Firefighters union seeks contempt ruling, says KC is ignoring judge’s order
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Local 42 filed a contempt motion saying the city ignored a March judgment.
- The March judgment required reclassifying several training positions and negotiating a.
- An Aug. 5 hearing will address the union’s contempt motion and the city’s motion as well.
Kansas City’s firefighters union says the city has ignored a judge’s order to carry out a 2023 arbitration award and is asking a Jackson County judge to hold the city in contempt.
The International Association of Fire Fighters Local 42 filed the motion after a judge upheld the arbitration award in March, requiring the city to reclassify several Kansas City Fire Department training positions and negotiate a side agreement implementing those changes. The union says the city still has not complied, even though the court gave it 60 days to do so.
The union is asking the judge to force the city to comply with the March judgment and fine it $1,000 for each day it continues to ignore the court’s order.
Jackson County Circuit Court Judge Jalilah Otto will preside over the Aug. 5 hearing where the motion will be heard. Otto will also hear the city’s motion to reconsider, in which it argues that the arbitration happened under the old collective bargaining agreement and no longer applies.
“This is about accountability,” said Dan Heizman, union president. “They agreed to a contract with binding arbitration, and when we lose arbitration, we have to live with that decision by the impartial third party. We expect the city to do the same.”
The city did not directly answer questions regarding the agreement, instead saying the case remains active and that the Aug. 5 hearing will address both the union’s contempt motion and the city’s earlier motion to reconsider.
“The City is participating fully in that process and will present its position to the Court,” spokesperson Jordan Berger said in a statement.
“The City values its firefighters and its relationship with Local 42 and is working through the legal process to resolve the parties’ disagreement over how a 2023 arbitration award interacts with the current collective bargaining agreement. Because the matter is pending before the Court, the City will not comment further on the specifics,” Berger said.
How the two sides got here
The dispute dates to 2022, when the city created five assistant division chief positions in the Fire Department’s Professional Development and Risk Reduction divisions to oversee EMS training and professional development.
Local 42, which represents most fire department employees, argued the jobs were not supervisory positions and therefore belonged in its bargaining unit rather than the supervisors’ union.
An arbitrator agreed, concluding the duties were “clearly not supervisory or managerial” and ordering the city to remove the positions from the supervisors’ bargaining unit, rename them and negotiate a side agreement establishing new classifications and pay scales.
When the city did not implement the arbitration award, the union went to court seeking to have it confirmed as a judgment. Otto granted that request in March, ordering the city to carry out the arbitrator’s directives, including executing the required side agreement within 60 days.
Rather than implementing the judgment, the city argued the parties’ new collective bargaining agreement superseded parts of the arbitration award because it was negotiated after the arbitrator issued his decision. The court briefly granted the city’s motion to reconsider before setting that order aside and leaving the original judgment in place while additional proceedings continued.
The union argued the March judgment is still in effect because no court has put it on hold or overturned it.
In its contempt motion, union attorneys say the city has failed to execute the required side agreement. It continued resisting implementation after its appeal was dismissed on procedural grounds and has argued it does not have to comply with the court’s order rather than claiming it is unable to do so.
Heizman said the union initially worked with the city on how to implement the arbitration award while the two sides negotiated a new labor contract. He said discussions later broke down after the city proposed adding unrelated contract language to the agreement needed to carry out the award.
“We were working toward implementing it,” Heizman said. “Then all of a sudden they just went radio silent.”
The delay has stalled the creation of new EMS captain positions that would provide career advancement opportunities for paramedics and other firefighters who currently have few opportunities for promotion, he said.
“I just want the city to be held accountable to the agreements and the rules that were put in place,” Heizman said. “That’s why we have rules and laws in place, to make sure we’re all playing by the same sheet.”
