The Daily Herald has an article stating the Buffalo Grove joins with other municipalities in opposing HB 5485:
Buffalo Grove Village President Jeffrey Braiman has joined the chorus of municipal leaders opposing state legislation that could subject firefighter staffing levels to arbitration. Braiman this week said House Bill 5485, otherwise known as the Minimum Manning Bill, would negatively impact the village budget and firefighter response times — and even might force the village to close one of its three fire stations.
Currently, the decision of staffing levels rests in the hands of department management. But under the bill, if a municipality or fire district and the union representing its firefighters cannot agree on staffing, the matter would be turned over to arbitration.
The arbitrator, Braiman said, “isn’t an investor in our community, who will not have the expertise in firefighting and finance to make logical and appropriate decisions.”
Braiman noted, however, that the proposed changes would not afford the village’s firefighters better wages and benefits, nor would it increase their pensions. It also would not improve response times, Braiman said. “Clearly, getting more persons into a vehicle will not get it there any faster,” he said.
The bill ultimately could force the village to add firefighters at a time when it is trying to manage its workforce and constrain costs, Braiman said. Requiring one more person per fire truck per shift would cost the village as much as $1.3 million a year, he said, forcing spending cuts elsewhere or a tax increase.
Fire Chief Terry Vavra said he also does not favor the bill.
“I think Mr. Braiman made some very valid points,” he said. “I don’t know that this is the answer.”
However, in a letter to legislators, the Mount Prospect firefighters union states that opponents of the bill “are attempting to mislead lawmakers and have stated opinions that simply are not true.” “The working conditions of a firefighter are inherently dangerous and safe staffing levels have an enormous impact on our safety, and ultimately the safety of the very citizens I have sworn to protect,” the letter adds.
thanks Dan
Pingback: State legislation concerns local municipalities (more) « chicagoareafire.com
#1 by Operator 57 on April 28, 2014 - 9:24 PM
Let the trained experienced professionals decide what proper staffing for each individual enity. The politicians will just reroute money they should have been putting into pensions as agreed , into pork barrel projects. Otherwise let a fireman or police officer be injured or killed and when the litigation hits, let those same politicians explain to the jury they equated human life and safety to money, THE JURY WILL EAT THEM ALIVE.
Pingback: State legislation concerns local municipalities (more) « chicagoareafire.com
#2 by Mike on April 28, 2014 - 10:48 AM
http://southtownstar.suntimes.com/opinions/27057585-474/forum-setting-things-straight.html#.U11rkTe9KSO
#3 by Mike on April 28, 2014 - 9:56 AM
All these articles about the minimum manning bill is nothing but a waste of ink and time. Minimum manning has been a mandatory subject of bargaining since 1986. All year people crying about how it’s going to break their budgets are full of it. What this bill does is codify and clean up the existing language. Firehouses are not going to close and villages are not going to go bankrupt from this. Manning is about everyone’s safety and the fact that you need people to get tasks done on the fireground. There are national standards NFPA 1500, 1710, OSHA 2 in/ 2 out and even AHA guidelines for CPR that makes us need to have certain amount of personnel on scene. MABAS is not the answer to allowing departments to short staff thee departments. It is there to assist departments during a major emergency, not to be your second ambulance because your town chose to cut it’s department. I always ask this an no one ever answers this but I ask you. How many firefighters do you think is needed to provide safe and efficient services to your community.