It’s time
– given the budgetary vise the city finds itself in and the
resurrection of the debate regarding binding arbitration – to
explain where I stand and why.
It’s time – given the budgetary vise the city finds itself in and the resurrection of the debate regarding binding arbitration – to explain where I stand and why.
For starters, it’s important to know that police officers and firefighters intrinsically have my respect. When I see the badge and the uniform, that’s how I feel – respectful and grateful. Those are symbols of honor and courage until proven otherwise. That is exactly how, I believe, most Gilroyans feel: Due to the essential nature of the job, the people who do it should be respected and valued.
The occupation also comes with a personal satisfaction for those in blue, both in the intrinsic nature of the job and in the work itself. Officers and firefighters come to the rescue. Often people are most grateful for their services and remember their efforts against the backdrop of a trying personal time – officers on scene at a car accident involving a loved one; a medical call responded to by trained firefighters. Besides giving comfort and aid, officers and firefighters have the opportunity to act heroically.
There is great value in those aspects of their jobs, and it goes far beyond the monetary realm. As a community and as a society, we would hope that our firefighters and police officers choose their careers not based on monetary values. We know that the men and women serving in our armed forces do not choose the career for the pay and benefits, or the ability to retire early or double dip into the public trough for personal gain.
In fact, it’s that choice which accords our soldiers such great respect and gratitude.
That said, practical matters for police officers and firefighters cannot and should not be ignored. But neither should money be the driving force in the choice of a public safety career or in the reason for continuing it. Decent wages and benefits, as well as training and opportunity, should be a part of our city’s program.
That outlines my fundamental beliefs. Next are refinements.
Distinguishing public safety jobs, or distinguishing between, say, a police officer and a building inspector, should not be difficult for our city leaders. Simply applying common sense and real-world experience should yield a clear understanding.
Building inspectors do not have to roll up to a dark-windowed automobile at 2 a.m. and be on guard because this might not turn out to be a routine car stop. It might be a criminal with a gun, and though you’ve called for back-up, it doesn’t always work out as planned. Neither does the inspector have to show up at a violent domestic disturbance or a burglary in progress.
While the building inspector’s job should be valued, clearly the police officer’s job – even with the rewards intrinsic in the job – deserves more compensation comparatively.
When comparing firefighters in Gilroy to police officers, the same logical distinctions should be made by the City Council.
Firefighters – along with paramedics from the ambulance service – arrive at calls. There are few fires in Gilroy – fewer even of the dangerous variety. Far and away, most calls to firefighters are for medical aid. Firefighters aren’t chasing gangsters with guns, they aren’t making 2 a.m. car stops and they aren’t dealing with high-speed pursuits. Yet, often they “want what the police officers have” when it comes to pay and benefits.
Ironically, the firefighters have worked the system to such a degree that arcane rules about overtime pay, in particular, allow them to soak up the city’s cash. In 2006-’07, for example, firefighter Jim Buessing received $31,420.45 in overtime pay. That’s puny compared to Colin Martin’s $36,931.91 in OT. Amazingly, even battalion chiefs – the guys just below the chief in our fire department – are eligible for overtime pay.
But back to the point: Gilroy police officers should be compensated on a higher level than firefighters in every aspect. There aren’t four officers to a police car as there are to a fire engine, and the job is light years more dangerous and stressful.
Still, neither the police officers nor the firefighters should be compensated at current levels where more than 75 percent of the entire city budget is devoted to their departments.
That’s why binding arbitration should be repealed by the voters. The public safety unions currently hold the hammer with the ability to send our city’s fiscal future into the hands of an outside attorney who is not accountable to residents.
How would we resolve disputes? The same way we did before (and even since) binding arbitration, by hammering out a fair agreement.
Gilroy is at a crossroads. We can’t afford the current city compensation levels without drastically cutting – again – the number of employees. Hopefully, the unions will give ground across the board and save most of those jobs. Using up the reserves at this point would be the utmost folly. Reserves are not there for ongoing salary and benefit expenses.
Lastly – and though it would be most unfortunate – the Council should not just look at contracting for fire services, as it currently is, but view the inquiry as a more-than-likely necessary change.
