In the afternoon work session on 26 September Trey
Yelverton, the city manager, presented an update on civil service. The first chart he put up was a pay scale
depicting that the average fire fighter in Arlington makes $86,000 a year. All that is required is a high school
diploma. One must consider that
firefighters only work 8 days a month in earning this wage. But then Mr. Yelverton started putting up
sick leave utilization charts and how, since August (start of budget talks)
sick leave has increased requiring an increase in overtime expenditures. So please let me elaborate. 
As you can plainly see from this chart unauthorized absences
increased dramatically from the time budget discussions started concerning the
reductions in fire department benefits.
I might add that no other departments at the city had this increase in
sick leave.
This staffing chart, illustrates
that sick leave abuse drove the department staffing down to 76 firefighters per
shift. 76 is the number that is required
to staff all trucks and keep them in battery for the entire 24 hour period. In order to accommodate the abuse of sick
leave by our firefighters we had to call in others and pay them overtime, depicted
on the chart below.
The increase of FY17 overtime due to excessive sick leave, cost the taxpayers an additional
$1 million dollars just to staff the fire department and would have cost the department $1.5 million if the department hadn't gone to minimum staffing. Chief Crowson has taken the
overtime budget and lowered it from 36,000 hours annually down to
6,000 hours. I can only look at these
numbers and come up with one conclusion.
Certain union following firefighters, with high school diplomas making
$86,000 a year, who swore an oath to serve and protect the citizens of Arlington,
find it more convenient to call in sick than to uphold their oath to the
citizens. In doing so they
have cost those same citizens an additional million dollars in overtime. I believe that since this phenomenon is only indigenous
to the fire department and no other part of city staff, that this action was
contrived by their union leadership. I
find this action by the fire union to be despicable, and that the actions of
anyone participating in this organized labor action, to be reprehensible. These firefighters should be ashamed of
themselves, but they have no contrition, therefore no moral compass. How you can put the safety of the citizens, below your personal agenda is beyond comprehension. How you can denigrate the uniform and ignore your sworn oath, speaks volumes to your lack of character. Shame on you!
To those good firefighters that have been caught up in this
I apologize. But the actions of the
Union President and his selected e-board have clearly gotten you into this
situation. How they can do this without
remorse astounds me. Good luck to those
who chose to retire and those that leave for greener pastures. Your service was greatly appreciated.
Looks like a union-directed sick-out to me.
ReplyDeleteIsn’t it interesting that the union goes silent now? All the rhetoric and fighting with themselves and outsiders goes quiet when the City produces proof that the union is full of self serving public employees. I don’t use public servant on purpose because it’s clear this union doesn’t serve anyone expect themselves and clearly not those that pay them or define what they should or shouldn’t be doing.
ReplyDeleteI’m not disclosing my name because clearly these guys aren’t honorable. If they are willing to not show up to work, then I’m sure when they do work they pick and choose why and how hard. Sad.
I talked to a family friend from Austin Fire, they have it made. Unfortunately, the city is millions over budget to pay them overtime and they continue to struggle with hiring minorities, even under a judges order to do so. They have civil service too.
The Austin Fire Department is a perfect example of what can go wrong if a union is given too much power. By ordinance they are required to man each truck with 4 firefighters. Their overtime budget is $7.5 million and they burned through it is 7 months. Their Council is going to supplement the overtime budget with rainy day funds. Arlington mans their truck with 3 firefighters and its overtime is only 6,000 hrs. compared to Austin's at 275,000 hrs. It shows the difference between a well run organization and one that is out of control.
DeleteYou are comparing apples to oranges here Mr. Parker, Austin is a much larger fire department.
DeleteMany studies by NIOSH, OSHA and NFPA state that 4 firefighters on an apparatus is minimum for safe and effective operations.
I am truly saddened that the city is treating the firefighters this way.
I am concerned for the protection of my home and for the families of these firefighters who you are trash talking.
Can't wait till term limits are voted in to prevent people like you from sitting so disgustingly on the council.
ReplyDeleteYou have got to keep up. I have announced that I wasn't running again in 2016. I won't have the privilege of representing brave anonymous guys like you.
DeleteWhy do you think they run 4 man trucks? Since you know so much about being a firefighter? Let us hear parker!
ReplyDeleteI will give you a quick insight into why 4 man trucks are very much needed.
After decades of research and looking back at civilian fire fatalities and firefighter fatalities. It has was determined by NIOSH, OSHA, NIST, TCFP and countless other organizations,that 4 man crews are safer for the crews and results in fewer fatalities and saves billions in fire loss a year. Austin has determined that lives and property are more important than filling a bank account with money or building a new stadium. The union in Austin had nothing to do with 4 man staffing. That was what the city wanted. Why don't you give Plano a call and see why they do it, or Ft. Worth, or Dallas? Must be because they like wasting money. Not because it serves a purpose. I guess we just don't know as much as you do about our job.
Well if you read any of the articles about the fire department in Austin you would know that they are called out on an actual fire .75% of the time. Not even one percent. I understand the two in two out concept that has been part of your industry for decades, but the squad concept is the prevailing norm of your industry. Several major cities are currently using it to include large metropolitan areas like Los Angeles. Your response times are not suffering because of this concept. The Austin Fire Depart. is in serious financial trouble. Our department is operated in a fiscally responsible manner. Although your union may not like Chief Crowson, he is doing a commendable job, not only in the operation of the department through implementation of the squad system but also in the manning level of the department, and operating under the fiscal restraints of his budget. The Council is watching and learning each day what the firefighters are doing. You are not doing yourselves any favors.
ReplyDeleteWhere were you at the last council meeting? The word on the street is you were told not to come. Required vacation.
ReplyDeleteActually I have a condo down in Cabo and was there when I missed the first meeting. I have the same week every year and that week was the first vote on the firefighters benefits. Then I flew back on Wednesday and got in the truck to go Elk hunting with my son in Colorado and just got home last night at 11:00. So please tell everyone on the street that they don't have a clue as to the reason concerning my absence. What is important to understand is that my vote wasn't needed to accomplish the affect that the Council wanted to accomplish. So as you can plainly see the Council is united in the reduction in benefits as a result of the firefighters union biting the hand that literally feeds them. Both of these vacations were scheduled before the vote on civil service in May.
ReplyDeleteMr Parker, welcome back.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the sick leave abuse info. Interesting how they want to change the conversation away from their misdeeds...
Firemen at the Kroger on Little Rd said they are doubling down on dues for legal fees, going to have a vote of no confidence, and gather a petition for term limits.
How do you feel about that and the constant push against the city? Is it really about a bad Chief, bad benefits, Council, what?
How did we get here?
Mr and Mrs Dazed and Confused
Well let me tell you how we got here. The union president doesn't like the fire Chief. They have tried all kinds of ways to get him fired. So if they can't get rid of him they will try to diminish his power. The Chief reduced their overtime hours from 35,000 to 6,000 hrs. They really didn't like that, so they started a false narrative about the hiring/promotion/discipline practices under the Chief being unfair. All were lies and have been proven false on this blog, in previous articles. So now that they have civil service, it comes with some drawbacks concerning reductions in benefits. The firemen want civil service and all their previous benefits package. This is not going to happen and this is the reason. The firefighters have been given more in the past than any other group of city employees. They knew that if civil service was adopted there would be a reduction of benefits and they are whining that the Council, (the body that gave them the benefits) is actually going to do what they said they would. You don't get part 142 benefits and part 143 benefits. It is one or the other. Funny how the Police Department doesn't have this problem. It is because of their union and the ability to see past the ego's involved. The police see that this Council has given its employees more in the last few years because of the increase in revenue to the city.
ReplyDeleteActually the police have a ton of internal problems, you just won't talk about them because you want to demonize the firefighters. Secondly, you were told not to be there and lastly, the firefighters aren't raising any extra funds for legal fee's. Stop the hateful, hurtful rhetoric, in other words stop lying.
ReplyDelete1. The Police union, APA has a much more intelligent President than the firefighters President. There isn't any hate between the Chief and the Union, therefore there is no drama. I have told you time and again that Crow is driving this because of his ego. He has gotten you in this mess and it is too late to change it now. So enjoy civil service with less benefits. 2. I was never told not to show up. My condo in Cabo is for the first Saturday of October each year. It never changes. During the second week that I missed I had an Elk hunt planned with my son. This is much more important to me than a vote on your benefits. It was his graduation present from me for his getting his MBA from Tulane. I booked the hunt on 6 February 2017. 3. I didn't say that you were doubling the dues. So as you can see I am not the one lying.
ReplyDeleteI want you to know that the people that told you these things are lying to you and you had better wake up and realize it. I can't keep spoon feeding you the truth so go out and find it yourself.
I think the firefighters, fire chief, city manager and the council all took an oath of office or position to serve and protect the citizens. If anyone in this chain has forgotten or not willing to do this, they need to step aside. It will be a matter of time until we are discussing a citizen or firefighter's loss of life that is the poster child of this embarrassing public argument. People watching from the outside cringe because the Arlington Fire Department was a employer of choice and that in part was fueled by a council and manager that publicly supported them. We could all point fingers back and forth, but that doesn't fix the wounds and damage to how outsiders view city leaders or the fire department. It's time to move on to stop both sides from looking like they took an oath to themselves and not the citizens they swore to protect.
ReplyDeleteI haven't forgotten and I am complying with that oath by serving the citizens responsibly. I did not swear to give the fire union everything that they wanted. I did not swear to represent organized labor. A union will try to get everything they can and it is my responsibility to see that this does not happen. I personally don't care if they are unhappy because I have a charge to be fiscally responsible to the citizens. I don't see the Police getting upset. As a matter of fact they are sitting on the sidelines and watching this mess seeing how the firefighters are acting, and saying they feel real good about their benefits package. They are appreciative that the Council is being so generous and they want no part of civil service.
ReplyDeleteMr. Parker
ReplyDeleteI saw where you recently outlined the new hiring process for the City now that 143 has been adopted. As everyone knows, and as you stated multiple times in the run up to the vote, the only thing someone can be hired based off of under 143 is a test score. So why is the City choosing to waste all this time and money on these unnecessary hiring steps?
Concerned Tax Payer,
Matt Taylor
Mr. Taylor if you would care to simply read the document it clearly states that the only criteria for hiring is a simple test score. However over time that requirement has been found to be insufficient in hiring quality employees. But still the only requirement is one of the highest score. Finding out that highest score, as I have stated in the past several times, is not an good indicator of a quality employee, enter the lawyers to civil service. This effort by lawyers to correct this deficiency, in the government hiring process, was welcomed by employers, but offended the unions position. Knowing full well that the hiring process was flawed the government allow a caveat called "Local Rules" to be adopted to correct this egregious deficiency. So the lawyers were allowed to affect Part 143 by the use of "Local Rules." The local rules allowed background checks, drug and alcohol screening, physical ability testing and other aspects of process to affect Part 143. Now we are back to a legitimate hiring process. Not one that is simply stated as the highest test score.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is worth noting that after the vote a battery of tests were administered for A/O, Lieutenant and Captain positions. Firefighters were given promotions and the Union challenged the validity of the tests because they weren't part 143 tested, since civil service wasn't adopted as of that date. Well the biggest proponent of civil service was promoted on that list. Now he has to retest under Part 143 and get one of the highest scores. Remember the old saying, "It isn't who you know, it is what you know."
Well this individual writes a letter stating that he wants to keep the results of the Part 142 test. Hypocrite? He would like the Council to overturn the Civil Service Commission's decision to throw out the test. Well civil service is here and the Commission's decision is autonomous. Everyone will have to retest because the union has stated that all Part 142 testing in the past has been tainted. . This shows the fallacy of the union's statement. They even threatened to sue the city if the results weren't thrown out. The truth is that there was never anything wrong with the old system. The problem has always been the Union President. Mr. Graham you would have been promoted if it wasn't for Mr. Crow.
I’m well aware of the reasoning behind having those steps be a part of the hiring process. I just find it troubling that in the lead up to the vote you were so adamant that these things would be removed from the hiring process. You seem to be somewhat of an expert on these things now. It’s almost as if you knew they wouldn’t be removed from the hiring process but you wanted to make it seem like they would in order to influence voters.
ReplyDeleteSincerely,
Matt Taylor
Mr. Taylor I don't think that you are well aware of anything that actually pertains to the document and the items stated in Part 143. You only know what you think that you know without any knowledge of the contents of Part 143. The only requirements contained in the ordinance are the test score the physical (by a doctor) and the mental eval. (conducted by a psychiatrist. There is nothing in there about background checks, substance abuse checks or physical ability, these are covered by Local Rules added by lawyers. So if you were to actually read the document, which apparently you haven't you would know these things. I think the best thing for you to do is educate yourself on Part 143 and then go away. I have asked you several times to show me where physical ability requirements are located in Part 143 and you can't, because it isn't there. But local rules allow for these requirements.
ReplyDelete