The following grievances are pending arbitration:

1. 8 hour OT Grievance

2. Short Week Long Week Grievance

3. MFRI Testing Grievance.

4. NREMT Testing Grievance

We have had our first meeting with the City and OLRCB regarding implementation of the EMS Task Force Recommendations. Further meetings will be scheduled and we expect to commence both negotiations over some topics, and impact & effects bargaining for others. Updates to come.

Power Point presentation prepared by the DC Retirement Board regarding the plans for retirement transition.

PDF of Grievance filed against NREMT Testing. The Agency has denied the grievance, and we will be taking this to arbitration.

These are the documents handed out on the Friday 5/9/2008 meeting

These are the documents handed out at the last Friday Meeting

A Step 3 Group Grievance has been filed regarding the testing process at MFRI and a copy can be found on the link above. This grievance is now pending arbitration. Among the resolutions requested are destruction of all test data and reimbursement for driving POV to MFRI.

During a recent hearing before the Judiciary Committee the chief of DCFEMS stated, in responds to a question by Council-member Cheh, that civilian EMS personnel of the agency salaries exceeded that of their uniform firefighter counterparts.  He qualified this statement by claiming that he was advised of this by the Director of the Office of Labor Relations and Collective Bargaining, Natasha Campbell.  

Dear Council Members Mendelson, Cheh and Schwartz:

 

A concern has been raised about the accuracy of statements made at the Fire & EMS recent oversight hearing before the Committee on the Judiciary on 2/12/08.  (See attached email dated February 13, 2008, from Mr. Kenneth Lyons, President AFGE Local 3721).  The issue under discussion in the exchange between myself and Councilmember Cheh, was the very important issue of pay and benefits parity between single-role and multi-role personnel. As you know, the Mayor’s EMS Task Force Recommendation 1 (d) states: “All employees shall have the same basic pay and benefits.  The City Administrator shall develop a plan, no later than March 31, 2008, to transition to pay and benefits parity between single-role medical providers and dual-role providers.”  I have supreme confidence that the City Administrator, working in conjunction will the appropriate stakeholders, will meet this deadline.  I also pledge to do my very best to implement this plan and achieve this important objective.  

 

Mr. Lyons questions the basis for statements I made at the hearing discussing the current comparative gross pay between single-role and multi-role providers.  I thank him for raising the question, and I am happy to outline the basis for these statements.

 

First, a technical correction.  My staff has reviewed the segment of the hearing referenced in the email and has found that one technical clarification needs to be made.  I misspoke when I stated that overtime for single-role providers begins when they exceed 8 hours in work day.  This is incorrect.  Overtime or compensatory time for single-role personnel is earned under the following conditions: 

 

• Comp Unit 1, non-supervisory single-role personnel on compressed work schedules do not begin receiving overtime or compensatory time pay until they have worked more than 48 hours in a long week, or 36 hours in a short week.  The normal rule for work in excess of eight hours in day or 40 hours in a week does not apply, as the 12-hour shift is considered to be part of the scheduled tour-of-duty.  

 

• Single-role EMS supervisors on compressed schedules receive overtime pay or compensatory time for authorized work in excess of forty (40) hours in a pay status in a work week. 

 

I can assure you that this technical error was unintentional, and please let the record reflect the accurate facts.  On the substantive issue being discussed however, that of comparative gross pay between single-role and multi-role providers, the facts as stated are correct.    

 

There is no argument that there are significant disparities in benefits for single-role providers versus multi-role providers, as they currently participate in different retirement systems, as was described in my testimony.  The issue of pay parity, however, is far more complex.  The most simplistic analyses of pay parity between single versus multi-role personnel simple look at the base salaries as listed in the DCHR pay schedules for the two different groups and draw conclusions based upon those data points.  However, the base salaries for single-role providers in as listed in the pay schedule do not reflect numerous structural components which increase the actual take-home pay of these personnel.  These items include: Night Differential: 10% premium for hours worked on a regularly scheduled tour of duty falling between 1800—0600 hrs; and Sunday Premium: 25% premium for hours worked on a regularly scheduled tour of duty between 0000—2400 hrs on Sunday.  These two structural components do not exist for multi-role personnel (firefighters).  In addition, single-role providers earn overtime or compensatory time at a time-and-a-half rate, while firefighters commonly earn overtime or compensatory time at a straight time rate. 

 

These structural components can comprise a significant portion of actual earnings for single-role providers.  For example, an independent analysis of real take-home gross pay for single-role EMS supervisors conducted by DCHR in June 2007 analyzed the earnings of EMS supervisors for calendar year 2006 and found that on average, single-role supervisors earned an additional 30% above their base salaries with overtime and premium pay. 

 

An external analysis of gross pay for all members of FEMS, using a selection of pay periods from CY2007, conducted by the Office of the City Administrator in June 2007 found that while base salaries for firefighters are generally higher than that of their single-role peers, at all levels below that of Lieutenant, single-role providers actually earned more than their peer counterpart firefighters at both the median and 90^th percentile level.:^[1] 

 

• Single-role EMTs                     Median: $54K, 90^th Percentile: $68K: 
• Firefighter/EMTs                      Median: $53K, 90^th Percentile: $65K

 

• Single-role Paramedics           Median: $73K, 90^th Percentile: $111K
• Firefighter Paramedics            Median: $70K, 90^th percentile: $95K

 

• EMS Preceptor                         Median: $78K, 90^th percentile: $132K
• Fire Sergeant                          Median: $85K, 90^th percentile: $112K

 

For supervisors*, the numbers were:

 

• Supervisory Paramedic           Median: $88K, 90^th percentile: $116K
• Fire Lieutenant                        Median: $99K, 90^th percentile: $114K
• Fire Captain                             Median: $116K, 90^th Percentile: $133K

 

*Note that after this analysis was completed, a compensation change was implemented on 10/03/08 to increase the salary of all current single-roleEMS supervisors (Management Supervisory Service employees-MSS) to reduce the impact of step compression and to move their salaries closer to a comparable range within the MSS salary schedule to that of their peer fire officers.

 

The specific reasons that actual take home pay for single-role providers so often exceeds that of their peer multi-role counterparts are multi-factorial.  As I noted during the hearing, these reasons include structural pay components (such as Sunday premium pay and night differential) that are unique to civilian personnel and are not received by firefighters.  In addition, single-role providers earn overtime or compensatory time at a time-and-a-half rate, while firefighters commonly earn overtime or compensatory time at a straight time rate. All of these findings require further detailed analysis and discussion, but I think that you will agree that any truly valid comparative analysis of pay issues between the two groups (or between various sub-groups) must also look at actual earnings versus simply comparing base salaries from a pay schedule. As we work together to solve the issues of pay and benefits parity, I know that you will agree with me that it is critically important that we seek the most accurate understanding of the underlying issues.

 

Thank you for allowing me to present additional information to inform our analysis of these complex and challenging issues, and I thank you for your continued support as we work to maintain a fair and equitable workplace, and strive to improve the quality of emergency medical services in the District of Columbia.

 

Sincerely Yours,

 

Dennis Rubin, Fire/EMS Chief

 

I appreciate Chief Rubin's admission that he "misspoke" on the issue of the Compensation 1 and 2 article regarding tour of duty compensation during the Judiciary hearing on February 12th.  The local and its membership will also accept that this error was not intentional and was impart caused by a staff  unfamiliar with a Comp 1 and 2 agreement that is  more than three years old.  

However, there appears to be continued confusion demonstrated by the agency regarding the Rosenbaum EMS Task-force Recommendation and should be corrected.  As stated in a previous correspondence Recommendation 1 (d) states..."All employees shall have the same BASIC  pay and benefits.  The City Administrator shall develop a plan, no later than March 31, 2008, to transition to pay and benefits parity between current single-role medical providers and dual-role providers."  This recommendation is quite clear and simple so I will attempt to demonstrate the same clarity.

The term "Basic" can best be defined by reviewing the District of Columbia Salary Schedule for Comp Unit 1 and 2 as well as the Fire Service pay schedule.  This defines an employee's yearly "take home" pay/salary and in the event of retirement (with the exception of the post October 1987 employee), the amount that an employee's percentage of retirement will be based upon.  It will not include overtime as defined by the Fair Labor Standard Act (FLSA) or make unfair assessments based upon incorrect Grade and Step comparisons or median pay schemes, but simply what an employee earns yearly.  However, the chief attempts to play the numbers game and by a slight of hand manipulate the figures while conveniently neglecting to mention in his assessment that in addition to what is negotiated by his fire suppression brethren, is a longevity component that increases their yearly salaries starting in the fifteenth year by 5% and topping out at 20% at 30 years of service.  This is not overtime, this is longevity pay that is it factored into their base pay.  This increase will also be factored into their retirement percentage unlike the EMS civilian employee hired before 1987 (Civil Service) or the EMS employee (post 1987) that currently takes part in the Defined Contribution Plan, the retirement plan that many of the staff members employed by the council are part of.

An in-depth comparison of  the base pay of civilian EMS providers and firefighters can be viewed in the attachment below.  Unlike the chiefs figures, overtime is not included because it is not factored in the employees base pay or retirement percentage assessment.  However, the firefighter LONGEVITY PAY is included in their retirement assessment starting at year 15 @ 5%, year 20 @ 10%, year 25 @ 15% and year 30 @ 20%.  Again, I would emphasize that these increases (LONGEVITY PAY) are in addition to any negotiated increases that firefighter may receive. 

How the District of Columbia demonstrates its appreciation to the many EMS civilian providers following years of dedicated service, should not be to deny them the opportunity to care for themselves and their families, but through comparable/competitive pay and a humane retirement and benefits and not through the slight of hand demonstrated by a Fire Department's leadership that continues to ignore the personal sacrifices by these individuals.

Kenneth Lyons, President

AFGE Local 3721

This is the Rosenbaum EMS Task Force Final Report as presented to the Mayor

Summary of EMS Task Force Recommendations

Recommendation 1:  One Force, One Standard

The Department of Fire and Emergency Medical Services shall transition to a

fully integrated, all-hazards agency.

- Same basic requirements for all EMS and fire personnel through basic

training courses, while maintaining various levels of specialization within

the force.

- Basic pay and benefits parity between current single-role medical providers

and dual-role providers.

Recommendation II: Raise EMS Standards Through Strong Leadership

Reform Department structure to elevate and strengthen the EMS mission.

- Appointment of Assistant Chief for EMS - appoint an Assistant Chief for

Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responsible for analysis and planning for

all medical units, including strategic planning, budgeting, program

evaluation, special operations, and prevention.

- Maintain Medical Director -Medical Director at the rank of Assistant Fire

Chief will provide medical oversight for all aspects of emergency medical

services provided by FEMS.

- More EMS Management - increase number of EMS Battalion Chiefs and Captains who are specialized EMS providers at various levels of the agency and update current standards for EMS personnel and protocols.

Recommendation III: Improve Patient Services

Improve the level of compassionate, professional, clinically competent

patient care through enhanced training and education, performance

evaluation, quality assurance, and employee qualifications and discipline.

- Training and Education - comprehensive training and educational programs for

emergency medical technicians and paramedics as well as evaluation of

current employee proficiency.

- Performance Evaluations with Excellence in Mind - annual clinical

performance evaluation of all personnel with medical certification based on

clearly documented protocols for patient care.

- Quality Assurance - institute a comprehensive system to assess quality of

EMS service with an eye to improving response time evaluation and overall

quality of EMS service.

Recommendation IV: Enhance Emergency Responsiveness

Enhance responsiveness and crew readiness by revising deployment and

staffing procedures.

- Response Time Evaluation - 100 percent compliance with National Fire

Protection Association Standards to achieve more rapid transport responses.

- Employee Preparedness - consider shorter shifts for all employees and other

recommendations to ensure employee alertness.

- Continuity of Service - assign employees to ambulance duty for fixed

periods.

- District-wide Coverage - enable an adequate number of units to meet response

time targets and provide coverage when any area of the District is short

staffed.

- Service Delivery Alternatives - make full range of District vehicles and

personnel available for EMS service.

Recommendation V: Improve Public Education and Coordination

Reduce misuse of EMS and delays in patient transfers by ensuring public

awareness, interagency coordination and hospital accessibility.

- Patient Outreach and Education -develop a public education program about

appropriate use of the 911 system to teach patients with chronic needs about

services available to them and how to most efficiently and rapidly get

emergency medical services.

- 911 Service Employee Training - ensure that call takers and dispatchers have

improved training and enhanced ability to distinguish between emergency and

non-emergency medical calls.

- Hospital Partnerships - District government will meet regularly with local

hospitals to clarify and improve issues such as drop times, diversion, and

closure, and to improve procedures for tracking patient outcomes.

Recommendation 6: Increased Oversight for Enhanced Enforcement

Strengthen Department of Health (DOH) oversight of emergency medical

services.

- Improved Oversight of Emergency Service Providers - draft legislation or

regulations or other administrative actions to improve oversight of all EMS

providers and ambulance companies in the District of Columbia to include

certification and reporting requirements through DOH.

- Adoption of National Transportation Standards - immediate adoption of the

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration standards for EMS

certification at all levels of training and as the minimum standard for the

District of Columbia.

Click on the Title to Download

Little Style and No Substance

CONTACT:  Kenneth Lyons, President AFGE Local 3721 president@local3721.org

Having watched closely the progression of the Rosenbaum incident from within the DC Fire Department, I was resigned to be silent as the process proceeded. Even during the 15 months that it required for a trial board (comprised of career firefighters and not one medical professional that could be regarded as objective) to render a decision resulting in anything from a slap on the wrist to termination only have the final outcome be determined by an assistant chief, I maintained my silence.  So as to the disciplinary process itself I will not comment and allow those involved the benefit of due process.  

However, I cannot remain silent as the President of the IAFF Local 36 Firefighters union, Daniel Dugan a career firefighter and not a medical professional, attempts to articulate his opinion as if it were fact, all the while intimating that it was the fault of the hospital, the Inspector General, the media and even Mr. Rosenbaum for choosing to take a stroll on a crisp evening in January 6, 2006.  But we all know what they say about opinions, so I will not give mine, just the facts.

Firefighter Dugan, President of the firefighters union makes the point that, “In truth, there was no bleeding or other observable signs of trauma.” This, according to Firefighter Dugan was the reason that the trial board, comprised of firefighters, rendered a decision that would later be endorsed by the Assistant Fire Chief of Operations, himself a career firefighter.  

What Firefighter Dugan, President of the career firefighters union fails to mention was that the call was dispatched as a “Man Down”, and according to emergency medical technician training, a patient found on the ground is to be regarded as a trauma patient until proven otherwise.  If career firefighter and local 36 President Dugan would take the time to review the District of Columbia State Medical Protocols, particularly Section A of the General Patient Guidelines under Trauma Patient Assessment, he would know that the treatment of a patient found on the ground, especially with altered mental status, is very specific, whether the injury is obvious or not.  However Lieutenant Dugan concludes, “Without any visible injuries to Mr. Rosenbaum, the firefighters reasonably concluded that his condition was attributable to alcohol consumption.”  Which brings me to my second medical fact.

In 20 years as a Paramedic I have attended to many patients that have appeared to be intoxicated, and even possessed the smell of alcohol on their breath. According to Firefighter Dugan’s version patient assessment, one should logically conclude that such a patient would deserve nothing more than a ride to the hospital without further assessment or concern. However, what we do know from eyewitness accounts and the patient care report as detailed in the media, was that Mr. Rosenbaum was exhibiting increasing altered mental status accompanied with repeated episodes of vomiting. Let’s stop here for a second: remember that smell of alcohol found on the patient, on the ground, experiencing altered mental status (GCS-3). Those of us who regard ourselves as medical professionals have a saying, “Altered mental status in an elderly patient is head or heart until proven otherwise.” 

The District of Columbia State Medical Protocols, under the heading of, Adult Medical Emergencies: Altered Mental Status [Non-traumatic] again has specific guidelines for the treatment of such patients. Among other treatment and assessment requirements is a test to be performed on patients presenting in this manner: blood glucose check. This is a simple 30 second test to determine the value of the blood sugar of the patient. Why you may ask? Because, even assuming, as Firefighter/President Dugan suggests, that there was no blood or obvious injury, you had an elderly patient with altered mental status.  Alcohol would be the ABSOLUTELY LAST THING to be considered the cause of the patient’s condition, even if the smell was present, (Diabetic Ketoacidosis anyone).

Firefighter Dan Dugan, President of the IAFF Local 36 firefighters union espouses medical opinion as if he were a medical expert and not primarily a firefighter.  However if Dan Dugan feels so strongly on this issue, on June 18^th, 2007 there will be an EMS Task-force meeting where the Mayor, City Administrator, Attorney General, representatives from the Rosenbaum family and members of the community will be in attendance.  It is here where Firefighter Dugan can articulate to these individuals why “this culture of indifference” is regarded as “…an offense, not only to these two men but to all firefighters”, but not an offense to the Rosenbaum family and to the community at large who are tired of these excuses.

Kenneth Lyons, President
AFGE Local 3721