We all hope we’ll never need firefighters, but we also had better admit that it’s potentially fire season year-round. Ballot Question 2L might help make sure Boulder attracts and retains the best firefighting force the city can afford.

At its simplest, passing Ballot Question 2L would grant City of Boulder firefighters, up through the rank of Battalion Chief, a City Charter-defined right to collective bargaining with the City. However, there would be topics for which collective bargaining would be allowed as well as exceptions that will be detailed below. The ballot measure text says in several places that the firefighters would not be allowed to strike.

The measure would amend Boulder’s City Charter, but would still only need 50% plus-one of the vote to pass.

The ordinance with the ballot measure text is fairly lengthy and what’s below is somewhat abbreviated to just address the top points. For those interested in reading the whole thing, visit the link below, click on the “packet” icon for the Aug. 6 City Council meeting, and search for Ordinance 8761: https://bouldercolorado.primegov.com/public/portal

What Could Firefighters Negotiate Over?

If 2L passes, firefighters referred to as the “bargaining unit” would be able to negotiate with the city over matters related to safety, wages, benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment. However, there would remain certain issues for which the city would not be required to enter into collective bargaining (see below), referred to in 2L as “rights of management.”

Rights of Management

The City of Boulder would not be “required” to negotiate with the unionized firefighters in case of certain matters (listed below), but the city could still choose to negotiate. The 2L ballot measure text says the union would be able to meet with the city in these instances, but not in emergency situations where there’s a threat to health or safety. This list is somewhat abbreviated but available in full in the ballot measure text:

  • The decision to develop, enforce, modify or terminate any policy, procedure, manual or work method associated with the operations of the employer
  • The decision to hire and promote firefighters
  • Decisions related to training needs, methods of training and firefighters to be trained;
  • The decision to consolidate the location of operations, offices, or work sites
  • Decisions regarding use of technology and the introduction of new equipment
  • The decision to transfer, assign and schedule firefighters
  • The decision to lay off firefighters for lack of work or funds
  • The decision to demote, suspend and discharge or otherwise discipline firefighters for just cause
  • Decisions over the Department’s budget, organization, and the merits, necessity and level of any activity or service provided by the city

Which Organization Would Represent City Firefighters?

Currently, the International Association of Firefighter Local 900 (IAFF 900) represents the majority of firefighters in the local bargaining unit. Per the ballot measure text, IAFF 900 would therefore be recognized by the city as the exclusive representative. For a few key points about this relationship should 2X pass:

  • IAFF 900 would need to represent all firefighters in the bargaining unit without discrimination
  • Individual firefighters would still be able to present complaints or other issues to the city, but IAFF 900 would need to be given an opportunity to attend meetings and present their views about the matter.
  • The city would make payroll deductions from firefighters who authorize collections of union dues.
  • Firefighters could attempt to change the exclusive representation, but only if the process starts with a petition signed by at least 33% of the bargaining unit. Then, there would be a secret ballot, and a new exclusive representative could be chosen with a simple majority of the vote.

What if There’s an Impasse?

Even with high-quality meetings and discussions, it’s possible that the sides might not reach agreement over a given issue. Under 2L, the parties could use “experts, consultants, facilitators or mediators” to help seek solutions, but even then, they might reach “impasse.” The ballot measure language says the parties might then need to go through arbitration.

Then, if arbitration doesn’t lead to agreement, unresolved issues could be taken to a vote of the people of Boulder in a special election.

Question 2L Pro:

  • Negotiations don’t always work out perfectly, but having collective bargaining can help parties hear each other out and hopefully come to better agreements
  • Firefighters may risk their lives or health on the job, and they deserve things like compensation, benefits, or working conditions that reflect the risk they take
  • 2L includes the “rights of management” to ensure that the city can still do things that it needs to do without needing to go into collective bargaining

Question 2L Con:

  • Collective bargaining agreements that lead to developments like higher pay or more expensive benefits might add to public expense

Links to More Information

Richard’s Take

I’ll be a fairly easy “yes” vote on this one, so I’ll keep my explanation short.

I fully understand the city and its residents are going through some level of economic uncertainty right now, and it is possible that negotiations might lead to a more expensive firefighting force – paid for with public funds. But firefighters might risk their lives and health to protect the residents’ property and safety, so that’s a trade-off I’m willing to support.

And with some of the impacts of climate change, isolated fires might easily spread to additional properties or acres of land, so a high-quality force with enough firefighters could respond quickly and hopefully keep small fires from becoming big fires. In areas of denser housing, rapid response could protect lots of households and lots of property value. Obviously, large fires put particulates or even toxic chemicals into our common air, so again rapid response might be a real public health benefit. It makes sense to have collective bargaining in place to help attract or retain the best firefighters Boulder can afford.

There are safeguards built into the ballot measure so the city won’t be on the hook in case, say, an economic depression means they can’t keep the whole force on the payroll. Collective bargaining agreements might not always favor the firefighters, and the same goes for arbitration if the parties reach impasse. I’m definitely not worried about collective bargaining bankrupting the city, but I am somewhat assured that there are checks and balances built into this ballot measure to make sure spending won’t be an open spigot.