Copyright 2005 Toronto Star Newspapers, Ltd.
All Rights Reserved
Guelph Mercury (Ontario, Canada)
Defending firefighters old hat for MPP; Arnott tries again to let full-time firefighters continue the practice of volunteering
By THANA DHARMARAJAH
GUELPH, Ontario, Canada — MPP Ted Arnott is refusing to extinguish debate on his private member’s bill to protect full-time firefighters who volunteer in smaller departments.
For three years, he has been battling for these workers, known as ‘double hatters.’
“The Liberal government in Queen’s Park is prepared to stick their head into the sand while rural communities are losing their key volunteer firefighters, but I’m going to continue fighting for them,” said the Waterloo-Wellington Conservative MPP.
This week marks the fourth time since 2002 Arnott has brought forward a private member’s bill fighting on behalf of firefighters who are being forced to resign as volunteer fire fighters in their home communities under the threat of union charges, the Ontario Professional Fire Fighters Association.
He brought Bill 44 forward in the provincial legislature Tuesday.
“If a firefighter has a few days off and he wants to serve in his town, the union has no right to stop that,” Arnott said.
Arnott believes his efforts have paid off, since Community Safety and Correctional Services Minister Monte Kwinter announced $30 million in grants to fire services in March intended to be used for equipment and training.
The funding was meant to favour departments in small and rural communities, and Kwinter said it was in response to the double-hatters’ bill, Arnott said.
It was divided amongst communities based on population. For example, Guelph received $178,000 and Puslinch got $50,000.
“I believe my efforts have made some impact,” the MPP said.
Puslinch fire chief Doug Smith said the bill has received constant opposition from the firefighters’ union, which has been successful in lobbying the province.
He said the union wants to phase out double-hatter firefighters, and is threatening firefighters with the loss of their full-time positions.
Fred Leblanc, president of the Ontario Professional Firefighters Association, cites health and safety concerns associated with having full-timers also doing volunteer firefighting duties in their off hours.
He said if a firefighter is called out on a volunteer basis in the middle of the night and then has to report early the following morning to his full-time job, the individual will be exhausted.
“Firefighting can be a both physically and emotionally taxing occupation,” Leblanc said.
Arguments have been made that many firefighters hold other part-time jobs, such as in construction, but Leblanc said that is scheduled work.
He said it could also affect workers’ compensation and benefits.
For example, since firefighters are covered in the province for certain types of cancer, a claim could be denied saying that a firefighter could have gotten the work-related illness while on his volunteer duties, Leblanc said.
In the legislature in early November, Arnott quoted from an article in the Stratford Beacon Herald about an October fire in Shakespeare which caused $50,000 damage and killed a family pet.
The MPP said the newspaper article indicated that the Shakespeare volunteer department had to call in volunteers from Milverton to obtain a full complement, while two full-time firefighters were sitting at home in Shakespeare with their pagers off, since they were charged by their union for volunteering with the Perth East Fire Department.
Smith said given this incident, he expects Arnott’s resurrected bill has more clout.
The Puslinch fire chief worries about the current situation, if there is a lack of volunteers able to respond to smaller communities.
“Sooner or later, it’s going to cost somebody their life,” he said.
Currently the Puslinch fire department has 39 volunteer firefighters, but Smith declined to disclose the number of double hatters for fear the union would target them.
But Arnott’s bill doesn’t have a fighting chance, Leblanc said, especially when it was initially defeated under a Progressive Conservative government watch.
The bill had a third reading in December 2002 and was defeated in a 52-37 vote, igniting one of the largest debates ever at Queen’s Park on any private member’s bill.
Arnott brought it forward again in April 2004 and June 2004, but it died both times after first reading since the legislative session ended.
“I don’t expect Arnott’s bill to get any traction,” Leblanc said.
But the union president added, the MPP is “very passionate about the issue. He’s very persistent. I’ll give him that.”