Maintaining adequate administrative support in an organization that has unique work schedules has always been a challenge for the Department. Fortunately, most of our operational expertise in the Department is possessed by members working the 21-day tour schedule, plying their trade in the field. By assuring these members retain their assignments in the field, it is possible to minimize the amount of time we are required to backfill their 24 hour watches and carry out the most critical mission; providing the best possible fire suppression and emergency medical services to the residents and visitors to the City and County of San Francisco.

The Department has gone to great lengths in recent years to increase oversight of the use of workgroups, committees and the exchange of watch privileges extended to members. These recent changes have put safeguards in place that prevent the possibility of "potential abuse" referred to by the Auditor.

· Recommendation of Auditor"s report

The Department should:

2.4.1 Annually review its committees and workgroups and reduce or eliminate committees that do not perform a function or do not produce a work product consistent with the Department"s mission, and restructure or eliminate committees that have compensatory time or work product expenditures exceeding projected expenditures.

· Assessment of Department

The Department concurs with the recommendation of the audit.

As a matter of current policy, the Department periodically reviews the status of all groups to assure their continued relevance to the Department"s mission.

The Workgroups and Committees in the Department are important Management Tools and all are task-oriented. All the Workgroups and Committees produce a work product consistent with the Department"s mission, and are an important mechanism for keeping the Department and its members educated and informed. They allow policies and procedures to be changed as required. For example, the existence of these committees allowed the Department to quickly adjust to changes in responding procedures brought about by the recent World Trade Center disaster and the ongoing biological threats. Currently the Committee Workgroups are trying to meet on the three (3) separate watches to reduce overtime. However, there are special circumstances where all the members need to be present to prepare for a drill or to discuss new equipment. The purpose of Workgroup Meetings is for the members in specialized units to meet together to share new ideas, review new equipment, and also train as a group. An example would be the surf or cliff rescue units.

As part of the Department"s work with the audit, a review took place in the first quarter of 2001. The result of this review was a reorientation of all Department committee"s and workgroups that included the addition of an Assistant Deputy Chief to each group to chair proceedings, monitor productivity and performance, and maintain fiscal accountability. The Department"s General Order A-40 dated April 6, 2001 recognizing this reorientation had been provided as Attachment 2.4.1 to this report.

The Auditor"s suggestion of an employing and annual review process for all Department workgroups and committees has merit. An annual review will allow the Department to assess the ongoing need for existing committees, the need to form new ones, and assure that membership is appropriate and adequate to carry out their mission.

· Department Action plan and timeline

The Department"s efforts in this area are ongoing. The Department will formulate a schedule for the annual review of existing committees and workgroups by July 2002.

· Recommendation of Auditor"s report

The Department should:

2.4.2 Develop written guidelines, outlining the reasons for committee members to attend meetings or perform committee work in an off-duty status, require Department Chief approval of workgroup and committee work plans with members participating in off-duty status, and require the appropriate Deputy Chief approval for any additional committee and workgroup compensatory time and overtime expenditures prior to accrual.

·Assessment of Department

The Department concurs with the recommendation of the audit.

The idea of approval for committee / workgroup formation, action and accrual of overtime or time coming through the chain is consistent with current Department practices. The idea of approval above the level of Deputy Chief or Assistant Deputy Chief is consistent with current Department policy. Each chair of a work group or committee is required to submit to the Chief of Department for approval a prospective estimate of hours expected to be required of each group and its members.

The Department is looking into reducing the overtime by making membership on workgroups and committees voluntary. These committees and workgroups give members the opportunity to participate in the Department. While some amount of participation may be generated in this fashion, it should be remembered that the Department identifies members for these committees based on their expertise and training. Often this training has been at the member"s own expense, and the Department is able to avoid expensive personal service contracts for public safety consultants by tapping into the Department"s own talent pool.

Note: Participation in Department committees and workgroups is being considered as criteria for provisional promotions, and will be investigated for possible inclusion as criteria for appointment to permanent promotions.

· Department Action plan and timeline

The Department"s efforts in this area are ongoing.

· Recommendation of Auditor"s report

The Department should

2.4.3 Report compensatory time and overtime expediters for committee and workgroups, including Division of training compensatory time and overtime expediters for drill preparation and performance, as part of FY 2002-2003 Budget review, including a written explanation of why the committee, work group or drill preparation and performance could not be performed in an on-duty status.

· Assessment of Department

The Department concurs with the recommendation of the audit.

The Department is currently working on policies for the formation and actions of workgroups and committees (see General Order A-40) that place an Assistant Deputy Chief as chair for all workgroups and committees. Each Assistant Deputy Chief would be responsible for the operational and fiscal activity of their respective workgroup / committee. All expenditures would be tallied and be reviewed by appropriate Department personnel on a regular basis.

The Department disagrees with the auditor"s implication that all costs associated with training and drills are exorbitant and avoidable. The Auditor cites the example of the Department recent High Rise drill. The overtime expense for the annual high-rise Drill totaled $2,745. For this expense, the Department was able to drill over 1200 members over a 3 day period in high rise operations; a total of over 4800 training hours for our members in mission critical-operations.

· Department Action plan and timeline

The Department"s efforts in this area are ongoing. The Department anticipates that policies requiring the participation of an Assistant Deputy Chief in all committees / workgroups will be formalized by July 2002.

· Recommendation of Auditor"s report

The Department should:

2.4.4 Meet and confer with the respective employee organizations to implement Rule and Regulations section 418, to pay compensatory time for attending committee and workgroup meetings or conducting committee and workgroup work at the regular rate of pay and not time and a half.

·Assessment of Department

The Department is analyzing the recommendation of the audit.

The Department believes the auditor is referring to Section 418 of its Procedure Guide in this recommendation. Section 418 refers specifically to members who volunteer to participate in workgroups and committees. Those members whose participation is mandatory must be compensated at time and a half.

· Department Action plan and timeline

The Department expects to complete the analysis by January 2003.

· Recommendation of Auditor"s report

The Department should:

2.4.5 Implement a payroll procedure to pay firefighters for exchanged watch hours actually worked and to deduct pay for firefighters exchanging watches.

· Assessment of Department

The Department disagrees with the recommendation of the Auditor.

Much of the information provided by the auditor in this section is vague, inconclusive, the product of hearsay, and in some cases misleading. The rules governing exchange of watches (trades) in the Department is defined in the MOU between the Firefighter"s Union and the City, Department General Orders, Rules and Regulations, the City Charter and the FLSA. Any change to policies related to watch exchange would require a Charter revision through a ballot measure. The relevant charter section (A8.452) is included as Attachment 2.4.1.

While it is accurate that exchange of watches is a privilege extended to its members, it is inaccurate to say that the Department "does not monitor exchanges and does not maintain written records of when the Chief of Department and / or commanding officer grant permission to exceed the limits on exchanges¹."

The Department tracks all exchange of watches using the PeopleSoft scheduling module, and regularly runs reports to monitor the number of watches exchanged by individual members. Written requests to exceed the trade rule that are approved by the company Captain are held at the station in the personnel file of the requesting member. Only requests to the Chief of Department are archived at headquarters.

The report also makes note of a "instances where members had filled in WDO on there timerolls when they were working the exchange²." The auditor does not give any specific details, and fails to note that paper timerolls are merely a backup to the PeopleSoft scheduling and payroll module. Payroll is generated by PeopleSoft, which has business rules in place to prevent just such a mistake. Therefore any problem of this nature would (1) not be allowed to be entered into PeopleSoft and (2) would be caught by payroll if a paper timeroll was used to input the payroll report into PeopleSoft.

While the auditor recognizes that the Department uses watch exchanges to reduce overtime costs, the report also alleges that Department members are at greater risk for injury and errors while working watch exchanges. The auditor provides no documented cases or evidence to ground this allegation, nor could the Department find evidence that injuries are more likely to occur when members are working shift exchanges.

The auditor refers to "rumors" about abuse of the watch exchange policy, but fails to document a single case where this alleged abuse has proven costly to the Department or the City. While the Department does consider the exchange of watch privilege to be a non-cash, revenue neutral (and overtime saving) transaction between two members, the Department takes very seriously its obligation to maintain workplace safety and both monitors and enforces the "two exchange per pay period" rule. The auditor also fails to note that the suspension of the watch exchange privilege for months at a time is regularly employed as an initial sanction for members found to be in violation of the watch exchange policy.

The recommendation to add or deduct pay based on actual hours worked would prove to be extremely costly and runs in direct opposition to section 12 of the CCSF / Local 798 MOU which defines overtime as time "in excess of normal work hours on a regular work day or week." Because of the direct impact on employee wages (less pay for a member whose watch was exchanged), Local 798 would undoubtedly file a grievance.

The costs associated with the implementation of this recommendation are significant. Each time a member works a watch exchange for another member, the member would be entitled to receive compensation at their overtime rate (one and a half (1.5) times their regular rate of compensation).

Each exchange of watch would represent a net cost to the city of $488 (cost of a watch worked at overtime minus the cost of a watch at regular rate.) Assuming every member in the Department conservatively trades four (4) time a year, using fifth step compensation as an average, the total annual cost to the Department would be at least $2,998,272.

· 1536 (uniformed members) X 4 (trades per year) = 6144 (watch exchanges)

· 6144 (watch exchanges) X $488 = $2,998,272

Additionally, the mechanism that would be used to monitor these type of transactions (PeopleSoft) would require a great deal of costly customization and employment of additional human resources.

This recommendation would also have a significant impact on the use of sick leave. Rather than exchange a watch and have hours deducted from your salary, a member would most likely use sick leave. This represents an even greater cost to the City as each member using sick leave would need to be backfilled using overtime.

· Recommendation of Auditor"s report

The Department should:

2.4.6 Meet and confer with the Fire Fighters Union to increase the overtime limit for watch exchanges from the current MOU limit of 96 hours per pay period to the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) limit of 159 hours per 21 day tour.

· Assessment of Department

The Department disagrees with the recommendation of the audit.

The Federal Fair Labor Standards Act allows each municipality to determine the regular work week and or pay period for its Fire Department. Once a determination has been made the law requires the municipality to adhere to its decision on the maximum number of hours firefighters" may be scheduled to work in that period with out being paid overtime³. The current 144 hour / 21 day limit is part of the negotiated current MOU between CCSF and Local 798, and is a long standing tenant in the relationship between CCSF and Local 798. The current MOU is active through FY 2003. Any change to the current hour / pay period limit would be in violation of long standing CCSF policy, require renegotiations of the current MOU with 798, violates CCSF Charter and opens the door to significant liability and drawn out litigatory efforts.

¹Management Audit of the San Francisco Fire Department, 2001 pg 2.4-4

² Ibid. pg 2.4-5

³ Case of Danielson, 1985