STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS OF ) ORLANDO, LOCAL 1365, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
vs. ) CASE NO. 75-111
) PERC NO. 8H-RC-756-1036 CITY OF ORLANDO, FIRE DEPARTMENT, )
)
Respondent. )
)
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings by its duly designated Hearing Officer, Stephen F. Dean, held a public hearing on the above matter on April 24 and 25, 1975, in the Commissioner Chambers, Orange County Courthouse, Orlando, Florida, and on April 28, 29, and 30, 1975, in the City Council Chambers, Orlando City Hall, Orlando, Florida.
APPEARANCES
For Petitioner: Robert A. Sugarman, Esquire
Kaplan, Dorsey, Sicking & Hessen 1951 Northwest 17th Avenue Miami, Florida 33125
For Respondent: Norman Burke, Esquire
van den Berg, Gay & Burke
16 South Magnolia Avenue Orlando, Florida
This hearing involved the Petition of the Professional Firefighters of Orlando, Local number 1365, the International Association of Firefighters, affiliated with the AFL-CIO, CLC. The foregoing designation of the Petitioner was stipulated to by the parties. It was further stipulated that the Public Employer was either the City of Orlando, Fire Department or the City of Orlando, Florida, a Florida municipal corporation. The hearing was held pursuant to the Petitioner's Petition for a Certificate of Representation as the representative of firefighters, engineers, lieutenants, and captains of the Orlando Fire Department. There were no motions filed or presented orally at the beginning of the hearing and there were no intervenors. Prior to the commencement of the proceeding, the parties further stipulated that the Public Employer had a history of collective bargaining with other units that were not involved in the Instant Petition.
According to the testimony of Mayor Carl Langford, he received a letter dated December 18, 1974, from Mr. William B. Thomas, President, Professional Firefighters of Orlando, L.U.1365, AFL-CIO. Said letter being received into evidence as Exhibit 4. It was the position of the Petitioner that a request for recognition of the union had been made by the aforementioned letter, Exhibit 4;
and that the City having an acknowledged receipt of the letter as indicated by the minutes of the City Council meeting for December 30, 1974, Composite Exhibit 3, and having failed to take any other action had denied the union recognition. The Petitioner's Petition for Certification of Representation filed January 30, 1975, indicates that no reply had been received to its letter dated December 18, 1974, and the testimony of Mayor Langford indicated that the City had not taken any action with regard to said letter as of the date of hearing, April 24, 1975.
In a matter related to recognition, the Public Employer questioned the registration status of the petitioning employer organization. Testimony and exhibits were received regarding the initial and subsequent submittals from the Petitioner to the Commission. These exhibits and testimony revealed that the registration of the Petitioner was not completed until April 21, 1975, although the initial filing of the registration documents was commenced on December 13, 1974. The Public Employer's position was that it could not recognize the Petitioner for purposes of collective bargaining until the Petitioner has registered because of the provisions of Section 447.008(1), Florida Statutes.
The Public Employer thereafter inquired of the Petitioner's President and Secretary-Treasurer, regarding apparent discrepancies existing on the face of the two financial statements, Exhibits 6 and 13, filed by the Petitioner. These discrepancies specifically related to Items 60(1-136), 66(T-155), 69(T- 157), 40(T-158), 29(1-162), 20(1-165), 26(1-165), and paragraph 17C-Dues. The Hearing Officer notes from an examination of Exhibits 14, 6, and 13 and the testimony of Charles M. Jessie (1-185) that dues were increased by vote of the membership in January, 1975, and not reported to the Commission until April, 1975. The Public Employer pointed out that this was a late amendment of the original Petition. See Section 447.008(1), Florida Statutes. With the exception of the reporting of the change in dues, the apparent discrepancies in the financial statements were explained by Neil F. Tobin, who testified that he was a member of the union's Audit Committee and had been so since September, 1974. Serving in that capacity, Mr. Tobin had prepared the two financial statements for Charles M. Jessie. Regarding Items 20, 26, and 28 on Exhibit 6, Tobin testified that he had erroneously taken the entries in Column B, relating to Items 20, 26 and 28 and used them for the beginning period data (Column A) on Exhibit 13. This was an error because both financial statements covered periods beginning on January 1, 1974. See T-234, T-236. The two statements can be used to accurately reflect the year's financial picture by using the beginning period data contained in Exhibit 6 and the ending period data contained in Exhibit 13. See T-237.
Tobin further testified that he had worked to establish a new bookkeeping system for the Petitioner between the submission of Exhibit 6 and Exhibit 13 and that this had resulted in a reclassification of certain accounts during the period between the two submissions. Further in that regard, Tobin explained that the change in Item 66, Taxes, between Exhibit 6 and Exhibit 13 resulted in a reclassification of a check which he had originally thought was for sales tax but had later determined was for registration for a non-profit medical organization, therefore the entry was transferred to Column 59 on Exhibit 13. See T-238. Tobin explained Item 60, Professional Fees, Exhibit 13, stating he had again discovered that checks that he had originally thought were for Professional Fees were in fact spent for sending members of the Petitioner to "E-Board" meetings, and therefore were removed from the category of Professional Fees in Exhibit 13. See T-239. Item 40 on Exhibit 13 was clarified by Tobin who stated that the $7,964 were funds form sponsorship of a dance and movie, and which he had not included under Item 50, Other Sources.
See T-240, T-247, and T-248. Tobin testified that the financial statement form as received from the Commission had not contained any instructions regarding the categorization of entries. See T-243 and T-244. Tobin was able to specifically explain the majority of the discrepancies existing between Exhibit 6 and Exhibit 13, although he was unable to fully explain the nature of the changed in Item
However, this is in part understandable in light of the reclassification of specific accounts by Tobin when the new bookkeeping system was installed.
Thereafter the Public Employer challenged Exhibits 6, 13, and 7. Each of the aforementioned exhibits contain a statement to the effect that the undersigned office of the petitioning employee organization declares that he has read the information contained in the form, and that it is true to the best of the officer's knowledge. The Commission rules require that the officers swear to the truth of the statements made in the Petition. See Rule 8H-600.1, F.A.C. The testimony of William B. Thomas, Charles M. Jessie, and Hazel Long revealed that these exhibits had not been sworn to before a person authorized to administer oaths. The signatures of the officers of the employee organization were notarized by Hazel Long, who personally knew the men. Hazel Long could not remember the specific instances of notarizing the signatures of the men on the documents but that it was not her general practice to swear the individuals whose signatures she was notarizing.
The Public Employer also challenged the status of the officers signing the Petition for registration, however, William B. Thomas testified that the Vice-President, Pete Thomas, as reported in Exhibit 14 was in fact Willard Gordon Thomas, listed as Vice-President in Exhibits 6 and 13. See 1-213, 1-219, and 1-220. The Hearing Officer made no ruling on the foregoing matters, but allowed testimony and evidence to be presented pursuant to Section 447.009(3)(8), F.S., for the Commission's consideration.
Proceeding to the issue of the appropriateness of the unit, the Petition sought for inclusion within the bargaining unit; the firefighters, engineers, lieutenants, and captains. The Petition specifically excluded the chief and deputy chief. Counsel for the Petitioner clarified that the Petitioner did not seek to represent civilians (1-333) and did not seek to represent any of the deputy chiefs (1-1398); however, the Petition was silent with regard to the status of assistant chiefs within the Orlando Fire Department. The parties would mot agree further as to the inclusion or exclusion of any grade of firefighter or any specific position within the Fire Department. Testimony was then received regarding the organization and staffing of the Orlando Fire Department. Chief Jessie V. Jackson identified and testified regarding Exhibit 21 indicating the organization of the Department and describing the duties of the various positions, and Exhibit 41 indicating the incumbent of the various positions within the Department and the rank of the incumbent.
The fire chief's personal staff, as depicted on the organizational chart contained in Exhibit 21, consists of the Assistant Fire Chief, the Research and Development Section, Special Investigative Services Division, and the Civilian Administrative Assistant to the Fire Chief. The Department is further organized into four (4) bureaus, two (2) of which are responsible for administrative and support services, and two (2) of which are responsible for public safety and life saving. Each bureau within the Orlando Fire Department is further divided into divisions. Within the Fire fighting Bureaus, the divisions are geographical areas of the City of Orlando, although divisions of the Administrative and Support Bureaus represent specific functional responsibilities such as training, fire prevention, communications, etc.
Divisions within the Field Operations Bureaus of the department are further organized into districts which represent shifts. Divisions within the Administrative and Support Bureaus are further broken down on Exhibit 21 into sections.
Testimony developed that within the Administrative and Support Bureaus, certain sections represented on the organizational chart were not fully staffed and functional but that these sections represented specific areas of responsibility assigned to the controlling division and handled by divisional personnel. These non-operational sections included recruit training, in- service training, special training, and cadet training sections in training division; and alarm systems, data processing, communications, maintenance, and information sections within communications division. Personnel and financial services are merged to a large degree and are the responsibility of the bureau commander, Assistant Chief Reynolds. Equipment Services Division and Apparatus Specifications Section are the responsibility of Assistant Chief Rugg, and Apparatus and Equipment Testing Section and Apparatus Maintenance Section are the responsibility of Captain Hurst, who reports to Assistant Chief Rugg. Assistant Chief Rugg is also responsible for Technical Services Division, although Lieutenant Golay is temporarily assigned to that section. The Topography and Photographic Sections are one man sections within Technical Services Division. Within the Fire Prevention Division, the Inspection Section is the responsibility of Captain Campbell and Plans Review Section is the responsibility of Captain Whitaker. Public Education and Community Relations Sections are not actually functional but represent responsibilities handled by the Fire Prevention Division.
It further developed from Jackson's testimony that there were certain staff members who held appointive grade, having been appointed by the fire chief to his administrative staff. The appointive grade of these individuals was higher than their permanent civil service grade. These appointive positions are exempt for municipal civil service and- the incumbents serve at the chief's pleasure. These positions include the Assistant Fire Chief (Job Description B), Special Investigative Service Division Commander (Job Description AC), Research and Development Section - Commander (Job Description AD), and Bureau Commanders (Job Description C). Personnel occupying the aforementioned positions work Monday through Friday from the hours of 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. They constitute those members of the Fire Department staff who report either directly to the fire chief or the assistant fire chief. The Research and Development Section Commander, according to Exhibit 21, Is responsible for advising the chief on policies relative to changes in firefighting techniques and trends in public safety. The incumbent, Lieutenant Bleddyn, holds the permanent civil service grade of engineer; however, he could not assume the duties of engineer without retraining. See 1-315. The Research and Development Section Commander assisted in preparation of Exhibit 21, preparation of the budget, preparation of forms used by the department, and installing a functional cost analysis system. See 1-351, T-384, and T-387. It was apparent from the testimony of Chief Jackson, the job description contained in Exhibit 21, and the organizational chart contained in Exhibit 21 that the Research and Development Section Commander assist in the preparation and implementation of plans and policy within the Orlando Fire Department.
The Commander of Special Investigative Services Division, Captain Harvey, and Lieutenant Moran, who works directly under Harvey's direction, are charged with arson investigation and with investigation of allegations made against the fire department personnel. See T-323. In carrying out their investigative functions they are authorized to carry weapons and have the power
of arrest. In performing these duties they report directly either to the deputy chief or chief. See T-323, T-927, T-928 and T-791-794.
Referring the organizational chart in Exhibit 21, underneath the Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief and the aforementioned members of the fire chief's personal staff, are the four (4) bureaus: Administrative Services Bureau, Staff and Line Support Bureau, Field Operations Bureau City Divisions, and Field Operations Jet Port Division. The Administrative Services Bureau and the Staff and Line Support Bureau are each commanded by an assistant chief and the Field Operations Bureaus are each commanded by a deputy chief. According to the testimony of Assistant Chief Jackson, the organizational plans of the Orlando Fire Department would eventually call for each bureau to be commanded by a deputy chief, however, the City has only authorized at this time three (3) deputy chief positions. The deputy chiefs within the department are Assistant Chief Jackson, City Field Operations Bureau Commander - Camnitz, and Jet Port Field Operations Bureau Commander Strickland. The commander `of the Administrative Services Bureau is Assistant Chief Reynolds and the commander of Staff and Line Support Bureau is Assistant Chief Rugg. Although Assistant Chiefs Reynolds and Rugg are Bureau Commanders they are paid in the grade of assistant chiefs, and not as deputy chiefs. Without regard to their rank, these bureau commanders constitute the level of authority and control immediately below Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief. According to the duties described in Job Description C, Exhibit 21, bureau commanders are responsible for recommendations of candidates for appointment to vacancies within their bureaus, recommending disciplinary action or awards for exemplary achievement, serving as weekend duty officers commanding the fire department, and compilation of the budgetary needs of their bureaus. Their activity primarily involves office work with varying degrees of field work dependent upon the bureau concerned.
As discussed above, the next level of organization beneath a bureau within the Orlando Fire Department is the division. Discussing the Field Operations Divisions first, there exist two (2) Fire and Rescue Divisions within the City Field Operations Bureau and one (1) within the Jet Port Field Operations Bureau. Each of the City Divisions is commanded by an assistant chief. The commander of the Fire and Rescue Division at the Jet Port is commanded by a captain. Referring to Exhibit 51, Division One consist of the geographic area of downtown Orlando east of the red and yellow line indicated thereon. Division Two consist of the geographic area of downtown Orlando west of said dividing line. There are five (5) stations in each of the two downtown divisions. The Jet Port Division consist of Stations Eight and Sixteen located at the Orlando Jet Port in the southern area of the city. The division commanders, without regard to their rank, are responsible for the activities of all shifts in all stations within their division. The division commanders, although on call at all times, normally work from the hour of 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. The commanders of the downtown divisions, as assistant chiefs, attend and participate in the fire chief's staff meetings regularly. Assistant Chief Ballard commanding Division One has responsibility for four (4) captains,
twenty-eight (28) lientenants, and one hundred sixteen (116) men assigned to his division at all times. Assistant Chief Carnes similarly is responsible for four
(4) captains, twenty-eight (28) lieutenants, and one hundred four (104) men at all times. See Exhibit 41. Assistant Chiefs Carnes and Ballard have to approve all transfers within their divisions, approve promotions, approve disciplinary actions, and provide input into the budget of their bureaus. The division commander of the Jet Port Field Operations Bureau will be discussed in conjunction with that bureau hereinafter.
With regard to the six (6) assistant chiefs on the Orlando Fire Department, which Petitioner has neither sought to include nor exclude, two (2) of them had bureaus within the department, two (2) of them head Fire and Rescue Divisions within the city Field Operations Bureau, and two (2) head the Training and Fire Prevention Divisions of the Administrative Services Bureau. As "chief" officers, they together with the three (3) deputy chiefs, form the Fire Chief's staff. Testimony revealed that plans, procedures, and policy relating to the operation of the Orlando Fire Department were discussed at the Fire Chief's regular staff meeting. The comments of the chief officers on such matters at these meetings provides the Fire Chief with important input on decisions which he ultimately is called upon to make. Although the Chief has to approve all department-wide policies, through the staff meetings the chief officers of the fire department have a real and direct influence on the decision making process within the department.
Within the Administrative and Support Bureaus of the Orlando Fire Department there are positions which, because of their specialized function, should be considered on an individual basis in determining whether the incumbents should be included within the proposed bargaining unit. In addition to the Research and Development Section Commander and the Special Investigative Services Division personnel discussed above, these would include the training officer, fire, cadet instructor(s), fire prevention and inspection personnel, fire equipment and maintenance personnel, communications division commander, and the men in the Photographic Section.
With regard to the training officer, testimony revealed that Captain Haney was responsible together with Assistant Chief Hobby, Training Division Commander, for recruit training and service training, special training and cadet training. The Training Division is responsible for development of training policy, doctrine, and training schedules for the department. In addition, it prepares the examinations for fire cadets, in-service training, and promotional examinations. Although the chief of the department would be responsible for approving matters relating to policy, the function of the Training Division has a department-wide impact.
There is one instructor with grade of engineer within the Training Division. See T-329. This individual is an instructor for fire cadets within the department and plays an important role in determining whether a cadet is certified as a firefighter during the period of their instruction lasting 10-12 weeks. In addition, during this period he has access to the trainees' personnel records. Testimony was received that officers within the active fire department are often influenced in their efforts to obtain a recent graduate by the comments of the instructional staff, and are often guided in their initial evaluation of a probationary fireman by the instructor's comments. Instructors within the department's cadet training program are in a, position to determine whether the fire cadet is certified as a fireman, affect his initial assignment within the fire department, and to influence his initial evaluation.
The Inspection Section of the Fire Prevention Division is headed by Captain Whitaker. As head of the Inspection Section he is responsible for the scheduling of fire prevention inspections. Captain Campbell is head of the Plans Review Section. Although primarily assigned the aforementioned duties, Captains Whitaker and Campbell are cross-trained and can perform each others duties when necessary. Although their duties require firefighting training, these duties differ substantially from other captains' in the department.
Within the Apparatus Maintenance Section there are two (2) officers, Captain Hurst and Lieutenant Maggio. The primary responsibility of these officers is to repair and maintain the fire trucks, pumps, and similar apparatus used within the department. The lieutenant and captain wear a work uniform rather than the standard firefighter's uniform. Testimony was received that only one of the officers has been trained in fire combat although the other would be so trained because as sworn personnel, they must be certified firefighters. Apparently such training, however, is not a prerequisite for performing their primary duties. The vehicle assigned for their use is a standard pick-up truck without siren or flashing light. Both men are issued portable two-way radios so that they may be called to a fire scene as needed during non-duty hours.
A communications officer is responsible for the development of policies regarding communications equipment and procedure within the department. He supervises seventeen (17) civilian employees who are dispatchers for the department. He provides the fire chief with input regarding decisions relating to communications within the department. His primary duties and the nature and number of personnel who he supervises vary substantially from those of other lieutenants in the department.
The Photographic Section consist of Lieutenant Ault and one firefighter. Currently the two individuals are working a split shift to permit the firefighter to attend school. They are responsible for photography for all purposes within the department. Although the members of the Photographic Section are assigned firefighting equipment, this is primarily for their convenience and protection while photographing fire scenes.
All of the foregoing individuals were categorized as "specialists" who work primarily from the hours of 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. and are therefore called day personnel". These personnel are on call during their non-duty hours.
The non-officer personnel assigned to these divisions and sections perform primarily specialist duties and as such their duties differ substantially from personnel of similar rank assigned to firefighting duties. However, two (2) of the ten (10) personnel so assigned as indicated on Exhibit
41 are only temporarily assigned from Tower 11.
The structure, equipment, organization, and function of the Jet Port Field Operations Bureau is discussed separately because of the differences existing between this bureau and the City Field Operations Bureau. As stated above the Jet Port Field Operations Bureau consist of two (2) stations located on the Orlando Jet Port in the southern section of the City of Orlando. This bureau is commanded by a deputy chief, however, the division commander is a captain in the Orlando Fire Department as opposed to an assistant chief as is the practice in the City Field Operations Bureau. The primary responsibility of the Jet Port Operations Bureau is to combat fires and effect rescues during aircraft fires. To perform its assigned mission it is equipped with firefighting equipment especially adapted for combating aircraft fires. This equipment requires smaller crews than the firefighting equipment used to combat structural fires therefore the number of personnel assigned to the Jet Port Bureau is substantially less than in the city bureau. The techniques required to combat aircraft fires are different than those utilized in combating structural fires. Testimony was received that in combating an aircraft fire with a chemical-type truck, that the truck would approach the scene of the fire and the lieutenant in charge of the apparatus would dismount the truck and utilize special protective equipment to move forward into the area of the fire
to gain entry into aircraft while the driver fought the fire from inside the truck. Because aircraft fires involve primarily fuel-type fires, the training conducted by personnel assigned to the Jet Port differs to some degree from that of the city bureau. Because of the smaller crews, smaller number of stations, and the mature of the assignment, the relationships existing between the men are apparently different than those existing in the city bureau. The officers assigned to the Jet Port Fire Stations assist the men in the cleanup of the stations and maintenance of equipment. The repair of the equipment assigned to the Jet Port is handled by the City Automotive Facility located at the Jet Port rather than the fire department's mechanics. One of the district commanders assigned to the Jet Port Bureau testified that assignment to the Jet Port Bureau was considered because of the age of the equipment and the smaller number of personnel assigned. Exhibit 5 was a proposed bill which would have had the effect upon passage of creating an Aviation Authority to operate the Orlando Jet Port which at the time of this hearing was before the State Legislature. The Hearing Officer notes that Chapter 75-464 was a special Act enacted by the Legislature during the last session amending the Orlando Port Authority and creating an Aviation Authority. Division Three commanded by Captain Guest contains four (4) captains, four (4) lieutenants, and forty (40) men.
Based upon the evidence and testimony received regarding the "specialists" or day personnel and the personnel assigned to the Jet Port Division, the Hearing Officer questions whether or not they share the same community of interest with the other personnel of the Orlando Fire Department which the Petitioner seeks to have included in the proposed bargaining unit although the aforementioned personnel share the same salary, leave, and retirement benefits of personnel of similar grade and service located elsewhere in the department.
The remainder of the positions and personnel to be discussed are assigned to the City Field Operations Bureau. These include district commanders holding the grade of captain, company commanders holding the grade of lieutenant, engineers and firefighters. Within Division One and Two a district commander (captain) would typically be responsible during his tour of duty for seven (7) lieutenants and thirty (30) men. The district commander has responsibility for all the stations, equipment, and men within his entire division area during the period of his shift. The duties of the district commander are set out in Job Description H, Exhibit 21, and includes recommendations for appointments to vacancies, evaluation of company commanders, resolving personnel and procedural conflicts within his district, supervising the preparation of reports and budget requests by his subordinate station personnel. As stated in the Job Description, supra, the district commander commands a fire scene until properly relieved by a superior commander. It should be noted that normal duty hours for division commanders (assistant chiefs) are from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. although they are on call at all times. The district commander exercises essentially the same authority regarding training and other operations within his district as the division commander when the division commander is not available. Testimony of Captain Lewis beginning T-1440 would indicate that district commander in carrying out their duties are to be guided by the standard operating procedures of the department but are to exercise their personal discretion and judgement.
Although they may be called upon to account for their actions in a given instance, the parameters for the exercise of their personal authority is very broad so long as they keep their superior officers informed of their actions.
Within each district or shift the company commanders (lieutenants) are responsible for a particular piece or pieces of firefighting equipment and the
personnel assigned to that equipment. The firefighting equipment of the Orlando Fire Department within Division One and Two are located in one of ten fire stations. The lieutenant is the lowest ranking officer within the department.
The number of men for which he is assigned and the size of the crew required to man it; however, generally, a company is made up of four (4) men in addition to the lieutenant. The lieutenant is responsible for the activities of his men and for the submission of the paper work, team training, evaluations of his personnel and of maintenance of his equipment. Because the district commander (captain) is responsible for five (5) stations and must travel between them in order to properly supervise their activities, the company commander or lieutenant is the individual who has the ultimate responsibility for directing, carrying out, and enforcing fire department policy as it relates to the men within his company. When the fire company responds to a fire call, the lieutenant is responsible at the fire scene until relieved by a superior officer. Dependent upon the nature and seriousness of the fire, the district commander may not respond. The company officer is responsible for formulating, executing the firefighting plan during that period. Although, because of the reduced number of men assigned to a company necessitated by reorganizing the fire department into four (4) shifts, a lieutenant may be called upon to pull hoses or to do other manual work at a fire scene, his primary responsibility is to direct all of the men in his company in combating the fire. Although not a common occurrence, engineers may take over command of a piece of apparatus when the company commander is not present. In such an instance they are exercising the authority of a company commander. Reference to Exhibit 41 indicates two (2) engineers serving as acting lieutenants pending the upcoming examination for lieutenant. Although there was testimony received that lieutenants assist in the maintenance and cleanup of equipment and fire stations, this was primarily related to the Jet Port Division which has a smaller complement of men on each shift and on each pierce of apparatus as discussed above. A lieutenant who was assigned to the City Operations Division testified that he had viewed the position of company commander or lieutenant as one in which participation in equipment maintenance and building maintenance was not required having dome his share of such work while a fireman and engineer. It was clear that a lieutenant is responsible for the evaluation of his personnel and that these evaluation reports form a basis for eligibility for promotion. Testimony was received that superior officers sometimes exerted their influence to modify a lieutenant's evaluation; however, even when this occurred lieutenants were free to protest and debate the ratings. This activity was an effort to keep the rating system meaningful by requiring justification of substantially higher or lower ratings of personnel. The lieutenant had the absolute authority to make work and duty assignments for the men assigned to his company. This might include assigning less desirable duties to company personnel as a disciplinary measure. For more serious punishment, such as suspension or dismissal, the action would have to be pursuant to the fire chief's direction with appeal to the civil service board.
The company officer would recommend such a disciplinary action which would be generally effective, although it might be modified by his superiors dependent upon specific circumstances.
With regard to transfers and similar types of personnel actions, it was clear that while a company commander or district commander could not approve permanent transfers that their recommendations were generally followed except where the transfers or denial thereof was for the overall good of the fire department. The testimony was substantiated by one officer who testified that a fire department officer generally sought to obtain and to retain the best men for his company or division.
With regard to the number of captains and lieutenants, Exhibit 25 indicates that there were eighteen (18) captains and sixty-four (64) lieutenants on the Orlando Fire Department. Reference to Exhibit 41 indicates that thirteen
(13) captains are assigned to the Field Operations Bureaus and eight (8) captains are assigned to Divisions One and Two of the City Operations Bureaus. There are sixty (60) lieutenants assigned to the Field Operations Bureaus, fifty-six (56) being assigned to Divisions One and Two of the Field Operations Bureau and four (4) assigned to the Jet Port Bureau.
Having heard the testimony of the witnesses it appeared to the Hearing Officer that the duties and responsibilities of district commanders and their authority in carrying out those duties is more closely aligned with those of division commanders since he in essence exercises essentially the same authority during the period of his shift. It further appeared that the company commander in the City Field Operations Bureau by virtue of his duties and responsibilities is responsible for enforcing the policies of the Public Employer with regard to his men, exercising independent judgement, and evaluating their performance and determining the nature and extent of discipline when individuals assigned to their companies violate the existing rules, regulations, and policies of the department.
The general activities of the firemen and engineers in the City Field Operations Bureau is to fight fires and perform life saving functions. The engineers' duties are described in Job Description K of Exhibit 21. The firefighters' duties are described in Job Description L of Exhibit 21. There are 294 engineers and firemen on the department (Exhibit 25) of which ten (10) are assigned to the Chief's Staff or Administrative or Support Bureaus (See Exhibit 41). The ten (10) so assigned were discussed above. It would appear that the remaining 293 engineers and firemen would be properly included within the bargaining unit.
The following general observations were also felt to he important to the consideration of the issues presented. The time spent by officers of the department in functions in which they exercise their own judgement and discretion would appear to vary dependent upon the grade and position which they hold.
The officers within the department do exercise considerable personal judgement and discretion in carrying out their assigned duties. Officers in the Field Operations Bureaus also must assess the training needs of their assigned personnel and direct "remedial" training which is not covered by the department's overall training schedule. These officers have leeway to conduct such training so long as they keep their superiors informed of their plans and these plans would not adversely affect the department's readiness to combat fires or be economically prohibited. The assignment of duties within a particular level of organization is largely the sole responsibility of the officers in charge and permanent transfers of personnel must be approved by the officer in charge of the organizational level above that of the losing and gaining organization. For example, a transfer of a person from one district to another within a division would have to be finally approved by the division officer; however, a transfer between a district in one division and a district in another division within the City Bureau would have to be approved by the bureau officer. Criteria for approval of transfers would be, first, the good the department, and second, the good of the individual involved. Temporary transfers and time switches are less formal and can be approved by the officers directly involved. A temporary transfer necessitated for example by vacation schedule might originate with a division or district officer's request to a
company officer to provide a member of the company officer's assigned crew. The company officer would be free to make his selection; however, it might be rejected if it, for example, would result in either crew having too little experience. Time shifts would be even less formally approved, however, they would necessitate the approval of the company officers involved who would probably advise the district officer.
It appears that guidelines and operating procedures have been developed to standardize and give direction to personnel at all levels but that the amount of individual discretion expected to be utilized increases as one progresses up through the organization. Officers of the rank of captain and above obviously operate with little direct personal supervision and therefore exercise considerable personal discretion and judgement. Lieutenants are in much the same position, the only difference being that the tasks assigned their companies to accomplish are more specific. The manners in which a lieutenant guides, directs, and supervises his personnel in attaining these tasks is largely a matter of the lieutenants' personal choice. Regarding the time required in such activities, it is noteworthy that the Orlando Fire Department has ten (10) and fourteen (14) hour shifts, for personnel assigned to firefighting and rescue duties. Personnel during these shifts do not sleep but participate in maintenance of their equipment, training, administrative duties, and firefighting. Therefore, the officers of the department are involved in directing work activity during their entire duty period.
Every officer whether within Field Operations or the Administrative and Support Bureaus provides input into the department's budget. The revised form used (Exhibit 3) requires that any requested budget item also include the cost of operation and maintenance for the year. These requests form the basis for the department's budget after review by the chief's staff.
Finally, the average wages of the various personnel are set out in Exhibit 25, together with the number of each rank currently on the department. This salary data was not felt to be determinative of any issues presented.
This Report done and respectfully submitted this 20th day of August, 1975.
STEPHEN F. DEAN, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304
(904) 488-9675
COPIES FURNISHED:
Robert A. Sugarman, Esquire Kaplan, Dorsey, Sicking & Hessen 1951 N.W. 17th Avenue
Miami, Florida 33125
Norman Burke, Esquire
van den Berg, Gay & Burke
16 South Magnolia Avenue Orlando, Florida
Mr. Curtis Mack, Chairman Public Employees Relations
Commission Suite 105
2005 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
LIST OF EXHIBITS
NUMBER EXHIBIT
Composite file titled Firefighter File on PERC Certification 1974 (23 pages)
Composite IAFF Collective Bargaining Minutes 1974, 1974 (38 pages)
Composite City Council Minutes pertaining to IAFF 1974- 1975 (17 pages)
Letter from Thomas to Langford, dated December 18, 1974
Port Authority Amendment Bill dated March 25, 1975
*6. Labor Organization Annual Report dated December 13, 1974 (4 pages)
*7. Petition dated January 7, 1975 - (3 pages)
*8. Envelope and contents consisting of signature cards
*9. By Laws and Constitution of the Central Labor Council of Orlando, dated June 1, 1972. Forwarded per PERC request. (17 pages)
*10. Labor Organization Registration dated December 13, 1974 (3 pages)
*A. Constitution and By Laws, Florida AFL-CIO
*B. Constitution and By Laws, Local 1365
*C. Constitution and By Laws, Florida Fire Fighters
*D. Constitution and By Laws, International Fire Fighters
Petitioner's file copy of Petition to Revoke Subpoena in telegraphic form dated April 23.
Subpoena - subject of Exhibit 11
Labor Organization Annual Report,, 12 months dated April 10, 1975
Firefighters News Letter dated January, 1975
Petition dated January 7, filed January 30, and notarized by Long
Composite, Union's PERC Commission correspondence
*17. Letter from Lange to Thomas dated March 28, 1975
Orlando Professional Firefighters News Letter dated April, 1975
Orlando Professional Firefighters News Letter dated March, 1975
Subpoena of City to Hazel Long
Rules and Regulations, Orlando Fire Department
Code of Rules and Regulations, Civil Service Board, Orlando
42 Hour Pay Schedule
40 Hour Pay Schedule
Average Salary Schedule dated April 22, 1975
Personnel Evaluation Report Form
Form 605-54; Certification in Grade Form
Form 605-42; Training Record and Evaluation 29. Form 605-23
Form 605-7; Consolidated Daily Activity Report
Form 605-65; Inter Departmental Preparatory Budget Report
Foreman's Accident and Investigation Report
Form 605-2, Report of Efficiency
Form TD-2; Company Field Training Work Sheet
Annual Company Training Report Form
Form 605-69, Daily Attendance Record
Form 605-29, Report on Apparatus and Equipment
Hose Test Record
Disciplinary Activity initiated by company officer & above (3 pages)
Notary Public Guide
Orlando Fire Department Work Schedule, March-April, 1975
Rules and Regulations of Fire Department affective until December, 1974
Composite, Form 605-54, on R. Gardner dated January 7, 1975 and memo dated February 7, 1975 from Parker
Composite, Form 605-54, on R. Gardner dated December 12, 1974 and memo dated December 6, 1974 from Parker
Manning levels extract
Memo, dated March 1, 1975, subject: Personal Issue Procedure
Professional Firefighters of Florida - Summary of Exclusion-(NOT ADMITTED)
Pages A, B, C, D, & E thru F of Arbitration Award - January 16, 1974
*49. Affidavit of Registration dated April 21, 1975
Memo, Ballard to District Commander, dated March 20, 1975
Map of Orlando showing fire stations
Orlando Fire Department - Educational Development Program memo dated January, 1973
Training schedule, January, 1975, stations 8 & 16
Hose Practices - Orlando Fire Department Training Manual
Report of Fires, 1973. (NOT ADMITTED)
Report of Fires, first 6 months of 1974. (NOT ADMITTED)
Data Sheet on working Fires for 1973-74. (NOT ADMITTED)
Interview Rating Form - Form 742-1
Report of Efficiency on G. E. Norman, dated January 1, 1975
Report of Efficiency on A. Jackson, dated July 1, 1973 to September 30, 1973
Efficiency Report, Thomas, July 1, 1973 thru September 30, 1973
Efficiency Report, Thomas, October 1, 1973 thru December 31, 1973
Efficiency Report, Wood, July 1, 1973 thru September 30, 1973
Efficiency Report, Wood, December 31, 1973
Efficiency Report, Jackson, December 31, 1973
*Contained in official PERC file.
| Issue Date | Proceedings |
|---|---|
| Aug. 20, 1975 | Recommended Order (hearing held April 24 and 25, 1975). CASE CLOSED. |
| Issue Date | Document | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Aug. 20, 1975 | Recommended Order | Record hearing for Public Employee Relations Commission (PERC) review of proposed collective bargaining unit. No Recommended Order, descriptions of duties only. |
