Mansfield City Council votes to approve new contract for firefighters' union

The union representing Mansfield firefighters has a new contract.

Mansfield City Council voted 7-0 Tuesday night to approve a three-year deal with International Association of Fire Fighters Local 266. Councilwoman Laura Burns was absent.

The vote followed a 20-minute executive session.

Last week, union membership approved the deal by a 56-11 margin, union President Lt. Matt Shafley said. The deal is retroactive to April 1.

Firefighters came up with a last, best offer to avoid conciliation after turning down a fact-finder's report in December.

"The negotiating committee decided that our members should get to vote on that, and that's what we did," Shafley said. "We started the (negotiating) process in January (2022). The contract process is the contract process. Sometimes you're not going to be happy; sometimes you're going to be happy."

Shafley said there was one area of the contract that was upsetting to the union.

Firefighters get less of a raise than city police

"We didn't get the same consideration, so to speak, that the cops got in terms of raises," the lieutenant said. "We're a little disappointed by that."

The union requested a 7.75% wage increase effective April 1 of last year, followed by 2.5% raises the next two years.

City firefighters do not have a "me too" clause, but their request mirrored the contract awarded to Mansfield police officers.

Effective March 1, 2022, city police received a 7.75% raise for the first year of a three-year contract. Officers and supervisors will get a 2.5% raise in the second and third year of the deal, which runs through July 31, 2025.

The fact-finder recommended a 4% raise for firefighters in each of the three years.

Details of the contract were not available by press time.

Another issue in dispute was a retention incentive going back to the city using Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery funds to provide one-time worker retention incentives of $6,500 for all police bargaining unit members.

The city said all of those funds have been expended. The union representing the firefighters argued it should be paid from COVID funds or other available funding.

Fire department staffed at budgeted strength

The city argued the retention bonus was necessary to keep police officers. From Aug. 31, 2020, to July 14, 2022, the police department was budgeted for 87 officers but had an actual strength average of 76.83.

There were no months in that two-year span when police were over budget strength.

During the same time period, the fire department was budgeted for an average of 90.38 and had an actual strength of 90.29. It was over budget in 18 of the 24 months.

The fact-finder said the city showed no clear abuse of discretion or illegality.

After Tuesday's council meeting, Shafley said the firefighters received a "letter of acknowledgment" from the city promising an upcoming bonus of $6,000 per member.

"It's not part of the contract, so we didn't vote on that," Shafley said. "We were told that's a legal document."

Following the meeting, Councilwoman Stephanie Zader said members did not discuss the retention bonus in executive session.

Sharon May, human resources director, provided a copy of the letter of acknowledgment to the media on Wednesday morning.

Dated Jan. 26, the letter was signed by Mayor Tim Theaker, interim Safety Services Director Dave Remy and May. It acknowledged the mayor's intent to gift all full-time sworn firefighters who have been with the city at least one full year the $6,000 bonus.

No employees will receive the "retention payment" if they are not employed and receiving pay from the city on the date of distribution, which should occur no later than 180 days from the date of the letter.

Any full-time firefighter who has not completed a year of service will receive the bonus after one year.

The payment will be one time only.

Several other disputes revealed in previous fact-finder's report

Another wage-related dispute was the amount of money given for uniform maintenance. Under the previous contract, firefighters received $1,000, with half in January and half in July.

City firefighters requested an increase to $1,500. The fact-finder agreed an increase was justified and recommended $1,250.

Another issue in dispute was the probationary period. In the previous contract, no probationary employee was considered for minimum-manning purposes until between four and six months after obtaining certifications.

The union proposed eliminating the four- to six-month provisions, arguing there is no defined number of days required to work in that period before counting minimum manning.

The union proposed having probationary employees complete at least 35 shifts of 24 hours after obtaining the required certifications.

In response, the city objected on the basis there is no present contractual minimum-manning provision. The fact-finder said the probationary training and timelines were "within the scope of management rights."

Sick leave was also in dispute. Under the previous contract, firefighters accrued sick leave at a rate of 0.0769 hours for each non-overtime hour in active pay status.

Firefighters hired after April 1, 2014, accrued sick leave at a rate of 0.0577 hours. The union proposed using a single number of 0.0769 hours, while the city argued the 0.0577 number is the formula used throughout the city for all employees.

The fact-finder recommended leaving the previous contract language.

Another issue in dispute was a waiver in case of emergency.

The city proposed a new article addressing procedures when an emergency has been declared. For example, time limits for grievances, overtime pay requirements and all work rules could be suspended.

There was no language in the previous contract dealing with that situation.

The fact-finder did not recommend including the new language.

mcaudill@gannett.com

419-521-7219

Twitter: @MNJCaudill

This article originally appeared on Mansfield News Journal: Mansfield City Council approves new contract for firefighters