Firefighters get retroactive pay raises

Summary#

PR26-0824 is the District’s Compensation and Working Conditions Agreement between the District of Columbia Government and the International Association of Fire Fighters, Local 36, AFL-CIO Emergency Approval Resolution of 2026. It approves a collective bargaining agreement; it does not amend an existing Act. The stated aim is to approve compensation and working-condition terms for Local 36 members.

  • It sets base-pay increases of 2% for fiscal year 2025, 3.5% for fiscal year 2026, and 3.5% for fiscal year 2027. The first two increases are retroactive.
  • It raises the premium for dual-role firefighter/paramedics from 15% to 18%, starting October 1, 2026.
  • It changes the District’s monthly contributions toward optical and dental insurance premiums.
  • The Council would adopt the Chief Financial Officer’s fiscal impact statement. The resolution would take effect immediately upon adoption.
  • The measure is listed as introduced and retained by the Council; it is not yet law.

What it means for you#

  • Local 36 employees: The agreement’s pay schedules set higher base salaries. The fiscal statement says employees covered by the agreement who were or are actively employed in a given fiscal year receive that year’s increase.
  • Dual-role firefighter/paramedics: Their premium rises to 18% of the applicable current class-and-step pay, beginning October 1, 2026.
  • Employees with optical or dental coverage: The District’s contribution changes. Optical contributions rise in steps from $10.80 per month to $24.33 by the end of fiscal year 2027. Dental contributions change from $60.81 per month for any plan to $56.82 for a single plan or $108.48 for a family plan.
  • Other residents and taxpayers: The resolution does not directly change taxes, public services, or residents’ benefits. It does approve compensation and benefit costs paid by the District.

Money#

The Chief Financial Officer estimates substantial District costs, and reports that funds are available in the fiscal year 2027–2030 budget and financial plan.

  • The fiscal statement reports $40.9 million in local-fund costs in fiscal year 2027, including retroactive costs.
  • It reports $118.7 million in personnel costs over the four-year plan, plus $3.67 million for higher firefighter retirement-plan contributions; it describes the total local-fund cost as $122.4 million.
  • It reports another $4.7 million in personnel costs from non-local funds over the plan period.
  • The statement says the Workforce Investments Account has enough funding for the agreement’s costs, including Fire and Emergency Management Agency and retirement-plan costs. It does not identify a new tax or fee.

What is unclear#

  • The complete collective bargaining agreement is not included, so other working-condition terms cannot be checked. No publicly available information.
  • The supplied material does not explain the agreement’s detailed eligibility or payment rules beyond saying covered employees actively employed in a given fiscal year receive that year’s base-pay increase.
  • The fiscal statement says funds are sufficient but does not explain what other uses of the Workforce Investments Account may be affected.
  • The material does not provide a detailed account of how the agreement’s costs would change after fiscal year 2030.

Case for#

  • The agreement provides scheduled pay increases to the covered workforce, including retroactive raises for earlier fiscal years.
  • A possible argument for the higher firefighter/paramedic premium is that it recognizes employees who hold both roles.
  • The District also contributes more toward optical and dental coverage, with a higher dental contribution for family plans.
  • The CFO reports that the District has funds available to meet the agreement’s costs within its financial plan.

Case against#

  • The agreement creates large public costs, including retroactive pay and higher ongoing salary and retirement contributions.
  • The supplied material does not include all working-condition terms, making it hard to assess the full agreement.
  • The cost statement says funding is available but does not spell out which other possible uses of that funding may be limited.
  • It is unclear from the supplied material how the agreement’s costs will be handled after the four-year financial plan.