Firefighters will accept a two-year wage freeze under a tentative contract deal announced today by Mayor Jim Suttle.
However, a major part of the new contract was not announced.Suttle said today he's still working with the union on how to address a $500 million shortfall in the police and fire pension fund.
As part of the agreement announced today, firefighters accepted wage freezes in 2009 and 2010 — which Suttle termed “a major contribution from our firefighters to help address our city's budget shortfall.”
The city has projected budget shortfalls for 2009 and 2010. It has said wage freezes for the police, fire and civilian unions would save $5 million a year.
Under the deal, firefighters would receive wage increases of between 3.25 percent and 5.75 percent in 2011, 2012 and 2013.
Suttle announced the five-year agreement with fire union president
Steve LeClair, who called the deal a “positive step.” “We needed a consensus and that's where we're at today,” LeClair said.
Other key details of the union contract still need to be worked out, including how to address the pension fund shortfall, pension benefits and minimum staffing levels for the Fire Department.
The mayor said he hoped to have a final contract ready to announce in the next two to four weeks. “We still have a lot of rolling up the sleeves to do,” Suttle said.
He said the pay hikes for the last three years of the contract were included based on the assumption that the economy would turn around and on projected rates of inflation.
Firefighters and the City Council will have to sign off on the final terms of the contract.
One other issue affecting the Fire Department could be settled by the council next week, when it votes on whether to repeal a minimum staffing ordinance.
The ordinance mandates the number of firefighters assigned to trucks, as well as the number of fire engines, aerial trucks and medic units in operation and the number of firefighters staffing administrative bureaus.
At a public hearing Tuesday, several firefighters spoke, calling the ordinance essential to their safety, but they were outnumbered by citizens speaking on both sides of the issue.
Those in favor of the repeal included Jim Grotrian of the Greater Omaha Chamber of Commerce, who said losing the ordinance would give the city better flexibility to manage its budget. Others questioned why the Fire Department was immune from budget cuts.
Vicky McHugh of Omaha captured the sentiment of those wanting to keep the ordinance with her question to the council: “Why would we repeal a law that protects public safety?”
Councilman Franklin Thompson introduced the proposal to repeal the minimum staffing ordinance about a week after the same proposal from Councilman Ben Gray failed on a close vote, 4-3.
Both councilmen sought to repeal the ordinance, passed in 2000, to give the city more leeway in finding cuts in the Fire Department and more negotiating room at contract time. Similar language also exists in the fire contract, meaning that truck staffing, the ordinance's most controversial aspect, will remain the same — a minimum of four to a truck — unless the contract is changed.
LeClair said some may believe “firefighters don’t give a damn about the City of Omaha,” but that’s not the case. “We’re going to try to do everything we can to make sure we have a good, solvent city moving toward the future,” he said.
World-Herald staff writer Lynn Safranek contributed to this report.
Copyright ©2012 Omaha World-Herald®. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, displayed or redistributed for any purpose without permission from the Omaha World-Herald.
