Firefighters reinstated: District offers to put men back to work
EDGERTON — Former Edgerton firefighter Arnie Lund said he’d start working for the district again in a heartbeat, but he doesn’t believe the district’s offer to reinstate him is serious, he said.
“They’re up to something,” he said. “It’s a ploy, in my opinion.”
Ploy or not, the three employees fired by the Edgerton Fire Protection District can have their jobs back if they want them, according to a vote taken by the district commission Wednesday.
The district voted after a closed session to send letters to Mark Backes, Ken Crandall and Lund offering to reinstate them Dec. 2.
The letters will include a work schedule with hours and terms similar to what the men had before they were fired in 2003, said Richard Grant, attorney for the district.
“We’re doing what the order said,” Grant said.
The order came in 2004 from the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission. The fired employees had filed an unfair labor practices complaint with the commission, claiming they were fired for joining a union.
WERC ruled the firings illegal and ordered the men reinstated with back pay and benefits. The ruling has been upheld in a series of appeals.
On Nov. 6, the Wisconsin Supreme Court declined to hear the district’s latest appeal of the decision, bringing the court case to an end.
The offer to reinstate the men represents a reversal from the district’s previous actions. In August, the commission directed Grant to begin negotiations with the employees “bearing in mind that the board feels that the best interests of the community will be served by an all- volunteer fire department.”
The district is still willing to consider a buyout of the men’s jobs, Grant said.
“We’ve already made overtures in that regard,” he said.
The commission Wednesday tabled until its Dec. 6 meeting a motion to appoint a negotiator to assist Grant.
Negotiations could include back pay, a union contract or a buyout for the firefighters, Grant said.
The letter to the employees will not include terms for back pay because the district is waiting for information from the men, Grant said. The WERC ruling allowed the district to subtract from the back pay any wages the men earned after 2003 that they wouldn’t have earned while working for the fire district.
“We can’t figure out what the back pay is until we know the offsets,” Grant said.
Lund said he’d rather settle the back pay issue before returning to work for the district.
“Hopefully they’ll come to the table and start negotiating what they still owe us,” he said. “I’ve got four years of wages and hardships and benefits, plus 12 percent interest.”
Patrick Kilbane, a representative for the International Association of Firefighters, said he is happy about the vote.
“All they’re doing is complying with the order they were given four years ago,” he said. “I don’t think they had much choice.”
He said the firefighters haven’t been able to send an offer of back pay because a contract was never negotiated.
“They have no idea what should have been until that’s done,” Kilbane said. “We’ve been back and forth on this. We have no idea, nor do they, how to calculate the back pay because we never negotiated a contract.
“This is going to be a long process,” Kilbane predicted. “I’m anxious to get back to the negotiating table.”
Backes and Crandall both want their jobs back, Kilbane said.
—Reporter Marcia Nelesen contributed to this story
STORYLINE
The issue: Mark Backes, Ken Crandall and Arnie Lund were the only paid, full-time employees at the Edgerton Fire Protection District when they were fired in 2003. The district said they were fired for budgetary reasons, but the men said they were fired for joining a union.
The men and their union, the International Association of Firefighters, filed suit with the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission. WERC ruled the men reinstated with back pay. The ruling was upheld through several appeals.
On Nov. 6, the Wisconsin Supreme Court declined to hear the district’s latest appeal of the case.
What’s new: The district commission voted Wednesday to reinstate the men effective Dec. 2.
What’s next: At its Dec. 6 meeting, the commission plans to appoint a negotiator to assist its attorney, Richard Grant, in dealing with the employees and their union. Negotiations could include back pay, a union contract or a buyout, Grant said.
Nov 17, 2007 at 9:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
I believe wisconsin is an at will state, meaning u can quit or be fired without cause. If you join a union and your employer is not a union fan, he can fire you. But gov't jobs may be different im not sure. Yeah i think the union claws on gov't jobs are not affected by the at will status. such a pity.
Nov 17, 2007 at 8:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
etown, it is not just the City of Edgerton it is the fire district, made up of several surrounding communities, that made the decision to cut the positions.
The position of the drivers were not needed and that is why they were cut, not because of joining the union. The volunteers have stepped up and have proven that they don't need a full time person at the station. Look at their website (www.edgertonfire.com) to see the calendar of when they clean the station, have meetings and practice and compared it to other departments. Have you ever looked at the response time now compared to when there was a full time person at station? Look at all that the volunteers have done since the full time positions have been cut...do you even know? First responder program, etc. As a taxpayer I would much rather have the department that we have now then the department that we had before...keep up the good work volunteers!
Nov 16, 2007 at 7:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
i think your right everyone is missing the point here the city of edgerton violated the rights of these 3 men when they terminated their employment after they joined the union there are laws against this kinda stuff , the point i was trying to make earlier its not the first time or the last time the city will ignore laws, but to keep fighting when you know your wrong with the hope they will give up is what truly cost the taxpayers money, as far as the way it s being handled now and it working , if one person dies because of lost minutes, that s one person to many as a taxpayer, this is one thing i dont mind paying for, i could list at least 10 things the city has done and ignored what the citizens of this town wanted or didnt want and they just did it any way
Nov 16, 2007 at 2:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
I stand corrected. Opinion, you are correct, they are driver/dispatchers. Now that the Rock County 911 center has replaced the dispatcher part of the job, their full time position is clearly not required. I hope that I did not offend any of the volunteer firefighters.
Nov 16, 2007 at 11:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
021012 you need to make a correction, they were not full time firefighters, they were full time employees that were driver/dispatcher. I don't think they even come close to having the qualifications to be considered a full time firefighter. Why should the tax payers pay for the full time positions when clearly the volunteers have been doing an excellent protecting the Edgerton Fire District.
Nov 16, 2007 at 10:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
So many people seem to be missing the point here, which is saving the city and surrounding area money! It is unfortunate that individuals lost their jobs, it always is, but it is a risk in every business, and happens every day. The firemen and their union should get over this and not take it so personally. The point was that the fire district board thought that they could save the district money and still provide the same service level with the volunteers. Over the past few years, it has been proven that the premise was correct, the full time firemen were not required. The volunteers were able to provide the same high level of service without the full time firemen. Problem is, now we have to pay out all of that money to the firemen that we could have saved. I applaud the fire district board for trying to save me money.
Nov 16, 2007 at 8:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
etown, you obviously have a problem with the city of edgerton. the city is only one part of the fire district, so why do you vent about streets in the city of edgerton in a fire district story? this battle may be a black eye on the fire district, but you seem to want to keep throwing punches at the city.
Nov 15, 2007 at 10:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
i hope these guys take their job back and all the money they can get from the city , edgerton has to learn that they just cant push everybody around or its gonna cost them , i just read in the paper, where they gave part of a street to the golf course , and made another road a dead end to do this , nevermind they gave away someone elses easement to their driveway in the process, and never notified them , their excuse wasnt a dedicated road, hmmmm we ve been driving on it for years, first they take this road to 15 mph makes it a speed trap, then they let the people who park their park illegally all summer, yet they wont let a business have a delivery company park on a street to unload to them , why the different rules
Nov 15, 2007 at 1:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
“We’re doing what the order said,” Grant said.
Seems to me like this attorney has lost repeatedly, and the taxpayers ought to recoup legal fees from this attorney. Clearly, he had a poor understanding of the WI court system and must have given poor advice to his clients to have carried this case to the WI Supreme Court, only to be rejected.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.