While the council’s votes have already been cast, the battle over the decision to privatize the staffing of Dowagiac’s wastewater treatment plant is just beginning.

Officials with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 876 — the union that represents the four city employees working at the facility — have declared their intent to oppose the city’s decision to contract for operational services at the plant. The Dowagiac City Council voted unanimously Monday to adopt a recommendation to accept a proposal from Grand Rapids’ F&V Operations to provide staffing for the facility, effectively replacing the city workers currently employed there.

“We are going to take any appropriate legal action to fight for our members’ jobs,” said Chad Clark, business manager with the union.

According to City Manager Kevin Anderson, the decision to contract out services came following a notice given to the city by Infrastructure Alternatives Inc. — the company the city hired to provide training and management to city employees at the plant in June — that it would not renew its six-month contract with the city due to a lack of cooperation from the existing staff.

Members of IBEW Local 876 attended Monday’s council meeting to show support for the four employees, who are in jeopardy of losing their jobs with the city.

Among those in attendance was Phil Barnett, a representative with the union. Barnett spoke against the move to privatize, placing the blame for the problems the plant had experienced in recent months on management, not the employees.

“He [Anderson] is treating the city as if it is a business,” Barnett said, about the privatization. “It is a small town, and it should have small town values. It is not a corporation.”

In a letter distributed during Monday’s meeting, the union pointed to several signs of mismanagement of the plant, including failure to update equipment inside the more than 30-year-old facility and running the plant with only four employees, in spite of the original operating manual calling for seven full-time staff members.

One point of contention between the city and the union is the amount of time off taken by employees during the first several months that contractors with IAI were present at the facility, which the contractor pointed out as an issue in its correspondence with the city.

“We have not accused the employees of taking any vacation time they had not earned,” Anderson said. “We are not accusing them of any wrong doing, but the time they had taken off during that period presented problems with setting training sessions. It made it harder to accomplish the goals of the
original contract.”

Barnett also criticized the city’s decision to lay off the staff in spite of employees’ claims they had never received any prior disciplinary action.

The city manager could not confirm or deny whether or not the city had issued any reprimands to any employees prior to Monday’s decision, per city policy.

While the union gears up for a possible legal battle, the city is in the midst of working out terms with FVOP for the transition, which could be begin in the next 45 to 60 days.

Per its agreement with the city, the employees will be given a chance to join FVOP, though they would lose their benefits from the city in the process. They may also be able to transition into another job with the city, per their collective bargaining agreement, Anderson said.

“We hope and pray these guys can land on their feet,” Barnett said. “They are good men. They do not deserve to lose their jobs like this.”