Legislation passed protecting volunteer firefighters and EMT's

[ajsbear 11]

I think there are plenty people in state govt that would pass almost anything in order to get re-elected. As said before, they cant pass a budget, which is actually important to EVERYONE, but can pass this which benefits a few.

I have to agree with you. What everyone here fails to realize is what I said before. In NYS your employer really does not need a reason to fire someone. You are an AT WILL employee and they can fire you on a whim. No reason given. It happens every day.

[ladder55 26]

I have to agree with you. What everyone here fails to realize is what I said before. In NYS your employer really does not need a reason to fire someone. You are an AT WILL employee and they can fire you on a whim. No reason given. It happens every day.

I think this may help people working in municipal jobs like dpw. If the supervisor is anti volunteer there can't be any punishment for responding on a call before or during work

[AJU 39]

Tell me, how did you arrive at this conclusion?

I thought I gave some insight into my reasoning in the next paragraph of that post, but I'll try and be more clear:

In my opinion, if you have a good relationship with your employer then even without the law you will most likely be met with understanding if you call out because you were out all night at a fire, or if you ask to come in late. And this is without the backing of any law.

So, based on the assumption that most people can get time off to go to a parent-teacher conference, or to close on a house or go to the doctor, etc., it stands to reason that there should only be difficulty being excused for missing work because of fire duties in the event that the employee (note I said employee, not FF – because that’s what you are first as a volunteer FF) has a track record of abusing time off to the point where another hour or three is putting that employee in jeopardy.

Taking time off because of fire duties is taking time off for personal reasons. Maybe back in the day when people didn’t leave their communities the argument could be made that everyone in a town had a personal stake in fire suppression activities (actually they did: every household had a leather bucket with their name printed on it and if your bucket wasn’t at the scene of a fire your property often wouldn’t be protected as a result). Now there are very few business owners who would look at it that way. You just can’t make the argument that it’s not personal time anymore.

Let's face it, the "protections" of this law are nominal at best. I would bet every one of us exceeds the time allowed in this law for various personal reasons (of which anything having to do with volunteering most certainly is) already, hopefully with their employer's blessing. It doesn’t protect anyone but the jobs of the politicians who passed it and FASNY. I don’t go to my boss and say “I’m not feeling well today [no long term illness implied], I need to go to the doctor and FMLA says you have to let me go”, do you?

[firefighter-70 27]

A question I have not seen asked. After a working job that extended through the night for 8-12 hours, is the volunteer firefighter covered under this law not to report to work at all? One for safety reasons if the volunteer operates machinery or vehicles, and two for rest and recovery to be prepared to do it again if needed.

[Bnechis 3,961]

If your store or business is in Yonkers or White Plains or New Rochelle or Eastchester or NYC (on fire or not) its not relevant because as I understand the law, the volunteer is not compensated for time lost at work.

Yes, while the employeer does not have to pay that volunteers salary for the time, the employeer is not compensated for lost productivite, which depending on the industry can be substantial.

I have no Idea how many volunteers commute to New York City nor am I aware of any survey's or polls regarding such. Perhaps if you have access to that information, you could share that with us??

Nope, but I know many and there have even been many threads on here about chiefs commuting in dept cars or parking at the train stations. I do not know how many, but even with this law, I dont see that they will be coming back quickly or will use the law to go to work late. If protecting the community is so important, then maybe they should not commute out of the community.

Whether my mom's in the hospital or not is not relevent; either way I don't think by law, Nurses cannot leave their post until relieved.

So which law takes is correct the one that says you can or the one that says you can not? The bigger issue is when the nurse does not relieve anyone or is not relieved by some one. Then that does not apply. i.e. most OR nurses work a day shift and prior to the start of the shift there is minimal staff if any assigned to the OR.

That's an extreme analogy; DOC members who are working would remain on the job until relieved.

Same deal as the nurses, day shifts have more staff and oncoming employees may not actually relive somebody. If its extreme then why no exemption in the law?

Again, that's an extreme analogy; the workers from the previous shift would remain on duty until relieved.

This was for municipal or commercial EMS employees and the same holds true for them as the corrections.

Not according to your IAFF; career fightfighters are not supposed to volunteer in their communities so its obviously a non-issue.

Then 1) This is clearly not true in CT (they pass a law that says they can) and 2) IAFF has never enforced this and its up to each local & each department to determine how they handle this.

I guess the 1,000's of IAFF members who are FDNY firefighters that volunteer never new that. So if a FDNY member is late because of a volly call does he need the law to protect his job?

Now please answer the original question: "Now we have volunteer firefighters who are employees of my career department. Does the legislation mean they can come to work late or leave work to cover calls back in their volunteer community? To cover them the citizens of my city will have to pay overtime to cover this. That means that my taxpayers (who are willing to fund proper fire protection) will be subsidizing a volunteer community that if they utilize this law (if signed) shows they are willing to let our taxpayers fund their dept."

Your answer was an attempt to say that career FF's dont volunteer and we all know thats not the truth.

The real truth of the matter is that this bill goes a long way to assisst volunteers in serving their communities without fear of retaliation or termination for performing their duties as volunteer firefighters.

1)this bill will do nothing to improve the dropping numbers of volunteers, but the politicians that cant pass a budget will use this to show that the are behind the VFD's....please reelect me.

2)If the employeer wants to fire them he just can't use the excuse you were late.....it will take him one more day to "find" a reason.

3) it allows employeers to screen out volunteers and not hire them in the 1st place.

The real truth of the matter

Everything you've mentioned is in all honesty a non-issue.

That maybe true, but is only because the bill wont do what FASNY wants it to do........turn back the clock to the good old days when everyone worked localy and the whistle got 100 guys.

[spin_the_wheel 460]

Minimal impact, yes. That's the point I was trying to make.

As for all your othe points, you're talking about a labor (union) contract which was already stated would override this legislation.

It probably isn't needed, but it also doesn't hurt anyone because like I said before, coming in late for work because of a call should and will be delt with on a personal level with your employer.

I agree, this has been going on now without a bill. You have to know what your boss will allow and what your responsibilities are. I know many f/f's who are allowed to leave their jobs now for BIG fires, not the everyday automatic alarm, but a big worker. Many village employees allow f/f's to leave work. I know a village where the 3 man sanitation truck is all f/f's and lets this truck go to the fire house on alarms. This is not a busy village fire call wise but they do what they have to do.

In Nassau County ALL county workers get fire day hours, meaning if a large worker or other serious emergency happens, they can take time off from their next scheduled shift. This is used when they are off...so this would cover the other post about someone at a fire all night then have to report for a day shift and operate a bulldozer. No one takes advantage of this, and it has been in place for decades.

There are just some people who always want to chime in on the negative side whenever it is a volunteer issue. But I understand to many it's buisness not personel..it's a union thing and its all good, I understand that, but sometimes it seems they really go out of their way to try and find negatives all the time.

Good news is these people will be long retired, and the Volunteer Fire Service will still be responding to alarms!

Edited June 16, 2010 by spin_the_wheel

[gamewell45 258]

So if a FDNY member is late because of a volly call does he need the law to protect his job?

That would be determined by the current collective bargaining agreement and/or department policy in place at the time.

[ajsbear 11]

I think this may help people working in municipal jobs like dpw. If the supervisor is anti volunteer there can't be any punishment for responding on a call before or during work

no but unless you are protected by your union, the supervisor does not need a reason. You can be fired for smiling on a cloudy day if they want. Doesn't matter. The AT Will law protects the employer.

[Bnechis 3,961]

That would be determined by the current collective bargaining agreement and/or department policy in place at the time.

If this was true, then the entire bill is even less then useless. Ok we have a policy that says you can never be late for work. If you are and we fire you then you have no legal recourse. The whole purpose of the bill is to superceed job rules.

If this were the case then the bill is not even worth the paper its printed on.

[gamewell45 258]

If this was true, then the entire bill is even less then useless. Ok we have a policy that says you can never be late for work. If you are and we fire you then you have no legal recourse. The whole purpose of the bill is to superceed job rules.

If this were the case then the bill is not even worth the paper its printed on.

Not true; those volunteers who are not covered by a collective bargaining agreement at their place of employment would be covered by the bill.

[JJB531 652]

Not true; those volunteers who are not covered by a collective bargaining agreement at their place of employment would be covered by the bill.

So, basically the bill only applies to certain Volunteers depending on their employment?

Does anyone have a link to the bill as it has been proposed? I have read similiar bills from other states, and other states have a lot of restrictions on their Volunteer Protection law. In various states volunteers who are career firefighters or law enforcement officers are not covered. Volunteers who work for a business that employs less then a certain number of people are not covered. There are strict limitations in other states regarding how many hours a volunteer is permitted to be absent. And in a majority of states an employer is permitted to withhold a Volunteers pay for the time they are not at work. I don't know about anyone else, but I couldn't afford to lose a days pay.

I'm just curious if NYS implies any of these stipulations within the bill.

Edited June 16, 2010 by JJB531

[gamewell45 258]

So, basically the bill only applies to certain Volunteers depending on their employment?

As I read it, yes.

[ajsbear 11]

If this was true, then the entire bill is even less then useless. Ok we have a policy that says you can never be late for work. If you are and we fire you then you have no legal recourse. The whole purpose of the bill is to superceed job rules.

If this were the case then the bill is not even worth the paper its printed on.

Barry you are 100% correct. It is totally useless, just like the clowns in Albany who voted for it. It will appease enough people so that when the elections come up in November they get the Vol. fire and ems vote. You work for anyone in NYS and they do not, and I repeat for the deaf who have not read my prior posts on this, need a reason to fire you unless you are union and covered by said union. New York is one of several At Will employment states that can fire without any cause.

[gamewell45 258]

....... and I repeat for the deaf who ......

I'm sure you meant Blind as opposed to deaf.

[helicopper 1,050]

Does anyone have a link to the bill as it has been proposed?

STATE OF NEW YORK

________________________________________________________________________

9856

IN ASSEMBLY

February 3, 2010

___________

Introduced by M. of A. THIELE -- read once and referred to the Committee

on Labor

AN ACT to amend the labor law, in relation to prohibiting an employer

from terminating an employee who also is a volunteer firefighter or a

volunteer provider of emergency medical services when that employee

misses or is late to work because of an emergency to which the employ-

ee was dispatched

The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assem-

bly, do enact as follows:

1 Section 1. The labor law is amended by adding a new section 202-l to

2 read as follows:

3 § 202-l. Authorized absence. 1. If an employee is absent from or late

4 to his or her employment due to his or her engaging in the actual

5 performance of his or her duties as (a) a volunteer firefighter, or (

6 an enrolled member of a volunteer ambulance service pursuant to article

7 thirty of the public health law, an employer shall be prohibited from

8 terminating such employee solely on the basis of such absence or late-

9 ness.

10 2. The entire period of the authorized absence may be charged against

11 any other leave such employee is otherwise entitled to, and such author-

12 ized absence shall include travel both to and from such duties performed

13 in his or her capacity as a volunteer. At the employer's request the

14 employee must provide the employer with a statement from the head of the

15 volunteer firefighter or volunteer ambulance service, as applicable,

16 stating the employee responded to an emergency at the time of such

17 response.

18 3. In the event that the employee does not have accrued time to offset

19 any time lost in an emergency response the employer must either, at its

20 option:

21 (a) grant at least three hours of authorized absence in any twelve

22 month period to an employee who has engaged in a volunteer response; or

23 ( allow its employees without use of accumulated leave time an

24 authorized absence for volunteer response during work hours at least two

25 times per calendar year.

EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets

[ ] is old law to be omitted.

LBD11619-01-9

A. 9856 2

1 4. The commissioner is hereby authorized to establish any necessary

2 guidelines, including requirements for documentation of the emergency

3 response, validation of accrued leave, and the conditions of dismissal

4 and procedures for an employee to seek reinstatement and reimbursement

5 if dismissed on the basis of an authorized absence.

6 § 2. This act shall take effect immediately.

[INIT915 1,119]

Barry you are 100% correct. It is totally useless, just like the clowns in Albany who voted for it. It will appease enough people so that when the elections come up in November they get the Vol. fire and ems vote. You work for anyone in NYS and they do not, and I repeat for the deaf who have not read my prior posts on this, need a reason to fire you unless you are union and covered by said union. New York is one of several At Will employment states that can fire without any cause.

While not commenting on the specifics of this particular NYS legislation, as I'm indifferent to it, everyone should be aware, New York Courts recognize an exception to "at-will" known as the "Implied Contract Exception". Two other common exceptions, known colloquially as "Public Policy Exception" and "Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing" are not recognized under current NYS Labor Law, nor through existing case law here.

Again, this is not a reflection on the current topic, just a clarification on your skewed interpretation of current New York civil practice.

And a further clarification, every state is an "at-will" state, so New York isn't actually "one of several", it's more like "one of every". The only quasi-exception is in Montana where they have a complicated law called the Montana Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act (WDEA). I'm not going to go into explaining it here, but if your truly interested in why Montana is different, check out an article written by Don Robinson in the 1996 edition of the Montana Law Review.

One last additional point, "at will" does not supersede federal statutes such as ADA, the 1964 Civil Rights Act, or any other statute governing workplace discrimination.

[spin_the_wheel 460]

What the??? Arent we all "Brothers" (yeah right)... if this bill helps one Brother Volunteer Firefighter save his job, it's worth it. Case closed. JMO

Edited June 17, 2010 by spin_the_wheel
Use of symbols to bypass profanity filter.

[spin_the_wheel 460]

This bill will have an economic impact, especially considering most volunteers are in the service industry (DPW, etc). And, the business taxpayer will have to pay twice. He pays taxes related to his business, and let's say one of his employees is a plumber, and he's a volunteer and goes to a fire and is gone all day. Now that business owner has to find a way to cover those customers that he had planned on that employee doing. If he can't, he's going to take a hit on the reliability of his company. What if he gets hurt on a fire scene or in an accident responding in a company vehicle?

I understand this is one way of staffing in these critical economic times, but the days of the "small town" are gone sadly.

As mentioned, is this going to affect the volunteer's employment? If the employer knows the person volunteers, are they going to hire them? I guess this will be similar to military service leave...

Take it from me, NYS Employment laws protect the employer, NOT the employee.

I thought we were on the same side here...isnt the public what matters? In one breath some of you scream about doing the right thing for the public, and manpower and response. And in the next breath you go out of your way to knock everything Volunteer of FASNY related. In reality this bill wont be much but if it helps get 1 or 2 more people out to a major incident isnt it worth it? Isnt it worth it to the Chief in charge or IC at the "big one?", not to mention the rest of the firefighters on scene? Whatever happened to supporting the idea of goodwill and helping your community?? Most of the Dept.s this bill is aimed for probably get 1 or 2 "big ones" a year if that. We are not talking about workers leaving for every alarm every day.

I doubt it will have any "economic impact" your pulling at straws with that one, there are way to many other things to worry about as an employer then if an employee misses 2 days work during the year at a fire. I doubt his company is going to suffer a "reliabilty hit" because his worker was fighting a major fire, in fact some poeple might look upon that as an admirable thing to do for the emploee and employer. I bet the company could get some good press out of doing something like that, run some ads with a picture of the employee and the fire "We care about our communities"

Again JMO

Edited June 17, 2010 by spin_the_wheel

[JJB531 652]

Thanks Chris192... so from reading it we can gather that if an individual chooses to respond to an emergency instead of going to work, the employer will have the right to deduct the time missed from work out of someone's vacation or sick time (if sick time is even accrued by the employee). If the employee (Volunteer firefighter or EMS provider) doesn't have any accrued time, they are entitled up to 3 hours in a 12 month period (which in reality works out to 1 or 2 jobs) in a 12 month period and/or they are permitted to leave work to respond to an emergency 2 times a year (assuming that the volunteer works in the same town/village that they volunteer).

Realistically, how much of an effect is this bill going to have? For somone who doesn't work in the town they volunteer in, they won't be able to respond to calls during work hours so that part of the bill won't come into play, and after one or two calls they've burnt up the 3 hours allotted to them before their employer can start tapping into their accrued time. Tapping into accrued sick or vacation time means you can forget that family vacation or don't bother calling in sick when you are doubled over on the toilet because you no longer have the time to take.

It's a nice gesture by the State government, and it definetly may save someones job at some point, but I don't think in the long run the benefits offered by this bill are going to be felt by many people.

[gamewell45 258]

Thanks Chris192... so from reading it we can gather that if an individual chooses to respond to an emergency instead of going to work, the employer will have the right to deduct the time missed from work out of someone's vacation or sick time (if sick time is even accrued by the employee). If the employee (Volunteer firefighter or EMS provider) doesn't have any accrued time, they are entitled up to 3 hours in a 12 month period (which in reality works out to 1 or 2 jobs) in a 12 month period and/or they are permitted to leave work to respond to an emergency 2 times a year (assuming that the volunteer works in the same town/village that they volunteer).

Realistically, how much of an effect is this bill going to have? For somone who doesn't work in the town they volunteer in, they won't be able to respond to calls during work hours so that part of the bill won't come into play, and after one or two calls they've burnt up the 3 hours allotted to them before their employer can start tapping into their accrued time. Tapping into accrued sick or vacation time means you can forget that family vacation or don't bother calling in sick when you are doubled over on the toilet because you no longer have the time to take.

It's a nice gesture by the State government, and it definetly may save someones job at some point, but I don't think in the long run the benefits offered by this bill are going to be felt by many people.

Its important to realize that outside of urban/suburban areas, many small-town rural fire departments have members who work in the same town they protect and this bill will no doubt benefit them.

Obviously tapping into accrued sick or vacation time (for those fortunate enough to have that benefit) is a personal choice. It could be possible that someone actually doesn't mind using a vacation day for the benefit of the public in certain circumstances. When you think of it, why should we even be concerned about how someone spends their sick/vacation days?? In essence, its really none of our business.

I think, as spin_the_wheel eloquently stated above, if the bill saves even one job, then its all worth it.

Edited June 17, 2010 by gamewell45

[JJB531 652]

Its important to realize that outside of urban/suburban areas, many small-town rural fire departments have members who work in the same town they protect and this bill will no doubt benefit them.

Obviously tapping into accrued sick or vacation time (for those fortunate enough to have that benefit) is a personal choice. It could be possible that someone actually doesn't mind using a vacation day for the benefit of the public in certain circumstances. When you think of it, why should we even be concerned about how someone spends their sick/vacation days?? In essence, its really none of our business.

I think, as spin_the_wheel eloquently stated above, if the bill saves even one job, then its all worth it.

I understand what you're saying when it comes to the more rural areas of NYS... being a NYC/Westchester guy I tend to forget that there's more to NY then just the Metro NYC area!

It could be very well possible that someone doesn't mind using a vacation day for the benefit of the public, but we are here to discuss the bill, and this stipulation in this bill could be a factor in whether or not someone decides to take advantage of what this bill has to offer. Yes it's none of our business what one particular individual decides to do with their own accrued time, but it is everyone's business who volunteers the stipulations that are set forth in this bill, and that is open to discussion, hence the reason I brought it up.

[ex-commish 490]

I have a gross distrust for most politicians and feel that the timing was right passing this bill and others being our state legislators are not exactly in good graces with the average NYS resident thanks to the recent budget mess. They know they are in trouble and are reaching for straws to stay in office and they know the majority of the voters are volunteers. I am not opposed to this bill but I don't feel it will be as effective as it is being portrayed but perhaps I am wrong and at this point we will have to wait and see as time goes on if the bill had an impact.

[Guest]

1)this bill will do nothing to improve the dropping numbers of volunteers, but the politicians that cant pass a budget will use this to show that the are behind the VFD's....please reelect me.

2)If the employeer wants to fire them he just can't use the excuse you were late.....it will take him one more day to "find" a reason.

3) it allows employeers to screen out volunteers and not hire them in the 1st place.

That maybe true, but is only because the bill wont do what FASNY wants it to do........turn back the clock to the good old days when everyone worked localy and the whistle got 100 guys.

Exactly correct. CT has had this law for a few years. I have no idea if it has been challenged in court or used to prevent a termination because CT is an at will state also, and if an employer wants you gone, unless you are protected by a CBA, you are gone. They will find something.

Also, in several years on the books in CT this law has done absolutely NOTHING to slow down the decay of volunteer numbers.

It is absolute feel good legislation, and the pols are looking for exactly what we are seeing here- a WOO HOOO response from the volunteer community. It is a mirage.

[gamewell45 258]

Exactly correct. CT has had this law for a few years. I have no idea if it has been challenged in court or used to prevent a termination because CT is an at will state also, and if an employer wants you gone, unless you are protected by a CBA, you are gone. They will find something.

Also, in several years on the books in CT this law has done absolutely NOTHING to slow down the decay of volunteer numbers.

It is absolute feel good legislation, and the pols are looking for exactly what we are seeing here- a WOO HOOO response from the volunteer community. It is a mirage.

I don't believe the purpose of the bill was to retain volunteer firefighters; rather I believe it is merely supposed to make it a little easier for those who want to respond to calls without fear of termination.

Is it feel good legislation? I guess we'll find out. If its never used, then you might be correct but lets wait and see.

Btw, I've yet to hear anyone from my firehouse or friends in the volunteer community go "WOO HOOO" over this legislation.

Edited June 17, 2010 by gamewell45

[Guest]

Ehh, wait and see, who knows. But one of the realities of an "at will" state is that, without CBA protection if an employer wants you gone it is not hard to manufacture cause.

[gamewell45 258]

Ehh, wait and see, who knows. But one of the realities of an "at will" state is that, without CBA protection if an employer wants you gone it is not hard to manufacture cause.

In this case I'd definitley agree with you. That's why unions tend to do better in the northeast as most states up here have horrible labor laws.