‘Compromised Safety’ 

Mr. Cassidy filed the grievance because the city had, in his opinion, acted unilaterally and not in the best interests of the public or the Firefighters. “Reductions of firefighting staffing of any kind compromise public and firefighter safety.” Said Mr. Cassidy. “Firefighters will always fight to protect the citizens we serve.”

William Frankel, Senior Counsel on Fire Staffing for the Law Department, said he disagreed strongly with the judge’s opinion. No final injunction has been issued yet,” said Mr. Frankel. “However, we still plan to appeal the ruling.”

In the days and months leading up to and following Commissioner Scoppetta’s December decision, FDNY officials said repeatedly that the union contract allowed the city to implement staff cuts if department medical leave rose above 7.5 percent annually.

Mr. Cassidy argued against the cuts in the interest of safety, but he also maintained that the union had the right to seek review of the city’s staffing decisions through grievance and arbitration. In response, the city cited a provision in the roster staffing agreement reached between the UFA and the FDNY in 1996 that said the Commissioner could exercise discretion in ordering reductions if the annual rate of medical leave exceeded 7.5 percent but less than 7.6 percent. 

Judge Rebuffs City 

Union lawyers turned to the courts for arbitration on the provision in question and the provision in question and got the injunction against further cuts that they wanted from Justice Douglass, although with the city planning to appeal, an automatic stay applies to the injunction.

Justice Douglass dismissed the city’s interpretation of the roster staffing agreement provision. He said that instead of prohibiting the UFA from seeking review of the Commissioner’s decision, roster staffing allowed for disputes between the city and UFA over the enforcement of cuts to be solved by grievance and arbitration procedures as defined by the unions collective bargaining agreement.