DC Firefighters Third-Party Impasse Procedures Negotiable For Mandatory Subjects Of Bargaining

Written on 07/11/2025
LRIS

Article 6 of the CBA between IAFF Local 36 and the District of Columbia Department of Fire and Emergency Medical Services established a procedure for resolving impasses in “impacts and effects” bargaining. Specifically, it required the Department to notify the Union of proposed changes, negotiate upon request, and, if negotiations reached an impasse, allowed for third-party mediation or “last best offer” interest arbitration. The Department declared Article 6 nonnegotiable, arguing that its broad language encroached on management’s statutory rights under D.C. Official Code § 1-617.08(a), particularly the exclusive authority to assign work and direct operations. The Union appealed to the District of Columbia Public Employee Relations Board.

PERB emphasized that D.C. law creates a “presumption of negotiability” under § 1-617.08(b), meaning all matters are negotiable unless explicitly barred by the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act. The Department contended that PERB’s recent precedent provided that impact and effects bargaining could not create binding impasse procedures for nonnegotiable management rights. However, PERB rejected this argument, clarifying that the decision cited by the Department addressed a fundamentally different scenario; one where a proposal “prevented the agency from implementing changes to job duty assignment,” a core management right. By contrast, Article 6 did not restrict the Department’s ability to act but merely established a process for resolving disputes over the effects of those actions.

PERB stressed that third-party impasse procedures are permissible when they involve mandatory subjects of bargaining, such as working conditions, and do not “curtail management’s right to make changes.” The Board further noted that Article 6’s language was not inherently overbroad: while the Agency feared it could be interpreted to cover management rights, PERB clarified that any such application would be nonnegotiable. “The proposal concerns impact and effects,” the Board wrote. “Any interpretation of Article 6 that would encroach upon management rights would be non-negotiable.”

District of Columbia Department of Fire and Emergency Medical Services, Slip Op. No, 1910, PERB Case No. 24-N-14 (2025).