AJ Smith talking during council meetings

 

For everyone's info asbestos doesn't grow it is inorganic.

 

Asbestos is a mineral fiber that has been used commonly in a variety of building construction materials for insulation and as a fire-retardant.

 

 

 

Look around and you will take note Middletown is becoming a non profit, public sector network. That's alot of fat and tenure there, that will be bloated and expected to protect itself by others that vote for these levies, and wasted spending.

 

Instead of recruiting indiviauls to run for office, why not recruit those tough guys and gals down in West Chester that soundly get the message to the schools and city halls who runs city hall? Maybe then Middletown would change. Bill, MUM will be here because they have tenured profs, the good life with all the baggage of pensions and money with no worries about career ending, job cuts, so inspite of any competition, MUM and Cinci State will happily co-exist. ROI is a foreign concept in the city, its leaders, and to the two schools which will occupy downtown. 

 

 

 

 

 

And I have to pose the obvious question--why is it that AJ and Anita Scott Jones refuse to entertain the notion that cuts have to be made to the police and fire budgets, which comprise over 70% (public safety) of the city budget?  If times are tight and you need to spend less money, wouldn't you look at the area at which 70% of your income is spent and seriously think about cutting spending there? 

 

This seems like a no-brainer to me--if the unions won't accept less than a 3% raise (though it's really more than that when you consider the rising cost of health care--10% or more each year--that the city continues to cover) then that 3% raise has to come at the expense of a few of the positions.  And in my opinion, the first place to cut is at the fire department, which AJ seems so desperate to protect (again, making my point about his compromised status as a city council member). 

 

Can anyone explain to me why fire fighters work 24-hour shifts (other than the fact that it allows them to work other part time jobs)?  Can anyone explain to me why they have to accompany ambulances most or all of the time?  Can anyone explain to me why these guys feel like they're entitled to a 3%+ raise when city tax revenues are flat to declining and the private sector is hemorrhaging jobs and barely paying cost of living increases? 

 

I suppose I sound like I'm coming off as a firefighter-hater, and that's not entirely accurate.  I do want professional (non-union) firefighters who are well-compensated for their time, expertise and bravery under potentially very risky conditions.  I just happen to believe that we can get by just fine with fewer of them. 

 

Can anyone tell me where I'm wrong on this, and to my point about AJ and Anita, why some of our city leadership can't see this?  I agree with Anita on the police issue (a crime-free city is a must before economic development takes hold), but can we please have an adult conversation about whether some people in the city have to be laid off?  For further consideration on this issue, I'd ask any of you to research Harrisburg, PA and tell me if Middletown isn't potentially headed in this direction if cost-cutting measures aren't taken seriously. 

 

(If the DESIGN costs a hundred Gs, how much do you think the actual "enhancements" will totally cost???  What was just authorized is just the start!!!)

 

I will try to answer your questions about fire fighters.

 

 

We work 24 hours a shift every third day.  That averages out to 56 hours per week.  My contract is for 51 hours per week.  To reduce my workweek from 56 hours per week to 51 hours per week, I get one 24 hour shift off every 33 days.  A 51 hour per week fire fighter makes the same amount of money as the 40 hour per week daystaff worker.  If you would like me to work a regular 8 hour day, you would have to hire approximately 27 more fire fighters to cover the same amount of hours.  It is beneficial to the City to we work 24 hour shifts.

 

Can anyone explain to me why they have to accompany ambulances most or all of the time? 

 

We don't have to "accompany ambulances", we choose to.  When we receive a call that is potentially life-threatening, we send extra help in the form of an engine company.  Within the Division of Fire, all but 3 members are paramedics.  That means if the engine company shows up first, we can start the same treatment as if the ambulance staffed by 2 paramedics had shown up.  If the ambulance arrives first, the engine company will assist if needed or the ambulance can disregard the engine company.  We feel it is better to send extra help in the beginning instead of having to wait for help to arrive once the ambulance determines help is needed.

 

 

We negotiate a contract with the City and they agreed to pay us the amount we receive.  Negotiation is largely based on comparative wages.  I don't know if the City has asked us to forgo a raise in '11 or not.  Do you know what fire fighters make at present?  What do you feel is "well-compensated"? 

 

 

I don't think you sound like a firefighter-hater.  I think you sound like a concerned citizen looking for answers.  Do you think I am not a professional because I belong to a Union?  Do you think current fire fighters should be well-compensated for being put into "very risky conditions"?  How many fire fighters should the City employ?  Do you have a working knowledge how we operate?  Stop in a fire house and ask fire fighters your questions, we would be glad to answer them.

 

Ashkicker

 

 

Thank you very much for your answers.  I do appreciate your input and willingness to respond to my questions. 

 

You posed a few questions to me, and I'd like to answer them and offer a few more points as well. 

 

First off, to me "well-compensated" would be (given Middletown's cost of living considerations and the level of training that firefighters must attain) a starting salary of about $40,000-$45,000 per year, rising to about $90,000-$100,000 over the course of a career, in today's dollars.  For the chief and other leadership positions, I wouldn't mind paying $120,000 or more.  And actually it wouldn't bother me at all if Middletown had the highest salaries of any fire department in the area--this would be a good selling point when trying to lure the best possible employees to the city.  So that's what I consider well-compensated--at or near the highest pay levels in the area for comparable skill sets.  I would imagine that the numbers I've thrown out there are fairly similar to what is being paid out now to our firefighters, but as I said, on an individual basis it wouldn't bother me if they were higher--it's the large collective spend that is troublesome.  We as a city should seek to get the most highly motivated fire professionals to fill the ranks, since I am certain you get the most bang for your buck when you ask more of people (but pay more) than you do by simply paying average or below-average salaries but staffing with additional people.  It's simply easier for people to "coast" in such an environment.  I can't imagine many of your fellow firefighters would be opposed to such a high-compensation/high-expectation philosophy, and those who are might just be those who prefer to coast.

 

Next, to your point about 24-hour shifts--I must say, I am skeptical of this.  I will accept that you are at the station for a period of 24 consecutive hours as your scheduled workday, but how much actual work is being accomplished during this time?  How much of the 24 hours is spent sleeping or eating?  I don't blame you for sleeping or needing to eat during such a lengthy span (anyone would do the same), but I have to seriously question whether the 24-hour shift gives the city the best possible coverage for responding to emergencies.  There's no way a person can be fully alert and functional for such a long period of time.  Even working a 16-hour day at a desk is very tiresome for anyone, much less if you have to exert yourself the way firefighters are asked to do.  This is the only profession I've ever heard of that schedules in such a way--would we ask our police departments to work a similar sort of shift?  Certainly not, since a person could not effectively function for such a long period of time.  I don't necessarily claim to have the answer to this, so maybe I shouldn't complain, but I have a hunch that having, say, 3 or 4 12-hour shifts each week, with another "on-call" shift would be a more effective way of covering the city.  Maybe this has been extensively studied and maybe I'm wrong, but I am certain that there are not 24 hours worth of productivity occuring for each person during each of their shifts. 

 

As far as the negotiated contracts--I agree with you, the city agreed to pay you "x" so they ought to live up to their end of the deal.  And I agree that they should.  The problem, as I understand it, is this: if the city and the union can't come to an agreement on a deal, the matter goes to binding arbitration (according to Ohio law) and the matter is settled, generally in favor of the union.  If I don't have my facts straight then please let me know and fill me in.  This clearly makes it difficult for the city to negotiate from a strong position if the union knows that the arbitrator will rule in their favor. 

 

Finally as to the union aspect of things--I am quite certain that a person can be very "professional" in their demeanor and the way they go about their work while still belonging to a union.  So it's not the individual effort or expertise that bothers me, it's the "us vs. them" mentality that a union tends to promote.  But I will give credit where credit is due--I am proud of the fact that I never read about our union leaders in the paper taking up such a militant anti-city position as some union leaders do (the former police union head of Cincinnati comes to mind, although her name escapes me at present).  As far as I can tell our union and city have a good working relationship and there isn't the angst present that some cities have to deal with.  So I commend your leadership in that aspect.  But I am of the opinion that a person ought to rely on their education, their training, their commitment and their value to the organization as a basis for their continued employment, not the threat of a strike or union grievance. 

 

Consider this--why doesn't the military unionize?  Is there something that feels wrong about that?  If so, what?  It certainly feels wrong to me, and I would argue that it's because the military, not unlike police and fire employees, are expected to be committed to serving their community and a higher cause of protecting the citizenry.  You are held to a higher standard because of our dependence upon you, and no doubt when we're in need we expect you to be there, no questions asked.  And for that I am grateful, don't get me wrong.  But if there's that wedge between the fire/police union members and the democratically elected city leadership then there's a serious problem.  (Again, I don't perceive any major divisiveness in Middletown, but in my opinion the threat of that is ever-present with a union relationship, particularly in tough times). 

 

That's my perspective.  I would be glad to read yours or other responses.