The national election news was not good for public safety unions. The selection of a majority of Republicans in both houses of Congress probably means that a national collective bargaining bill is dead for at least two years. The measure, which would grant bargaining rights to fire fighters and police officers nationwide, had been gaining slow but steady support in the House of Representatives and even came to the floor of the Senate last year, but was stalled on a procedural vote. New Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (Rep.-Miss.) reportedly opposes the bill and is unlikely to permit its consideration in the next session, according to Capitol Hill insiders.
Meanwhile, union leaders can claim victories at the local level. Voters in Baltimore County and Anne Arundel County, Maryland, approved binding arbitration for public safety personnel. Fire fighter and law enforcement unions in Baltimore had campaigned heavily for the initiative against only token opposition. Both counties’ referendums garnered nearly a four-to-one approval by voters.
In California, voters blessed binding arbitration for Monterey fire fighters and police officers by a 62 percent margin. Also, the Los Angeles Fire Department will remain intact as voters rejected a secession effort to separate the San Fernando Valley and Hollywood from the rest of the city and create two new municipalities. The San Fernando Valley secession proposal failed 67 percent to 33 percent while the Hollywood effort was more soundly defeated. Had the proposals passed, the San Fernando Valley would have become the sixth largest city in the country. Passage would have required a reorganization of public safety services within the cities. The United Fire Fighters of Los Angeles City, Local 112 IAFF, had opposed the secession movement.
New Haven, Connecticut fire fighters were also successful in defeating a city charter measure that would have required new fire chiefs to hold college degrees and would have permitted outside candidates to vie for the fire chief position. The proposal, which was bundled with several other charter amendments, failed by only 250 votes.
The news was less good for fire fighters in Missouri. After spending 17 months gathering signatures to place an amendment to the state constitution on the November ballot, the Missouri State Council of Fire Fighters saw their efforts to gain collective bargaining fail by a mere 40,000 votes. A slight majority of voters, 51 percent, voted against the constitutional amendment that would have granted bargaining rights and binding arbitration to the state’s fire fighters and emergency medical service personnel. The initiative was the closest effort since a 1990 gubernatorial veto of legislation that would have granted bargaining.
USFA study says
The United States Fire Administration (USFA) recently released a comprehensive study that examines the causes of deaths for on-duty fire fighters. The USFA Firefighter Fatality Retrospective Study: 1990-2000 is an in-depth analysis as to the causes for more than 1,000 on-duty deaths that occurred in the United States during the last decade of the 20th century. The goal of the study was to identify trends in fire fighter mortality and use the information to help reduce fire fighter deaths by 25 percent in (five) years.
The key findings of the study include confirming that the leading cause of death for fire fighters is heart attack (44 percent). Death from trauma, including internal and head injuries, is the second leading cause of death (27 percent). Asphyxia and burns account for 20 percent of fire fighter fatalities.
Each year in the United States, approximately 100 fire fighters are killed while on duty and tens of thousands are injured. Although the number of fire fighter fatalities has steadily decreased over the past 20 years, the incidence of fire fighter fatalities per 100,000 incidents has actually risen over the last five years, with 1999 having the highest rate of fire fighter fatalities per 100,000 incidents since 1978.
Fire fighters under the age of 35 are more likely to be killed by traumatic injuries than they are to die from medical causes (e.g., heart attack, stroke). After age 35, the proportion of deaths due to traumatic injuries decreases and the proportion of deaths due to medical causes rises steadily.
Since 1984, motor vehicle collisions (MVCs) have accounted for between 20 and 25 percent of all fire fighter fatalities annually. One-quarter of the fire fighters who died in MVCs were killed in private/personally owned vehicles (POVs). Following POVs, the apparatus most often involved in fatal collisions were water tankers, engines/pumpers, and airplanes. More fire fighters are killed in tanker collisions than in engines and ladders combined. About 27 percent of fatalities killed in MVCs were ejected from the vehicle at the time of the collision. Only 21 percent of fire fighters were reportedly wearing their seatbelts prior to the collision.
Approximately 60 percent of all fire fighter fatalities were individuals over the age of 40, and one-third were over the age of 50. Nationwide, fire fighters over the age of 40 make up 46 percent of the fire service, with those over 50 accounting for only 16 percent of fire fighters. About 40 percent of volunteer fire fighters are over the age of 50, compared to 25 percent of career fire fighters.
The majority of fire fighter fatalities (57 percent) were members of local or municipal volunteer fire agencies (including combination departments, which are comprised of both career and volunteer personnel). Full-time career fire fighters account for 33 percent of fire fighter fatalities. Numerically more volunteer fire fighters are killed than career personnel, yet career personnel lose their lives at a rate disproportionate to their representation in the fire service.
In many fire departments, emergency medical service (EMS) calls account for between 50 and 80 percent of the emergency call volume. These EMS incidents result in only three percent of fire fighter fatalities. Trauma (internal/head) accounts for the deaths of 50 percent of fire fighters who were involved in EMS operations at the time of their fatal injury. Another 38 percent involved in EMS operations died from heart attack.
For the past 25 years, the United States Fire Administration (USFA) has tracked the number of fire fighter fatalities and conducted an annual analysis. Through the collection of this information on the causes of fire fighter deaths, the USFA is able to focus on specific problems and direct national efforts to finding solutions for the reduction of fire fighter fatalities in the future. The information in this study is also used to measure the effectiveness of current programs directed toward fire fighter health and safety. One of the USFA main program goals is a 25 percent reduction in fire fighter fatalities in five years and a 50 percent reduction within 10 years. The complete report may be viewed and downloaded from the USFA web site at: http://www.usfa.fema.gov/dhtml/inside-usfa/fa-220.cfm or may be obtained by contacting Fire Service Labor Monthly at 800-824-5203.
fire service solicitations could be affected
The use of telemarketers to raise funds for fire service organizations and affiliated “badge charities” is a topic that splits the public safety labor community. Some see telemarketers as a way to raise funds for noble purposes, such as acquisition of protective equipment, while others argue that the tactics of professional telephone solicitors in representing public safety groups are misleading at best and purely fraudulent at worst. In November, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to weigh in on the debate. Justices agreed to hear a case that examines a Constitutional loophole that permits telemarketers to pocket most of the money they raise on behalf of charities.
In an Illinois case that could have broad implications nationwide, the court will decide whether the Constitution’s guarantee of free speech protects fundraisers who do not tell donors that only a small fraction of their contributions will go to charity. The case, State of Illinois v. Telemarketing Associates, Inc., No. 01-1806, stems from a fraud action that Illinois brought against a company that raised money for Vietnam veterans. The charity, VietNow, had an agreement with Telemarketing Associates, Inc., in which the charity received 15 percent of the money and the fundraiser kept the remaining 85 percent for salaries, expenses, and profit. VietNow had no problem with the arrangement but the state did. A civil suit charging fraud and breach of fiduciary responsibility regarding charitable funds was dismissed on free speech grounds. On appeal, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that prior case law protects charitable solicitations even if the overhead fees are viewed by some as excessive.
The Illinois Supreme Court “transformed the First Amendment into a license for unscrupulous fundraisers to defraud the public in the name of raising money for charity,” Illinois Attorney General James Ryan told the nation’s high court in his filing.
State officials want to prove that telemarketers intentionally misled donors. But, Michael Ficaro, an attorney for the telemarketing company, said to allow the lawsuit “would place all charitable fundraisers at the mercy (of) the attorney general’s whims. Potentially any gross fee can be called too high. Potentially any contractor arrangement can be called unreasonable.” He said the company raised money for VietNow and educated the public about the needs of veterans.
Ryan said people were told that their donations would be used for food
and shelter for hungry and homeless veterans. In reality, just three
percent was used for that, he said.
Use of commercial telemarketers by fire and police associations is commonplace
in many states. Claims of abuse have also been commonplace.
A recent investigation in Chicago found that phone solicitors had called area homes and businesses in the name of the local fire fighters’ union and a retired fire fighters’ group and did not report those fundraising campaigns, a violation of state law.
Many states require commercial solicitors to register but do not limit their fees. In a series of decisions in the 1980s, the Supreme Court ruled against states in disputes over charitable solicitations. In 1988, the court barred states from placing strict regulations on professional, for-profit organizations that solicit contributions for charities.
A decision in the Telemarketing Associates case likely will not be forthcoming
until June.
Britain’s 50,000 full-time fire fighters struck November 13 in protest of low wages. The strike, which lasted 48 hours, was the first in the country in 25 years. The Fire Brigades Union (FBU) is demanding a 40 percent boost in wages and threatened three more eight-day strikes before the end of the year. “There is no government on earth that could yield to such a claim,” said Prime Minister Tony Blair in response to the union’s demand.
British troops operating antiquated “Green Goddess” fire trucks were called in to provide emergency service but the 18,500 troops assigned to fire suppression was far below the number of fire fighters normally available. The same troops would be expected to be deployed to the Mid-East if war breaks out with Iraq.
The dispute escalated when, in early November, Blair’s Labour government proposed the first substantial reorganization of the British fire service in over 50 years. Wage increases of four percent this year and seven percent next have been offered, providing the FBU agrees to wholesale reforms of the operations of the brigades. Among the proposed changes are reinstitution of overtime, which is currently banned, and alteration of work schedules that permit fire fighters to work two days followed by two nights followed by four days off. The rank structure would be reformed and rigid national salary schedules would be replaced with a type of merit pay.
Base pay for a British fire fighter is about $34,000. A station commander earns about $57,000. FBU protestors have been carrying signs bearing the legend “31K” with a smiley face, referring to the union’s goal of a target salary of 31,000 British pounds, or about $49,000.
Cornell University and New York City fire union leaders have announced that the university will undertake a large-scale study of fire fighter stress and trauma resulting from the World Trade Center (WTC) tragedy. Starting in 2003, researchers will ask approximately 3,000 New York fire fighters to answer a questionnaire probing topics ranging from substance abuse to family relationships. Selected one-on-one interviews will also be conducted. The study will examine both the psychological effects of September 11 and the everyday stress of being a fire fighter.
“It’s really to know how trauma on their job continuously affects them,” said Sam Bacharach, director of the Smithers Institute at Cornell’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations. The study is expected to be the largest ever conducted of workplace trauma.
Hundreds of fire fighters and emergency medical workers who responded
to the WTC scene have reported nightmares, sudden anger, and other severe
psychological reactions to their experiences.
Both the Fire Department of New York and the fire fighters’ unions have announced
support for the research.
In October, a Springfield, Massachusetts fire fighter became the first individual in the state to lose his job under a state law prohibiting fire fighters from smoking on or off the job. John Marrero, 25, was smoking when he was arrested by a state trooper for erratic driving. Marrero also faces criminal charges of possession of crack cocaine and Oxycontin after the trooper discovered the substances in the vehicle. Marrero pleaded not guilty to the drug charges, claiming he borrowed the car containing the drugs.
His employer terminated his job as a fire fighter on the grounds that Marrero was found in violation of a law that prohibits any fire fighter or police officer hired after January 1, 1988, from smoking tobacco on or off duty. The law was enacted as part of pension reform. State statute presumes that heart ailments among fire fighters and police officers are job-related disabilities. A fire fighter who retires on accidental disability receives 72 percent of his salary tax free.
Representatives of the Springfield Association of Fire Fighters, Local 648 IAFF, said the union will appeal the dismissal and called for a change in the law to permit smoking fire fighters be given assistance to kick the habit.
Marrero is the second public safety officer to be terminated under the law. A Plymouth police officer lost his job in 1993 for smoking on duty.
Collateral consequences of the World Trade Center (WTC) tragedy continue to plague the Fire Department of New York (FDNY). Plans for firehouse closings, lawsuits against the city, and protests over books about the tragedy are all making the workaday world of a FDNY fire fighter pretty difficult.
Despite the infusion of federal aid to the city, the events of September 11, 2001, have driven New York City into a financial crisis not seen since the city considered bankruptcy in the 1970s. A municipal budget gap of $1 billion is expected this year with a possible deficit of $6 billion next year. In response, Mayor Michael Bloomberg is considering not only a mid-year 25 percent increase in the property taxes but also significant restrictions on city expenditures, including the FDNY budget. Among proposals being considered by city fathers are the closing of eight firehouses and elimination of the attendant 50 engine companies.
Fiscal stability may also come on the backs of fire service personnel. One proposal will reduce the number of personnel assigned to some fire apparatus from five to four. Additionally, while no furloughing of fire fighters is likely to be suggested, one new recruit class has already been postponed. Also, because of the current age of many fire fighters, the FDNY is expected to experience an abnormal loss of personnel to retirement in the next few years. Replacement of many of these fire fighters may be slow coming.
In further September 11 fallout, eight FDNY fire fighters recently sued the city, senior municipal officials, and several police officers accusing them of false arrest during a violent confrontation a year ago following a protest march to the WTC site. On November 2, 2001, more than 500 fire fighters took part in a protest march called in response to the city’s decision to reduce the number of personnel assigned to search and rescue work at the WTC site. The eight plaintiffs in the suit, along with several companions and a union official, were arrested after allegedly pushing through barricades and threatening police officers. The protesting fire fighters - angry, stressed, and exhausted - believed that reducing the number of rescuers would undermine efforts to find the bodies of lost comrades. Subsequently, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani ordered all charges against the arrested fire fighters be dropped. The eight fire fighters are claiming in their federal court suit that the police acted unconstitutionally.
“Liar! Liar!” was the chant from about 100 off-duty fire fighters November 18. They were protesting outside a Manhattan museum where author William Langewiesche was autographing his new book, American Ground: Unbuilding the World Trade Center. In the manuscript, Langewiesche accuses some fire fighters at Ground Zero of looting.
According to Langewiesche, construction workers toiling about 50 feet below street level found a FDNY ladder truck filled with blue jeans from The Gap, an apparel store located in the concourse below the twin towers. The jeans were reportedly tagged, folded, and stacked in the truck.
Peter Gorman, president of the Uniformed Fire Officer’s Association, which has organized protests against Langewiesche, said, “For him to insinuate that a fire fighter got off the truck that morning and told his captain, ‘I’ll be right with you Cap, let me go down and grab a couple pair of jeans and I’ll be right back inside’ is disgusting.”
Langewiesche, a veteran journalist, sticks by the looting story but added, “I have nothing against fire fighters. I have great admiration for fire fighters.”
FDNY officials have suggested the merchandise may have blown into the
truck when the towers collapse but other news sources say the existence of
looting at the site - by someone - is undeniable.
Fire fighter participation in community holiday events is commonplace nationwide. In some towns, a fire engine is used to transport Santa Claus at the end of the annual Christmas parade. That is unlikely to happen this year in Stamford, Connecticut, however, where the cry has become, “No contract. No Santa!”
For the past six years Stamford fire fighters have donated their time to help Santa rappel down the side of a building in what was becoming one of the town’s most memorable holiday traditions. In response to what they call “blatant disrespect” shown during contract negotiations, the city’s 263 fire fighters will be boycotting all community holiday celebrations this year.
“Santa stays at the North Pole, not at the fire station,” observed Sandra Goldstein, an event organizer. “We will have a rappelling Santa, and that Santa will be fabulous. We had this before the fire fighters, and we will have it post fire fighters.”
Local 786 of the International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, has been negotiating with the city since their contract expired in spring of 2001. Arbitration in the matter is scheduled for the first of the year.
Mayor Dannel Malloy stated that the tactic would not affect contract negotiations.
“That’s why there’s an arbitration process, because the mayor ain’t Santa
Claus.”
Romagosa, a fire captain, injured his wrist while pulling down ceiling tiles at a fire. The injury was aggravated a few days later at another fire. As a result, he underwent surgery and was granted worker’s compensation benefits. After nearly a year, his treating physician released him to light duty with the limitation that he could not lift with his left arm anything heavier than three pounds. The fire chief ordered Romagosa to report for light duty at the department’s training center. Romagosa reported to the center and was assigned to perform clerical duties. He did, however, continue to receive his fire captain pay.
Nonetheless, Romagosa filed a complaint with the civil service board requesting a hearing concerning his light duty assignment, which he characterized as discriminatory and in violation of Louisiana civil service law. A subsequent letter from Romagosa’s attorney to the city suggested that Romagosa should be required only to perform those duties applicable to his job classification as a fire captain. Consequently, the attorney suggested that Romagosa should either be paid worker’s compensation benefits or sick leave until he was fully released by his physician to full duty as a captain. After receiving this letter, the fire department ordered Romagosa to go home and he began to be paid sick leave.
Subsequently, the worker’s compensation carrier for the city terminated Romagosa’s benefits because of his refusal to perform the light duty work that was offered. Once again, the fire chief ordered Romagosa back to light duty at the training center. Again, he reported and his worker’s compensation benefits were reinstated retroactively. In a hearing before the civil service board, the board concluded that a light duty assignment indeed was not within Romagosa’s job classification as a fire captain. At that point, the fire chief ordered Romagosa back to the fire line. The matter goes up on appeal.
HELD: Romagosa points out that a Louisiana statute provides that every fire fighter who is ill or incapacitated shall be entitled to full pay during that period of illness or incapacitation. He uses this section to argue that an injured fire fighter must either be placed on full pay sick leave or be allowed to work in his normal job classification if able. Prior case law holds, however, that civil service law and workers compensation law are not related. There is no statutory or case law authority in Louisiana suggesting that working outside of one’s job classification is per se a violation of a civil service or worker’s compensation claimant’s constitutional property right in his job classification. By certifying to his inability to work within his job classification and filing a demand for workers compensation benefits, the claimant has effectively removed himself from doing the work of his job. When assigned to light duty, all that changed was a temporary assignment to a different but related job classification. Fire captain has failed to establish a right not to be placed on light duty. [Romagosa v. Lafayette City-Parish Consolidated Government, 824 So.2d 448 (La. Ct. App. 2002)]
The families of two different crime victims filed suit against the county alleging that it was negligent in the manner in which it operated its local 911 emergency telephone system. In the first case, the teenage daughter of Fried became intoxicated at a party with several other teenagers. Ultimately, the daughter was sexually assaulted and abandoned in an area of woods behind a townhouse. One of the teenagers anonymously called the sheriff’s department and reported the location of the girl and requested assistance. The 911 operator took the call and dispatched a deputy sheriff. Because the directions to the teenager’s location were imprecise, the deputy did not find her and terminated the call as an unfound complaint. The teenager subsequently died of hypothermia.
In a second case, Muthukumarana, a female who had been the victim of domestic violence in the past, called the 911 operator when her husband threatened her and her children. Even though the husband was physically beating her at the time, she managed to place the call. The husband ultimately shot their children and himself. Police and ambulances were dispatched to the scene, but it was too late to provide medical aid to the deceased. At the time of the prior domestic violence incident, Muthukumarana had been given an instruction sheet telling her to call 911 if another incident occurred. She filed suit against the county alleging that the call-taker was negligent and responsible for the death of her children. Trial court ruled that no liability existed on the part of the county or 911 personnel in either case. Intermediate court of appeals upheld these determinations and plaintiffs appeal.
HELD: The first question presented is whether the 911 operators enjoy public official immunity from suit under Maryland law. A governmental actor will enjoy a qualified immunity from liability for his non-malicious acts where he is a public official rather than a mere government employee and his tortuous conduct occurred while he was performing discretionary, as opposed to ministerial, acts in furtherance of his official duties. Once established that the individual is a public official and the tort was committed while performing a duty which involved the exercise of discretion, the individual is generally free from liability.
Under Maryland law, a person is a public official if their position was created by law, the holder performs an important public duty, the position calls for the exercise of some portion of sovereign power of the state, and the position has a definite term for which a commission is issued and a bond or oath required. Clearly, under the facts of this case, neither of the 911 operators or dispatchers falls within this category. Thus, they are not immune from suit as public officials. Under Maryland law, to maintain an action in negligence, a plaintiff must assert the following elements: (1) the defendant was under a duty to protect the plaintiff from injury; (2) the defendant breached that duty; (3) the plaintiff suffered actual injury; and (4) the loss or injury proximately resulted from the defendant’s breach of the duty. Duty, in negligence law, has been defined as an obligation, to which the law will give recognition and effect, to confirm to a particular standard of conduct toward another. The existence of a legally recognized duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff is vital to sustaining a cause of action in negligence. However, under the Public Duty Doctrine, when a statute or the common law imposes upon a public entity a duty to the public at large, and not a duty to a particular class of individuals, the duty is not one that is enforceable by an individual. The Public Duty Doctrine is not without limitation, however. It has no application when the court concludes that a statute or the court order has created a special duty or specific obligation to a particular class of persons rather than the public at large.
The plaintiffs in these cases argue that by the 911 operator promising to send a police officer or otherwise asserting that help was on the way, a special duty was created. The argument continues that the duty was breached because the officer in the first case did not find the deceased and in the second case, the dispatch personnel did not handle the call appropriately. However, the role of 911 personnel is not to provide the emergency service the caller needs but to facilitate the response of appropriate resources. The emergency communications call-taker’s primary job is to find out from the caller enough about the emergency to classify the call for appropriate public safety response and to verify the name and address of the caller. Prevailing law throughout the country is not to hold such personnel liable under tort law. The circumstances under which 911 operators function are often quite demanding and some mistakes will occur even when the service is well organized and conscientiously administered. There may be problems with language skills of the caller, or the telephone equipment being used. The caller’s emotional state may affect communication as often the caller is near hysteria. Some callers provide incomplete or false information. Likewise, a problem always exists in interpreting someone else’s statements when the call-taker cannot see what is occurring. Thus, the court concludes that pursuant to the Public Duty Doctrine, a 911 employee generally owes no duty in tort for the negligent performance of his or his duties to an individual in need of emergency telephone services.
Such liability may exist if a special relationship is shown. However, in order for a special relationship between a 911 employee and a person in need of assistance to exist, it must be shown that the 911 employee affirmatively acted to protect or assist the specific individual in need of assistance, thereby inducing specific reliance by the individual upon the employee. Absent the existence of those factors, a special relationship does not exist. In the two cases at hand, no such relationship existed. In the first instance, the dispatcher promised to “send someone out” to assist the teenage girl. But, neither the receipt of a call for help nor the dispatch of emergency assistance by itself creates a special duty to the person in need. The mere fact that an individual has emerged from the general public and become an object of special attention of a public employee does not create a relationship which imposes a special legal duty.
Similarly, in the second case, the failure of the dispatcher to advise Muthukumarana to leave her home and call from a safe location is not actionable. The 911 call-taker in this case did not deviate from department standard operating procedures. Upon receipt of the call, she obtained the address of the house where the disturbance was located, immediately identified it as a domestic violence matter, and routed it to the dispatcher. She then attempted to determine, pursuant to department policy, who was involved, where the husband was located and whether any weapons were present. It was during this process that the husband shot the children and then himself. There is no indication that the call-taker acted negligently in handling this relatively brief call. Likewise, no liability exists because of Muthukumarana’s receipt of an information sheet suggesting she call 911 if she feared for her safety. Such a sheet did not create a special duty between her and the county. Dismissal of cases affirmed. [Muthukumarana v. Montgomery County, 805 A.2d 372 (Md. 2002)]
New York statute provides that fire fighters and police officers injured in the performance of their duties are entitled to the full amount of their wages until the disability ceases as well as payment of all medical expenses. This special worker’s compensation law was more generous than the statute covering most public employees, which created a scheduled compensation and medical expense chart regardless of fault. Legislative history of the special law indicated that the special law was enacted because police officers and fire fighters are exposed to substantial hazards in their performance of their duties. Two police officers, Clements and Rice, were injured and sought full salary and benefits during their time off. Clements injured his back when he slipped and fell while removing police tape that had been used to mark flooding on a municipal street, while Rice injured his elbow when he fell down the stairs at the police station while walking to the locker room. Trial court denied their petitions and the two officers appealed.
HELD: The legislature’s focus in enacting the special worker’s compensation law for fire fighters and police officers was to provide benefits for injuries arising from the heightened risk in duties to which they were exposed in their special work. These functions are key to the criminal justice process, including investigation. This special benefit is in contrast to the general worker’s compensation law. For example, an officer injured during a police department basketball practice might be eligible for the ordinary benefit but not for special benefits because his injury was not of the heightened risk type that arises from the performance of his duties. Prior case law has made it clear that the special benefits are not available for all injuries incurred by police officers in performance of their duties but are limited to the more narrow category of injuries incurred from the performance of special work related to the nature of the heightened risk duties to which officers are exposed. Here, Clements and Rice failed to demonstrate that their respective injuries were sustained in the performance of special work related to the heightened risk of being a police officer. Trial court properly denied their petition for special benefits. Rejection of claim affirmed. [Clements v. Panzarella, 746 N.Y.Supp.2d 495 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)]
Prior to becoming a paid member of the local emergency medical service, Ward had been a volunteer member of the local rescue squad. Upon becoming a paid EMT, she was required to resign from her position with the rescue squad. After her resignation from the rescue squad, however, she was granted the status of honorary member of the squad. Honorary members were not required to respond to emergencies and did not engage in active service. However, they were allowed to return to duty under extenuating circumstances.
In 1999, a hurricane struck the North Carolina coast and did extreme damage. The governor issued a proclamation of disaster and ordered all state and local entities to implement an emergency operation plan. Volunteers and paid emergency workers performed a variety of tasks during this period. During one particular day following the hurricane, Ward was ordered not to report to work as an EMT. Consequently, rather than stay at home and do nothing, she went to the fire department and she began patrolling the beach with some members of the volunteer fire company. During the patrol, they spotted some persons who were on the beach in violation of a curfew. The persons were told to leave the beach. As they were departing the scene, the driver of the Humvee in which Ward and the others were riding accelerated too quickly and lost control of the vehicle. It overturned and Ward sustained injuries as a result of being thrown out of the vehicle. She filed a worker’s compensation claim. Benefits were initially denied her, but eventually the full compensation board granted her an award. Rescue squad and town appeal.
HELD: The question presented is whether Ward, at the time of the
injury was an “emergency management worker” as defined by North Carolina
law and thereby eligible for worker’s compensation benefits. The applicable
statute covers full and part-time paid and volunteer employees of political
subdivisions or any agency that provides emergency management services.
Clearly, Ward fit within this definition.
The town argues that her injury did not arise out of the course of her volunteer
employment but was the result of simply riding for pleasure in the Humvee
vehicle. State emergency management statutes, however, recognize
that part of the emergency process involves the “never ending preparedness
cycle of prevention.” Here, Ward made herself available during the
patrol to assist in the event that emergency services were needed.
By virtue of her status as an honorary rescue squad member, she was accepted
for active duty in the wake of the extenuating circumstances. Specifically,
she was engaged in the “never ending preparedness cycle of prevention” when
the injury occurred. It is irrelevant whether Ward was responding to
a call for help at the actual moment of injury because the need for help
existed on a continuous basis. Award of worker’s compensation benefits
affirmed. [Ward v. Long Beach Volunteer Rescue Squad, 568 S.E.2d 626 (N.C.
Ct. App. 2002)]
fire fighters
The city’s fire fighters recently signed a contract ending months of contentious wrangling that had led to state mediation. Under the agreement, members of Local 1876 of the International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, will receive 2.75 percent wage hikes in each of the next three years. The city domicile requirement was modified to expand the area in which fire fighters may reside outside the city limits.
fire fighters
The eight fire fighters in Local 63 of the Firemen’s Mutual Benevolent Association have a new labor contract with the City of Millville. The retroactive three-year pact grants 3.6 percent wage increases, moving starting pay to $21,709 for 2002. Veteran fire personnel will now draw $50,816. The pact is retroactive to January 1, 2001.
fire fighters
After months of pushing for raises higher than other city workers, the Uniformed Firefighters Association (UFA), IAFF, has reached a tentative accord with the city that will grant pay and benefits changes essentially equal to what police unions recently received. The two-year retroactive contract is worth about 11.75 percent in pay raises. Starting base wage will move to nearly $35,000, with top of scale hitting $54,000. Fire fighters will be credited with a five percent wage hike on the first day of the pact and a compounded five percent in the thirteenth month of the deal. The union will receive a special fund equal to 1.5 percent of overall pay to use for raises and increments. Reportedly, the UFA has agreed to use the funds to increase night differentials and pay of the less senior fire fighters to assist in personnel retention. A back pay check of at least $7,500 will be forthcoming to every fire fighter. Because of the lag time in reaching a settlement, the contract will end immediately upon ratification.
fire fighters
Plant City commissioners recently approved a tentative three-year contract with Local 2103 of the International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO. The union's 30 members must still approve the pact which provides a two percent cost of living raise. Fire fighters could earn an additional three percent in merit pay. The wage change moves the salary range to between $25,445 and $38,946 annually.
fire fighters
A tentative three-year labor deal has been reached between Portland and the city's fire union, Local 43 of the International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO. Economic gains include a 2.2 percent cost of living (COLA) hike the first year and a one percent pay raise on top of the calculated COLA in each of the next two years. Veterans with more than 23 years service will receive longevity raises as well. Starting pay moves to about $32,400 while a five-year veteran will earn a base just over $58,600. In a unique provision, the parties compromised on the issue of fire fighters conducting fire inspections and entering the resultant information into the city record system. Under the contract, an experiment will be conducted. One-third of the reports will be typed into the computer by fire fighters, one-third will be entered by civilian staff and light duty personnel, and one-third will be downloaded from handheld computers. If the last method proves preferable, the city has agreed to purchase Palm Pilots and software for the task.