IDENTIFYING FACTORS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO OVERTIME SPENDING AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO REDUCE THESE EXPENSES

EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP

By: Alvin K. Tomita Honolulu Fire Department

Honolulu, Hawaii

An applied research project submitted to the National Fire Academy as part of the Executive Fire Officer Program

January 2003

2

ABSTRACT

The Honolulu Fire Department (HFD) was encountering shortfalls in its projected fiscal

year 2003 operating budget because of rising personnel costs; specifically, overtime. The

problem was identifying the factors that resulted in high overtime expenditures and finding

solutions to reduce this expense. The purpose of this applied research project was to identify the

significant factors that contributed toward the escalating overtime expenditures and to

recommend possible solutions to reduce this expense.

Historical research methodology was used to provide information that identified factors

that contributed to the increasing demand for overtime. Evaluative research was used to analyze

staffing levels, leave taking, morale issues, training delivery, and shift schedules that identified

recommended changes or adjustments that addressed increasing demands for overtime. The

following research questions were presented:

1. Can a review of department staffing practices produce data that is relative

to the analysis of excessive overtime expenditure?

2. Can a review of department training practices produce data that is relative

to the analysis of excessive overtime expenditure?

3. What types of leave have a direct or indirect impact on overtime?

4. What practices have been proposed or implemented by other departments

to reduce overtime expenditure?

The procedures used in the preparation of this research project began with a literature

review of relevant material, including collective bargaining agreements between labor and

management, current financial status reports of the City and County of Honolulu, relevant

Executive Fire Officer (EFO) applied research projects, and various periodicals.

3

Information was obtained from the Fair Labor Standards Act website, the International

Association of Fire Fighters website, and the Hawaii Fire Fighters Association website. Personal

interviews were conducted with the budget analyst and fiscal officer assigned to the HFD, City

attorneys, labor union representatives, and various HFD personnel to gather information to identify or

clarify overtime practices and factors that contributed to overtime.

It was recommended that the HFD administration create task force committees to analyze

and evaluate staffing practices and find a balance between appropriate and efficient expenditure

of overtime and the need to hire extra personnel. Other recommendations included reviews of

the sick and vacation leave policies, the data collection practices, a study of a possible schedule

change, the use of personal service contracts to fill temporary vacancies, the City’s hiring

process, and the HFD training practices.

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS 4

INTRODUCTION 6

BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE 7

LITERATURE REVIEW 14

PROCEDURES 26

Assumptions and Limitations 28

Definition of Terms 29

RESULTS 31

DISCUSSION 38

RECOMMENDATIONS 43

REFERENCES 46

INDEX OF APPENDICES 49

APPENDIX A - DRAFT POLICY ON RANK FOR RANK RECALL 52

APPENDIX B - ACTUAL OVERTIME EXPENDITURES (LINE ITEMS) 55

APPENDIX C - OVERTIME ISSUES FOR FIRE AND RESCUE PERSONNEL- 56 THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT APPENDIX D - VOLUNTARY RECALL EXPENDITURES AND 60 AVERAGE DAILY BALANCES APPENDIX E - UNION’S PROPOSAL ON RANK FOR RANK OVERTIME 61 APPENDIX F - MANPOWER (DAILY AVERAGES) 62 APPENDIX G - LEAVES TAKEN 64 APPENDIX H - FIRE SERVICE INJURIES (1995-2002) 67

5

APPENDIX I - WORKERS’ COMPENSATION EXPENDITURES 68 AND STATISTICS APPENDIX J - PERSONNEL YEARS OF SERVICE 69 APPENDIX K - VOLUNTARY RECALL SUMMARY 70 APPENDIX L - MONTHLY VACANCIES OF FIRE SUPPRESSION 72 PERSONNEL APPENDIX M - TOTAL OVERTIME EXPENDITURES 73

6

INTRODUCTION

A large percentage of the problems facing the fire service today could easily be resolved

by having unlimited funding. However, many fire departments belong to jurisdictions facing

financial difficulties and are hard pressed to provide their citizens with the necessary services

they demand and deserve. The Honolulu Fire Department (HFD) has such an obligation to the

citizens and visitors of the City and County of Honolulu. The heart and sole of any fire

department and its greatest resource are the men and women who serve as fire fighters. Their

salaries constitute approximately 90% of most fire department’s operating budget.

The HFD is encountering shortfalls in its projected fiscal year 2003 operating budget

because of rising personnel costs; specifically, overtime. The problem is to identify the factors

that result in high overtime expenditures and to find solutions to reduce this expense. The

purpose of this applied research project is to identify the significant factors that contribute

toward the escalating overtime expenditures and to recommend possible solutions to reduce this

expense.

Information and data collected and provided in this research project will provide insight

into staffing and training practices and the use of overtime, as well as recommendations to the

Fire Chief, of specific actions to take to address this significant problem.

Historical research methodology will be used to provide information that identified

factors that contributed to the increasing demand for overtime. Evaluative research will be used

to analyze staffing levels, leave taking, morale issues, training delivery, and shift schedules that

identified recommended changes or adjustments that addressed increasing demands for overtime.

The following research questions are presented:

7

1. Can a review of department staffing practices produce data that is relative

to the analysis of excessive overtime expenditure?

2. Can a review of department training practices produce data that is relative

to the analysis of excessive overtime expenditure?

3. What types of leave have a direct or indirect impact on overtime?

4. What practices have been proposed or implemented by other departments

to reduce overtime expenditure?

BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE

The HFD provides fire protection, emergency medical, hazardous materials, and

technical rescue services to the citizens and visitors of the City and County of Honolulu, which

encompasses the entire island of Oahu. The island of Oahu has a population of approximately

872,000 and spans 604 square miles that include many residential communities, business

districts, industrial complexes, agricultural areas, wild lands, and the resort area of Waikiki.

The HFD is a fully paid, career department of 1,145 employees of which 51 are civilian

and 1,094 are uniformed. The HFD is structurally organized into three major sections under the

administration of the Fire Chief and Deputy Fire Chief. They are Fire Operations, the

Administrative Services Bureau, and the Support Services section.

Fire Operations provides fire suppression, hazardous materials response, rescue and

emergency medical services. They are organized into three platoons that operate on a 56-hour

workweek, 24-hour per shift schedule that equates to approximately 9 or 10 on-duty shifts per

month per platoon. Each company is allocated five fire fighter positions with the exception of

the fireboat, which is allocated six fire fighter positions.

8

The Administrative Services Bureau administers the personnel management programs,

the departmental operating and capital budgets, the procurement and fiscal processing, the safety

and health programs, and the computer and electronic processing programs. The HFD’s

Storeroom, which is responsible for supply, property, and inventory programs, and the Mechanic

and Radio Shops, which are responsible for the equipment maintenance programs of the HFD are

also under the purview of the Administrative Services Bureau. The personnel assigned to the

Administrative Services Bureau operate on a 40-hour per week, Monday through Friday

schedule.

The Support Services section is comprised of the Fire Communication Center, the Fire

Prevention Bureau, and the Training and Research Bureau. The Fire Communication Center is

responsible for the receipt of fire and emergency calls and dispatching the proper emergency

companies. They have a total of 23 personnel and are under the direction of a Battalion Chief

who is assisted by an Administrative Captain and a Clerk. The Battalion Chief, along with his

Administrative Captain and Clerk, operate on a 40-hour per week, Monday through Friday

schedule. Twenty (20) uniformed personnel are assigned on four separate shifts and operate on a

modified 40-hour per week, 24-hour on-duty shift followed by a 72-hour period off schedule.

The Fire Prevention Bureau administers the fire prevention programs for the City and County of

Honolulu. They have 40 personnel (38 uniformed) who operate on a 40-hour per week, Monday

through Friday schedule. The Training and Research Bureau develops, evaluates, and

administers various training programs as well as conducts research and experiments to improve

fire operations, emergency medical services, and hazardous materials response. They have 24

personnel (20 uniformed) that operate on a 40-hour per week, Monday through Friday schedule.

9

Promotions in the department begin at the Fire Fighter II level. Positions within this level

include the Fire Communication Radio Operator, Fire Prevention Inspector I, and four positions

in Fire Operations: Ladder Tiller Operator, Fire Rescue Specialist, Hazardous Materials

Technician, and the Battalion Chief Aide. The next position of promotion is the Fire Fighter III.

Positions within this level include the Fire Communication Journey Level Radio Operator, Fire

Prevention Inspector II, Training and Research Bureau entry level, and the Apparatus Operator

position in Fire Operations. The next level of promotion is the Captain, a supervisory position,

which is followed by the excluded levels of Battalion Chief and then Assistant Chief. A fire

commission appoints the Fire Chief and Deputy Fire Chief. They and the four Assistant Chiefs

comprise the department’s Executive Staff.

Fire fighters of the HFD who are assigned to fire suppression and emergency companies

work a 24-hour shift schedule that begins at 8:00 a.m. This is followed by a 24-hour off-duty

period, a 24-hour on-duty period, and a 24-hour off-duty, followed by a 96-hour off-duty period

before the work cycle repeats itself. This allows them to have part-time jobs, additional income

from which they have become very dependent to maintain a particular standard of living for their

families. In addition to the work schedule, there are premium pay packages that they earn such

as scheduled overtime as a result of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) requirements, night

alarm premium pay (pay received for responding to and mitigating incidents between 8:00 p.m.

through 6:00 a.m.), overtime pay for holidays, which is paid on the actual holiday regardless if

you work or not, overtime pay for off-duty training, and overtime pay for voluntary recall work.

Voluntary recall is only given to the Fire Fighter Recruit and Fire Fighter I levels due to the

collective bargaining agreement, which states that temporary assignment and the appropriate pay

shall be initiated when ranked positions are vacant for various reasons. This voluntary recall

10

program has resulted in a morale issue among ranked fire fighters due to the overtime benefits

that Fire Fighter Recruits and Fire Fighter I personnel receive. As a result, Fire Fighter Recruit

and Fire Fighter I personnel realize substantial increases in their annual income, which exceed

the annual income for many ranked fire fighters. This controversial concern is one of the

primary issues in the collective bargaining process that is currently in arbitration in the form of a

rank for rank recall proposal. In fact, the Arbitrator has ruled in favor of adopting this proposal

and has mediated collective bargaining language and an HFD policy regarding a two-year rank

for rank recall pilot program. This rank for rank recall program does not primarily address

staffing concerns, but addresses morale issues. Rank for rank recall will be initiated for rank

personnel on scheduled vacations (Appendix A) and will definitely result in an increased demand

for overtime funds. This program needs to be implemented no later than July 1, 2003.

The City and County of Honolulu will be operating on $49 million less in property tax

revenue than in 1994, balancing its operating budget despite rising personnel costs over the

years. This year, the City faces a budget deficit approaching $180 million and a debt burden

expected to double to $233 million over the next five years. Paying back the City’s debts would

consume a greater portion of the City’s budget next year, while spending a smaller portion on

police and fire protection. As a result, city departments have been instructed to use their

appropriated fiscal year (FY) 2003 (July 1, 2002 to June 30, 2003) Operating Budget plus a one

percent cut as the FY 2004 (July 1, 2003 to June 30, 2004) budget ceiling. The problem is that

the HFD is already encountering shortfalls in its projected FY 2003 Operating Budget because of

rising personnel costs; specifically, overtime.

Non-holiday overtime is the line item in the salaries category of the operating budget that

is interpreted by the City and County of Honolulu’s budget analysts and fiscal officers as

11

discretionary expenditures or funding that is in the department’s (the Fire Chief) direct control.

Fiscal year 2003 has a non-holiday overtime appropriation of $1,902,000. As soon as fiscal

projections were completed during the first month of this budget, our fiscal officer indicated that

shortfalls in other line item categories in salaries restricted 10% or $190,000 of that appropriated

amount. If we do not keep within this adjusted appropriation, we will fall short of salary funds.

In FY 2002 (July 1, 2002 to June 30, 2002), overtime expenditures of $1,945, 723 exceeded the

appropriated amount of $1,755,000 by $190,723. During FY 2001 (July 1, 2000 to June 30,

2001), overtime expenditures of $1,568,466 exceeded the appropriated amount of $222,000 by

$1,346,466. These amounts were allowed and funded since the department had generated a

savings in regular salaries due to the large amount of personnel vacancies (Appendix B).

The Fire Chief of the HFD has stated that minimum staffing for suppression companies

will be four fire fighters, and for specialty companies such as rescue and hazardous materials,

minimum staffing will be five fire fighters. To meet the Fire Chief’s directive, voluntary recall

continues on an overtime basis. Fite (2002) references Cascio (1998) who states that overtime

can be effective to ride out the staffing and revenue roller coasters, but not as a permanent

solution. Ocamel (2000) states that overtime should be used as a temporary tool to ease staffing

shortages, but not as a long-term solution. Fite (2002) states that the future impact of overtime

will be substantial if the organization does not accurately identify and forecast future overtime

costs and causes because the overtime budget will continue to be miscalculated.

Prior to 1995, the HFD’s company staffing levels were six fire fighters assigned to engine

companies and seven fire fighters to ladder companies, which serviced high risk, densely

populated urban areas. Engine and ladder companies servicing other areas were assigned five

and six fire fighters, respectively. In 1994, the City and County of Honolulu experienced an

12

economic decline, which prompted the City to contract the services of the consulting firm of

Towers Perrin to survey and recommend options to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of

services provided by the City that included fire protection and emergency medical services. As

stated in the Towers Perrin report, the cost of a fire suppression force is determined largely by

three factors: the number and location of fire stations, the number and type of vehicles assigned

at each station, and the number of fire fighters assigned to each apparatus. As a result of the

Towers Perrin report, the HFD and the City reached a compromise and reduced or maintained its

staffing levels where all engine, ladder, rescue, and hazardous materials units were staffed with

five fire fighters.

Demands for training to address the ever-growing duties and responsibilities for the fire

service has resulted in variations of training delivery for the HFD. Historically, the Training and

Research Bureau conducted training activities mainly during on-duty time. Companies were

taken out of service and were sent to the Training Center for the day. Strategic movement of

surrounding companies covered their areas of response. Another practice was to send instructors

out to the field or de-centralize training. Although these practices were cost efficient, they were

time consuming and redundant. However, due to an increased demand for additional training

regarding medical, hazardous materials, confined space, nuclear, biological, chemical, terrorism,

and weapons of mass destruction, the HFD administrators felt that off-duty training was

necessary to centralize training in order to have expert instructors in these areas brought in and

instruct more personnel in a shorter period of time. They also felt that it was not prudent to leave

certain areas without fire protection for prolonged periods utilizing the strategic cover in

practice. This transition in training practices resulted in an increase in overtime expense.

13

The practice of conducting mandatory and a few voluntary training activities during off-

duty days on an overtime compensation continues. Fite (2002) explains that they commenced

much of their department’s training on an overtime basis that included many officer development

courses, which greatly increased their overtime expense. The HFD also pays overtime for Chief

Officer and Captain workshops. For a mandatory Captains workshop, it is estimated that

approximately $48,000 of overtime funds may be expended. The HFD usually has two Captain

workshops and two to three Chief Officer workshops per fiscal year.

In a previous applied research project (January 2001), I identified and clarified why the

HFD was experiencing difficulty in maintaining adequate company manpower levels on a daily

basis. Due to an economic decline and recommendations by a consulting firm contracted by the

City and County of Honolulu to improve its efficiency and effectiveness of services provided,

staffing per company was reduced to five personnel. The minimum staffing level was

recommended at four personnel per company referencing national standards and federally

mandated regulations as well as various research projects and publications as justification. Since

this manpower implementation, the HFD has had difficulty in maintaining minimum staffing

levels of four personnel per company. Factors contributing to low staffing numbers will be

identified and analyzed.

Should revenues continue to experience slow growth and debt continues to rise, priority

funding will be for essential and mandatory programs only. Increased funding for overtime will

not be approved and may possibly be restricted if projected shortfalls exist in essential areas of

the operating budget. Therefore, the HFD needs to evaluate, analyze, plan, and implement the

appropriate courses of action to reduce overtime expense yet still provide the resources to

address and accomplish its mission.

14

This applied research project is linked to the Executive Fire Officer Program’s Executive

Leadership course. The course curriculum provided instructions in leadership, decision skills,

influencing, coaching and mentoring, and evaluating. Produced data needs to be analyzed and

evaluated and possible solutions need to be planned and implemented by the HFD to stabilize its

overtime expenditures. Implementing possible solutions may require bold leadership and

decision skills. Influencing, coaching, and convincing will be imperative in implementing the

necessary changes.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The primary mission of the fire service is to protect life and property by maintaining a

well-equipped and highly trained force of professional fire fighters. In reference to my January

2001 Applied Research Project on factors that determine minimum company staffing levels,

national standards and federal regulations support a minimum daily staffing level of four fire

fighters per company.

National Fire Protection Agency (NFPA) 1500 (1997 edition) is a standard on fire

department occupational safety and health programs. Fire fighters operating in the hazardous

areas shall operate in teams of two or more. Initially, where only one company is operating in

the hazardous area at a working structure fire, a minimum of four fire fighters is required.

NFPA 1410 (2000 edition) is a standard on training for initial emergency scene

operations. To safely conduct necessary fire ground operations, the recommended minimum

staffing level for a fire company responding to any type of fire consists of four fire fighters

responding on or arriving with each engine or ladder company.

15

NFPA 1710 (2001 edition) is a standard for the organization and deployment of fire

suppression operations, emergency medical operations, and special operations by career fire

departments. Engine and ladder companies tasked with basic fire fighting at fires should be

staffed with a minimum of four fire fighters.

The Occupational Safety and Health Agency’s (OSHA) Regulation 1910.134, a standard

on respiratory protection, states that employers shall ensure that in procedures for interior

structural fire fighting, at least two fire fighters enter the high risk atmosphere and at least two

fire fighters are located outside of the high risk atmosphere. This regulation establishes that a

minimum of four fighters is required at the scene before an interior attack on a structure fire can

be initiated.

Bruno (1992) cites a study conducted for the International Association of Fire Fighters

(IAFF) by the Johns Hopkins University that covered 63 cities with populations of 150,000 or

more. According to their report, there were 38% more injuries per 100 alarms on engine and

ladder companies staffed by fewer than four fire fighters.

Dozier (2001) states that the Chief of the Abilene Fire Department set a goal to have four

persons manning all fire apparatuses at all times. Citing various OSHA and NFPA standards as

support for his minimum level of staffing, the Chief proposed that the additional overtime money

needed to maintain this level could come from the budget savings obtained through personnel

vacancies. Monthly overtime expenditures increased significantly and in a relatively short

period of time, the amount of money spent for overtime had become alarming to both the Fire

Chief and the City administration. The Chief stated that significant staffing changes might be

necessary if the overtime usage could not be curtailed.

16

Tharp (1998) conducted a survey that sought information in regards to providing staffing

based on a minimum plan or a constant plan. Minimum staffing was defined as hiring additional

manpower than required for daily staffing to fill in for scheduled leaves, vacations, illnesses, and

other time off, the plan being to have the additional manpower reduce the need to use overtime to

hire back when an employee is absent. Constant staffing was defined as hiring only the number

of manpower needed to equal required daily staffing. Therefore, it is always necessary to use

overtime to fill staffing needs as a result of scheduled leaves, vacations, illnesses, and other time

off. The majority by an almost two to one ratio indicates that they used the minimum staffing

method and hired additional manpower to fill in for employees who were on scheduled or

unscheduled leave. The formula for establishing overtime incurred as a result of overtime

caused by absences that depleted the staffing level below the minimum required personnel,

involves determining the percentage of time necessary to hire back on overtime. Laurich (1996)

states that the findings of most staffing studies revealed a need to begin with a base line built on

an analysis of historical data on the actual use of overtime. A figure above minimum staffing

then needs to be developed to cover the unexpected absences.

The HFD uses the minimum staffing method by establishing appropriated staffing at five

fighters per company. My previous research regarding the HFD’s staffing (2001) indicated that

a decision was reached to establish that the adequate number of fire fighters on an apparatus

would be five since the study of fire fighter absenteeism was determined to average 20% and that

the minimum manning level per company would be adequate at four fire fighters. The HFD is

still incurring absenteeism above the average 20% factor resulting in the recall of personnel

utilizing overtime. This research indicated that vacancy levels were not taken into consideration

in establishing this 20% absenteeism factor. There was evidence that the studies that were

17

conducted to establish this 20% factor was not accurately done, and as a result, the HFD has

progressively increased their overtime expenses due to staffing needs.

Section 26 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (July 1, 1999, to June 30, 2003)

between the Hawaii Fire Fighters Association (HFFA) and the City and County of Honolulu

regarding temporary assignments made in accordance with existing laws, rules, and regulations,

states that temporary assignment shall be made on a rotating basis from among qualified regular

employees within the same company, unit, or bureau and who are on the same platoon within the

same station and the same division as that in which the temporary assignment originates.

Temporary assignment of personnel with appropriate pay adjustments is utilized in filling ranked

positions such as Captain, Fire Fighter III, and Fire Fighter II. This section mandates that call

back be at the Fire Fighter I or Fire Fighter Recruit levels on an overtime basis to meet minimum

staffing needs.

An interview with Tim Veit, President of the Henderson Fire Department Fire Fighters

Union, indicated that his department once used the minimum staffing method, but changed to the

constant staffing method approximately three years ago. The Henderson Fire Department has

168 fire fighters in fire suppression divided into three platoons that work a 24-hour, 56-hour per

week schedule. They have nine stations with a staffing level of four personnel on engine and

ladder companies and two personnel on rescue. The situation that resulted in the transition from

minimum staffing to constant staffing involved a need for overtime to be earned by ranked

personnel to address morale issues since call back on overtime (under the minimum staffing

method) to meet staffing was given to unranked fire fighters while vacant ranked positions were

filled via a move up with temporary assignment pay to address morale issues. The Fire Chief

faced expansion and a problem dealing with a span of control for Chief Officers while the

18

County government of Henderson was concerned with budget issues. A study was conducted

utilizing a formula taking the cost of one position, which included all benefits, versus call back

on overtime to address staffing. The results were an overall savings in transitioning to the

constant staffing method. The savings generated by eliminating the over hire positions provided

funding for four additional Chief Officer positions and a cost effective system that satisfied

government officials. Another benefit as a result of this transition was that many fire fighters no

longer needed part-time jobs, and subsequently, devoted 100% of their time to the department.

The Phoenix Fire Department’s policy on constant staffing (M.P. 104.03 10/98-R)

defines constant staffing as the process wherein members of the appropriate rank and

qualification fill positions that are vacant on a given day on an overtime basis, following

seniority and in rotation. Constant staffing is adhered to in order to maintain staffing levels of all

units at required levels for safe and efficient operations. Included in the constant staffing

program are 24-hour rescue and partial shift positions. Constant staffing is a privilege, not a

right, and all efforts are made to keep opportunities as equal as possible.

It seems that more departments are seriously looking into the constant staffing practice

and addressing the same issues that faced the Henderson Fire Department. As suggested by Tim

Veit, factors that govern staffing practices differ from department to department and each factor

needs to be analyzed and evaluated separately. For example, factors of concern for the HFD

mainly because of its size and the multiple differences in topography and occupancy (mountain,

plains, valleys, streams, and ocean; urban, suburban, and rural), would be common knowledge of

the area and safety regarding the use of different equipment and apparatuses. These factors

would definitely have more of an impact in the selection of staffing practices for the HFD then it

would for smaller departments that do not have great variations in topography or occupancy and

19

that have common knowledge in area and standard equipment and apparatus. Factors such as

these have far greater influences on efficiency than pure budgetary calculations.

Granito (1990) indicates that because of extensive overtime, the annual overtime income

of many fire fighters is higher than their regular salaries. You need to balance the size of initial

attack crews, the total number of fire fighters in the department, the desire of people to earn

overtime, the type of shift arrangement, the ability and the willingness of the city to increase the

budget, and several other factors. Chief Alan Brunacini (1992) of the Phoenix Fire Department

states that the budget process involves the art, science, and politics of resource availability and

allocation. No matter how much budget analysts, city managers, mayors, fire chiefs,

policymakers, and guys with gypsy blood want to make fire fighting requirements fit current

resources, they can not. We have always been stuck with the constants, and we probably always

will be. He further indicates that resource levels, including staffing, are driven by our flexible

and currently shrinking financial capability. Fire fighting and fire ground activities are driven by

a rigid set of realities. O’Connell (2000) cites several resources stating that it is more cost-

effective to pay employees overtime during busy times than to pay regular wages to additional

employees who are not needed during slow times. The majority of his research sources indicated

that overtime is a convenient and workable means for dealing with staffing fluctuations and short

term staffing deficiencies. In most cases, the authors of these works were quick to caution that

long term and regular use of overtime can become more costly than the actual costs of hiring

additional personnel. Fite (2002) quoted resources regarding overtime being used as a temporary

tool to ease staffing shortages, but not as a long-term solution. Overtime can be effective to ride

out the staffing and revenue roller coasters, but not as a permanent solution.

20

A report by the Assistant Chief in charge of the HFD’s Fire Operations (November 2002)

indicated that the primary purpose of the HFD’s Voluntary Recall System (VRS) was to

supplement on-duty staffing levels with off-duty personnel. A computerized system was

implemented replacing a manual recall system that was in place since the initial implementation

of staffing recall in December of 1999. He states that every battalion should be viewed as being

independent in terms of staffing requirements. He identifies the total number of authorized

positions in each battalion and the minimum number of personnel that needs to work on a daily

basis and the total number of authorized positions that are not staffed before the VRS is activated

for any given day. Estimated recall costs for a 30-day recall summary conducted from

October 14, 2002, through November 12, 2002, were $95,000. This cost would have been higher

if all call back positions were filled. However, due to the unavailability of volunteers, several

positions could not be filled. Once the computerized VRS is evaluated and improved, recall

information may result in these positions being filled, which will result in a higher overtime

expense.

A study conducted by a Captain of the HFD regarding the issue of rank for rank recall

indicated that some form of rank for rank recall was in place for the following departments:

San Diego, Los Angeles City, Los Angeles County, Ventura, San Jose, San Francisco, Seattle,

Las Vegas, Clark County, Phoenix, and Boston. Most departments had rank for rank recall in

place because of a morale issue citing fairness as justification in spite of an increased expense of

overtime due to call back.

Off-duty training and workshops are another reason for overtime expense. It has been

projected that training requirements, Chief Officer and Captain workshops, and meetings

conducted during off-duty time will cost the HFD approximately $800,000 in overtime expense.

21

A summary report generated by the HFD’s management analyst regarding a Chief Officers’

workshop conducted in January 2003 cited that the preferred method of training was for it to be

conducted during off-duty hours with appropriate compensation. Moody (1999) indicates that

extra pay systems and off-duty training, although not a pure form of overtime for off-duty

training, cites pay as one of the primary factors for the success and willingness of personnel to

attend off-duty training. Fite (2002) indicates that increased training requirements to meet their

ISO evaluation prompted the department to commence much of its training on an overtime basis

that included many officer development courses. This training was conducted on an overtime

basis and greatly increased the overtime expense during the past three years.

There are other factors that contribute to staffing shortfalls thus contributing to increasing

use of overtime to address staffing shortfalls. A review of staffing data by O’Connell (2000)

indicated that when vacancies increased and the ability to take vacation was reduced, personnel

resorted to the use of sick and emergency leaves. As the use of unscheduled leave increased, so

did the use of overtime to maintain staffing levels. Liberal vacation and sick leave policies

contribute to excessive leave taking. Heumann (2001) cites literary resources regarding overtime

being eliminated through increased staffing. However, the cost of fringe benefits for the

increased number of employees often negates any savings gained from reducing overtime.

Varone (1994) stated that time lost due to injury carries with it the biggest price tag in terms of

workers’ compensation payments and in overtime necessary to maintain minimum staffing in the

absence of the injured member. Decreasing injuries may lead to a decrease in costs and

decreasing time lost due to injury will lead to a decrease in costs. Laurich (1996) concludes that

when there is less manpower on duty than anticipated, you need to look harder than ever at your

22

staffing procedures. Sick leave is up, employees are using more vacation time than anticipated,

and there are more employees gone for miscellaneous reasons than expected.

Mims (1999), in researching the topic of overtime, noted that all literary research

confirms that overtime expense is reduced when utilizing a shift schedule that does not involve a

24-hour shift. When employee absence requires the hiring of off-duty personnel, overtime is

paid for only 10 or 14 hours rather than for 24 hours. Fire fighters involved in a physically

intense alarm early in a 24-hour shift might experience the same later in the same day. This

increases the chance of a fatigue-related injury. The 10-hour duty day/14-hour duty night

(10/14) work schedule provides more rest and energy restoration than a 24-hour shift. Family

contact, project management, and productivity all receive increased continuity in a 10/14 work

schedule. The advantages include lessened overtime expense, use of fewer sick leave, and an

increase in fire fighter safety. Mims conducted a survey of 50 fire departments that revealed that

the reason for excessive overtime spending must be determined in order to provide

recommendations for problem resolution. The data collection results determine that personnel

directly relate the excessive overtime spending to the use of sick leave. These types of schedules

are 10/14, 12/12, and 11/13. Mims (1999) cites a poll conducted by Dann Maurno, freelance

writer for Factory Mutual, noting that overtime can be expensive when utilizing a 24-hour shift.

Rule (1997) states that the combination of a 10/14 work schedule offers several benefits,

including improved safety, sick leave reduction, increased productivity, and more. Assuming

that most employees are absent for a one-day period, implementing the 10/14 work schedule can

reduce sick leave time and overtime pay. If a department chooses to pay employee overtime

rather than run short, it will only have to pay for a split shift rather than a 24-hour one.

23

Heumann (2001) references literary sources noting that it takes time and attention, but

done properly, computerizing your shift schedule can lower excess overtime, reduce mistakes,

improve service quality, and reduce boring, unnecessary work giving managers more time to

improve the performance of the department. Several factors affecting scheduling choices include

negotiated agreements, employee fatigue, number of funded positions, actual hours of

productivity expected, work load/demand per shift, state and federal mandates, and hours to be

covered.

According to Laurich (1996) a practice by his department is to over hire in anticipation of

vacancies caused by retirements, leave of absences, or other reasons that might provide

vacancies throughout the year. Riemar (1998) explained the benefits of using part-time

employees in place of expending overtime. Perhaps the utilization of recently retired personnel

hired back on contract to address staffing needs could reduce overtime expense. Smith (2000)

suggests that by combining personnel on one apparatus or perhaps doubling the response of the

apparatus could address staffing issues and overtime.

Section Number 29 CFR 553.200 of the FLSA’s Statutory Provisions establishes the

general principles regarding the fire service. Section Number 29 CFR 553.201, Statutory

Provisions, Section 7(k), provides a partial overtime pay exemption for fire protection personnel

who are employed by public agencies on a work period basis. This section of the FLSA formerly

permitted public agencies to pay overtime compensation to such employees in work periods of

28 consecutive days only after 212 hours of work. For purposes of this research, the HFD’s

work period as defined in Section 19, Hours of Work, of the Collective Bargaining Agreement,

shall mean a consecutive nine-day period during which employees shall be scheduled to work 72

hours and which shall be used to determine the total number of hours worked. “Scheduled

24

Overtime” shall mean the four scheduled work hours in excess of 68 hours per work period,

which shall be paid at the overtime rate in lieu of straight time. Section Number 29 CFR

553.230, Minimum hours standards for work periods of 7 to 28 days - Section 7(k), verifies this.

Section Number 29 CFR 553.210, Fire protection activities defines fire protection activities,

identifies employees who qualify as well as those employees who do not qualify.

Section Number 29 CFR 553.212, Twenty percent limitation on nonexempt work, defines that

the hours of work in the different allowable capacities need not be counted as hours worked for

overtime purposes on the regular job. Section Number 29 CFR 553.214, Trainees, establishes

that basic training or advanced training is considered incidental to and part of the employee’s fire

protection activities. Section Number CFR 553.220, Tour of duty defined, establishes the period

of time during which an employee is considered to be on duty for purposes of determining

compensable hours. Section Number CFR 553.221, Compensable hours of work, establishes the

general rules on compensable hours of work. Other sections such as 29 CFR 553.222, Sleep

time; 29 CFR 553.223, Meal time, 29 CFR 553.224, Work period defined; 29 CFR 553.225,

Early relief; 29 CFR 553.226, Training time; 29 CFR 553.227, Outside employment; 29 CFR

553.231, Compensatory time off; 29 CFR 553.232, Overtime pay requirements; 29 CFR

553.233, Regular rate defined; give information that all Fire Chiefs and administrators should

understand in regards to a class action wage and hour lawsuit and potential fire fighter claims

regarding overtime and FLSA violations. To my understanding and through discussions with

City and County of Honolulu’s attorneys assigned to this case, this lawsuit is not proprietary to

our department. In general, the lawsuit identifies a number of areas where the City and County

of Honolulu has and continues to violate state and/or federal wage and hour law in the way it

pays fire department employees. For each of these potential claims, the federal statute of

25

limitations for a violation of the FLSA goes back a minimum of two years and a maximum of

three years from the date an employee’s consent to join the suit is filed. Referencing this

lawsuit, the areas of complaint are as follows: unpaid overtime and an exception by the FLSA

(referred to as the 7(k) exemption) to this general rule which permits an employer to designate a

work period of more than seven days and set an overtime threshold above 40 hours. Our

preliminary research suggests that the City and County of Honolulu may not be able to rely upon

this exception. Overtime rate issues do not include a variety of “salary add-ons” that must be

included in the overtime rate for every hour of overtime worked. Such additional compensation

includes temporary assignment pay, night alarm premium pay, hazardous duty pay, longevity

pay, night shift differential pay, and several additional forms of premium pay. Training issues

where employees who have participated in both annual and recruit training have stated that they

were not compensated for their additional hours worked when training sessions ran longer than

scheduled or into the meal break. Further claims are for preparation time, including mandatory

homework completed during off-duty hours, is compensable on an overtime basis. Instructors in

training have reported for work early and stayed late to assist students and have prepared lesson

plans during off-duty hours. Employees have indicated participating in pre-/post-shift activities

wherein they report to work early or stay beyond the end of their shift for a briefing with the

alternative watch. Equipment replacement for damaged fire fighting equipment must be

personally obtained during off-duty hours. Other claims include the possibility that fire fighters

should be compensated under state law when required to work through their meal breaks,

whether any employees have been required to attend fitness-for-duty or follow-up physical or

psychological examinations on off-duty time without compensation, the possibility that

employees should be compensated for their travel time to off-site training, and whether the

26

compensatory time-off practices of the City and County of Honolulu comply with FLSA

requirements. This lawsuit, if successful, will have a huge impact on overtime increasing the

demand for additional funding (Appendix C).

PROCEDURES

An extensive literary review of studies and evaluations conducted by the HFD personnel,

as well as our collective bargaining agreement between labor and management, current financial

status reports of the City and County of Honolulu, relevant EFO applied research projects, and

various periodicals was completed. The FSLA’s website was utilized to obtain material

pertaining to the FLSA standards regarding overtime. The IAFF’s website, as well as the

HFFA’s website, was referenced to obtain material pertaining to the class action suit regarding

wage and hour specific to overtime filed against the City and County of Honolulu. Information

that was obtained from City and County of Honolulu’s attorneys clarified this lawsuit and the

potential impact it may have on overtime expense.

An interview with the Henderson Fire Department’s Union President, Tim Veit, produced

information regarding a transition from a minimum staffing method to a constant staffing method

and reasons why it was cost effective for them. The policy regarding constant staffing of the

Phoenix Fire Department was obtained from a former EFO classmate. National standards set

forth by the NFPA, as well as the OSHA regulations, were referenced regarding staffing

standards. A survey conducted by Tharp (1998) indicated that the most common staffing

philosophy is to use a minimum staffing (56.6%) versus constant staffing (35.8%). Only a few

departments indicated they had a formula for determining the number of personnel to hire. One

formula was to hire additional personnel when overtime costs exceeded 25% of the personnel

27

costs and another formula was to use a ratio of hiring an extra person when a specific number of

new hires were reached. Another formula is to use a three full-time equivalent in overtime

expenses in determining a break over where it is cost effective to use overtime and not hire. All

salaries, employee benefits, and insurance are incorporated times three and that cost determines

an equivalent overtime budget. Tharp (1998) concluded that the survey might lack in

effectiveness since most Fire Chiefs have not considered calculating staffing requirements.

A review of past HFD annual reports provided an insight to past practices regarding

staffing and overtime expense. Specific data regarding the HFD’s staffing and off-duty training

identified monthly overtime expenditure since 2000. Fiscal reports obtained from the City and

County of Honolulu’s Department of Budget and Fiscal Services provided data regarding

monthly expenditures of overtime for fire suppression personnel as well as the total overtime

expenditures by the HFD. Reports on the voluntary recall program completed by various fire

suppression personnel provided data on estimated monthly expenditures for this program.

Computer generated payroll reports for 2000, 2001, and 2002 were obtained from the

City and County Honolulu’s Department of Information Technology and provided information

regarding various leaves taken on a monthly basis. The nine factors utilized in this project were

compensatory time taken, funeral leave, family leave using sick leave, family leave using

vacation leave, leave without pay, military leave, industrial injury leave, sick leave, and vacation

leave. These factors were restricted to fire suppression personnel only. The HFD’s Personnel

Assistant maintained historical records that provided vacancy data. Informal conversations with

the City and County of Honolulu’s Budget Analyst, as well as the Fiscal Officer assigned to the

HFD, were conducted mainly to establish their reaction and course of action regarding overtime

funds.

28

The data was used to identify trends, departmental practices, and the correlation between

overtime expenditure for staffing recall, off-duty training, and the nine factors identified as

having a direct or indirect impact on overtime. This data also indicated when the HFD’s

transition from on-duty training to centralized off-duty training. Literature regarding off-duty

training and the impact it has on the overtime budget was reviewed and utilized in this research.

A survey conducted by Mims (1999) was referenced in noting the most utilized work

schedule. This survey indicated that 61% of the agencies that responded currently work a 24-

hour shift duty schedule. Most fire fighters who are on a 24-hour shift schedule are not in favor

of changing to 12-hour shifts citing part-time job commitments as the primary reason. Mims

(1999) states that surveys may have a tendency to yield a subjective opinion and are not always

completed honest. Literature regarding practices that have been proposed or implemented by

other departments regarding the reduction for overtime was reviewed and utilized in this

research.

Assumptions and Limitations

An estimate based on an average hourly pay rate for Fire Fighter Recruit and

Fire Fighter I positions was used in determining overtime expense for voluntary recall for

staffing concerns since its inception in December of 1999. There is no computerized system in

place to accurately track specific overtime expense for recall, training, or other miscellaneous

reasons. The expended amounts used for voluntary recall are not accurate primarily because the

individuals who were tracking this program used different average overtime pay in their

calculations. What is needed is specific pay codes for recall, the upcoming rank for rank recall

system, off-duty training, and other miscellaneous reasons.

29

The true vacancy count at any given time needs to be manually researched as there is no

computerized system implemented to historically track position numbers and vacancies. The

HFD’s Personnel Assistant maintains quarterly manpower statistics from the Department of

Human Resources who derived this information from payroll printouts. The vacancy

information was not entirely accurate and was only used through a given quarter for purposes of

this research project.

There is a three- to four-week lag in the posting of overtime expenditures by our fiscal

officers. The overtime earned is paid in subsequent paychecks, and therefore, the posting of that

expense is completed at that time. The data provided by the fiscal section is actually one month

in arrears.

Through collective bargaining arbitration agreement, the rank for rank recall pilot

program is mandated for implementation prior to July 1, 2003, and will be treated as an increase

in overtime expense. There is no accurate means for available data regarding potential increases

in overtime spending. A process must be designed to track expenditures regarding this collective

bargaining mandate in order to justify operating budget requests specific to this program.

It is assumed that if the class action lawsuit regarding wage and hour specific to incorrect

FLSA application regarding overtime filed against the City and County of Honolulu prevails,

there will be a definite increase in overtime.

Definition of Terms

Temporary assignment pay: Additional pay received by personnel who perform in

higher ranked positions due to various reasons.

Night alarm premium pay: An employee who is assigned to work more than an

average of 40 hours per week and who is required to perform work between the hours of

30

8:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., shall be paid, in addition to the employee’s basic compensation, an

amount equal to 25% of the employee’s hourly rate of pay per hour for each full hour or portion

thereof in excess of one half hour of actual work and 13% of the employee’s hourly rate of pay

for each one half hour or less.

Night shift differential: An employee who is assigned to work an average of 40 hours

per week and who is required to perform work between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.,

shall be paid, in addition to the employee’s basic compensation, an amount of 45 cents per hour

for each full hour or portion thereof in excess one half hour or less.

Hazardous duty pay: Compensation for temporary hazardous duty in addition to base

pay and applicable differentials and premiums.

Longevity pay: Pay at specific years of service to an employee in the maximum step of

the salary range or as otherwise provided. Longevity pay is included in the employee’s base pay

and is treated in the same manner as salary in computing adjustments involving less than a full

month’s pay.

Compensatory time: Time earned at the rate of one and one half times in lieu of

overtime pay. Requests for compensatory time-off shall be granted as requested by the

employee whenever possible. An employee on compensatory time-off shall be deemed to be on

official leave with pay status.

Funeral leave: When death occurs to a member of an employee’s immediate family, the

employee shall be entitled to three days leave with pay provided an employee assigned to a 24-

hour work shift shall be entitled to leave with pay of one work shift.

Family leave using sick leave: Leave allowable by law up to one month due to a family

crisis utilizing sick leave. This request cannot be denied.

31

Family leave using vacation leave: Leave allowable by law up to one month due to a

family crisis utilizing vacation leave. This request cannot be denied.

Military leave: Leave allowable by law for reasons of military activation. Orders must

be provided.

Industrial injury leave: Uncharged leave due to an on-duty injury or illness.

Leave without pay: Leaves of absence without pay in accordance with existing rules,

regulations, and statutes; for example, military activation.

RESULTS

The purpose of this applied research is to identify the significant factors that contribute

toward the escalating overtime expenditures and to recommend possible solutions to reduce these

expenses. The following four research questions are utilized to systematically present the

results:

• Research Question 1. Can a review of department staffing practices

produce data that is relative to the analysis of excessive overtime

expenditure?

The majority of fire departments seem to staff manpower by hiring more personnel than

required for daily staffing to have additional personnel fill in for scheduled leaves, vacations,

illnesses, and other time off. The purpose of this practice is to reduce the need to use overtime to

hire back when an employee is absent. When determining the number of addition personnel to

hire, a minimum staffing level needs to be established. In a previous research study I conducted

concerning factors that determine minimum company staffing levels, a staffing level of four per

company was recommended (based on justification from certified references, nationally

32

recognized organizations, and mandated regulations). Staffing for the HFD is based on hiring an

additional fire fighter above the minimum of four establishing appropriated manpower at five

fire fighters per fire suppression company. This decision was based upon a study that

determined absenteeism to average 20%. However, my research indicated that this study failed

to correctly take into consideration vacancy levels in establishing this 20% absenteeism factor

thus contributing to the increase in overtime expense for recall during high vacancy periods

(Appendix D).

Departments that utilize this minimum staffing practice temporarily assigns personnel

upward to fill vacant ranked positions for additional pay thus creating vacancies at the bottom

level that allow only unranked fire fighters to be recalled to address staffing shortages for

overtime pay. This practice indicates that the majority of the premium pay, such as temporary

assignment pay and overtime pay, is earned by newer unranked personnel resulting in morale

issues among ranked personnel (Appendix E). A decision by an arbitrator regarding a collective

bargaining issue on rank for rank recall for the HFD is due in April. The proposed language

(Appendix A) for the rank for rank recall policy indicates that this program does not primarily

address staffing concerns, but addresses morale issues. This practice will increase overtime

expense resulting in an increase disparity in cost effectiveness.

Other departments have initiated rank for rank recall citing fairness as justification in

spite of an increased overtime expense due to call back. There is no information regarding

whether these departments utilize minimum staffing or constant staffing practices. Constant

staffing is defined as hiring only the number of personnel needed to equal the required daily

staffing. Utilizing this type of staffing will mean that overtime will always be used to fill

staffing needs as a result of scheduled leaves, vacations, illnesses, and other time off. For

33

departments that have adopted this practice, the cost of over hiring personnel to reduce overtime

expense and to maintain adequate staffing levels was greater than the expense of calling back

personnel on overtime to maintain adequate staffing levels. These departments have found that

safety issues such as knowledge of the area, equipment, and apparatus have been addressed, that

vacancies and absenteeism due to various leaves have been addressed, and that the pool of

available personnel for call back is always adequate. Appendix F indicates that in fiscal year

2000, the HFD had no available personnel for call back and companies fell short of the

recommended staffing of four personnel per company during the early phases of its voluntary

recall. During fiscal year 2001, the trend indicates that voluntary recall was able to adequately

staff the vacancies. During fiscal year 2002, the trend indicates that the voluntary recall system

provided more personnel than was necessary to meet minimum staffing requirements. This is

assumed to be a direct result of heightened alert events following September 11, 2001,

requiring additional personnel.

Laurich (1996) states that a broader education base, a better understanding of staffing

requirements, and strategic planning for overtime, are just a few of the enhancements that will be

gained as progress is made in understanding the overtime issues of the fire service. He further

states that the findings of most staffing studies were based on figures developed from an average

number of personnel, but does not work for the fire service. What is needed is a base line built

on an analysis of historical data on the actual use of overtime then the development of a figure

above minimum staffing to cover the unexpected absences.

• Research Question 2. Can a review of department training practices

produce data that is relative to the analysis of excessive overtime

expenditure?

34

Historically, the HFD conducted training activities mainly during on-duty time.

Companies were taken out of service and were sent to the Training Center for the day. Strategic

movement of surrounding companies covered their areas of response. Another practice was to

send instructors out to the field or de-centralize training. These practices may seem time

consuming and too redundant for instructors, but it was more cost efficient. However, due to the

increasing demands for additional training regarding medical, hazardous materials, confined

space, nuclear, biological, chemical, terrorism, and weapons of mass destruction, the HFD

administrators felt that off-duty training was necessary to centralize training in order to have

expert instructors in these areas brought in to instruct more personnel in a shorter period of time.

They also felt that fire protection could not be left in areas for prolonged periods utilizing the

strategic cover in practice. This transition in training practices resulted in an increase in

overtime expense. The practice of conducting mandatory and a few voluntary training activities

during off-duty days on an overtime compensation continues.

Workshops for Chief Officers, as well as for Captains, are indeed good management

practices. At this time, there is no other way to conduct these workshops, but during off-duty

time using overtime to get them together as a group, to interact, to discuss, and to mitigate issues

on a consensus basis. When guest speakers or subject matter experts are utilized and since the

expense for utilizing these individuals are normally high, it is more prudent to address a majority

of the personnel in a group in order to receive the full impact of group interaction and reaction.

The current Assistant Chief of Fire Operations for the HFD has again revised our training

delivery. He has reverted back to the practice of conducting the majority of training during on-

duty hours. He strategically brings in companies to the Training Center ensuring that there is

adequate response coverage for their area of responsibility. The justification for this practice is

35

not only the savings in overtime expense, but also the necessary company interaction and the

evaluation of company performance for accountability purposes. Off-duty training does not

provide for much practical training on a company level. In other words, training would not be

conducted with the crew you work with.

I agree with this philosophy. We are strategically organized to allow periodic on-duty

training and provide adequate services during the times that these companies train and interact

with each other. This type of training should be conducted when manpower seems to be high

(Appendix G) during the months of January through May. Call volume seems to be lower during

these months as indicated by our Fire Communication Center’s year-end report. Time of day

incident surveys reveal that most calls occur when the public finishes its workday and are headed

home for the evening. Hands-on training and interaction between companies from different

areas (urban, suburban, and rural) is necessary for performance improvement and efficiency

when our resources need to be allocated to certain areas and situations during incidents requiring

large resources. The time expended during this on-duty hands-on training brings forth a

necessary system of evaluation, accountability of responsibility, and follow-up. Off-duty

training seems to encourage an attitude of “what’s in it for me” and a lack of dedicated effort.

• Research Question 3. What types of leave have a direct or indirect

impact on overtime?

Researchers on overtime have indicated that sick and vacation leaves are the most

prominent factors contributing to the call back of personnel on overtime to address staffing

needs.

Laurich (1996) states that the fact that there are fewer people on duty than anticipated

makes you look harder than ever at your staffing procedures. Sick leave is up, people are using

36

more vacation leave than anticipated, and there are more people gone for miscellaneous reasons

than expected. In a study conducted by O’Connell (2000), a review of staffing data found that as

the number of unfilled positions within the organization increased, the availability of vacation

leave decreased. When it became apparent to employees that they were unable to use vacation

leave at their choosing and convenience, they resorted to the use of sick and emergency leaves.

As the use of unscheduled leave increased, so did the use of overtime to maintain minimum

staffing levels. Mims (1999) stated that data collection results determined that personnel directly

relate the excessive overtime spending to the use of sick leave.

Factors were identified as contributing directly or indirectly to overtime expense

regarding call back. Nine factors utilized in this study were compensatory time taken, funeral

leave, family leave using sick leave, family leave using vacation leave, leave without pay,

military leave, industrial injury leave, sick leave, and vacation leave. Data collected on these

factors were restricted to fire suppression personnel only. Other factors that indirectly contribute

to staffing are special assignments to 40-hour positions for prolonged periods and extra duty

details. For purposes of this study, these factors were not used as they were not significant.

Factors that the department had very little control over were funeral leave, family leave,

military leave, and leave without pay regarding military activation. Injuries relating to fire

ground incidents have decreased (Appendix H), but the City and County of Honolulu’s workers

compensation statistics indicate an overall high level of industrial injuries and lost time attributed

to it (Appendix I). Sick leave seems to be high, and as the data indicates, seems to be higher

during months that vacation leave is high. An assumption can be made that when staffing levels

are low because of vacation leave, personnel are aware that their requests for vacation leave will

37

be denied; therefore, they call in sick instead. As indicated by the data, high vacation leave is the

factor most contributing and correlating to high overtime expense for call back.

According to Section 31 of our Collective Bargaining Agreement (July 1, 1999, to

June 30, 2003), when an employee requests vacation leave upon proper application, it shall be

granted to and taken by the employee at such time or times as the department head may

designate. However, wherever possible, the department head shall grant the vacation as

requested or as close to the requested period as the exigencies or conditions of the department

will permit so as to prevent any forfeiture of vacation allowance. Accumulation of vacation is

allowed up to 90 working days for 40-hour employees and 44 shifts for 24-hour employees. Any

leave above that level is deemed as excess vacation leave and must be taken within a given

calendar year or else it is forfeited. That equates to ten shifts for 24-hour shift personnel and 21

days for 40-hour employees. Data indicates a liberal allowance for vacation leave by the HFD.

Whether or not this is attributed to excess vacation leave and the number of personnel who are in

this situation is highly unlikely. Appendix J indicates that the majority of the HFD’s employees

are young in total years of service and would not have an accumulation of excess vacation leave.

There is a rumor that the younger fire fighters readily use their vacation and sick leaves for

various reasons since they will make it up with the overtime they earn during recall.

Data collected indicated high vacation leave usage during summer months (June, July,

and August) and continues through the remaining months of the year peaking in the months of

October and December. It is safe to assume that this practice probably could be a result of

children being on their summer breaks, high incident activities for the HFD, or a combination of

both. High vacation leave during the fall months could be attributed to the football season or the

holidays. A month long survey conducted by the HFD’s Assistant Chief of Fire Operations

38

(Appendix K) indicated an unavailability of recall personnel during weekends, especially

Saturday, correlating with the high need for recall during those times. We can also assume that

vacation and sick leaves (although a data study has not been done), tend to occur mainly on the

weekends.

• Research Question 4. What practices have been proposed or implemented

by other departments to reduce overtime expenditure?

Studies conducted by Mims (1999) and Rule (1997) indicate that overtime expense is

reduced when utilizing a shift schedule that does not involve a 24-hour shift. The combination

of a 10-hour duty day and a 14-hour duty night (10/14) work schedule offers several benefits,

including improved safety, sick leave reduction, increased productivity, and more. When

employee absences require the hiring of off-duty personnel, overtime is paid for only 10 or 14

hours. Other practices proposed or implemented dealt with over hiring to reduce vacancies,

computerizing shift analysis and the call back process, or utilizing part-time employees.

Informal discussions with union leaders indicate that a shift schedule change from a 24-

hour shift to a 10/14 work schedule is not acceptable due to part-time jobs that many fire fighters

have and find necessary in supplementing their income. They did not see the overall efficiency it

may bring to curbing overtime expense, increasing the call back pool, reducing sick and vacation

leave use, and improving safety.

DISCUSSION

Staffing practices continue to be the most significant issue that impacts overtime expense.

According to Tharp (1998), the majority of departments, by a ratio of almost two to one, utilized

the minimum staffing method whereby additional employees were hired as replacements for

39

employees who were on scheduled or unscheduled leave. Constant staffing is defined as hiring

only the number employees needed to equal the required daily staffing needs and utilizing

overtime to fill staffing needs as a result of absenteeism. Research by Dozier (2001), Bruno

(1992), and references such as NFPA 1500 (1997 edition), NFPA 1410 (2000 edition), NFPA

1710 (2001 edition), and OSHA Regulation 1910.134, all support a minimum staffing level of

four fire fighters per company. Heumann (2001) states that overtime can be reduced or

eliminated through increased staffing, but the cost of fringe benefits for the increased number of

employees often negates any savings gained from reducing overtime.

The HFD’s administration has adopted the practice of staffing at least four fire fighters

per company. The HFD utilizes the minimum staffing practice having an authorized staffing of

five fire fighters per company or an over hire of one fire fighter per company. This staffing was

established as a result of a previous study completed by the HFD in response to a City and

County of Honolulu study conducted by the consulting firm of Towers Perrin regarding city

efficiency. The 20% factor addressing absenteeism is not consistent since it depends mainly on

vacancies at any given time. The major factors contributing to overtime expended for call back

are high vacancies combined with high sick and vacation leaves taken. In fact, the budget and

fiscal practice of the City and County of Honolulu is not to fund a number of positions

(identified as a vacancy cutback practice) resulting in the inability of the HFD to fill those

positions. Their justification being that the hiring process in place, wherein vacancies are filled

when there is a termination and/or retirement, is time consuming, and therefore, results in a

varying number of vacancies throughout the year anyway. Therefore, there would be no need to

fund those positions. This is supported by the amount of salary savings generated that was

utilized to cover overtime shortfalls in fiscal year 2000 and 2001 (Appendix B) and the amount

40

of salary funds that was returned to the City’s treasury. In those fiscal years, there were no

mandated vacancy cutbacks. Simply stated, historically, the City has utilized funds from vacant

positions to pay the overtime of other workers. This practice has saved the City money by

eliminating the cost of benefits for the workers that were not hired; however, now there will be

neither the workers nor the money.

In determining what staffing practice works best for a department, factors such as safety,

morale, as well as cost efficiency, must be taken into consideration. The Phoenix and Henderson

Fire Departments find that constant staffing works for them while others find that minimum

staffing works better. Laurich (1996) states that in determining what practice is best for your

department, you need to begin with a base line built on an analysis of historical data on the actual

use of overtime. A figure above minimum staffing then needs to be developed to cover the

unexpected absences. At this point, each department should determine when it is cost effective

to use overtime rather than hiring additional personnel. There are several methods in

determining this and most departments should consult with their fiscal personnel in determining

which process works best. The research of identifying and presenting the various processes goes

beyond the scope of this project. In conducting such a study, departments should also be aware

of the FLSA statues that regulate overtime. They should be knowledgeable of a possible

impending class action lawsuit by various fire fighter unions regarding overtime issues for fire

and rescue personnel and the FLSA (Appendix C). Websites for the IAFF and the FLSA

regarding fire fighters and overtime are great resources for this information.

Rank for rank recall will assist staffing needs, but overtime expense will increase. Since

the primary reason for rank for rank recall is designed to address morale issues, overtime may be

expended when there is no need to call back due to staffing.

41

Off-duty training is another reason for overtime expense. As stated earlier, if the practice

of off-duty training continues, a projection of $800,000 will be needed to fund this overtime

expense. Fite (2002) states that the incentive for attending off-duty training is overtime pay.

Moody (1999) indicated that an increase in training requirements would require off-duty training

and overtime expense. The primary issue in regards to on-duty versus off-duty training comes

down to what method is most effective. For the HFD, the argument by most is that off-duty

training accomplishes this and is most effective. The justification is that there are too many tasks

that need to be completed aside from responding to incidents during a given on-duty day.

However, the argument can be made that off-duty training is driven by the earning of overtime

and is not effective due to the attitudes of most personnel. The HFD’s Assistant Chief of Fire

Operations supports on-duty training for most activities, citing practical training by company

results in accountability and an opportunity to evaluate hands-on performance. This practice is

certainly effective and raises the bar.

Appendix L indicates that when absences are high, so are recall overtime expense. It also

indicates the difference in overtime expended for recall purposes and what was expended for

training, workshops, and other miscellaneous overtime expenses.

Staffing data reviews by O’Connell (2000) and Laurich (1996) indicate that sick and

emergency leaves, as well as vacation leave, are major factors contributing to an increase in

overtime expenditure for call back to meet staffing requirements. Liberal vacation and sick leave

policies contribute to excessive leave taking. These reviews support the findings regarding the

HFD’s personnel that the months of high overtime expense are attributed to staffing needs.

Therefore, the liberal policies and practices of the HFD’s administrators regarding sick and

vacation leaves need to be reviewed and tightened.

42

Mims (1999) and Rule (1997) strongly support that a change in schedule from a 24-hour

shift to a 10/14 or 12/12 work schedule will definitely reduce sick and vacation use resulting in

reduced overtime expense.

Positives for a 10/14 or 12/12 work schedule:

• An increased pool for recall

• Reduction in sick and vacation leaves by addressing the one-day “I have to take off”

leave (taking the whole shift off for something that only takes a portion of the day)

• Improved safety due to the shortened length of duty time and addressing the fatigue

factor that goes with a 24-hour shift

• Time efficiency regarding more productive time toward training, maintenance, mandated

programs such as physical fitness, and more effective coordination with support sections

such as the Training and Research Bureau and the Fire Prevention Bureau

(implementation of flex schedule incentives for bureau personnel)

• A stable family lifestyle having the fire fighter home for a portion of the day, every day

• The ability for those to attend school and not utilize leave

Negatives for a 10/14 or 12/12 work schedule:

• Strong cultural opposition by fire fighters (they seem to conclude that they will be

working more and have less time off)

• Greatly affect their lifestyle in regards to leisure activities that usually involve drinking

• The general feeling that one will be working more on such a schedule. A 24-hour shift

has established the practice that after 4:00 p.m. or after eight hours of work time has

ceased, standby activities come into play (physical fitness activities, volleyball, and

basketball)

43

• Strong union opposition

The HFD’s administrators should seriously consider studying the viability of such a

schedule change not only because it addresses overtime expense, but for overall efficiency.

Other factors that need to be addressed are vacancies and hiring practices as well as

addressing temporary staffing shortages by hiring back qualified retirees on personal services

contracts (no benefits) and assigning them to staff bureau positions thus releasing able-bodied

bureau personnel to fill fire suppression vacancies. This may occur during periods of heightened

security or war. Hiring of civilians to address on-duty absences by fire fighters performing

details activities.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Results of this research project indicate that staffing practices, training delivery, sick

leave, vacation leave, industrial leave, as well as other factors, contribute to overtime expense.

Also identified are possible practices that have been proposed or implemented by other

departments to reduce overtime expense. The following recommendations are based on the

findings of this applied research project. The HFD’s administration should:

• Create a task force, which include experts in the field of finance, to study and review the

efficiency regarding minimum staffing or constant staffing relating to important issues

concerning the HFD. We need to find that balance between appropriate and efficient

expenditure of overtime and the need to hire additional personnel. What needs to be

developed is a formula that determines what practice is most cost effective.

44

• Conduct a collaborative study by administrative staff and union officials to review and

tighten the department’s liberal sick and vacation leave policies. The data collected

indicates a liberal use of sick and vacation leaves.

• Undertake the task of developing specific programs to gather and interpret data as it

pertains to justifications for budget requests through its Planning and Development

section. There is no computerized system in place to accurately track specific overtime

expense for recall, training, and other activities. Before a thorough study can be made

regarding practices involving overtime, accurate historic data must be available.

• Develop a tracking system to document vacancies at least on a monthly basis through its

Personnel Section.

• Seriously consider changing to a 10/14 or 12/12 work schedule for reasons of safety,

potential reduction in sick and vacation leave, and time efficiency. The implementation

of rank for rank recall will have serious impact on overtime expense and bureau

personnel morale. It will result in more reasons why fire fighters do not want bureau

assignments.

• Consider hiring qualified retirees on personal service contracts to staff bureau positions

during times of increased staffing requirements for fire suppression positions utilizing

able-bodied bureau personnel to fill those suppression positions.

• Work with the City and County of Honolulu’s Department of Human Resources to adopt

a process to fill anticipated vacancies and hiring personnel in lieu of those vacancies,

sending them through required training and assigning them when the vacancies actually

occur.

45

• Explore an efficient method of implementing on-duty training for the majority of

mandated programs. This will not only reduce overtime, but will result in overall

improvement in training efficiency. Appendix M indicates a growing percentage of

overtime expended for off-duty training, workshops, and miscellaneous activities.

This applied research project has analyzed the problem and has recommended several

solutions that could be implemented to address it. Hopefully, the recommendations will lead to a

permanent resolution of the problem and not just a temporary one. Remember that overtime

expense is used to address a temporary resolution to a problem and should not be used as a

permanent solution.

46

REFERENCES

Brown, R. (1998). Combination Hiring/Overtime Program How to Best Meet Approved

Staffing Levels for the West Metro Fire Protection District. Emmitsburg MD: National Fire

Academy.

Brunacini, A. V. (1992, May/June). Shrinking Resources vs. Staffing Realities. NFPA

Journal, 28, 132.

Bruno, H. (1992, April). A Four-Person Standard. Firehouse, 10.

Dozier, K. E. (2001). Options Available to Reduce Overtime Expenses for the Abilene

Fire Department. Emmitsburg MD: National Fire Academy.

Fite, R. (2002). Identifying Past Factors and Costs to Predict Future Overtime within the

Richardson Fire Department. Emmitsburg MD: National Fire Academy.

Granito, J. A. (1990, September). A Balancing Act. Fire Command, 43-44.

Hawaii Fire Fighters Association (2002). FLSA Lawsuit Update.

http://www.hawaiifirefighters.org/

Heumann, F. J. (2001). Assessing Shift Personnel Opinions on Overtime Hiring Rules for

Implementing an Automated Scheduling Software Program. Emmitsburg MD: National Fire

Academy.

International Association of Fire Fighters (2002). Overtime Issues for Fire and Rescue

Personnel-The Fair Labor Standards Act. http://www.iaff.org

Laurich, D. R. (1996). Overtime Projections: Is it Math or Mystery? Emmitsburg MD:

National Fire Academy.

Mims, L. (1999). Overtime Cost Reduction with Alternative Work Schedules. Emmitsburg

MD: National Fire Academy.

47

Moody, S. (1999). Extra-Pay Systems and Off-Duty Training. Emmitsburg MD: National

Fire Academy.

National Fire Protection Association (1997). NFPA 1500: Standard on fire department

occupational safety and health program. (1997 edition).

National Fire Protection Association (2000). NFPA 1410: Standard on training for initial

emergency scene operations. (2000 edition).

National Fire Protection Association (2001). NFPA 1710: Standard for the

organizational and deployment fire suppression operations, emergency medical operations, and

special operations to the public by career fire departments. (2001 edition).

OSHA Regulations (Standards-29 CFR). Respiratory protection standard, 1910.134.

(1998).

O’Connell, T. J. (2000). Examining the Financial Impact of Escalating Overtime in the

Sunrise Fire Rescue Department. Emmitsburg MD: National Fire Academy.

Phoenix Fire Department. Assignment Policy M.P. 104.02 5/00-R.

Phoenix Fire Department. Constant Staffing Policy M.P. 104.3 10/98-R.

Riemar, T. (1998). Extra-board Firefighters: Part Time Employees as an Alternative to

Overtime. Emmitsburg MD: National Fire Academy.

Rule, C. H. (1999, August). Shift Change. Fire Chief, 62-63.

Smith, M. L. (2000, July). Making the Best of a Bad Situation. Firehouse, 28-29.

Tharp, D. (1998). Determining Optimum Staffing to Minimize the Use of Overtime at the

Central Jackson County Fire Protection District. Emmitsburg MD: National Fire Academy.

Tomita, A. K. (2001). Factors that Determine Minimum Company Staffing Levels.

Emmitsburg MD: National Fire Academy.

48

U. S. Department of Labor (1987). Application of the Fair Labor Standards Act to

Employees of State and Local Governments.

http://dol.gove/dol/allcfr/ESA/Title_29/Part_553/29CFR553.200.htm

Varone, J. C. (1994). Providence Fire Department Staffing Study. Emmitsburg MD:

National Fire Academy.

Westfall-Lake, P. (1997, October). Shift Scheduling’s Impact on Morale, Safety, and

Performance. Occupational Health & Safety, 146-149.

49

INDEX OF APPENDICES

Appendix A - Draft Policy on Rank for Rank Recall

• Draft policy for rank for rank recall Appendix B - Actual Overtime Expenditures (Line Items)

• These tables have information derived from financial reports obtained from the City and County of Honolulu’s Department of Budget and Fiscal Services. The data reflects actual overtime expenditures for Fire Operations and Department totals for fiscal year 2000 (July 1, 1999 to June 30, 2000); fiscal year 2001 (July 1, 2000 to June 30, 2001); fiscal year 2002 (July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2002). For fiscal year 2000, Fire Operations had an appropriated overtime budget of $100,000 and expended $519,195, overspending by $419,195. Salary savings of $1,001,719 were returned to the City Treasury. For fiscal year 2001, Fire Operations had an appropriated overtime budget of $100,000 and expended $1,321,145, overspending by $1,221,145. Salary savings of $837,420 were returned to the City Treasury. For fiscal year 2002, Fire Operations had an appropriated overtime budget of $1,600,000 and expended $1,736,766, overspending by $136,766. Salary savings of $115,899 were returned to the City Treasury. This indicates that the Department’s operating budget is mandating vacancy cutbacks (not funding regular positions) while increasing the overtime budget for fiscal year 2002

Appendix C - Overtime Issues for Fire and Rescue Personnel – The Fair Labor Standards Act

• This is a copy of the overtime issues for fire and rescue personnel--the FLSA and the class action suit filed by union members of several fire departments.

Appendix D - Voluntary Recall Expenditures and Average Daily Balances

• These tables identify estimated voluntary recall expenditures and daily average absences per month. It indicates a correlation between high average absences and high expenditures of overtime.

Appendix E - Union’s Proposal on Rank for Rank Overtime

• This is the Union’s recent proposal for rank for rank overtime. This proposal addressed safety and morale issues.

Appendix F - Manpower (Daily Averages)

• This table shows a breakdown of daily averages for total absences (column 1 is data received from daily manpower statistics kept by Fire Operations administrators); an average of manpower absences attributed to the nine factors of leave used in Appendix G

50

(column 2); an average of absences due to industrial injury (column 3); an average of absences due to sick leave (column 4); an average of absences due to vacation leave (column 5); an average of needed manpower to reach a minimum staffing of four personnel per company (column 6 - a daily average of absences minus a factor of 57 allowable positions before recall is initiated); an average recall done (column 7); and an average number of unfilled positions (column 8). This table indicates more recall done daily in the fiscal year 2002 (July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2002) than actually needed. The reason for this could be attributed to the voluntary recall process in place at that time that resulted in excessive recall and unnecessary overtime expenditure (prior to computerized recall program).

Appendix G - Leaves Taken

• This information was derived from information received from computer generated payroll reports obtained from the City and County of Honolulu’s Department of Information Technology. The nine leave factors that were utilized were compensatory time taken (CTT); funeral leave (FNF); family leave using sick leave (FSF); family leave using vacation leave (FVF); leave without pay (LWF); military leave (MIF); industrial injury leave (SIF); vacation leave (VCF). This information is for Fire Operations personnel only. This information identifies high totals of vacation, sick, and industrial injury leave. It identifies high leave taking starting from May through the end of the year peaking in the months of October and December. It also indicates that when vacation leave is high so is sick leave.

Appendix H - Fire Service Injuries (1995-2002)

• The information in this table was taken from our NIFIRS incident reports and indicates the number of injuries incurred during fire department incidents. It shows a decline since voluntary recall was initiated from December 1999. It can be assumed that there is a correlation with insufficient manpower and fire ground injuries.

Appendix I - Workers’ Compensation Expenditures and Statistics

• This is a summary of injury and workers’ compensation statistics for the Honolulu Fire Department for the last five fiscal years. These statistics are provided by the Workers’ Compensation Division of the City and County of Honolulu’s Department of Human Resources. These statistics should be useful in evaluating our safety, training, and return to work programs. From the information derived from Appendix H, it can be assumed that there are less number of injuries attributed to fire ground injuries and more injuries involving round ball activities (injuries requiring more loss time).

Appendix J - Personnel Years of Service

• This table identifies the number of HFD personnel by years of service. This shows that the HFD has a greater number of personnel with 15 years of service or less, than personnel with more than 15 years of service by a two to one ratio. From this

51

information, it can be assumed that the majority of personnel should not have excess totals of vacation or sick leave. This is not reflective of the sick or vacation leave expended data.

Appendix K - Voluntary Recall Summary

• These tables reflect the statistical data kept by our Assistant Chief in charge of Fire Operations to track filled and unfilled positions attributed to voluntary recall. These tables indicate a tendency for personnel to work during the weekdays and avoid weekends. It also indicates higher absences during the weekends without the reasons.

Appendix L - Monthly Vacancies of Fire Suppression Personnel

• This table shows the total of Fire Operations personnel absent per month (combining nine leave factors used in Appendix G) for various leaves (column 1); estimated monthly recall expenses (column 2); total overtime expense (column 3 - figures used are one month in arrears due to a fiscal delay in posting and are not accurate); difference of overtime expended reflect estimated overtime expended for off-duty training, workshops, and miscellaneous activities (column 4 - derived from the difference in columns 2 and 3). This table also indicates a high total of overtime expended for activities other that recall for the month of September, October, November, and December of 2001. This can be attributed to the events after 911.

Appendix M - Total Overtime Expenditures

• The total overtime expended per fiscal year by Fire Operations personnel (fiscal year 2000: July 1, 1999 to June 30, 2000; fiscal year 2001: July 1, 2000 to June 30, 2000; and fiscal year 2002: July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2002) for voluntary recall (column 1 - estimated); total overtime expended (column 2 - actual); overtime expended for off-duty training, workshops, and miscellaneous activities. This table indicates a growing percentage of overtime expended for off-duty training, workshops, and miscellaneous activities.

52

Appendix A

Subject Category: ADMINISTRATION

Index Code

Subject Title: Voluntary Rank-for-Rank Recall Pilot Program

Issued by: Fire Administration

Reference (s) Unit 11 Agreement

Purpose(s): To establish a voluntary rank-for-rank recall pilot program for Fire Captains, Fire Fighter IIIs and Fire Fighter IIs in the Honolulu Fire Department.

I. POLICY:

This policy addresses the fair and equitable distribution of recall opportunities. This pilot program shall be effective from July 1, 2003 through June 30, 2005, during which time the Fire Chief in consultation with the Union will determine the feasibility and the continuance of the program.

II. DEFINITIONS:

A. Scheduled Vacation – Any vacation where such application was approved by the

Battalion Chief at least 7 days prior to the commencement date of such vacation.

B. Ranked Fire Fighters – A ranked fire fighter is defined as a Fire Fighter II, Fire Fighter III or Fire Captain and hereafter, referred to as “ranked personnel”.

C. Qualified Ranked Personnel – Qualified ranked personnel means employees who are not currently serving any probationary period.

III. APPLICABILITY:

This rank-for-rank recall procedure shall supercede the application of Section 26 (Temporary Assignment) only in situations involving projected vacancies due to planned or scheduled vacations and shall be limited to eligible employees assigned to the same unit or company, but on different platoons. Projected vacancies due to vacation must be for the entire 24-hour shift.

IV. PROCEDURES:

A. Program Manager

1. The Assistant Chief of Fire Operations or his/her designee shall be

designated as the Rank-for-Rank Program Manager to oversee and manage the pilot program.

53

2. The Program Manager shall regularly review the program and meet with

the Rank-for-Rank Recall Committee during the pilot program. 3. The Program Manager shall review any requests for rank-for-rank

overtime on days of projected vacancies due to scheduled vacation. 4. The Program Manager shall be responsible for rank-for-rank recall

assignments:

a. Ranked personnel are assigned rank-for-rank overtime only within their Company for scheduled vacation.

b. Ranked personnel who work 24 consecutive hours must have an

8-hour break before they are eligible for rank-for rank overtime. c. Ranked personnel shall not be assigned to work from 0800 to

2000 on their day off following a work shift or from 2000 to 0800 hours on their day off preceding a work shift.

d. Ranked personnel shall be assigned rank-for-rank recall based on

their availability for a specific date. e. To the extent possible, ranked personnel on rank-for-rank recall

shall not serve Temporary Assignment to higher-level Fire Fighter ranks for the duration of such recall assignments. Section 26.A of the Unit 11 Agreement is not applicable to mandate the temporary assignment in this situation.

B. Rank-for-Rank Recall Procedures

1. Rank-for rank recall shall be restricted to qualified rank personnel

assigned to the same unit or company, e.g., ranked personnel and their ranked counterparts assigned to the same unit or company on different platoons (Red, Blue or Green).

2. Upon the availability of recall opportunities based on projected vacancies

due to scheduled vacations of ranked personnel, the qualified personnel interested in assuming the recall overtime opportunity shall indicate his/her interest of working the recall overtime. (NOTE: Specific procedures relating to proper notification and confirmation of recall overtime shall be completed prior to implementation date.)

3. Employees who commit to recall assignment shall be fit for duty, report

to work on time and are expected to work the entire 12-hour or 24-hour

54

shift, as applicable. Failure to report to work without proper notification or tardiness without a legitimate excuse may result in discipline.

4. To the extent possible, the Program Manager shall not schedule fire

fighters to work more than 24 consecutive hours, because of this program. V. This policy is subject to amendments by the Fire Chief in consultation with the Union.

2/15/03 HFD Rank-for-Rank Policy.final

Appendix B

ACTUAL EXPENDITURES OF OVERTIME

(Line Items) Fiscal Year 2000 Fiscal Year 2001 Fiscal Year 2002 Fiscal Year 2003 Operations

(1408) Department

(1401) Operations

(1408) Department

(1401) Operations

(1408) Department

(1401) Operations

(1408) Department

(1401) July 17,918 30,440 175,799 202,926 13,378 16,716 33,087 36,016 August 4,213 24,382 164,883 181,835 108,243 112,022 122,337 139,047 September 24,948 39,114 152,425 170,719 89,982 101,277 94,598 108,872 October 9,144 27,967 116,155 142,735 182,765 211,277 227,986 254,848 November 7,155 17,739 59,900 72,477 295,993 337,217 142,190 153,900 December 15,072 16,725 55,404 71,146 226,739 247,259 159,515 169,020 January 104,586 115,968 108,337 141,417 308,216 331,946 February 38,920 47,226 62,217 82,474 145,683 165,447 March 55,117 65,503 39,844 53,245 148,473 165,195 April 130,396 145,193 110,980 131,246 104,263 121,819 May 35,641 50,836 63,261 73,675 37,413 43,880 June 76,085 85,962 211,940 244,572 75,618 91,668 Total 519,195 667,050 1,321,145 1,568,466 1,736,766 1,945,723 779,712 Appropriated 100,000 222,000 100,000 225,000 1,600,000 1,755,000 1,700,000 Balance (419,195) (445,050) (1,221,145) (1,343,466) (136,766) (190,723) Salary Savings

2,191,079

2,537,331

2,734,089

3,629,698

(528,021)

(463,244)

Salary Monies Returned

562,049

1,001,719

507,786

837,420

87,714

115,899

Provisional 1,362,300 1,560,000

55

56

Appendix C

OVERTIME ISSUES FOR FIRE AND RESCUE PERSONNEL THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT

ON-CALL TIME--Payable in Certain Circumstances SLEEP TIME--Can your Employer Deduct On-Duty Sleep Time? MEAL TIME--Should you be Getting Paid for On-Duty Meal Breaks? RECEIVING COMPENSATORY TIME IN LIEU OF CASH FOR OVERTIME HOURS--It’s Allowed Only in the Public Sector and Only if you Agree EXCLUDING OFFICERS FROM THE OVERTIME PAY REQUIREMENT--Are Fire Officers Entitled to Overtime? Answer: Some Are and Some Are Not. SPECIAL JOB CLASSIFICATIONS PRE-SHIFT AND POST SHIFT ACTIVITIES--Must be Paid Overtime for Activities Such as Lineups, Check Out Firearms, Writing Reports...) The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is a federal law that requires employers to pay minimum wage and overtime compensation (under specific circumstances) to their employees. Since the FLSA became applicable to state and local government employers in 1986 following a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, many public employers have attempted various ways to avoid paying overtime compensation (i.e., time and one-half pay) to fire fighters, rescue service, emergency medical service (EMS) and law enforcement personnel as the law requires. If an employer’s overtime pay practices are in violation of the FLSA, employees may file a lawsuit against the employer and obtain back pay (which may be doubled to include what is known as "liquidated damages"), reimbursement for attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses. Various circumstances in which public employers are required to pay overtime (after a specific threshold is met)—and in which many public employers try to avoid paying overtime—are described below. FEDERAL FIREFIGHTERS EMPLOYEES: Many different rules apply to federal public sector employees. Check the Federal Employees page for special rules that apply to them. ON-CALL TIME--Payable in Certain Circumstances In some jurisdictions, public safety employees are required to be on-call during times that they are not on duty at their normal work site. These on-call hours may be considered compensable hours of work (and payable at the overtime rate) if the restrictions placed on the employee during the on-call time prevent the employee from utilizing the time effectively for his/her own personal pursuits, and thus the time is regarded as being predominantly for the employer’s benefit. Factors that are considered in determining whether on-call time must be treated as compensable work hours include the following:

• the average number of emergency calls the employee responds to during the on-call period

• the time in which the employee has to be at the work site after being called in • whether an employee is subject to discipline for missing or being late to a call-back • the extent to which an employee is able to engage in other activities while on-call

57

SLEEP TIME--Can your Employer Deduct On-Duty Sleep Time? Many fire and rescue employees work shifts that span an entire day, and because of the time period involved, sleep at their work sites during each shift. Unless certain conditions are met, a public employer must treat this sleep time as compensable hours (even if no emergency calls come in). Under applicable law, an employer can deduct up to eight hours of sleep time per shift from the number of compensable hours of work that trigger overtime pay only if the following two conditions are both met:

• the shift lasts more than 24 hours (e.g., 24 _ hours) and • there is an express or implied agreement from the employee that the employer may

deduct such time Not surprisingly, many of the cases in this area focus on the issue of whether an express or implied agreement ever came into existence. MEAL TIME--Should you be Getting Paid for On-Duty Meal Breaks? Fire and rescue employees who are required to work shifts lasting an entire day also usually eat meals at their work site. As with sleep time, employers may try to exclude meal periods from an employee’s compensable work time. However, an employer may exclude meal periods (and avoid paying overtime) only if the following conditions are met:

• the shift lasts more than 24 hours (e.g., 24 _ hours) and • the time that is designated for eating is a "bona fide" meal period, meaning that the

employee is generally relieved of duties during this time such that he uses the time predominantly for his benefit rather than for the employer’s benefit) and

• there is an express or implied agreement from the employee that the employer may deduct such time

As with sleep time claims, if each of the required conditions is not met, meal time must be considered as compensable work time. RECEIVING COMPENSATORY TIME IN LIEU OF CASH FOR OVERTIME HOURS--It’s Allowed Only in the Public Sector and Only if you Agree The FLSA permits public employers to afford compensatory time ("comp time") to fire and rescue personnel in lieu of cash overtime payments provided that the employees agree in advance to this compensation policy. In states that permit collective bargaining between employers and employee representatives, an agreement covering a group of employees may be reached through negotiations with the employees’ representative. In noncollective bargaining jurisdictions, an employer may institute a comp time in lieu of cash overtime policy through agreements with individual employees. Under current law, fire and rescue personnel can work 320 overtime hours and thereby accrue a maximum of 480 hours of comp time (320 hours times 1.5) before overtime hours worked above this maximum must be compensated in cash. An employer must permit an employee to use his/her accrued comp time upon request unless using it on a particular day would (in legal terms) "unduly disrupt the employer’s operation." An

58

issue that will soon be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court is whether an employer can force an employee to use accrued comp time. EXCLUDING OFFICERS FROM THE OVERTIME PAY REQUIREMENT--Are Fire Officers Entitled to Overtime? Answer: Some Are and Some Are Not. The FLSA generally requires that public employers pay time and one-half overtime to fire and rescue personnel when they work more than an average of 53 hours a week. However, the FLSA also exempts certain classes of employees from this overtime pay requirement. A public employer can determine that officers shall not be paid overtime if

• officers are paid on a salaried (rather than per hour) basis and • the officers perform primarily supervisory duties during their work time

The courts have established factual and legal standards that are applied to determine whether these two conditions are met (and therefore, whether officers are improperly being denied overtime pay). SPECIAL JOB CLASSIFICATIONS A. EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE (EMS) EMPLOYEES (If they are not cross-trained as fire fighters paid on a 40 hour week) Public employees who are not engaged in fire protection activities are, in general, entitled to overtime pay after working 40 hours in a workweek. However, to avoid overtime costs, some public employers attempt to treat EMS employees as fire fighters, thereby paying them overtime only when they work more than 53 hours a week. Under applicable federal regulations, a state or local government employer must demonstrate that EMS/ambulance employees meet all of the following criteria in order to treat them as being eligible for overtime pay only after they have reached 53 work hours in a week:

• The EMS employee must be an "integral part" of the public agency’s fire protection activities;

• The EMS employee must be trained in the "rescue" of victims of fires, crimes and accidents;

• The EMS employee must be regularly dispatched to fire, crime scenes and vehicle accidents; and

• The EMS employee must spend at least 80% of his/her work time and calls in conjunction with fire protection/rescue activities.

Single role EMS employees whose jobs do not meet all of the above tests (including being cross-trained in fire and rescue activities) are required to be paid overtime compensation after they work 40 hours each week. B. ARSON INVESTIGATORS (Not subject to fire fighter overtime hourly standard) Fire (arson) investigators in a public fire department whose job is to investigate possible arson following a fire may no be grouped with fire fighters for overtime pay purposes, and therefore, pubic employers cannot decide that they will pay overtime to these employees only after they

59

have worked 53 hours in a week. Arson investigators are entitled to overtime compensation after they have worked either 40 or 43 hours in a week, depending on whether their job responsibilities include certain law enforcement functions (e.g., whether or not they have the authority to make arrests). C. DISPATCHERS (Paid on a 40-hour workweek) Employees who perform an emergency communications role dispatching public safety personnel and equipment to fire, crime and accident scenes and who are not assigned (or rotated) into law enforcement or fire protection (i.e., fire suppression or prevention) functions must be paid overtime according to the 40-hour workweek standard rather than the higher thresholds permitted for police and fire fighters. PRE-SHIFT AND POST-SHIFT ACTIVITIES--Must be Paid Overtime for Activities Such as Lineups, Check Out Firearms, Writing Reports Many public employees, aside from canine handlers, are entitled to be compensated for job-related duties that they perform either before or after their regular work shifts. The general rule is that an employee must be compensated for activities performed either before or after the regular work shift if those activities are an integral and indispensable part of the principal work activities for which the person is employed. Whether pre-shift or post-shift activities are considered an integral and indispensable part of the principal work activities is highly dependent upon the specific facts of each case. In deciding a particular case, courts analyze whether the activities in question are necessary to the job and performed at least in part for the benefit of the employer (compensable time), or are performed for the employee’s convenience (non-compensable time). Therefore, in many cases, public safety employees are entitled to be compensated for such activities undertaken outside their regular shift such as cleaning firearms, checking firearms in and out, inspecting and repairing equipment, attending a lineup or briefing or writing reports.

60

Appendix D

VOLUNTARY RECALL EXPENDITURES

Fiscal Year

2000 Fiscal Year

2001 Fiscal Year

2002 Fiscal Year

2003 July

136,422

73,800

68,600

August 123,408 65,781 85,600 September 56,466 48,168 99,800 October 31,086 122,976 124,800 November 43,488 113,076 109,000 December 76,617 94,212 191,232 116,200 January 25,137 31,482 86,157 59,000 February 31,923 41,292 115,182 March 83,862 83,862 73,098 April 40,086 39,600 25,452 May 62,172 119,592 20,367 June 114,300 18,558 34,749

AVERAGE DAILY ABSENCES Fiscal Year

2000 Fiscal Year

2001 Fiscal Year

2002 Fiscal Year

2003 July

78.16

58.43

August 77.68 54.78 September 66.23 55.92 October 60 66.45 November 56.13 63.12 December 77.52 71.16 77.38 January 64.52 59.16 59.75 February 67.07 67.54 70.04 March 72 72 62.56 April 63.50 62.70 51.59 May 70.39 69.54 51.37 June 76.13 74.40 55.93

61

Appendix E

UNION PROPOSAL 1/02 NEW SECTION. RANK FOR RANK OVERTIME The Employer shall follow the rules provided in Section 26, Temporary Assignments provided such temporary assignment does not cause an overtime situation. All overtime shall be filled by an employee holding an equal rank as the work assignment which has been vacated as a result of an absence whenever possible. If such temporary assignment causes overtime as the result of the absence, the temporary assignment shall not be allowed and an employee of equal rank shall fill the vacated position (i.e., if a Fire Fighter is temporarily assigned to fill a Fire Apparatus Operator’s work assignment, and such temporary assignment causes overtime as a result of an absence, the temporary assignment of the Fire Fighter shall not be allowed and the ranked position shall be filled by a Fire Apparatus Operator). The Employer in each jurisdiction, in consultation with the Union shall develop a fair and equitable policy to address rank for rank overtime within their own jurisdiction. Related sections of this Agreement shall be appropriately amended to reflect any changes implemented by this Section.

62 Appendix F

MANPOWER

(Daily Averages)

Positions Needed to Meet Voluntary Authorized Recall Criteria Positions Unfilled Battalion 1 73 positions 61 positions 12 positions Battalion 2 72 positions 59 positions 13 positions Battalion 3 58 positions 47 positions 11 positions Battalion 4 60 positions 50 positions 10 positions Battalion 5 64 positions 53 positions 11 positions 339 positions 272 positions 57 positions

Fiscal

Year 2000 Absences based on

Daily Stats

Absences based on 9 Factors

Sick

(Industrial)

Sick

Comp. Time/

Vacation

Vacancy

Recall

Unfilled

Positions July

August September October November December 78 21 12 9 January 65 23 2 6 13 8 4 4 February 67 27 2 6 16 10 6 4 March 72 30 3 6 19 15 12 3 April 64 25 4 6 14 7 6 1 May 70 31 4 8 16 13 10 3 June 76 35 3 6 22 19 17 2

Fiscal

Year 2001

July

78

39

3

6

28

21

23

August 78 35 2 7 24 21 19 2 September 66 32 3 5 21 9 9 October 60 42 4 7 28 3 5 November 56 29 3 4 19 +1 7 December 71 45 3 7 32 14 14 January 59 25 4 7 12 2 5 February 68 30 4 7 17 11 7 4 March 72 31 4 7 18 15 12 3 April 63 24 2 5 15 6 6 May 70 25 3 5 13 13 17 June 74 33 3 6 21 17 3 14

63

Fiscal

Year 2002

Absences based on Daily Stats

Absences based on 9 Factors

Sick

(Industrial)

Sick

Comp. Time/

Vacation

Vacancy

Recall

Unfilled

PositionsJuly 58 33 2 7 22 1 11 August 55 31 2 8 20 +2 10 September 56 34 2 7 22 +1 7 October 66 43 3 10 28 9 16 November 63 32 2 7 20 6 13 December 77 45 2 7 33 20 22 January 60 23 2 7 12 3 11 February 70 28 2 8 16 13 17 March 63 28 1 8 17 6 11 April 52 32 3 9 19 +5 4 May 51 32 3 7 20 +6 3 June 36 34 3 6 22 +1 5

64 Appendix G

LEAVES TAKEN

(Hours)

Fiscal Year 2000

CTT

FNF

FSF

FVF

LWF

MIF

SIF

SKF

VCF

TOTAL

January 321 240 402 56 264 96 1,680 4,350 9,600 17,009February 952 96 488 72 248 512 1,600 4,045 10,060 18,073March 1,262 192 734 192 240 332 2,004 4,685 12,585 22,226April 710 168 288 216 352 112 2,742 4,218 9,304 18,110May 844 120 776 432 224 744 2,960 5,874 11,295 34.370June 1,020 96 788 408 361 870 2,277 4,560 14,952 25,332July 862 168 668 152 512 515 2,328 4,168 19,903 29,276August 585 128 552 224 552 464 1,815 4,976 17,017 26,313September 917 224 624 24 408 344 2,376 3,790 14,427 23,134October 667 24 1,432 424 264 35 3,020 4,948 20,507 31,321November 589 128 525 136 288 376 2,216 2,976 13,408 20,642December 390 48 1,536 384 160 872 2,280 4,903 23,158 33,731

Fiscal Year 2001

January 402 136 865 128 432 128 2,616 5,324 8,566 18,597February 824 80 754 24 552 296 2,720 4,545 10,544 20,339March 842 172 396 0 398 784 2,974 4,925 12,646 23,137April 399 72 376 24 800 1,520 3,711 10,529 17,431May 256 72 999 120 181 1,571 2,113 3,985 9,549 18,846June 445 168 813 344 72 704 1,996 4,123 14,978 23,643July 696 72 208 200 120 836 1,797 5,269 15,766 24,964August 653 136 280 156 131 224 1,696 6,067 13,950 23,293September 649 104 32 352 488 1,130 1,636 4,983 15,091 24,465October 848 144 519 95 365 950 2,088 7,190 19,911 32,113November 418 288 232 120 224 680 1,680 5,142 14,194 22,978December 683 160 904 85 266 638 1,676 5,356 23,627 33,395

Legend: CTT - Compensatory Time Taken FNF - Funeral Leave FSF - Family Leave using Sick Leave FVF - Family Leave using Vacation Leave LWF - Leave Without Pay MIF - Military Leave SIF - Industrial/Illness SKF - Sick Leave VCF - Vacation Leave

65

Fiscal Year

2002

CTT

FNF

FSF

FVF

LWP

MIF

SIF

SKF

VCF

TOTAL

January 713 200 391 72 272 472 1,384 4,963 8,313 16,780February 483 48 436 144 296 810 1,224 5,302 10,185 18,928March 374 48 368 24 128 881 936 3,719 12,573 21,051April 364 96 552 216 400 217 1,837 6,307 13,089 23,078May 492 48 696 176 389 518 2,247 5,216 14,072 23,854June 394 112 688 312 0 833 2,119 4,490 15,406 24,354July 164 48 744 168 0 1,139 2,207 5,167 16,067 25,702August 190 264 536 403 78 872 2,840 4,840 15,166 25,189September 307 120 880 264 0 1,408 2,400 5,284 13,937 24,600October 525 168 1,368 296 36 147 3,372 7,087 21,938 34,937November 199 128 128 328 120 704 2,136 3,940 14,768 22,451December 231 72 437 384 24 200 2,940 4,781 22,496 31,565 Legend: CTT - Compensatory Time Taken FNF - Funeral Leave FSF - Family Leave using Sick Leave FVF - Family Leave using Vacation Leave LWF - Leave Without Pay MIF - Military Leave SIF - Industrial/Illness SKF - Sick Leave VCF - Vacation Leave

TOTAL LEAVE TAKEN

(Hours)

Fiscal Year 2000 Fiscal Year 2001 Fiscal Year 2002 Total

Leave # of

PersonnelDaily

AverageTotal Leave

# of Personnel

Daily Average

Total Leave

# of Personnel

Daily Average

January 17,009 709 23 18,597 775 25 16,780 699 23 February 18,073 753 27 20,399 848 30 18,928 789 28 March 22,226 926 30 23,137 964 31 21,051 877 28 April 18,110 755 25 17,431 726 24 23,078 962 32 May 23,269 970 31 18,846 785 25 23,854 994 32 June 25,332 1,056 35 23,643 985 33 24,354 1,015 34 July 29,276 1,220 39 24,293 1,012 33 25,702 1,071 35 August 26,313 1,096 35 23,293 971 31 25,189 1,050 34 September 23,134 964 32 24,465 1,019 34 24,937 1,039 35 October 31,321 1,305 42 32,113 1,338 43 34,937 1,456 47 November 20,642 860 29 22,978 957 32 22,451 936 31 December 33,731 1,405 45 33,395 1,391 45 31,565 1,315 42

66

67

Appendix H

FIRE SERVICE INJURIES

(1995-2002)

Fiscal Year

1995 41 1996 43 1997 39 1998 62 1999 36 2000 31 2001 19 2002 25

68

Appendix I Table 1

Five-Year HFD Workers’ Compensation Expenditures Fiscal Year 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02

01 - Act 64 (Full Wage) 198,460 237,697 113,315 243,732 192,252 02 – TTD 85,131 105,605 162,415 170,905 152,981 03 – TPD 1,466 1,154 188 635 0 04 – PPD 285,656 278,758 279,837 253,056 519,707 05 – PTD 11,895 12,353 11,895 11,895 11,895 07 - Disfigurement 3,250 5,660 14,275 4,675 10,675 08 – Death Benefits 33,234 25,053 22,834 22,834 20,374 10 - Medical Expenses 276,463 398,642 315,741 349,614 382,658 11 - PPD Evaluations 15,457 15,855 18,431 16,672 23,361 20 - Vocational Rehab 0 325 0 0 4,388 31 – Subrosa 0 0 1,540 0 0 32 – Legal 0 4,582 0 0 2,119 40 - Attendant Services 0 0 0 0 0 70 – Settlements 38,000 0 0 0 852 91 – Claim Management 9,447 8,489 4,635 6,237 8,514 92 - IME Evaluations 32,582 18,849 10,280 23,572 34,369

TOTAL 991,041 1,113,022 955,386 1,103,827 1,364,145

Table 2 HFD Injury and Workers’ Compensation (WC) Statistics

Fiscal Year

No. Of

Employees

Lost Time

Injuries

Percent Change

Incidence Rate (I)

Lost Work Days

Percent Change

Severity Rate (S)

Total WC

Costs

Percent Change

97-98 1,014 62 5.0 2,609 211 991,041 -06.5 Na +12.3

98-99 Na 58 Na Na Na 1,113,022 +29.3 Na -14.2

99-00 1,034 75 5.6 2,817 210 955,386 -09.3 +29.9 +15.5

00-01 1,063 68 5.0 3,660 271 1,103,827 -22.1 -32.6 +23.6

01-02 1,084 53 3.8 2,468 177 1,364,145 Notes: Incidence Rate (I) is the number of lost time injuries per 200,000 hours worked; Severity Rate (S) is the number of lost work days per 200,000 hours worked; na = not available due to reorganization of departments.

69

Appendix J

PERSONNEL YEARS OF SERVICE

(2/1/03)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0-5Years

5-10Years

10-15Years

15-20Years

20-25Years

25+Years

Years of Service

334

203178

145123

85

70

Appendix K

Voluntary Recall Summary Comparing 30-day Periods

Dec 13, 2002 thru Jan. 11, 2003 and Jan 12 thru Feb 10, 2003 Filled Unfilled Filled Unfilled Date Positons Positions Date Positons Positions

F 12/13 8 0 S 1/12 5 0 S 12/14 9 12 M 1/13 7.5 0 S 12/15 10.5 6 T 1/14 4.5 0 M 12/16 18.5 2 W 1/15 6 0 T 12/17 16 5 T 1/16 0.5 0 W 12/18 5.5 0 F 1/17 8.5 0 T 12/19 17 0 S 1/18 5.5 1.5 F 12/20 7.5 1.5 S 1/19 6 2.5 S 12/21 7 12.5 M 1/20 2 0 S 12/22 12.5 2.5 T 1/21 1.5 0 M 12/23 12 9 W 1/22 2.5 0 T 12/24 7 15.5 T 1/23 4 0 W 12/25 3 0 F 1/24 7 0 T 12/26 4 0 S 1/25 10.5 3.5 F 12/27 13 0.5 S 1/26 11 5.5 S 12/28 8.5 0.5 M 1/27 8 7 S 12/29 8 0 T 1/28 2 0 M 12/30 3 9 W 1/29 0.5 0 T 12/31 3 7 T 1/30 1.5 0 W 1/1 4.5 1 F 1/31 0 0 T 1/2 3 0 S 2/1 F 1/3 6 0 S 2/2 S 1/4 6.5 1 M 2/3 S 1/5 1 0 T 2/4 M 1/6 6 0 W 2/5 T 1/7 4 1 T 2/6 W 1/8 6 0 F 2/7 T 1/9 7.5 0 S 2/8 F 1/10 4 0 S 2/9 S 1/11 11 0 M 2/10 Totals 232.5 86 Totals 94 20

71

Voluntary Recall Summary Comparing 30-day Periods

Oct. 14 through Nov. 12 and Nov. 13 through Dec. 12, 2002

Filled Unfilled Filled Unfilled Date Positons Positions Date Positons Positions

M 10/14 2.5 1 W 11/13 12 0 T 10/15 8 2 T 11/14 11.5 5 W 10/16 2.5 2 F 11/15 12 0.5 T 10/17 4 1 S 11/16 8 14 F 10/18 8 2 S 11/17 12 11 S 10/19 4.5 7 M 11/18 16 0 S 10/20 7 5 T 11/19 16 1 M 10/21 6.5 1 W 11/20 5 1 T 10/22 4 0 T 11/21 15.5 0 W 10/23 12 1 F 11/22 9 0 T 10/24 5 2 S 11/23 13.5 7 F 10/25 6 4 S 11/24 14 6.5 S 10/26 14 10 M 11/25 5 0 S 10/27 6.5 4 T 11/26 10.5 0 M 10/28 13 0 W 11/27 8 0 T 10/29 8 2 T 11/28 4.5 0.5 W 10/30 8.5 5 F 11/29 4 0 T 10/31 15 8 S 11/30 1 0 F 11/1 12 8 S 12/1 11 0 S 11/2 11 4 M 12/2 2 0 S 11/3 8 1 T 12/3 10.5 0 M 11/4 10 0 W 12/4 1 0 T 11/5 2.5 0 T 12/5 12.5 3.5 W 11/6 5 0 F 12/6 11 0 T 11/7 15 0 S 12/7 12 7.5 F 11/8 15 2 S 12/8 10.5 1 S 11/9 4.5 4.5 M 12/9 11.5 0 S 11/10 7.5 18 T 12/10 10 0 M 11/11 5 2 W 12/11 7 0 T 11/12 8.5 0 T 12/12 17 0 Totals 239 96.5 Totals 293.5 58.5

72

Appendix L

FIRE OPERATIONS

20001

Personnel Absences Per Month

(Excl. Vacancies)

Recall

Expense

Total Overtime (1 month later)

Difference* (Overtime for Training, etc.)

January 709 25,137 38,920 13,783 February 753 31,923 55,117 23,194 March 926 83,862 130,396 46,534 April 755 40,086 35,641 May 970 62,172 76,085 13,913 June 1,056 114,300 175,799 61,499 July 1,220 136,422 164,883 28,461 August 1,096 123,408 152,425 29,017 September 964 56,466 116,155 59,689 October 1,305 31,086 59,900 28,814 November 860 43,488 55,404 11,916 December 1,405 94,212 108,337 14,125 2002 January 775 31,482 62,217 30,735 February 848 41,292 39,844 March 964 83,862 110,980 27,118 April 726 39,600 63,261 23,661 May 785 119,592 211,940 92,348 June 985 18,558 13,378 July 1,012 73,800 108,243 34,443 August 971 65,781 89,982 24,201 September 1,019 48,168 182,765 134,597 October 1,338 122,976 295,993 173,017 November 957 113,076 226,739 113,663 December 1,391 191,232 308,216 116,984 2003 January 699 86,157 145,683 59,526 February 789 115,182 148,473 33,291 March 877 73,098 104,263 31,165 April 962 25,452 37,413 11,961 May 994 20,367 75,618 55,251 June 1,015 34,749 33,087 July 1,071 68,600 122,337 53,737 August 1,050 85,600 94,598 8,998 September 1,039 99,800 227,986 128,186 October 1,456 124,800 142,190 17,390 November 936 109,000 159,515 50,515 December 1,315 116,200 137,114 20,914

73

Appendix M

FIRE OPERATIONS

Overtime Paid for Recall (Estimate)

Total Operations Overtime

Expenditures

Training, Workshops,

Miscellaneous Fiscal Year 2000

434,097

84%

519,195

85,098

16% Fiscal Year 2001

819,468

62%

1,321,145

501,677

38% Fiscal Year 2002

970,038

56%

1,736,766

766,728

44%