Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Labor Contracts Firefighters topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council ratifies firefighters’ MOA, administration cites $10 million four‑year cost
Summary
After negotiation and amendments, the council voted to ratify a memorandum of agreement with the firefighters' union that labor counsel said will cost just over $10 million across four years and includes changes to staffing and vacation language.
The Clifton City Council voted July 15 to ratify a memorandum of agreement (MOA) with the Clifton Firefighters Association (FMBA) after legal changes were incorporated into the document.
Labor counsel reported two changes agreed to during final discussions: removal of proposed new vacation language and an amendment to staffing language that specifies "throughout the calendar year, up to 5 employees shall be allowed time off per shift" with deputy chiefs included among the five. Counsel said the FMBA had agreed to attempt ratification of the edited MOA.
When asked about cost, labor counsel stated the contract will increase labor costs by "just over $10,000,000" over the four‑year life of the agreement; the MOA is retroactive to July 1. Councilmembers asked whether the introduced budget covered retroactive pay; administration said the CFO had indicated money for the agreement was included in the introduced budget and would provide written confirmation.
The council approved the MOA by roll call: five councilmembers voted in favor and one voted against. One councilmember explained their no vote by saying they were unwilling to endorse a multi‑year wage package without greater clarity on the budgetary tradeoffs.
Outcome: MOA ratified (majority vote). Administration said it would update the contract documents to reflect the agreed changes and return the signed MOA following the union ratification process.
What it means: The MOA’s projected $10 million cost over four years will be reflected in future budgets; council members asked for written verification of available funding and called for transparency on retroactive payments and budget impacts.
