The IAFF editorial
Here is a reprint of the editorial from last year.

Editorial: Yes to ALS, no to union-busting
The Winchester Star
Wednesday, August 11, 2004
http://www2.townonline.com/winchester/opinion/view.bg?articleid=65866

As the old saying goes: It is not whether you win or lose, it is how you play the game.
This classic adage is used to teach our children respect and tolerance, especially in sporting events. Everyone is a winner, we tell our children, whether they score a goal or strike out.
We all know that in the real world, the adage rings hollow. No matter how we try to instill these timeless values in our children, adults quickly forget this wise saying.
Take municipal finance and union negotiations, where these principles are completely lost on those who should be finding acceptable compromises and playing the game fairly.
Last week, officials proudly touted the implementation of an Advanced Life Support system by the town's fire department. They called their decision a win for the town. But residents should be careful not to celebrate the decision because the way town officials handled themselves was deplorable and will only bring more future problems.
The workings between a union and a town can be very complicated. And because the negotiations between the two are held in executive session and out of the public view, we don't always know the entire story. However, after a contract is settled, the people and the press can request documentation and analyze the contracts and find out if these decisions were the best ones.
For example, earlier this year, we wrote an editorial critical of the School Committee's new teacher contract based on preliminary information we received from the department. A few months later, after seeing specifics from the contract, the Board of Selectmen were even more critical of the contracts. One of the reasons they were so upset was because town officials were in the process of negotiating new contracts with town employees. This, at a time when the town was trying to get the unions to concede various contract issues - an extremely difficult proposition after the other unions saw the school union's deal. One of those concessions was health care - an out of control cost the town needed to rein in to balance future budgets.
At the same time, the town has been trying to implement ALS service in the fire department. ALS will bring in at least an additional $150,000 to the town's coffers. The union also wants to offer ALS. But to its credit, they want to offer the service at the same level the town currently receives which means the town won't make as much money.
Right now, the town is covered by a "nine man minimum" and two private ALS paramedics. The decision by the town means that only the nine man minimum team will be covering the town. This increase in work for the firefighters changes their contract, something the union has to agree to. The union rejected the change and the town foolishly - and dangerously - implemented ALS anyway, essentially busting the union's clout.
This cut in staffing coverage comes at a time when Winchester's fire department coverage is below federal safety standards. The town's population is also getting older and older, meaning more ambulance activity. The town's ambulance will now venture out on longer trips, leaving the town understaffed and unprotected in case of a deadly fire ... all for $150,000.
The result of such action by a town is usually a strike, a work stoppage or lawsuits. The firefighters can't go on strike, but they will sue, and will probably win. This will cost the town even more money in lawsuits settlements, lawyer fees, higher salaries and stress. And heaven help the resident who is injured by a fire or a late ambulance due to the lack of proper staffing in the fire department.
Instead of putting everyone through all of this, why not come up with a revised contract that both sides can agree to in the first place? Why is the town more concerned about making a profit than providing the proper service? Why aren't town officials respecting the men who put their lives on the line to save all of us in case of an emergency? It is befuddling and unacceptable.