AFS Cinema
Be Fair to Firefighters
RECEIVED Wed., May 12, 2004
Dear Editor,
I'm afraid that Terrell Blodgett has hoisted himself on his own petard in his letter regarding Austin firefighters and collective bargaining ["Postmarks" online, May 6].
Collective bargaining is not preferential treatment. It is equitable treatment. These are people who willingly walk into places that everyone else runs away from. Why should they not have every chance to get pay and benefits commensurate with the risk involved in their work?
Mr. Blodgett mentions, somewhat snidely, that they have 48 hours off after a 24-hour shift "to rest or work on other jobs, which many do." I find this interesting, because three paragraphs later Mr. Blodgett states, "More than 3,600 Austinites applied this spring for just 74 vacancies in the fire department. That means 48 applications for each vacancy. Certainly those several thousand individuals think that the current pay and benefits of firefighters is quite adequate."
Why, if the benefits and pay are so good, Mr. Blodgett, do our firefighters work those extra jobs you mentioned? Is it perhaps because they need the extra job to make ends meet? Your attitude also smacks of the very reason Austin firefighters need collective bargaining. When it comes to a profession where your life is at risk every time you go out on a call, "adequate" is just another way to say "as little as we can get away with." "Adequate" is taking them for granted.
As a taxpayer who lives in this city I do not believe that the concept of "good enough" or "too good" should exist in regards to people who put their lives on the line every day for our safety.
Firefighters protect our lives and our property. Letting them have a role in determining their pay and benefits is the least we can do as a community to say "thanks." I will be voting for this measure and I hope you will join me in doing so.
I'm afraid that Terrell Blodgett has hoisted himself on his own petard in his letter regarding Austin firefighters and collective bargaining ["Postmarks" online, May 6].
Collective bargaining is not preferential treatment. It is equitable treatment. These are people who willingly walk into places that everyone else runs away from. Why should they not have every chance to get pay and benefits commensurate with the risk involved in their work?
Mr. Blodgett mentions, somewhat snidely, that they have 48 hours off after a 24-hour shift "to rest or work on other jobs, which many do." I find this interesting, because three paragraphs later Mr. Blodgett states, "More than 3,600 Austinites applied this spring for just 74 vacancies in the fire department. That means 48 applications for each vacancy. Certainly those several thousand individuals think that the current pay and benefits of firefighters is quite adequate."
Why, if the benefits and pay are so good, Mr. Blodgett, do our firefighters work those extra jobs you mentioned? Is it perhaps because they need the extra job to make ends meet? Your attitude also smacks of the very reason Austin firefighters need collective bargaining. When it comes to a profession where your life is at risk every time you go out on a call, "adequate" is just another way to say "as little as we can get away with." "Adequate" is taking them for granted.
As a taxpayer who lives in this city I do not believe that the concept of "good enough" or "too good" should exist in regards to people who put their lives on the line every day for our safety.
Firefighters protect our lives and our property. Letting them have a role in determining their pay and benefits is the least we can do as a community to say "thanks." I will be voting for this measure and I hope you will join me in doing so.
Sean Wardwell