Committee hears state and unions outline remaining impasses in public‑safety contracts

The Joint Select Committee on Collective Bargaining received an update on March 16 from the Department of Management Services about negotiations with multiple public‑safety bargaining units and heard union representatives outline outstanding demands.

Michael Matimore, representing the Department of Management Services, said the negotiations are "full‑book" — the entire contract is open — and that the state has agreed on the majority of articles in each unit but several economic items remain unresolved. For wages (article 25) Matimore said the state has offered a 2% competitive pay increase plus a 3% special pay increase — a 5% total adjustment — and described recruitment and retention funding and targeted hiring bonuses for high‑vacancy facilities.

Matimore flagged scheduling and overtime as recurrent non‑economic disputes. For example, he said the Florida Department of Law Enforcement has long applied a 28‑day/160‑hour work period, while some unions seek a 7‑day/40‑hour work period, a change DMS said would increase overtime and complicate scheduling. He also said the grievance articles include outdated references to the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service that the parties plan to update given changed FMCS practices.

Union speakers pressed for larger pay and safety measures. Philip DeMaria of the Florida State Fire Service Association called for clarifying classification language to prevent firefighters from being required to perform major construction (article 11), restoring fair work‑period treatment for different firefighter schedules (article 23), increasing on‑call and callback pay and guaranteeing overtime rates (article 24), and adding laundering, decontamination and showering facilities to reduce cancer exposure (articles 26 and 29). DeMaria said the union’s proposals are "fair and reasonable" and urged the committee to recommend them.

William Smith of the Police Benevolent Association’s Highway Patrol chapter said troopers remain understaffed and urged a multiyear career development plan; he said the union seeks roughly $30 million for that plan while Matimore noted a sworn‑officer career development line of $11,576,190 in current proposals. Smith also asked for a veteran stipend, relaxed grooming/tattoo restrictions for veterans and more funding to replace high‑mileage patrol vehicles.

James Biardi, representing security services for correctional and probation officers, said the primary impasse is wages: he said correctional officers currently start at $22 per hour and the union requests an $8 hourly increase, plus targeted retention payments and a 10% additive for death‑row and close‑management assignments. Biardi also said some lieutenants and captains do not receive overtime but are capped at comp time, which he said leaves them effectively working unpaid hours.

Committee members asked clarifying questions; Representative Harris confirmed that correctional officers do receive overtime according to Matimore’s response, though union testimony described gaps for certain supervisory ranks. The committee closed the informational hearing with no votes and took the submitted materials under advisement.

The committee did not take formal action; next steps will depend on continued bargaining and any legislative follow‑up the panel might recommend.