council to buy a new pumper truck this year, a purchase Passuite said is urgently needed. The truck targeted for replacement is 22 years old.

Patrick Brady, vice president of the Lockport Professional Firefighters Association, presented the board a letter from the union calling for a new pumper. “It’s a safety issue for our guys. They aren’t comfortable driving [the old truck],” Brady said.

Mayor Michael W. Tucker said he would “have to understand the urgency” before he could support buying a new truck.

The chief also told the board he has dropped Niagara County Community College as the source for the Fire Department’s paramedic recertification training after 10 years. Superior Training Solutions, a business operated by city firefighter John Frederickson, is the new trainer.