Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1970.07.018te Burli ngarne, July 1, cali fornia 1970 CAIJL ORDER A speciaL meetlng of the Burlingane City Council was held on the above given date, all nenbers having been notified previously and consenting thereto. Etre meeting was cal,led to order at 7s35 p.m. by uayor wi l1iam J. crosby. ROLL CALI, P resent - counci lmen : Aostrup-Crosby-ilohnson-t{ang ini -l{arthAbsent - Councilnen ! None PURPOSE OF UEETING frre Chair announced that the special meeting had been called for thefolloring purpoae: To detemine a procedure for resolving the impasse between the local 1862, Firefighters, and the llunicipal Erlployees Relations Officer concerning a requested reduction in duty hours. f'he City ltanager wag thereafter reguested by the Chair to c@ent. the City ltanager referred to the resolutior affecting enployer-enployeerelations wherein three proceduree are outlined and one of which naybe selected to reEolve an impasae, that a dispute has arisen on the reduction in hourly hrorking weeks proposed by the firemen and the method in whi ch the prior hearing on the subject wag conducted andthat under consideration this evening, is by which procedure thc inpasse may be resolved. {he city l{anager adviEed t}rat the firenen's group ha8 indicated apreference that the impasse be resolved through mediation proceaaes and that he was opposed to this nethod in that nerits of the issue arenot fully explored and understood in depth. Comenting on a procedure not referred to in the reeolution, that of 'fact-finding, " the City litanager stated that if the iesue was before Council at a public hearing, it could be considered a 'fact-finding"neeting to deternine the neritt of the dispute. lhe Chair Chereafter referred to E&lund Audeoud, President, Local 1872,International Aasociation of Fire Fighters, who strted that he uaE hopeful that the reaponEe to the firemenrs regueat would be favorablethis evening and in confirning that an impasse has been reached, pointedout that the firemen are requesting a reduction of only 1.3 houre per week. Councilman l,tartin reninded !tr. Audeoud that the subject before Councilon this occaEion, is solely on procedure on "hovr the impaese nay be regolved. ' the City Attorney, in his cormenta to Council on a procedure to beselected, stated that the merits of the arguoenta cannot be heard this evening. To Mr. Audeoud rs request that a €hird party, an impartial fact-finderbe selected, the City llanager expressed his objection and recmendedthat having the final detet'nination in any eventl council schedule apublic hearing on the merits of the dispute. fhe city Attorney, replying to councilman uangini's question concerningwhat the Eelection of a fact-finder impliee, referred to and readfrqr notea prepared by the League of California Cities on thedifferential beCween a fact-finder and an arbiter, the former, advisoryin capacity on1y, the latter, binding upon all parties. Counci lnan lrangini questioned whether a third party is an agent agreed upon lry bottr sides and is reinbursed on a profeasional baals,to rrhich inquiry the city Attorney replied to in the affir ative. An infornal poll of council thereafter indicated the najority favoring hearing the nerits of the dispute through a public hearing scheduled by council. A atatenent by E&rard Ruegg, firemen epokesman, that the frroup wereof the opinion that a fairer hearing would result if a third party sere to preaent facts to Council, drew an obj ection frm Councilmanllartin as an inference that Council \,rould not conduct an inpartial hearing. Further discussion again arose on the issue of, and the difference b€threen the functions of a mediator and a fact-finder, wittr the City Attorney advising that a nediator is a conciliatory agent who meets with both employee representativea and employer rePresentativegin an effort to reach an agreement througtt intercession, a fact-finderis prinarily on who is reguested to make a decision and tJrereafter subrui t a report on his 'finding of fact.' lo a direct inquiry frm Council to ttr. Audeoud whether the fi rernen are degirous of seeking the services of a nediator, ur. Audeoud referred to lrtr. Rregg, with both replying to Council thereafter i.n the affirEative. councilman Martin, during the ensuing discussion, observed that rgeries of factics employed by the firenen have delayed an action to regolve the inpasse issue. Robert Bezecny, firenen repreaentative, c@menting on a wish for an anlabl e enployee-aployer relationship, Etated that the firenen are "nerely projecting uhat is being placed into effect in other cities.' A aecond informal poIl of council re-confirmed that a hearing before council was preferred, with Counci Lman trlartin suggesting t}rat it be Echeduled for the regular meeting on July 5. !lr. Audeoud reguested a delay to the July 20 meeting, stating that Janes Duffy, a participant in the initial firemen negotiation meetings would be available to speak in behalf of the firemen. Furttrer discussion was concluded with the city Attorney recomendingthat council set forth its decision on a procedure to be appliedto reaolve the irpasse by notion. A motion w:as introduced thereupon by counci lman l.tartin, seconded by Councilman Smstrup and carried, that the merits of the dispute concern-ing a reduction in the firemen's hourly rrork week, be heard before counci! at its regular neeting on July 20, L97O. AD]OURNUENT :Ore neeting was thereafter adjourned by ltayor Crosb), and 8:40 p.m. IIERBERT ',{IIITE CINT CI,ERK APP RO\IED d*"r-LWI|II.T,IN J. C{OSBY }TAYOR tf,e 3t:t