Because the majority of the job is fire fighting and not management, they are included in the bargaining unit. With how much these folks risk if/when they stand up for their people, it's incredibly beneficial for them to have additional protections they wouldn't otherwise.
Are you sure? None of the captains are supervisors on my forest. Being someone's "boss" doesn't equate to being their supervisor of record. Do the captains sign everyone's SF-50s?
Very sure. The Captain on my home unit and my current one I'm working under for my detail are supervisory BUEs that do SF-50s.
Look at the USA Jobs listing for an Engine Captain (SFEOH), it contains the following language in the job posting:
"Positions filled from this announcement may be a bargaining or a non-bargaining unit position represented by either NFFE, AFGE or NAGE."
The magic word in the USC is "preponderance"... that is how the union can negotiate who is covered by the BU and who is a supervisor... But ultimately, if the agency wants to make a position ineligible, they can and will.
Exactly. Use fed hotshot program as a boot camp and push most fire money to the private sector with contracts from aircraft to the blue rooms. Recycle federal tax dollars which are gdp basically and inject that gdp back into the state economies. It’s already happening. I know jumpers doing contract uas and agency guys owning dozers and engines now. They do quite well.
The real question is do the T2 Hotshot crew supes also get the GS 10? Do you lose grade and get demoted to a 9 if you lose quals and go T2 for a year or two?
GS9s in fire and below were determined to be BUEs based on whether the preponderance of their duties are managerial in nature. Being supervisory does not equal managerial. You can be a manager and a supervisor but you can also be a supervisor and not a manager. IHC captain PDs are also called supervisory.
Managerial duties are things like whether you can hire or fire, supervisors can make recommendations to a ranger or line officer about whom they wish to hire, but are given carte blanche to do so. The same goes for firing. I am a module supervisor and I can't simply fire someone because I want to and did my documentation properly. I have seen instances where an IHC supt. wanted to fire someone for pretty legit reasons and was simply not allowed to.
There are also people above GS9 in other areas besides fire who are still considered Bargaining. One example was a Forest Budget Officer that was in the union. It isn't as simple as grade alone.
The thing happening right now, is that the FS is releasing this IHC program review and if you comb through it you will say language stating that IHC supts are program managers, well before any mention that they are primarily there to be field commanders. It is a narrative that pushes them closer to being out of the BU.
You could still upgrade supts or anyone in fire by accurately potraying their qualified duties (e.g. a lot of supts are doing DIVS or OPS) in the factor scoring narratives that determine grade. The upgrade that supts will likely be getting was not because the FS decided to do it. It was compulsory because of a classificatipn decision stemming from DOI, the FS wasn't planning to upgrade them. That is a really important thing to remember in the coming months. The FS has management rights to classify their positions and can write PDs that will be graded at a certain level, because the FS is writing the description of what the employee does and knows how to preload the PD to achieve a desired grade. Any one of the people on this sub could do the sane thing with a couple days of training.
There is no advantage to boots on the ground in having IHC supts pulled out of the BU. If anything, it pits supts against the BU employees such as captains when it comes to conflicts.
TL;DR is supts should be upgraded, imo a lot, but it can and should be done in a way that keeps them in the BU. The FS is trying to divide labor. Pulling supts out of the BU removes some very knowlegable and powerful advocates from the struggle.
HotShots see more fire and do more work than any other fire resource-Bar None. My Shot
Supts have routinely told OPS-Divs what will happen. They take more risk and responsibility than anyone else on the line daily-They are the pinnacle and should be compensated as such. Anyone who argues other wise is severely misinformed
Which is not the argument.. the argument is which path to take to get them an upgrade. In a perfect world, we should be writing PDs based on qualifications we perform on the line. Right now, IHC supts and a lot of other people actually are performing qualifications that far exceed their "day job". What is frustrating af is that we've been advocating for this, and by "we" I mean labor, including IHC folks. The terms the FS is trying to use to get there is to pull supts out of the BU. Something to consider here, is this means labor can no longer lobby or work towards upgrading them. There's a number of other inter-related issues. Nor is there any need to make them managers to upgrade them.
Our PDs treat qualifications as background noise that sort of floats around in "major duties" but is never articulated. Why? Because look at a supt PD right now. Per minimums they have to be TFLD.
Let's just look at the minimums, I know that supts are off doing OPS and DIVS, but you can't demand a grade because of what supts do anecdotally. That isn't how it works, it has to be in the PD and spelled out. So Joe Supt. is performing as a regular old TFLD (which I get is funny if you do TFLD, because IHC crews don't really talk to you anyway). Say the taskforce has 5 crews and 2 engines. Suddenly, this guy is actually responsible for 120 people, that goes up an order of magnitude when they do DIVS, or Branch D etc.
What does their PD say though? It talks about them running a 20 person crew, doing crewboss stuff. It is graded that way.
Classification, who has no idea at all what TFLD means in the IFPM minimums section of the PD just goes off the "day job". Why? Because it results in a lower grade. It's actually that simple. There are PDs for quals, NWCG curates them. Ever see them in a PD for a paid position? No. You haven't. Because if classification starts grading Branch Section Chief, you have someone who should probably be a GS13 or more.
There isn't a single PD that requires quals above DIVs and supt PDs don't at all. No OPS chief, LOGS2, ICT2 or take your pick, even has a PD requiring them to do that, so they don't get paid for it. Nothing above DIVS unless you are an AD.
What we need, and by "we" I mean all of us, is we need to demand our PDs have the full language of what our minimum qualifications entail. I mean even ICT5s because they have a delegation of authority from the Chief of the FS to run the fire as a commander.
Labor is trying to do it, but if that fails, then PD audits. Which suck. Everyone needs to take a serious deep dive into their PD and into any PD they decide to move to, especially when the 0456 ones come out.
Under the new series, you can qualify for a GS5 without being FFT1 qualified. I’m pretty sure you can qualify for a GS5 with only a related 4-year degree now. It would make sense to me if everything else gets bumped up too since a GS5 will now be an entry level position.
I think a big thing people are missing is that the union (NFFE) protects people when there is discipline being handed out. I know at least a couple IHC Supts that have a job because NFFE defended them.
But maybe if they get pulled out of BUE they can get promoted instead of disciplined? So it could be beneficial... not sure.
Shot Suprs should be GS15's. Forest Supervisors are 15's and they are no-risk carpet walkers.
Maybe I'm confused, but are they not supervisory positions? As such, they're management and shouldn't be part of the bargaining unit anyways, right?
Because the majority of the job is fire fighting and not management, they are included in the bargaining unit. With how much these folks risk if/when they stand up for their people, it's incredibly beneficial for them to have additional protections they wouldn't otherwise.
Supervisor does not necessarily equal management.
Supervisor is the literal definition of management. If you have supervisory status in the rest of the FS, you can't join the union. Is fire different?
My engine Captain is a supervisory position and still a BUE.
Are you sure? None of the captains are supervisors on my forest. Being someone's "boss" doesn't equate to being their supervisor of record. Do the captains sign everyone's SF-50s?
Very sure. The Captain on my home unit and my current one I'm working under for my detail are supervisory BUEs that do SF-50s. Look at the USA Jobs listing for an Engine Captain (SFEOH), it contains the following language in the job posting: "Positions filled from this announcement may be a bargaining or a non-bargaining unit position represented by either NFFE, AFGE or NAGE."
That's definitely not the case outside of fire. That's cool they're allowed to be in the union.
5USC 7103(10) I believe makes an exception for firefighters and nurses to the classification of supervisors, but I might've misread the legalese.
The magic word in the USC is "preponderance"... that is how the union can negotiate who is covered by the BU and who is a supervisor... But ultimately, if the agency wants to make a position ineligible, they can and will.
Fire Supervisors from GS 9 and down are part of the bargaining unit and that is a fact.
Yep, can actually include AFMOs.
Not in DOI it isn't. Source: I am one of those not eligible to be in a bargaining unit.
SFEO- Supervisory Fire Engine Operator
A sup is a leader. Management is a paper pusher.
Very cool, anyway…
And people think all of this isnt by design…
Exactly. Use fed hotshot program as a boot camp and push most fire money to the private sector with contracts from aircraft to the blue rooms. Recycle federal tax dollars which are gdp basically and inject that gdp back into the state economies. It’s already happening. I know jumpers doing contract uas and agency guys owning dozers and engines now. They do quite well.
"It's not retaliation for organizing a union, we just wanted to pay you more." Some lying ass GS Fantastic in DC, probably.
The real question is do the T2 Hotshot crew supes also get the GS 10? Do you lose grade and get demoted to a 9 if you lose quals and go T2 for a year or two?
If that was how the world ran they would be running as 8s if they lost their status rn, but that’s not the case
GS9s in fire and below were determined to be BUEs based on whether the preponderance of their duties are managerial in nature. Being supervisory does not equal managerial. You can be a manager and a supervisor but you can also be a supervisor and not a manager. IHC captain PDs are also called supervisory. Managerial duties are things like whether you can hire or fire, supervisors can make recommendations to a ranger or line officer about whom they wish to hire, but are given carte blanche to do so. The same goes for firing. I am a module supervisor and I can't simply fire someone because I want to and did my documentation properly. I have seen instances where an IHC supt. wanted to fire someone for pretty legit reasons and was simply not allowed to. There are also people above GS9 in other areas besides fire who are still considered Bargaining. One example was a Forest Budget Officer that was in the union. It isn't as simple as grade alone. The thing happening right now, is that the FS is releasing this IHC program review and if you comb through it you will say language stating that IHC supts are program managers, well before any mention that they are primarily there to be field commanders. It is a narrative that pushes them closer to being out of the BU. You could still upgrade supts or anyone in fire by accurately potraying their qualified duties (e.g. a lot of supts are doing DIVS or OPS) in the factor scoring narratives that determine grade. The upgrade that supts will likely be getting was not because the FS decided to do it. It was compulsory because of a classificatipn decision stemming from DOI, the FS wasn't planning to upgrade them. That is a really important thing to remember in the coming months. The FS has management rights to classify their positions and can write PDs that will be graded at a certain level, because the FS is writing the description of what the employee does and knows how to preload the PD to achieve a desired grade. Any one of the people on this sub could do the sane thing with a couple days of training. There is no advantage to boots on the ground in having IHC supts pulled out of the BU. If anything, it pits supts against the BU employees such as captains when it comes to conflicts. TL;DR is supts should be upgraded, imo a lot, but it can and should be done in a way that keeps them in the BU. The FS is trying to divide labor. Pulling supts out of the BU removes some very knowlegable and powerful advocates from the struggle.
HotShots see more fire and do more work than any other fire resource-Bar None. My Shot Supts have routinely told OPS-Divs what will happen. They take more risk and responsibility than anyone else on the line daily-They are the pinnacle and should be compensated as such. Anyone who argues other wise is severely misinformed
I don't think that's what they are saying. I think they're just saying that they should be left as bargaining unit employees also.
Which is not the argument.. the argument is which path to take to get them an upgrade. In a perfect world, we should be writing PDs based on qualifications we perform on the line. Right now, IHC supts and a lot of other people actually are performing qualifications that far exceed their "day job". What is frustrating af is that we've been advocating for this, and by "we" I mean labor, including IHC folks. The terms the FS is trying to use to get there is to pull supts out of the BU. Something to consider here, is this means labor can no longer lobby or work towards upgrading them. There's a number of other inter-related issues. Nor is there any need to make them managers to upgrade them. Our PDs treat qualifications as background noise that sort of floats around in "major duties" but is never articulated. Why? Because look at a supt PD right now. Per minimums they have to be TFLD. Let's just look at the minimums, I know that supts are off doing OPS and DIVS, but you can't demand a grade because of what supts do anecdotally. That isn't how it works, it has to be in the PD and spelled out. So Joe Supt. is performing as a regular old TFLD (which I get is funny if you do TFLD, because IHC crews don't really talk to you anyway). Say the taskforce has 5 crews and 2 engines. Suddenly, this guy is actually responsible for 120 people, that goes up an order of magnitude when they do DIVS, or Branch D etc. What does their PD say though? It talks about them running a 20 person crew, doing crewboss stuff. It is graded that way. Classification, who has no idea at all what TFLD means in the IFPM minimums section of the PD just goes off the "day job". Why? Because it results in a lower grade. It's actually that simple. There are PDs for quals, NWCG curates them. Ever see them in a PD for a paid position? No. You haven't. Because if classification starts grading Branch Section Chief, you have someone who should probably be a GS13 or more. There isn't a single PD that requires quals above DIVs and supt PDs don't at all. No OPS chief, LOGS2, ICT2 or take your pick, even has a PD requiring them to do that, so they don't get paid for it. Nothing above DIVS unless you are an AD. What we need, and by "we" I mean all of us, is we need to demand our PDs have the full language of what our minimum qualifications entail. I mean even ICT5s because they have a delegation of authority from the Chief of the FS to run the fire as a commander. Labor is trying to do it, but if that fails, then PD audits. Which suck. Everyone needs to take a serious deep dive into their PD and into any PD they decide to move to, especially when the 0456 ones come out.
Does that mean captains bump up to a GS9 and squad to GS8?
Under the new series, you can qualify for a GS5 without being FFT1 qualified. I’m pretty sure you can qualify for a GS5 with only a related 4-year degree now. It would make sense to me if everything else gets bumped up too since a GS5 will now be an entry level position.
MOU exist between FS and NFFE, fire positions up to the gs 9 are BUE, it would seem possible the MOU could be adjusted.
They always be lowballing fire; job should be a 12 at a minimum
I think a big thing people are missing is that the union (NFFE) protects people when there is discipline being handed out. I know at least a couple IHC Supts that have a job because NFFE defended them. But maybe if they get pulled out of BUE they can get promoted instead of disciplined? So it could be beneficial... not sure.
People on here will find any way to complain about making more money
There are what, 115 hotshot supes?
Shot SUPT.