Fire District Commissioner Suggests a Review of Disability Provisions

With several Rhode Island communities facing high numbers of firefighters retiring on disability pensions, EG Fire Commissioner Steve Bartlett thinks the Fire District should take a look at current contractual benefits, saying they could prove very costly for taxpayers.

In the last 20 years onlyEast Greenwich four firefighters have gone out on disability pensions and currently there are no temporary disability claims.

However Bartlett says the district has averaged four to six “injured on duty” claims for several years, which he says always have potential to turn into long-term disability pensions.

When a firefighter is injured on duty and suffers a temporary disability, he collects his salary, tax free, plus temporary disability insurance (TDI). That can total up to  2 ½ times as much as they earn when they are on the job, according to Bartlett.

The tax-free salary to a disabled firefighter is required by state law, but according to Bartlett, very few fire departments also offer TDI and he questions the need for it.  He says it was adopted in East Greenwich as the department evolved from all volunteers to a paid staff and current disability benefit provisions were not in place.

Chief Peter Henrikson and the commissioners say while there are no apparent problems right now, they see potential for abuse and so would like to make a change now, before there is an issue.

Henrikson says that in addition to involving a great deal of time, disability claims are costly to the department and affect morale. While a fire fighter on temporary disability is collecting 2 ½ times as much for not working, his or her job is being handled by a fire fighter at regular pay. The department may also have to pay time and a half to cover the open shift based on contractual obligations.

Lt. William Perry, president of East Greenwich Firefighters local 3328 disagrees with the idea of eliminating TDI and says it won’t save money as the firefighters pay for it themselves.

Perry said that firefighters need TDI coverage for protection against possible injury while not on duty. The district’s disability provisions would not cover that type of injury.

Because of their schedules, some firefighters have second jobs or do other work and TDI gives them coverage there, as well as protection against any non-work-related accident that would keep them off the job.

Perry agrees other departments may not offer TDI, but says many do have other types of disability programs that cover off-duty injuries.

The union would oppose any changes to disability benefits if they come up in contract negotiations, he said. The contract does not come up for renewal until 2013.

Making sure a firefighter injured while on fire fighting duty (IOD) is fully compensated is fair, said Bartlett. He doesn't think the same about a system that allows a firefighter who is injured on the job to collect more than his regular salary. 

“Further, Bartlett said, “the union argument that they pay TDI in order to cover themselves for injuries incurred while performing non-fire-fighter jobs is questionable.  I don’t recall any firefighter injured while performing their job and eligible for TDI turning down TDI payments.”

According to Chief Henrikson, the bulk of the department’s work is now EMS calls, often involving moving people on stretchers, a task that can result in back injury.  To reduce the potential for injury and disability claims the district purchased battery-operated stretchers to reduce lifting and it sends five firefighters on EMS calls.