History of AFGE Firefighter Council
| I. The Beginning | IV. Organizational Structure |
| V. Time for Change | |
| III. AFGE’s Role in Addressing the Issues | VI. Reconstruction |
In 1986, AFGE’s National President, John N. Sturdivant, pledged his support to AFGE’s firefighter members by promising to commit National Office staff to identify and focus on the problems that are unique to federal firefighters.
Soon thereafter, Mr. Sturdivant brought firefighters from around the country to the AFGE National Office to focus on firefighter issues. He appointed a Chair and assigned several National Office staff members to meet with the group. That core group formed what became known as the AFGE Federal Firefighters Steering Committee.
The Committee identified two main issues that it believed should be priorities: pay and uniform allowances. The uniform allowance at that time had been established by law in an amount not to exceed $125. In examining the pay issue, the Committee looked at the total compensation package received by federal firefighters and that led to the identification of a number of related issues. These specific issues were unique because they did not affect any other group of federal employees in quite the same way nor were they typical of the problems faced by firefighters in the nonfederal sector. These sub-issues included:
» Position Classification—the GS-081 series did not reflect the increased duties firefighters are required to perform including EMS and HazMat functions.
» Supervisory Differential—a promotion to a supervisory position often meant either a loss of premium pay or a cap on premium pay and a loss of overtime pay so that supervisors made less than they made before a promotion.
» Hazardous Duty Pay—because firefighting is inherently hazardous, firefighters receive no additional pay even when they faces nuclear, biological, chemical or other like hazards in the performance of their duties.
» Training—Although firefighters are routinely required to attend training classes, often attendance meant the loss of their overtime pay and where state licenses are required, the Comptroller General has ruled that appropriated funds may not be used to pay for the cost of them.
» Duty Time—Firefighters routinely are assigned to shifts consisting of 8 hours of regular duty time and up to 16 hours of standby time during which they are free to sleep, eat and do whatever they want so long as they are ready to respond to an alarm. However, firefighters have been asked to perform routine duties during their standby time.
» Mandatory Overtime—Federal facilities that provide fire and emergency services must meet minimum manning levels specified in either the National Fire Prevention Association national consensus standards or the agencies own standards. In order to achieve this when they are short-staffed, firefighters are asked to work successive shifts which means they may work three consecutive 24-hour shifts before being allowed to return home.
» Retirement—The bi-weekly workweek for most firefighters consists of 144-hours contrasted to 80-hours for most other employees. Hence, firefighters work up to 75% more hours per year than regular 40-hour per week employees. But, credit for retirement purposes is based on years of service. So, both the firefighter and the 40-hour per week employee are obtaining the same amount of retirement service credit each year even though the firefighter substantially more time than the regular employee.
» Leave—The accrual of leave for firefighters is figured so that leave used is charged in the same proportion as earned so that it more or less compares to the leave accrued by a 40-hour per week employee. Thus, a regular employee would be charged 40-hours of leave for one week’s leave and a firefighter would be charged working 24-hour shifts would be charted 72 hours per week for a week’s leave. The problem is that a 40-hour per week employee earns 8 hours of leave per pay period and if he takes a day of leave, he is charged 8 hours. A firefighter who works a 24-hour shift earns 14 hours of leave but if he takes a day of leave he is charged with 24 hours.
Not too long after the Committee began working on issues of concerns to federal firefighters, it began to some results.
» Uniform Allowance. At the urging of AFGE, the limit was raised to an amount of up to $400 per year by a provision contained in the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990, FEPCA. The statutory provisions require the head of the agency concerned to furnish a uniform to each employee required to it at a cost not to exceed $400 a year, or to pay the employee an allowance for uniforms not to exceed $400 a year and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has the authority to raise the $400 ceiling and it has the authority to issue regulations pertaining to the issuance of uniforms or the payment of uniform allowances. As of 2006, it has done neither.
» The Story Behind the Efforts to Address Issues of Firefighter Compensation.> Prior to 1989. Because pay for federal employees including firefighters is established by law, any attempt to fix the pay of firefighters had to be achieved by legislative action. For that reason, every organization representing firefighters had legislation introduced and no two bills approached the problem in the same manner. Some bills focused on a mandated workweek. Other proposals established different pay schedules for firefighters and still others offered other approaches. AFGE’s analysis of the firefighters’ pay situation led to the conclusion that the only way there was any chance of obtaining passage of a bill which was to find an approach which was rationale, equitable and which would not create a pay system different from that used to pay other federal employees. If this could be done, then a sensible and simple argument could be made to Congress in support of a bill: namely, that firefighters should be treated just like all other federal employees. AFGE determined that this could be done by modifying the statutory provisions pertaining to the calculation of pay. This needed to be done so that the varying lengths of the firefighters’ tours of duty could be reflected and firefighters’ pay would be calculated accordingly.
AFGE also determined that the only way to get a bill to pass Congress would be to get all of the organizations who represented firefighters to work together. So, AFGE draft a bill and work to establish a coalition of all of the organization and obtained their support for the AFGE bill.
> The Passage of FEPCA – 1990. In 1990, Congress deliberated over a bill to reform the method by which raises for all federal employees are determined and on November 5, 1990 the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act was signed into law. FEPCA did not specifically address the issue of firefighter pay but AFGE was able to urge the inclusion of a provision in the bill that gave OPM the authority to establish special occupational pay systems when it determined that the pay and classification provisions of title 5 were not particularly suited to an occupation.
> OPM’s Task Force on Law Enforcement and Protective Occupations – 1991-1992. Immediately after FEPCA’s enactment, the coalition of organizations representing firefighters contacted OPM and ask them to consider establishing special pay provisions for firefighters. As a result of the coalition’s urging, OPM convened a task force to study and report on the pay problems faced by those in law enforcement and firefighting occupations. Firefighter issues were not focused on until 1992. When it finished its work, the Task Force identified 14 issues:
• Hours of work
• Hourly pay rate
• Calculation of overtime
• Loss of pay during periods of training
• Loss of pay upon promotion
• Recognition of special skills
• Definition of firefighter
• Classification
• Tiered pay system
• Pay progression
• Service credit for retirement
• Holidays
• Leave accrual
• FLSA exemption test
And it recommended five major areas that needed to be addressed in arriving at pay fairness for firefighters:
• The need to pay an hourly rate to calculate base pay so that the varying lengths of tours of duty can be reflected.
• The need to simplify overtime calculations by utilizing the hourly rate used to calculate base pay
• The need to protect firefighters on training from loss of pay.
• The need to recognize specialized skills and certifications.
• The need to recognize a supervisory differential.
> A return to Congess – 1995. When the OPM Task Force finished its work, it was hoped that prompt action would be taken under the FEPCA authority. However, no action was taken due to a change in the Administration and a delay in the appointment of a new OPM Director. So, the coalition of organizations representing firefighters returned to Congress. Senator Sarbanes and Representative Hoyer both from Maryland were quick to introduce legislation addressing only the calculation of pay. Although a hearing was held, the bills did not move out of Congress.> DOD’s Pay Working Group – 1996. At the end of 1995, the coalition organizations met with DOD to ascertain if their only objection to the firefighter pay bill was its cost. DOD opposed no other objections and agreed to convene a working group to ascertain the exact cost of the proposal which it found to be $151.5 million.
» Pursuit of Pay Fairness in 1997. Once again, Senator Sarbanes and Representative Hoyer reintroduced the firefighter pay fairness bills and there were more original co-sponsors than ever. However, the bills did not move primarily due to the cost objections raised by the Administration.
» The Administration’s Agreement – 1998. In the waning hours of the Clinton Administration, OPM met with the coalition and agreed to a pay proposal that would provide approximately a 7% across-the-board increase and provide for no loss of pay when on training. It also agreed to establish a task force for the purpose of whether specialized skills such as EMS and HazMat should be recognized in the GS-081 classification standards. It would not, however, assist in obtaining Congressional passage of the proposal.
» The Firefighters Overtime Pay Reform Act of 1998. Following the Agreement with the Administration, members of the coalition met with Senator Sarbanes and Representative Hoyer to discuss how passage of the agreed upon proposal could be accomplished. It was decided that Mr. Hoyer would seek to add it to the Treasury/Postal Appropriations Bill. The problem with this strategy was that it was not a matter germane to the bill and when the bill was on the floor, members were systematically voting to remove all non-germane provisions. However, when the firefighter pay provision came up for consideration, there was no objection. The firefighters had done their job well. Across the country, Congressman had been asked to support the measure and they did. Finally, after almost fifteen years, firefighters’ pay was to be calculated in a manner reflecting the various tours of duty. This was to be achieved by using about 75% of the GS- hourly rate and multiplying it times the first 106 hours in the bi-weekly pay period and then using the same hourly rate to compute overtime at one and one-half times all hours in the bi-weekly period over 106. Further, the pay for all of the hours in the regular tour of duty would be considered for retirement purposes and no pay wo9uld be lost when a firefighter was sent for training.
» Position Classification. In 1991, the Office of Personnel Management revised the standards for the GS-081 series which had not been updated since April, 1978. The 1991 revisions failed to recognize the technological changes that had occurred in the profession and it failed to consider the additional knowledge, skills, abilities and responsibilities such as EMS and HazMat that are now endemic to the profession. It did, however, recognize some of the complexities of the duties performed and for line firefighters, it resulted in a change in the career ladder starting at a GS-3 trainee through a GS-5 driver/operator to a GS-4 trainee through a GS-6 driver-operator.
As part of the compromise agreement reached with the Administration regarding a legislative proposal to address the pay computation for firefighters, the Executive Branch agreed that OPM would create a task force to focus on certain classification issues. The Task Force was created in 2000 and its purpose was to determine whether certain EMS and HazMat duties performed by firefighters should be grade controlling. The AFGE Federal Firefighters Steering Committee was represented on the task force and played a major role in providing information to it. The work of the task force culminated with its report and subsequent issue of the March 2004 revision to the GS-081 series. For the first time, certain EMS and HazMat responsibilities were considered to be grade-controlling factors and the result was an upgrade for many federal firefighters.
» Partnership – Working with the Administration
The buzz-word of the early Clinton Administration was “Partnership” and the AFGE Firefighters Steering Committee was a strong advocate of the benefits that could be achieved by working together. It was the first union entity that partnered with the DOD Fire and Emergency Services Working Group. Since the early 1990’s, it has worked closely with the service component program managers in discussing F&ES policy and program issues. It has brought to the attention of the Working Group matters of concern to firefighters and by working together as partners, has been able to effectuate changes that ultimately improved the working conditions for all firefighters. Through this established relationship, the Committee has participated in DOD’s F&ES Working Group’s Strategic Planning Sessions and has been a speaker at many of the DOD F&ES Annual World-Wide Conferences.
» The Committee’s Role in Responding to Proposals Under AFGE’s National Consultation Rights
Almost since the Committee’s inception, AFGE has referred all proposals sent to it that pertain to agencies fire and emergency services programs for its comments and the Committee’s comments have, more often than not, been accepted by the agencies.
» The Committee’s Efforts to Make Information Available to its Members
The Committee has conducted week-long seminars attended by its members and managers. The Seminars have been specifically designed to educate the attendees on all aspects of issues of current concerns to firefighters and their employment in the federal sector. It has also conducted mini-training sessions in many AFGE Districts and the result is that AFGE firefighters are better informed and more knowledgeable than most.
» Resources Available to Committee members.
Available to Committee members is the AFGE Firefighter’s Manual; a three-volume set consisting of an explanation of the issues of importance to firefighters, the statutes and regulations applicable to employment in the federal fire and emergency service and cases involving issues incident to employment in the federal fire service.
The Committee maintains a web site where members can ask questions and receive answers in the nature of a legal opinion as well as find resources to aid them in addressing matters of concern.
The Committee was originally structured in a manner that would facilitate communications amongst its members. Its Chair was appointed by the National President. Each AFGE District had a District Firefighter Coordinator identified by the Chair and approved by the NVP. In turn, a State Coordinator was appointed for each State was that had locals that included firefighters in the bargaining unit. Finally, every Local was asked to identify a Local Coordinator approved by the Local President. The communication network thus, moved from the Local Coordinator to the State Coordinator to the District Coordinator and finally, to the Chair.
Over time, it became apparent that the duties of the Chair were simply too numerous to be handled by a single full-time firefighter. So, beginning in 2002, co-chairs were appointed. Although the co-chairs had equally responsibility, the duties of one was primarily to maintain the web site and to communicate with members while the other co-chair was the individual who maintained the established liaisons with program managers, agencies and other organizations.
In 2006, it became apparent that the Steering Committee needed to be revamped. It had functioned well n the 20 years of its existence but many factors such as access to email by all firefighters, the move by the services to a more centralized management (regionalization of the Navy and the Army’s shift for base operations to be under a single agency). In addition, bases had been closed and the proposed realignments will make even greater changes. In lieu of these factors, President Gage approved a project to revitalize, restructure and reorganize the Steering Committee. The goal of the project was to reorganize, revamp, and rejuvenate the AFGE Federal Firefighters Steering Committee so that:
» It is a stronger, more autonomous entity
» It stands ready to become a recognized council if that appears to be the proper direction in the future
» It serves the needs of AFGE’s firefighter members by providing them with needed, timely information and is a vehicle for answering questions related to employment as a firefighter in the federal sector
» It attracts new AFGE members
» It develops contract language that can used in negotiations either with DoD and/or the DVA at both the agency level and at the local level
» It serves as the clearing house for litigation issues that could properly be handled by the new AFGE field attorneys
The 2006 project resulted in the creation if a new entity – the AFGE Firefighters Council. Its governing body is an Executive Committee comprised of the Officers and Regional Liaisons who are elected in accordance with the Council’s bylaws. Its organizational structure consists of Local Liaisons at the installation/local level who are chosen in the manner decided upon by the local and the firefigthters.
The Local Liaisons report to Regional Liaisons who are elected by the firefighters in the region and who report to the officers who are elected by the firefighters. There are two Chief Executive Officers. One is responsible for policy and program including maintaining a working relationship with program managers and the other for administration maintaining the web site. The Chief Executive Officers are also responsible for reviewing cases referred to them by the Regional Liaisons involving issues that have an impact on a majority of firefighters or which are of first impression and which might appropriately be referred to the National Office with a request for assistance by the legal staff. The Regional Liaisons are responsible for maintaining contact with the Local Liaisons and for obtaining and developing contract language for use by those who desire.
The 2006 project also included the provision for membership cards to be issued to all AFGE firefighters and it up-dated and revamped the Steering Committee’s web site.