Northwest Indiana Discussion

Must be nice.

Hammond puts aerial firetruck back on the streets
6 hours ago • Jim Masters Times Correspondent

HAMMOND | Firetruck No. 1 is back in service effective Wednesday and that makes for a safer city, Hammond officials said.

Hammond Fire Chief Jeff Smith said the additional aerial truck is a strong enhancement to public safety, noting that a minimum of three firefighters man a truck. The four aerial units complement a fleet of six fire engines and four ambulances.

“Having another aerial truck in service will make it easier to rescue people from an eight- or nine-story building,” he said. “And I like having the additional manpower on the street.”

Hammond took the aerial ladder truck out of service in 2011 for budgetary reasons. Ironically, Hammond firefighters’ rejection of a city contract in December is essentially getting the truck back on the street and also enabling the hiring of more manpower.

Mayor Thomas McDermott Jr. said that manning a fourth aerial truck “won’t cost the city a dime.” He explained that without a contract, Hammond firefighters will work, on average, an additional three to five days a year at the same pay. Thus, increasing available man hours makes putting the rig back in service financially feasible.

By not coming to terms on a contract with the firefighters union, the city will save $650,000 in various wage and benefits perks, which included additional vacation time based on seniority, provided under the former contact. Firefighters did receive 1 percent raises under the 2014 city salary ordinance, as did other city employees.

“The city offered the firefighters an 8 percent wage increase over three years, but they overwhelmingly turned it down,” McDermott said. “They said that 37 men on a shift made the city unsafe. Well, by saving that $650,000 we are making the city safer in that we can bring back Truck No. 1 and soon we’ll have 42 men per shift. Never in a million years did I think they would turn that contract offer down.”

However, McDermott wants to increase the annual bonus of $1,800 for firefighters who reside in Hammond to $5,000, noting that just less than 30 percent live in the city.

“Having public safety workers who live in the city means a lot to me,” McDermott said. “It means that those workers put a high priority on being part of the community where they work. To me, they should be rewarded.”

He added that taking the firetruck out of “regular” service had been tough decision, but Hammond now will be one of the most manned cities per capita in the state.

“During my term in office I’ve avoided laying off firemen or policemen,” he said. “In fact, the city will be hiring six new firemen in 2014.”

The new hires will be the first for the department in six years and bring staffing back up to 155 firefighters.

Now, without a contract, Hammond firefighters will work under the city employee handbook, as do other nonunion city workers. McDermott said he has no plans to reopen negotiations with the firefighters.

Hammond Firefighters Local 556 President Edward Lomeli was unable to be reached for comment Monday.

Neo, if you had some marketable skills ,maybe you'd have a job that paid bonuses at the end of the year.

Neo has a valid question, emphasized by his rhetorical disbelief. He doesn't need sparks' to validate it. True to form, sparks makes yet another personal attack. McDermott says it's important to him to have firefighters live within the city. He is willing to spend other peoples money to make them subjects. See, college bound, ball fields and all the other intangibles of living in Hammond are not adequate to induce these recalcitrant responders to relocate. Cash is the failed resort when voluntary cooperation can't be obtained by cajoling, bullying, or lying.

It aint only the cash, but how is it Lomeli and the firefighters union arent on the radio and other media? Not a peep! Not a word in the press about negotiations. Has the union been abandoned? Recall that these were the guys publicly howling about the threat to their 3 percent raises not too long ago - when the city was on the fiscal ropes.

Check mate!

Last time they pitched a b!tch they went for the money without the mention of the staffing. This time they got the staffing after not accepting the contract.

Dave, they didn't get the staffing, they benefited from jr's attempt at some positive pr for his next year's campaign.

I am awfully glad, Tom's made the decision to stay in town, despite his efforts to leave, the Washington Lobbyist, the other vendors who he tossed his resume @.

He makes a welcome target.

It is an asset to any community when the firefighters reside in the city that they work for. In many parts of the country it is accepted practice that police,fire and other municipal employees are required to live in the community that provides their employment. However, the state of Indiana excludes police and fire employees from residency requirements. Until this law is changed, it is good public policy to offer incentives to fire fighters who choose to live in our community.

Disclaimer: I realize that to do anything other than genuflect in front of any fireman anywhere is a direct insult to the memories of all those who died on September 11. 2001, so I will apologize in advance now.

I'm with LUBU. What greater incentives can there be than a surfeit of baseball diamonds, a Walmart moving from one part of town to another, a Subway Sandwich shop at the "new" Woodmar, "superstars" like Steve Fowler managing various areas of the city, College Bound bribe money, a golf course, a new sports complex in the works, and Munster Steel moving a few miles north of its current location? Who needs cash incentives when the Mayor is dangling carrots like that in front of their faces?

In the past few months, I've heard several of Hammond's reluctant hero firemen say that their concern was manpower, and not money. Now that they have their plaything back, as well as several more firefighters, will they shut up and get back to chili cook-offs, working on their jump shots, and waxing their cars?

The best line of all: a mayor saying that a new firetruck, park, employee, street improvement "won't cost the city a dime"?! Watch your wallets, suckers!

See, sparks says so, so it's true. Any evidence to support this?



See, sparks says so, so it's true. Any evidence to support this?

The incentive is offered to everyone yet 70% of Hammond firefighters choose NOT to live in Hammond. Would it be "good public policy" to keep raising the incentive until you get 100% residency? What if that costs taxpayers 10 grand, per person, per year? Would 50% residency be adequate? Why is 30% too low? I see now that I'm paying a county income tax so Tom McDermott can offer 5 grand per year "hazardous duty pay" to fireman if they keep a Hammond address.

Lomeli finally speaks:
Hammond fire union cites safety in contract standoff

19 hours ago • Jim Masters Times Correspondent

HAMMOND | Hammond Firefighters Local 556 President Edward Lomeli understands the irony of the union voting down a three-year contract with the city.

By rejecting the contract, the firefighters’ desire for increased manpower is in fact achieved, including putting a fourth aerial truck back in regular service. However, it comes at the loss of $650,000 worth of financial incentives firefighters received under the expired contract, as well as a proposed 8 percent bump in pay.

On Tuesday, Lomeli shot back at Hammond Mayor Thomas M. McDermott Jr. over how the fruitless contract negotiations played out.

“Local 556 overwhelmingly turned down the city’s offer knowing we would lose up to $650,000 in benefits and additional days off spent with our families,” he said.

“We made the decision after a deadly fire that took a life — a fire that was in the first due territory of the shuttered fire truck, which had been prioritized for search and rescue of trapped victims. At that point, the Hammond firefighters decided it was no longer safe to work at the reduced staffing levels.”

He added, “What other department in the city do you see taking money out if their own pockets to provide safety to the ones they serve?"

The city took Truck No. 1 out of service in 2011 for budgetary reasons, but McDermott announced Monday he was putting the truck back in service as of today.

He also announced the hiring of six new firefighters to bring the shift count of firefighters up to 42 men—by virtue of saving the $650,000 that firefighters previously shared.

The new hires will be the first for the Hammond Fire Department in six years and will bring staffing back up to 155 firefighters.

In addition, McDermott said he is seeking an increase in the annual bonus of $1,800, which firefighters who reside in Hammond receive, to $5,000. Just under 30 percent of the firefighters have Hammond addresses.

Lomeli said the manpower issue was just too compelling to ignore, but the members felt the need to take a stand.

“We proposed phasing in the manpower over a three-year period, but that was rejected by the city,” he said.

Lomeli noted that Hammond firefighters supported McDermott when he championed the County Option Income Tax, believing the $2.5 million the city expects to receive annually would fund public safety needs. Now, with the manpower issue apparently satisfied, Lomeli hopes the tax money can help restore what they lost when they turned down the contract.

“The union is more than willing to sit down with the mayor and try to come to an agreement,” he said.

Without a contract, Hammond firefighters will work under the city employee handbook, as do other non-union city workers. McDermott said he has no plans to re-open negotiations with the firefighters. (Game, Set, Match?)

P.S. But wasnt there a collective bargaining provision whereby the old terms of agreement stayed in force when the parties failed to reach a new agreement? Or was there a sunset provision governing its application?

Was Tom's left hand man, Dave and/or his consulting company were reportedly involved in the negotiations?

They were so successful in their efforts, it resulted in no contract.

If there, now the real question is how much was this consultant paid?

AND

I thought I read some where, it wasn't just a conflict of interest to do consulting work for a city where you approve funding, but illegal?

Another Hatch Act issue?

You took the thought right out of my head. Sparky is big on the scientific method and asking for links as proof of a given claim.

Where are the studies to support these statements? Is it more important to have firefighters living in your community than police officers? Teachers? Municipal clerical workers? How do you choose?