Fire Chief Mike Becker sends letter to his Board
The below letter was sent to the Fort Myers Beach Fire Control District Board of Fire Commissioners from FMB Fire Chief Mike Becker on Sept. 3. It is in response to the Local 1826 District 3 Union letter dated Aug. 14. There have been allegations made against Becker regarding mis-management and public safety risks.
Honorable Board of Fire Commissioners,
In response to the letter given to the Board from the Union dated Aug. 14, 2009, I submit that the content of this letter is baseless and has no merit. However, pursuant to the Board’s request on Aug. 15, 2009, I offer the following response:
First, the fiscal responsibility of the District have not been mismanaged at any time, as substantiated by our independent auditor. Current management has not only developed enhanced internal controls but strives to ensure that all procedures are strictly adhered to. Current management has also employed greater detail in the budget process in addition to employing sound techniques for monitoring expenses. The District’s budget is well within check with excess funds to be carried forward in the next fiscal year. There is no evidence of micro-management by any board member at anytime.
The “hard economic times” described in the letter has been well perceived by management and Board members. However, attempts to work with the labor partners have not been productive; no substantial concessions have been made from organized labor to-date. Discussion with labor occurred with District officers and union leadership in early April 2009 without any substantial changes. Demands for increase in wages “e.g. longevity, promotions and incentives” remain topics for negotiation.
The statement “we have the money now so we might as well spend it” is untrue and inaccurate.
The Union asserts that misinformation has been relayed to the Board; this is simply not true. Many times the Union presumes to understand the inter-working of the District’s management and responsibilities and relays inaccurate information due to lack of knowledge and understanding. Managing the District is not the role of the Union. Labor and management will not always share the same vision and Union interest will always reside with their own membership.
There has not been any attempt to misinform actual costs for Ambulance 31. The report enclosed in the Union’s letter does not take into account the reassignment of Ambulance 31 from Ambulance 32 when the new ambulances were placed in-service, nor does it represent costs consistent with the fiscal reporting period. Furthermore, the repair and maintenance costs arte now reported in the monthly commission packet.
There is no doubt that negotiation with labor have become difficult. On June 30, 2009, labor and management met for negotiation, but no agreement was reached. District 3 Vice President Mesick then left for vacation and did not return until recently.
As of Sept. 1, 2009, management and labor reached a tentative agreement subject to ratification by the board as well as the union membership. The tentative agreement will reduce cost by close to $100,000, but wages will rise for reasons mentioned above. As the Board is aware, discussion with District’s labor council is privileged and the Board has met and will continue to meet in executive sessions for updates as necessary; however, we are no longer in negotiation at this point. If given the opportunity to negotiate further, the process of negotiations is clear and will be followed accordingly.
District liability coverage has not been neglected. In fact, the current renewal occurs Oct. 1, 2009, and is compliant with District needs. The emails attached to the letter refer to an increase in cost due to increased exposure and the emails were not represented appropriately by the Union. District management has researched suitable coverage and made appropriate adjustments as necessary.
The allegation of misconduct is not true. No law, policy or rule has been violated and appropriate disclosures were made.
As the letter relates to the public information officer, the investigation occurred timely and based on fact and policy. Decisions were then made by management as it related to the facts and appropriate policies. The Union does not represent the PIO position.
The task ahead is difficult because of the necessary adjustments to costs, particularly personnel costs. The Union is attempting to preserve their interest when cost control must be a reality. The letter states a “vote of no confidence.” Disappointedly, this is the result of push-back from labor and was unfortunately predictable.
Fire Chief Mike Becker