Escambia County offers smaller wage package in IAFF talks; union presses for pay scale and funding plan

Escambia County officials and members of the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) met Feb. 24 for continued contract negotiations focused on wages, a proposed pay scale, holiday and leave language, and certification credit, county HR Director Nikki Powell said.

In a meeting that lasted more than two hours, Powell outlined a county counterproposal that reduced the union’s roughly $7 million initial wage request to about $1.7 million in near‑term funding and an implementation option that would place employees into a new pay chart at an estimated $4.4 million, she said. Powell also noted pension costs the county must cover, saying the Florida Retirement System requires “almost 35% of your salary” in employer contributions for these positions.

The wage figures were the central point of debate. Union members pressed for a contractual wage progression — a multi‑step pay scale — that they say would reduce pay compression between new hires and long‑tenured firefighters, improve recruitment and retention, and provide predictable, recurring increases. “In order to make a decent living in Escambia County, we—re not with the times right now,” IAFF member David Carviosa said during public remarks.

Powell said county staff reworked the county—s response after reviewing the union proposal and comparable agencies. She said the county could not accommodate the union—s full $7 million request and described the $1.7 million figure as what staff could provide immediately, with the larger implementation table (the $4.4 million figure) showing the cost to place employees into the proposed chart without the additional 15% guarantee discussed separately.

Union leaders repeatedly pressed the county for a concrete funding route to make a scale sustainable, focusing on two revenue paths discussed in the meeting: drawing one‑time funds from departmental reserves and increasing an existing Municipal Service Benefit Unit (MSBU) or similar rate structure. County staff acknowledged reserves exist and that any recurring cost would require commissioner approval of a revenue source or an MSBU adjustment. Commissioner comments from prior meetings were cited by both sides to show mixed appetite among commissioners for large, recurring wage increases.

Negotiators also discussed several contract articles and side agreements:

- Article 10 (holidays): County staff said they had left holiday pay language at 12‑hour increments; staff indicated reverting holiday‑pay language reduced projected costs and helped make room for wage funding. Powell said the original holiday proposal carried a cost of roughly $1.2 million and the revised wording raised that line to about $2.5–$2.6 million, figures county staff used while rebalancing proposals.

- Article 13 (certifications and testing): Parties agreed to remove the phrase "or equivalent" for bonus points on promotion tests while retaining an equivalency path for qualifications (such as a completed state task book). The group agreed to update and circulate precise language by email so the contract reflects whether a candidate must hold the certificate to receive bonus points.

- Article 16: An existing memorandum of understanding for uniforms will be incorporated into the final agreement, Powell said.

- Article 19: County staff reverted to prior language to accommodate the wage proposal, Powell said; the change was presented as a compromise to offset other cost increases.

- Article 20 (acting pay): The negotiators agreed a firefighter assigned to act in another role would receive $50 per shift for up to 14 days; after 14 days the pay reverts to the higher classification. The $50 per shift applies to 24‑ or 9‑hour shifts as written in the contract language the parties reviewed.

Members and county staff also raised operational proposals connected to leave and scheduling. Union members suggested front‑loading annual leave (one proposal mentioned 48 hours on hire and a 48‑hour annual grant each Oct. 1) to address coverage and retention concerns; county staff said the idea required further analysis of overtime and staffing impacts.

On implementation mechanics, Powell said staff had produced two cost tables for bargaining: one that moves employees into the new chart (about $4.4 million) and a higher option that layered a 15% guarantee for certain placements. She said both tables were available for caucus review and that final decisions would depend on which revenue sources commissioners would approve.

Negotiators recorded a limited number of signed items during the meeting. Attendees agreed to initial signatures on copies described as "miscellaneous benefits" and "out‑classification pay" and to circulate final wording for testing equivalencies and other technical edits by email.

The meeting closed with both sides agreeing to caucus and to schedule a follow‑up negotiation session. Powell said county scheduling staff would coordinate dates and that, if ratified by the union membership and the Board of County Commissioners, any agreement would take effect the next full pay period after board ratification.

The discussion made clear both sides view wages and the question of recurring revenue as linked: union negotiators sought a multi‑year scale or recurring increases to fix compression and retention problems, while county negotiators said recurring costs must be tied to a commissioner‑approved funding source such as an MSBU or General Revenue allocation.