| LOCAL, NO. 831, INTERNATIONAL | | | CASE NO. 426 |
| ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS, | | | |
| AFL-CIO, | | | |
| | | ||
| Petitioner, | | | |
| | | ||
| v. | | | OPINION AND ORDER |
| | | ||
| CITY OF NORTH PLATTE, LINCOLN | | | |
| COUNTY, NEBRASKA, | | | |
| | | ||
| Respondent | | |
Appearances:
For the Petitioner:Donald E. Rowlands II
Baskins & Rowlands
North Platte, Nebraska
For the Respondent:William A. Harding
C. Kelley Baker
Nelson & Harding
Lincoln, Nebraska
Before: Judges Gradwohl, Orr, and Berkheimer
GRADWOHL, J:
Nature of the Proceeding:
This is a proceeding under Section 48-818 to determine wages and working conditions for bargaining unit members of the North Platte Fire Department for the period from August 1, 1981, to July 31, 1982.
On September 22, 1981, the Commission entered a Temporary Order, reported at 5 C.I.R. 248, that "In the event the Commission in its final order in this matter orders an increase in wages or longevity pay, such final order will contain interest at the legal rate specified in Section 45-102 for the period to the date of the Commission's final order" and reserving a determination of the question of whether or not the Commission should further order interest to be paid for any period following the date of the final order.
The trial of this matter was commenced on October 23, 1981, at the conclusion of which the Hearing Judge recessed the hearing after both parties had rested. In an Order entered February 5, 1982, reported at 5 C.I.R. 370, the Commission ordered that the hearing should be reopened generally for the presentation of evidence by either party. The City objected throughout the reopened hearing to the Commission's order reopening the hearing and allowing the introduction of additional evidence, which objections were overruled for the same reasons stated in the Order entered February 5, 1982. The objection of the City at the conclusion of the reopened hearing (3 Bill of Exceptions, pages 227-228) is hereby overruled for the same reasons stated in the Order entered February 5, 1982.
The City also filed a motion seeking to prohibit the Association from calling the City's expert witness to testify concerning the Association's case in chief at the reopened hearing. That motion was overruled on the basis of the Nebraska Evidence Rules in an Order entered March 9, 1982, reported at 5 C.I.R. 399.
The City also objected to the single hearing Judge, rather than the entire panel, ruling on motions raised during the evidentiary trial, particularly its motions to dismiss and for a continuance at the conclusion of the Association's evidence at the October 23d hearing. These objections were overruled. The Orders of September 22, 1981, and February 5, 1982, were entered by all of the Judges assigned to the panel in this case. This issue now appears to have been decided by the Supreme Court in Lincoln City Employees Union v. City of Lincoln, 210 Neb. 751, 317 N.W.2d 63 (1982), affirming the Commission's decision, in which the same issue was raised before the Commission and argued extensively in the Briefs and oral arguments in the Supreme Court. See also Fraternal Order of Police v. County of Adams , 205 Neb. 682, 289 N.W.2d 535 (1980), for similar rulings.
The issues remaining for decision at this time are:
a.determination of the array of comparable employments;
b.determination of workers exhibiting like or similar skills to (1) North Platte Fire Captains, and (2) North Platte Emergency Unit Officers;
c.deciding contested computational items pertaining to (1) training and proficiency pay, (2) longevity pay, and (3) Scottsbluff meal allowance;
d.ruling on the City's contention that an "economic deflator" factor should be applied;
e.determination of overall compensation and entry of an appropriate order as to (1) wages (including longevity pay), and (2) contested conditions of employment for (a) union dues checkoff, (b) uniform and clothing allowance, and (c) the amount of health insurance premiums for dependent coverage to be paid by the City; and
f.ruling on the interest issue in accordance with the Temporary Order entered September 22, 1981, reported at 5 C.I.R. 248.
Statute:
The controlling statute is Section 48-818, which states:
The findings and order or orders may establish or alter the scale of wages, hours of labor, or conditions of employment, or any one or more of the same. In making such findings and order or orders, the Commission of Industrial Relations shall establish rates of pay and conditions of employment which are comparable to the prevalent wage rates paid and conditions of employment maintained for the same or similar work of workers exhibiting like or similar skills under the same or similar working conditions. In establishing wage rates the commission shall take into consideration the overall compensation presently received by the employees, having regard not only to wages for time actually worked but also to wages for time not worked, including vacations, holidays, and other excused time, and all benefits received, including insurance and pensions, and the continuity and stability of employment enjoyed by the employees. Any order or orders entered may be modified on the commission's own motion or on application by any of the parties affected, but only upon a showing of a change in the conditions from those prevailing at the time the original order was entered.
Array:
The employments in the Association's proposed array are the fire departments in Fremont, Grand Island, Hastings, Norfolk and Scottsbluff, Nebraska. This is the same array which the Commission determined was appropriate for sworn officers in the 1979 determinations. See 4 C.I.R. at 17-18.
The City proposed three arrays: (1) a "Case No. 288" array consisting of the fire departments in Fremont, Grand Island, Hastings, Norfolk, and Scottsbluff, Nebraska; (2) a 200 mile radius array consisting of Scottsbluff, Nebraska, Hays, Kansas, Columbus, Nebraska, Norfolk, Nebraska, Hastings, Nebraska, and Grand Island, Nebraska; and (3) a 225 mile radius array consisting of Beatrice, Nebraska, Scottsbluff, Nebraska, Hays, Kansas, Great Bend, Kansas, Columbus, Nebraska, Norfolk, Nebraska, Hastings, Nebraska, Fremont, Nebraska, Grand Island, Nebraska, Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Greeley, Colorado.
From the entire evidence, we determine that a five city array consisting of Fremont, Grand Island, Hastings, Norfolk, and Scottsbluff is an appropriate array for the determination of this matter. This array fully complies with the standard stated in Fraternal Order of Police v. County of Adams , 205 Neb. 682, 685, 289 N.W. 2d 535, 537 (1980), that "In selecting employment units in reasonably similar labor markets for the purpose of comparison as to wage rates and other benefits, the question is whether, as a matter of fact, the units selected for comparison are sufficiently similar and have enough like characteristics or qualities to make comparison appropriate." Table 1 sets out some of the "Information On North Platte And Compared To Cities And Their Fire Departments" contained in the evidence.
The Order entered February 5, 1982, stated (5 C.I.R. At 374):
This was the array used in the 1979 decision (4 C.I.R. at 17-18). Together with Columbus, they were used as agreed comparisons during negotiations for a 1981-1982 contract (5 C.I.R. at 249-250). Both parties proposed an array of these five cities at the Pretrial Conference. There is a relatively small 'universe' of comparable employments within the State of Nebraska from which an 'array' with respect to North Platte can be drawn. The 1979 case did not include McCook and York because they were significantly smaller in size. Beatrice was not included because its 'fire department employees do not have EMTA certification or perform the emergency medical type duties.' 4 C.I.R. at 18. Despite the stipulation of the parties to include Columbus in the 1979 comparisons, the Commission did not include Columbus because '...the evidence demonstrated that its department structure is so different from the rest of the array that it should not be used. Its small paid force is composed of principally drivers and crew leaders who surrender command to a ranking volunteer as soon as one comes on the scene.' 4 C.I.R. at 17. It is recognized that 'the mere fact that one set of school districts was deemed adequate in one case, does not mean that a different set of school districts would necessarily be inadequate in a different case.' Crete Education Ass'n v. School Dist. of Crete , 193 Neb. 245, 226 N.W. 2d 752 (1975) (syllabus by the Court; also 193 Neb. at 255, 226 N.W. 2d 759). At the same time, consistency and stability of the array applicable to the same parties is a factor for the Commission to consider in making the factual determinations concerning the appropriate array in a specific case from all of the evidence presented. See Fraternal Order of Police v. County of Adams , 205 Neb.682, 684-685, 289 N.W.2d 535, 536-537 (1980). Insofar as consistency and stability of the array applicable to the same parties is concerned, it is significant that these five cities were used in the 1979 comparisons by the Commission, that they were used by the parties, themselves, during the current negotiations, that the parties will again be called upon to negotiate in future years, and that the Commission potentially may be called upon to resolve similar industrial disputes in future years.
The strong preponderance of evidence introduced at the reopened hearing supports these statements in the February 5th Order, particularly the statements as to the factor concerning the consistency and stability of an array applicable to the same parties throughout the prior, current (both during bargaining and in a determination by the Commission) and future years. Not only did the parties bargain during the current negotiations primarily on the basis of information from these five Nebraska cities plus Columbus but there was a virtual agreement that both parties would be willing to agree voluntarily to wages and conditions based on that array. The items which appear to have thwarted reaching a voluntary agreement were that the City refused to show the Association its figures for the six agreed cities during negotiations, although the Union requested the City to do so (as found in the September 22nd Temporary Order, 5 C.I.R. at 250); there was no agreement on workers exhibiting like or similar skills to North Platte Fire Captains and Emergency Unit Officers; all or some of the other cities had not arrived at final agreements for 1981-1982; and there were, or would have been, certain computational issues in making the necessary calculations. The factor of consistency and stability of the array applicable to the same parties is a very strong factor in favor of continuing to apply the "Case No. 288" array in this case.
There are strong policies in favor of using an array of comparable Nebraska employments, rather than using employments from outside of the State of Nebraska, when an appropriate array for the purposes of Section 48-818 exists within the State of Nebraska. Section 48-818 required comparisons to be made from "within the state" from 1947 to 1969. While that language was deleted from the Section in 1969 (L.B. 15, Section 6), the policy persists in those cases in which there is an appropriate array within the State of Nebraska. Nebraska public employers of the same type are generally subject to the same governmental, personnel, and fiscal rules. All Nebraska public employers are, of course, subject to the same public employment bargaining statutes, which differ greatly from the laws of all other states particularly insofar as impasse resolution is concerned. As a matter of pragmatics in the administration of Nebraska's public employment bargaining statutes, there are advantages from using employers from within the State of Nebraska in that information should be more readily available, the information should be available in a more uniform format, the comparisons in terms of overall compensation should be easier to determine and more reliable due to the likelihood of closer identity in terminology, pay systems, conditions of employment (as demonstrated by the record in the present case), and other fiscal and governmental considerations.
There have also been strong legislative and judicial expressions that personnel matters of the type involved in Section 48-818 cases are matters of state-wide concern throughout the State of Nebraska. In Axberg v. City of Lincoln , 141 Neb. 55, 2 N.W.2d 613 (1942), the Supreme Court held that the Legislature's act on pensions for retired and disabled firefighters was a matter of state-wide concern and was applicable to home rule charter cities. Similarly, Simpson v. City of Grand Island , 166 Neb. 393 89 N.W.2d 117 (1958), held that a civil service law applicable to cities of a specified size having paid fire or police departments was a matter of state-wide concern. In addition to the pension and civil service laws, state statutes presently specify a rebuttable presumption of work-connection for firefighters who have served five years and suffer death or disability as a result of hypertension or heart or respiratory defect (Section 18-1723), minimum pay (Section 19-1824, 1980 Cum. Supp., $350.00 per month), and maximum hours (Section 35-302, 1980 Cum. Supp., average of 60 hours per week on alternating day shifts).
The "Case No. 288" array submitted by both parties is a more suitable array than either of the two concentric circle arrays submitted by the City for utilization in this matter. The City's 200 mile concentric circle array does not include Fremont which is in the "Case No. 288" array and adds Columbus, Nebraska, and Hays, Kansas. The City's own evidence indicate that this made the 200 mile concentric circle array less suitable in this situation than the "Case No. 288" array (3 Bill of Exceptions, pages 128-129).
The 225 mile concentric circle array (which was designed so as to include Fremont) contains all of the members of the "Case No. 288" array and, in addition, Beatrice and Columbus, Nebraska, Hays and Great Bend, Kansas, Greeley, Colorado, and Cheyenne, Wyoming. Columbus and Beatrice are less suitable for inclusion in the array than the other five Nebraska cities, for reasons stated in the Order entered February 5, 1982, and in the Case No. 288 decision (quoted above). The evidence establishes that there are also substantial differences with respect to the Kansas, Colorado, and Wyoming cities, such as different pension plans and different public employee bargaining laws.
The City urges acceptance of the 225 mile concentric circle array because it contains a greater number of other employments and, therefore, has greater statistical validity. The City also contends that drawing a line at the State of Nebraska borders is arbitrary but that, in the context of personnel wage determinations, drawing a concentric circle at 225 miles is not arbitrary. Section 48-818 does not require statistical precision. As reflected in the language of Fraternal Order of Police v. County of Adams , quoted above, the object of Section 48-818 is to arrive at an "appropriate" determination in terms of the overall compensation of "reasonably similar labor markets." The five Nebraska cities of Fremont, Grand Island, Hastings, Norfolk, and Scottsbluff fit that standard well in terms of the evidence and the industrial dispute involved in this matter. It does not improve the operation of Section 48-818 to add to those five well-suited Nebraska cities other employments, within the State of Nebraska or outside of the State of Nebraska, which are, in the judgment of the Commission from the evidence presented, significantly less suitable for a determination of this matter. It is true that if statistical sampling is involved, greater numbers may produce more reliable or more valid statistical results. It does not follow, however, that adding further employments to an otherwise appropriate array will improve the quality of the array for the purposes of Section 48-818, unless the additional employments also contain a general quality equivalent to the employments constituting the otherwise appropriate array.
Accordingly, we determine that the five Nebraska city "Case No. 288" array consisting of Fremont, Grand Island, Hastings, Norfolk, and Scottsbluff is appropriate under Section 48-818 and should be utilized for the determination of this matter.
Workers Exhibiting Like Or Similar Skills :
Section 48-818 requires that Orders be based on wage rates paid and conditions of employment maintained for "the same or similar work of workers exhibiting like or similar skills under the same or similar working conditions." Substantial evidence was introduced as to job titles, the organization and staffing of the fire departments, job descriptions, job requirements, job skills, the nature and type of work performed by the fire departments, and how the work of the fire departments is actually performed.
The parties agreed that Firefighters in Fremont, Grand Island, Hastings, Norfolk, Scottsbluff, and North Platte all perform the same or similar work and exhibit like or similar skills under the same or similar working conditions within the meaning of Section 48-818. the parties also stipulated (see 3 Bill of Exceptions, pages 6-9) that for the purposes of this case, the wage rates to be paid to Fire Marshall Aide and Fire Protection Specialist shall be based on their relationship to the Firefighter wage rate. The two job classifications which are in dispute are Captain and Emergency Unit Officer.
(a) North Platte Fire Captain
The parties are in agreement that the North Platte Fire Captains should be compared with Captains in Grand Island and Hastings. The City contends that the North Platte Captains should be compared with Lieutenants in Fremont, Norfolk and Scottsbluff; the Association contends that the North Platte Captains should be compared with Captains in each of the other cities. The Case No. 288 determination compared North Platte Captains to Captains in each of the other cities.
The evidence presented in this case is more extensive than that in Case No. 288. The City bases its position on the organization, staffing, command, and operation of the shifts in the various fire departments. Table 2 shows the "Firefighting Forces" as to "Total Staffing", "Shift Staffing", and "No. of Fire Stations" throughout the array.
The crux of the City's argument is that North Platte uses a Battalion Commander as the Shift Commander of each shift and that it is the Captains in Fremont, Norfolk and Scottsbluff who perform the duties of Shift Commander in those cities. The City argues, further, that in North Platte the Captains are Station Commanders under the Battalion Commanders and that in Fremont, Norfolk and Scottsbluff, the Lieutenants perform the function of Station Commanders under the direction of the Captains acting as Shift Commanders.
The Commission is obligated to determine actual issues from the evidence in the record in accordance with the rules of civil procedure applicable to trials in district courts. Sections 48-812 and 48-809. The parties agree and the evidence establishes that most of what the North Platte Fire Captains do is similar to the duties performed and skills exhibited by Captains in Fremont, Norfolk, and Scottsbluff. A preponderance of the evidence also establishes, however, that the Captains in Fremont, Norfolk, and Scottsbluff serve as Shift Commanders and exercise supervisory responsibilities and perform managerial duties and skills on a routine basis (as distinguished from merely filling in for an absent officer) beyond those performed by the North Platte Captains.
The Shift Commander and supervisory duties performed by the Captains in Fremont, Norfolk, and Scottsbluff are significant in a Section 48-818 determination despite the fact that most of their duties are the same as those of the North Platte Captains or even, perhaps, as those of Lieutenants in their own respective Fire Departments. This situation is very much like that of the position of Secretary (Matron) in Fraternal Order of Police v. County of Adams , 205 Neb. 682, N.W.2d 535 (1980), affirming 3 C.I.R. 583 (1978). The Commission rejected evidence on wages and conditions of employment for secretaries of other employers in determining the wages and conditions of employment for the position of Secretary (Matron) in the Adams County Sheriff's Department, stating (3 C.I.R. at 591), "The survey submitted by the Defendant in this case did not take into account that the employees involved spend approximately 15% of their time in jail matron and law enforcement activities." In affirming this ruling, the Supreme Court stated (205 Neb. at 685, 289 N.W.2d at 537):
This evidence was all rejected by the CIR for the reason that as to both the Hastings police department and private sector employees, it did not establish a similarity of work skills under the same or similar working conditions.
* * *
The determinations made here, both as to acceptance and rejection of claimed comparables, were within the field of expertise of the Commission of Industrial Relations, were made after a consideration and comparison of all the evidence, and the methods of selection and comparison were in accord with the requirements of section 48-818, R.R.S. 1943. The CIR's action in accepting and rejecting evidence was within the scope of its statutory authority and was neither arbitrary, capricious, nor unreasonable.
From the evidence presented in this case, we conclude that the North Platte Fire Captains should be compared with Lieutenants in Fremont, Norfolk, and Scottsbluff. Both serve as Station Commanders and second in command of a shift. The position of North Platte Fire Captain should not be compared to the Captain positions in the other three cities because the Captains in those cities perform significant additional duties as Shift Commander and in supervision. On this issue, therefore, we adopt the position advanced by the City.
(b) Emergency Unit Officer .
The parties stipulated that as to Emergency Unit Officer "if there's insufficient data to come up comparable positions from the evidence that's adduced, that the Commission should use the historical average as shown on Defendant's Exhibits 38A, 38B and 38C, the average differential, that is". In Case No. 288, the North Platte Emergency Unit Officers were compared with Lieutenants in only three other cities, Fremont, Grand Island, and Scottsbluff (4 C.I.R. at 19-20). Hastings was not included in the array for this job classification since, as in the present case, it had no Lieutenants or other comparable position. Norfolk was not included in the array for this job classification because the evidence was not clear as to the same "second in command of a shift" issue as to Norfolk Lieutenants which is involved concerning North Platte Captains in this case. Having determined that the North Platte Captains should be compared with Lieutenants in Fremont, Norfolk and Scottsbluff in this case, the Commission further determines, pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, that there is insufficient evidence concerning comparable positions as to Emergency Unit Officer and that the decision should, accordingly, be based on the historical relationship of the Emergency Unit Officer wages to Firefighter wages as shown on the City's Exhibit38C.
Contested Computation Items:
(a)
Training and Proficiency Pay.
North Platte Fire Department Employees do not receive either training and proficiency pay or longevity pay but employees in some of the other fire departments in the other cities do receive such pay. The Association included those pay items in its calculation of the wages with respect to the other cities. The City included longevity pay in its calculations of wages with respect to the other cities only where it was shown that all employees receive the pay without any discretionary determination on the part of the city. The calculations of the Commission set out below include these pay items in those instances in which the evidence in the record indicates that employees appear to have routinely received the training and proficiency pay or the longevity pay. For example, with respect to Fremont where the evidence was that approximately 17 of 18 Firefighters were receiving training and proficiency pay (see 3 Bill of Exceptions, page 27), that figure was included in the wage calculations by the Commission (at the maximum but not the entry level pursuant to the evidence). The Association is the moving party with respect to these calculations and where the evidence was unclear, the City's calculations have been used.
(c) Scottsbluff Meal Allowance.
Scottsbluff pays a $15.00 per month meal allowance which the other cities do not pay. The Association included this amount in its monthly wage calculations. We conclude that this meal allowance should more properly be treated as a nonwage benefit and considered as a part of the employees' overall compensation rather than directly entering into the wage calculations. Although the meal allowance may be a factor in an employee's paycheck, it is more similar to clothing allowance or union dues checkoff as separate benefits than to wages. The Commission's calculations in the following portions of this Opinion and Order treat the Scottsbluff meal allowance as a separate component in overall compensation.
Tables :
The following Tables 3 through 15 summarize the evidence concerning wages, benefits, and conditions of employment.
"Economic Deflator" Issue:
The City introduced evidence and expert opinion that the median family income and the per capita income for North Platte is lower than the other Nebraska first class cities in the comparative array. This is substantially the same evidence presented in the previous North Platte police and fire cases. North Platte Police Officers Union v. City of North Platte , 3 C.I.R. 647 at 665-670 (1979); Local No. 831, International Association of Firefighters v. City of North Platte , 4 C.I.R. 12, at 23-24 (1979). The contention that an "economic deflator" should be applied by the Commission was rejected in those cases because the evidence did not establish any bearings of the alleged economic dissimilarities as to median family income or per capita income upon police or firefighter wages. The same factual situation is reflected in the evidence in the present case. The evidence does not establish any bearing of the alleged dissimilarities on the wages paid to employees of the North Platte Fire Department (or, for that matter, upon the wages paid to employees in the other cities' fire departments). We follow the rulings in the two prior North Platte decisions, particularly the reasoning set out in the North Platte Police decision (3 C.I.R. at 665-670).
Determinations As To Overall Compensation:
Section 48-818 states that "In establishing wage rates the commission shall take into consideration the overall compensation presently received by the employees, having regard not only to wages for time actually worked but also to wages for time not worked, including vacations, holidays, and other excused time, and all benefits received, including insurance and pensions, and the continuity and stability of employment enjoyed by the employees." This rule of overall compensation does not require an identity of benefits, but that the overall compensation be "comparable to the prevalent wage rates paid and conditions of employment for the same or similar work of workers exhibiting like or similar skills under the same or similar working conditions." These determinations must be made on the basis of the evidence introduced by the parties in the trial of the case.
(a) Wages.
Applying the statutory criteria of Section 48-818 to the evidence in this case, we find that the wages of Captains and Firefighters should be increased as follows, effective August 1, 1981:
North Platte Commission
Current Determination
Firefighter Entry $957 $1,022
Maximum $1,278 $1,352
Captain Entry $1,259 $1,280
Maximum $1,551 $1,608
From the determinations concerning Firefighters' wages, the stipulation of the parties, and the evidence (City Exhibits 38A, 38B, and 38C), we find that the wages of Emergency Unit Officer,Fire Marshall Aide, and Fire Protection Specialist should be increased as follows, effective August 1, 1981:
North Platte % Differential Commission
Current to Firefighter Determination
Emergency Entry $1,154 20.67% $1,233
Unit Maximum $1,466 14.75% $1,551
Officer
(56.15 avg.
hourly week)
Fire Entry $4.08 33.50% $4.42
Marshall Maximum $5.25 38.53% $5.63
Aide (40
hour week)
Fire Entry $6.93 26.78% $7.47
Protection Maximum $10.03 37.51% $10.74
Specialist
(40 hour
week)
We do not order a separate system of longevity pay as requested by the Association because longevity pay is not a prevalent wage item in the comparative array (see Table 4, above) and to the extent that the evidence indicates that employees in other cities' fire departments receive longevity pay routinely, the longevity pay item is taken into account in the calculations of the wages paid in the other cities.
(b)
Other Benefits.
(1) Union Dues Checkoff . The City should implement a system of voluntary union dues checkoff in compliance with the provisions of Section 48-224 forthwith upon the effective date of this Opinion and Order. See International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Number 1537, AFL-CIO, v. Board of Public Works, City of Fremont , 3 C.I.R. 164 (1976). Four of the five cities in the comparative array provide for a voluntary dues checkoff; a case is pending in the Supreme Court with respect to a voluntary dues checkoff system in Hastings (see Table 15, above).
(2) Uniform and Clothing Allowance . the City should increase its annual clothing allowance for shift personnel from $250.00 per year to $325.00 per year, effective August 1, 1981.
(3) Health Insurance Premiums . On the basis that the City has increased its 1981-1982 contribution to dependent health insurance premiums to $106.12 per month (as indicated at 3 Bill of Exceptions, page 117; for the comparable figures, see Table 8, above), no increase is ordered in this item. No order is entered as to dental insurance since the evidence shows that while three of the comparable cities have dental insurance coverage available to employees, only one of these employers contributes to the payment of dental insurance premiums.
Interest Pursuant To Temporary Order:
Upon a review of the entire evidence presented in this matter, we determine that interest to the date of this Opinion and Order should be ordered for the reasons set out in the Temporary Order entered September 22, 1981, reported at 5 C.I.R. 248. No further interest is ordered by the Commission.
It is hereby Ordered:
A) the wages of employees in the North Platte Fire Department shall be increased as follows, effective August 1, 1981:
(1) for Firefighters, the entry wage shall be increased to $1,022 per month and the maximum wage shall be increased to $1,352 per month;
(2) for Emergency Unit Officer, the entry wage shall be increased to $1,233 per month and the maximum wage shall be increased to $1,551 per month;
(3) for Captains, the entry wage shall be increased to $1,280 per month and the maximum wage shall be increased to $1,608 per month;
(4) for Fire Marshall Aide, the entry wage shall be increased to $4.42 per hour and the maximum wage shall be increased to $5.63 per hour; and
(5) for Fire Protection Specialist, the entry wage shall be increased to $7.47 per hour and the maximum wage shall be increased to $10.74 per hour.
B) the conditions of employment shall be adjusted as follows:
(1) the City shall implement a system of voluntary union dues checkoff in compliance with the provisions of Section 48-224 forthwith upon the effective date of this Order; and
(2) the annual clothing allowance for shift personnel is increased to $325.00 per year, effective August 1, 1981.
C) pursuant to the Temporary Order entered September 22, 1981, the City is ordered to pay interest at the legal rate specified in Section 45-102 for the period from the date such increased wages should have been paid to the employees to the date of this Order.
This Order shall be effective for wages and conditions of employment for the period from August 1, 1981, to July 31, 1982.
All Judges assigned to the Panel in this matter join in the entry of this Opinion and Order.
Filed April 27, 1982.
_______________________________