The announcement of the change came last month as administration officials met with representatives of various fire service organizations. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Director Joe Allbaugh made this announcement to the group, "As our nation's first responders to disasters, the fire service community deserves FEMA's support and the continuation of this vital program acknowledges their important role." 

Allbaugh's report came less than 24 hours after White House Special Assistant Kirk Blalock had spoken to the Legislative Conference of the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), AFL-CIO. IAFF representatives had expressed their displeasure with the administration's initial decision to recommend that funding be eliminated. Blalock told the IAFF, "I have heard you and I will take this message back to the White House." Apparently, Blalock did just that. 

Ironically, while IAFF was pushing for more funding, FEMA earlier this month voiced concern over the current low number of applications for assistance. "While our grant office has received nearly 5,000 e-mails and more than 4,000 telephone calls, they have logged in less than 250 completed applications as of [April 13]," said Ken Burris, Acting Administrator of the United States Fire Administration (USFA). With 30,000 fire service agencies eligible for funds, USFA officials fear that many will wait until the May 2 deadline to file their requests. "If we receive a batch of applications on May 2, it will be very difficult to process them all and still maintain our schedule of review panels in May and June," Burris added. 

This year the program will fund grants in six major categories. They are training, wellness/fitness, vehicles, firefighting equipment, personal protective equipment, and fire prevention programs. Grant application packets may be obtained at www.usfa.fema.gov/grants or by calling (866) 274-0920. 

Fire union officials claim that recently 

"Cut your hair or find another department you can work at," Few said during a visit to a firehouse to discuss the rules. The fire chief stated that the rules are being enforced for safety and appearance purposes. 

"I'm very upset," said Willie Gaffney, a 10-year veteran fire fighter who covers his waist length dreadlocks with a knitted skullcap while working. Gaffney was suspended for two days. He has not cut his hair in nine years, citing a Nazarite vow he took as part of his religious beliefs. Two Muslim fire fighters also have been suspended for wearing beards that exceed department standards. 

Few said he did not think that religious expression should supersede safety. He added that he feared some fire fighters might not be able to fit 

Critics claim, however, that the D.C. Fire Department does not conduct regular facemask checks as recommended by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Such tests are mandated in the two dozen states that have adopted OSHA standards as part of state law. The District of Columbia has not formally adopted the standards. 

Shannon Lyons, a Muslim fire fighter who also has been suspended, said he has not had a fitness test in six years. "If I learned that I failed the test, then I'd do something," said Lyons, who wears an inch-long beard. Department policy limits beard length to one-quarter of an inch. 

Both the fire fighter's union and the American Civil Liberties Union are considering challenging the regulations in court. 

Prior case law has generally upheld the authority of uniformed public safety agencies to enforce grooming standards. Some courts have required that variances be granted for medical and religious reasons. 

The trouble began for Jim Kuhn on January 8. During a heated bargaining session with city officials, Kuhn, a member of the union bargaining team, became so frustrated he called the session a "circle jerk." City manager Steve Spina, offended by the remark, ended the meeting and told union members to depart. He issued a written reprimand to Kuhn the following day. 

The fire fighters' union grieved the matter on the grounds that Kuhn was exercising his right of free speech. The union then filed an unfair labor 

"I was quite surprised," said Paul Donnelly, the attorney representing the fire fighters' union. "It's the first time the [PERC] general counsel has ever held that the union cannot file an unfair labor practice when there has also been a grievance filed relating to the matter." 

PERC attorney Stephen Meck said the ruling was purely procedural in nature. "There is a broad scope of protection for employee's speech in the context of collective bargaining," he said. "However, whether Kuhn's speech was protected 

While the city manager labeled the matter "frivolous," he rejected a union proposal to drop legal action if the reprimand is removed from Kuhn's 

"We're not going to just drop it," said union president Shawn Baptist, indicating an appeal of the PERC decision will soon follow. 

The Cincinnati African-American Firefighters Association held a news conference April 16 to announce resignations from Local 48 of the International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO. "This is a diverse fire division serving a diverse community. All members of the division 

Lieutenant Mark Sanders, president of Local 48, disagreed with allegations that black and female members are not properly represented. He said it was unfortunate the black fire fighters were withdrawing from the union. 

Local 48 has about 800 members. The black fire fighters' group claims about 200 members. 

Supreme Court update 

Denied consideration was Gilbert v. Baltimore County, Maryland, No. 00-1083, wherein a lower court dismissed a fire fighter's claim that he was under duress when he settled a work grievance. The source of the alleged stress was the threatened destruction of a search and rescue dog if the canine failed to perform adequately while the grievance was pending. A lower appeals court ruled that the trial judge acted appropriately in granting the county's motion for summary judgment. 

The court also refused to review Firefighter's Institute for Racial Equality v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, No. 00-1164. The inaction leaves in place a lower court ruling that the city did not violate 

Cases of interest 

HELD: For a public employee to sustain a claim of retaliation for protected speech under the First Amendment, the employee must show by the preponderance of the evidence that: (1) the employee's speech is on a matter of public concern; (2) the employee's First Amendment interest in engaging in the speech outweighs the employer's interest in prohibiting the speech to promote the efficiency of the public service it performs through its employees; and (3) the employee's speech played a substantial part in the employer's decision to demote or discharge the employee. Here, the speech, in the form of a questionnaire, addressed political candidates about their position of certain issues concerning staffing and employment conditions of the EMA. Some of the questions presented referred to matters such as grievance procedures, vacation 

HELD: The question presented in this case is the application of common law sovereign immunity and Indiana statutory immunity to the circumstances at hand. Prior case law holds that failure to provide adequate police protection to prevent crime, appointment of an individual whose incompetent performance gives rise to a suit alleging negligence, and judicial decision making are all protected by the doctrine of common law immunity. The courts have taken pains to emphasis that this list is not exhaustive however. The prior cases also hold that the failure to provide adequate fire protection also should be treated as an exception to governmental tort liability. Fire protection, like policing, is essential for public safety, which is the primary function of government. Both are required to sustain a well-ordered society that values and protects the lives and property of its citizens. Fire, like crime, is a common enemy. Thus, the common law immunity available to police agencies should also be available to fire departments. Consequently, a municipality is not liable to the owner of property destroyed by fire even though the destruction may 

HELD: On appeal the town argues that Fowler was required to exhaust his administrative remedies under the collective bargaining agreement before proceeding to an administrative determination and, ultimately, a judicial determination of his claim. A fire fighter's right not to have money withheld from his paycheck is statutory. When an individual seeks to vindicate a statutory right, any presumption of arbitrability does not pertain. Such a claim is not arbitrable unless there is a clear and unmistakable waiver of the employee's right to pursue his statutory claim. No such clear and unmistakable waiver exists in this case. Even if the town's interpretation of the collective bargaining provision allowing it to replenish sick leave accounts is correct, the provision is void as a matter of law because it is contrary to the New Hampshire Wage Act. Nothing in the collective bargaining agreement can validly permit the town to deduct from the fire fighter's regular wage for work he performed when he returned from leave. The town also argues that if it is not permitted to deduct the amount it paid the fire fighter while on leave, he is paid twice while on leave, once through accrued sick leave benefits and again by 

HELD: The evidence reflects that Roe's position with the borough was not abolished or terminated for any reasons related to himself or his performance. Nor was he terminated because payment of his salary could be avoided. In fact, the evidence reflects that the borough was pleased with his services. Roe contends, however, that his loss of job violated state statute. The statute in question provides that exempt fire fighters have tenure in their position except for economy reasons in time of widespread economic depression or mandatory retrenchment. The parties agree that neither widespread economic depression nor mandatory retrenchment exists in this case. A closer reading of the statute reveals it applies only to situations that occur "for the purpose of terminating his services." It has been consistently recognized in prior cases that governmental bodies acting in good faith in the public interest have the power to abolish public offices. Likewise, as long as the exempt fireman's tenure act has been in effect, the 

HELD: Under Texas civil service law a city's governing body shall by ordinance establish fire fighter classifications as well as the number of positions in each class. The city and the fire fighters' union, however, are parties to a collective bargaining agreement. Under Texas law a collective bargaining agreement may vary any provisions of the civil service law. Such variance must be specifically provided for in the labor agreement. In this case the city argues that the collective bargaining