The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Firefighters union douses volunteerism
Please let's get this out to as many folks as we can. You don't need to agree or disagree, just please read it and let's begin the discussions. Let's get ides out there about whether anything should be done about it.
I think it should be resisted at all cost, but how do volunteers take up the fight?
Firefighters union douses volunteerism
James Sherk
Heritage Foundation
October 9, 2007
You probably haven't heard that Congress is about to shut down many of America's volunteer fire departments. Not intentionally, perhaps. Yet a little-known bill advancing through Congress would do just that.
Nearly 26,000 volunteer fire departments protect tens of millions of Americans and their homes from fires. Almost three out of every four firefighters in the United States are volunteers, and smaller towns and cities call on them for protection. A town with 3,000 residents simply cannot afford the expense of hiring full-time career firefighters. They rely on volunteers.
These volunteer departments are usually anchored by a core of professional career firefighters. Often they work in another city and volunteer to protect their neighbors in their off-duty hours. Volunteer firefighters risk their lives and sacrifice their time for their communities. Who would want to shut them down?
The International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), that's who. The IAFF represents career firefighters. Volunteers who give their time and efforts to their communities allow many communities to do without full-time career fire departments. This means fewer jobs for career firefighters, and fewer dues-paying members in the union that represents them. So the IAFF does everything in its power to stop "two-hatters" from volunteering.
The IAFF constitution prohibits its members from belonging to a volunteer fire department. In the words of IAFF President Harold Schaitberger, the decision to volunteer is a personal choice, but "that personal choice is one that can have serious consequences under our Constitution." Union members who disobey face steep union fines that the courts will enforce. In some cities, the IAFF negotiates, on its members' behalf, contracts stating that they will lose their job if they volunteer in their off-duty hours.
The union's effort to ban volunteering is an assault on our civic fabric. Doctors who provide free care to the poor, lawyers who work pro bono for the disadvantaged, and firefighters who volunteer for their communities make America a better country.
Without career firefighters willing to give their time, many volunteer fire departments would have to close. Look at Connecticut. The IAFF negotiated "no-volunteering" clauses in the contracts of every major city there. Now many of the state's volunteer fire departments are having difficulty finding enough volunteers to protect their communities. Some cities have had to raise taxes significantly to hire career firefighters – exactly what the IAFF intended.
Enter the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act, which would make it significantly easier for the IAFF to shut down volunteer fire departments. The bill, which passed the House and is before the Senate, has nothing to do with employer-employee cooperation. This bill requires every state and local government to collectively bargain with their police officers and firefighters, and to negotiate virtually every term and condition of employment.
Those states that have decided collective bargaining doesn't meet their needs would have to do so anyway. States that currently limit what they negotiate would have to negotiate almost everything – including "no-volunteering" clauses.
If this bill passes and forces every local government to collectively bargain with its firefighters, the IAFF's membership rolls will swell and the union will have enhanced powers to negotiate away the freedom of its members to volunteer. Many career firefighters who want to serve their community will lose the ability to do so, unless they want to lose their jobs.
Recognizing that concerns for volunteer firefighters could sink the bill, its supporters added a provision specifying that private sector collective bargaining agreements cannot prevent workers from volunteering. Since virtually every firefighter works for the government and not in the private sector, this actually does nothing to protect volunteer firefighters. But it sounds good.
Instead of adding meaningless provisions that do nothing to defend firefighters' right to volunteer, Congress should let local communities decide if collective bargaining is right for them. Many communities have decided that it is. But others, concerned about how unions would attack their volunteer firefighters, have not. Congress should not make it easier for the IAFF to punish firefighters for volunteering to protect their neighbors.
I think it should be resisted at all cost, but how do volunteers take up the fight?
Firefighters union douses volunteerism
James Sherk
Heritage Foundation
October 9, 2007
You probably haven't heard that Congress is about to shut down many of America's volunteer fire departments. Not intentionally, perhaps. Yet a little-known bill advancing through Congress would do just that.
Nearly 26,000 volunteer fire departments protect tens of millions of Americans and their homes from fires. Almost three out of every four firefighters in the United States are volunteers, and smaller towns and cities call on them for protection. A town with 3,000 residents simply cannot afford the expense of hiring full-time career firefighters. They rely on volunteers.
These volunteer departments are usually anchored by a core of professional career firefighters. Often they work in another city and volunteer to protect their neighbors in their off-duty hours. Volunteer firefighters risk their lives and sacrifice their time for their communities. Who would want to shut them down?
The International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), that's who. The IAFF represents career firefighters. Volunteers who give their time and efforts to their communities allow many communities to do without full-time career fire departments. This means fewer jobs for career firefighters, and fewer dues-paying members in the union that represents them. So the IAFF does everything in its power to stop "two-hatters" from volunteering.
The IAFF constitution prohibits its members from belonging to a volunteer fire department. In the words of IAFF President Harold Schaitberger, the decision to volunteer is a personal choice, but "that personal choice is one that can have serious consequences under our Constitution." Union members who disobey face steep union fines that the courts will enforce. In some cities, the IAFF negotiates, on its members' behalf, contracts stating that they will lose their job if they volunteer in their off-duty hours.
The union's effort to ban volunteering is an assault on our civic fabric. Doctors who provide free care to the poor, lawyers who work pro bono for the disadvantaged, and firefighters who volunteer for their communities make America a better country.
Without career firefighters willing to give their time, many volunteer fire departments would have to close. Look at Connecticut. The IAFF negotiated "no-volunteering" clauses in the contracts of every major city there. Now many of the state's volunteer fire departments are having difficulty finding enough volunteers to protect their communities. Some cities have had to raise taxes significantly to hire career firefighters – exactly what the IAFF intended.
Enter the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act, which would make it significantly easier for the IAFF to shut down volunteer fire departments. The bill, which passed the House and is before the Senate, has nothing to do with employer-employee cooperation. This bill requires every state and local government to collectively bargain with their police officers and firefighters, and to negotiate virtually every term and condition of employment.
Those states that have decided collective bargaining doesn't meet their needs would have to do so anyway. States that currently limit what they negotiate would have to negotiate almost everything – including "no-volunteering" clauses.
If this bill passes and forces every local government to collectively bargain with its firefighters, the IAFF's membership rolls will swell and the union will have enhanced powers to negotiate away the freedom of its members to volunteer. Many career firefighters who want to serve their community will lose the ability to do so, unless they want to lose their jobs.
Recognizing that concerns for volunteer firefighters could sink the bill, its supporters added a provision specifying that private sector collective bargaining agreements cannot prevent workers from volunteering. Since virtually every firefighter works for the government and not in the private sector, this actually does nothing to protect volunteer firefighters. But it sounds good.
Instead of adding meaningless provisions that do nothing to defend firefighters' right to volunteer, Congress should let local communities decide if collective bargaining is right for them. Many communities have decided that it is. But others, concerned about how unions would attack their volunteer firefighters, have not. Congress should not make it easier for the IAFF to punish firefighters for volunteering to protect their neighbors.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Joel C Kelley on
-
Why? Is Union mambership a secret society. I guess I don't understand whay a union member can't take a personal position. Is it because if one is a union member, one is not entitled to any opinion but that of the Union?
-
-
See, now this is a place where unions still have a valuable place in society, and I know the IAFF works to protect the rights and working conditions of its members, and so yeas they have a place. But if there is, and iI have been told this more than once, a silent agenda to move all fire departments into paid, union departments, well, then we have a problem.
-
-
I will gladly agree that the writer of the article has a skewed and inaccurate understanding of how most fire departments are structured, and I have already contacted the publisher about this inaccuracy. But an underlying question remains: If this law passes, will every incorporated municipality or county have to enter into collective bargaining agreements with emergency personnel, and does that create an adversarial relationship with Volunteers?
-
Permalink Reply by Joe Stoltz on
-
I think the answer to the question is yes and no.
Every incorporated municipality or county employing paid FFs would have to enter into a CBA with their employees. There are already adversarial relations between paid and vols so why would this start anything new? If anything I would think becoming part of the IAFF would increase job security HUGELY for the career FFs.
I have learned something here. I had always assumed that paid FFs everywhere were unionized but now I realize that this is not so. Nita pointed out the situation in her area and it's pretty clear that municipalities are taking advantage of a lot of workers.
-
Permalink Reply by County 1 on
-
I have been a volunteer on our department, that is all volunteer, for 20 years. Our department doesn't have any paid FFs volunteering. In my part of the world, eastern Kansas, this is common.
I did hear some discussion similar to this years ago. It amazes me how things go around and then go around again and we are still here doing our job. After all, that is what a volunteer is, always doing the job.
I did appreciate one writers comment about being on-call departments because we all do the same training, Thank You.
I also call our volunteers, professionals. We have 60 members within our department. They are all required to attend training or they are released. Of the 60, 40 are FF Certified, 20 are EMTs, as well as, many other areas of training and I am proud of every one of them.
We do this without any union and most of the time, without even a thanks.
-
Permalink Reply by Spanner 122 on
-
I think basically, some areas that can afford fulltime, should go fulltime, but let's face it, no city wants to spend the money. I am from a career department that is affiliated with a POC department (career 1000, POC 400), and there is talk of a couple of the POC stations being made fulltime simply because of call volume, population and risks of slowed response time compared to the fully manned stations (just going by stats).
I don't think it's about the money either, as many have stated. The Union is not in need of money, have you looked at it lately? I am part of a Union and I would support volunteer departmentd being made fulltime if the city can support it. I can see that some people would not want to leave their current fulltime jobs to become fulltime firefighters, but would many of you really say no to a fulltime career in the fire department if it was offered to you?
Not all unions are the same. You elect the board from your own department that works for you. If you do not feel supported by your Union, you speak up about it and vote for change. You control who controls your local.
I think the major problem with Unions is too many people sit back and let the board deal with everything... it can breed apathy in some who would rather not be a part of change and development. That is not the union's issue, that is a personal issue.
-
Permalink Reply by Joe on
-
Okay - let's lift the fog a bit, shall we ? The ONLY issue that the IAFF faces with "two hatters" are the ones that work in ONE IAFF local and volunteer in another - this is known as "scabbing". I work in a jurisdiction that has a long volunteer tradition and have nothing against vollies that really want to be here and feel a call to do so - but we're not running a social club/community center/homeless shelter for these "two hatters" - the citizens of this jurisdiction pay good tax money for us, the career firefighters, to protect them. Just as the citizens of the jurisdiction where said "two hatter" is primarily employed pay good money for he/she to protect THEM. THIS CAREER ISN'T A HOBBY !!!!! Yes - I, too, have been disappointed by the IAFF at times - but it's what we've got brothers and sisters, so maybe we oughtta stand by them and see what happens. Remember Resolution 43 ?
We have departments all around this area (and, incedentally, this area is growing out of control) that have a volunteer political lobby that remains VERY strong in the state capital and CLAIMS membership in the thousands (while a recent audit of one local volunteer department revealed that a third of the members had died prior to 1985) yet consistently fails to provide their OWN staffing - leaving the burden upon the career firefighters...with trucks and rescue squads regularly responding severely understaffed or, if the EMS unit is on a call, failing altogether. Now I ask you - HOW is this fair to the citizens ? How are they going to feel watching your pretty, washed and waxed fire engine rolling down the street in the Fourth of July parade remembering that it never arrived at that fire where their uncle John died because no one was there to staff it ? Let's get a grip on the reality of the situation facing today's and tomorrow's Fire/EMS departments: Sure - I understand volunteer pride...but I also understand that it's not gonna cut it by itself if there's no one THERE to do the job.
-
Permalink Reply by nita on
-
After reading everybodies thoughts and re-reading the bill in question. I have decided we have been led down the wrong road here. Much ado about nothing, if you ask me. This bill isn't new....it may be closer to passing now...but it's no new idea. There are many reasons that this bill should be passed but they are all from a paid dept/firefighter perspective. It has nothing to do with volunteers. Nothing.
The government is not going to shut down volunteer depts. whether this bill passes or not. One has nothing to do with the other.
The issue.....and the only issue is to allow (NOT MANDATE) depts. in non-collective bargaining states to have a contract that they NEGOCIATE with their administration and for those contracts to be binding and for the union of that dept. to be the bargaining agent for it's dept. Like they ought to be anyway. I don't think this bill is going to affect as many paid depts. as people think. Not everyone is in a horrible situation like my dept....whether they are union or not or whether they have a contract or not. Some cities don't have to have laws to make them do right by their employees. I also don't think this bill will affect volunteer depts. and I wish someone could tell me some actual ways...instead of trying to scare everyone...that volunteer depts will be affected by this bill. I don't care how many paid FF's. volunteer or who's more professional or whatever your gripe is...all I want to know are facts about how this bill(if it passes) will affect any dept. paid or volunteer.
-
-
Here's a summary of HR980 guys....determine for yourself who it will affect.
The following summary is provided by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan government entity that serves Congress and is run by the Library of Congress. The summary is taken from the official website THOMAS.
2/12/2007--Introduced.
Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 2007 - Provides collective bargaining rights for public safety officers employed by states or local governments.
Directs the Federal Labor Relations Authority (Authority) to determine whether state law provides specified rights and responsibilities for public safety officers, including: (1) granting public safety employees the right to form and join a labor organization which excludes management and supervisory employees, and which is, or seeks to be, recognized as the exclusive bargaining agent for such employees; and (2) requiring public safety employers to recognize and agree to bargain with the employees' labor organization.
Requires the Authority to issue regulations establishing rights and responsibilities for public safety employers and employees in states that do not substantially provide for such public safety employee rights and responsibilities. Directs the Authority , in such cases, to: (1) determine the appropriateness of units for labor organization representation; (2) supervise or conduct elections to determine whether a labor organization has been selected as an exclusive representative by a voting majority of the employees in an appropriate unit; (3) resolve issues relating to the duty to bargain in good faith; (4) conduct hearings and resolve complaints of unfair labor practices; and (5) resolve exceptions to arbitrator's awards. Grants a public safety employer, employee, or labor organization the right to seek enforcement of such Authority regulations and authority through appropriate state courts.
Prohibits public safety employers, employees, and labor organizations from engaging in lockouts or strikes.
Provides that existing collective bargaining units and agreements shall not be invalidated by this Act.
-
Permalink Reply by Ray Crane on
-
I'm a Professional Volunteer for 17 years now. Question? Why can't we Volunteers start our own lobby group to push the government for the things we need, including respect. Our numbers are big enough that if we was banded together instead of argueing among ourselves we could push Congress pretty hard. Like someone else said look at the votes they would loose.
-
-
Cool. If it is much ado about nothing, then I am glad folks were there to recognize it, and help me understand the issues. Certainly CBA's can help protect the interests of Career fire personnel, and it should be the option of the districts that employ them to work through CBA's. I grant that it could under the right circumstances, force municipalities with smaller tax bases to employ fewer personnel, which might ctually incease the need for volunteers. The question then arises where do the volunteers come from? This is extensively explored in another discussion, also on this site. Volunteerism is a dying animal, unless we are able to make the difference.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
