Greater Sudbury firefighters are getting a raise as of Jan. 1, 2026.
In a ruling released Nov. 26 (but argued July 4 by videoconference), a provincial arbitrator ruled wages for first-class firefighters will rise from the $110,371 they received as of Jan. 1, 2024 to $119,000* as of Jan. 1, 2026. Because firefighters are considered an essential service and cannot strike as a result, new contracts are determined by provincial arbitration.
City firefighters are represented by the Sudbury Professional Fire Fighters Association, IAFF Local 527, which counts approximately 142 members in the Suppression Division, the Fire Prevention Division, the Training Division and the Mechanical Division, spread across 19 stations.
“These parties brought forward many proposals to amend the collective agreement,” arbitrator Matthew Wilson wrote in his decision. “Some proposals sought to fundamentally alter significant parts of the collective agreement. Other proposals reflected the normative changes in the collective bargaining environment including improvements to compensation and benefits.”
One area of particular concern for the city was in the area of overtime.
“The City emphasized that overtime costs were prohibitively expensive and trending upwards. It attributed the escalating costs, in part, to increases in absenteeism,” Wilson wrote. “The data put forward by the City shows a decrease in overtime hours worked over the past three years. However, there is no question that the costs associated with those hours has increased. I am persuaded that a measured approach to the City’s overtime proposals is appropriate and that there is a demonstrated need for some relief to the overtime costs.”
A point of divergence for both parties is the issue of compensation parity with Greater Sudbury Police Service officers.
“In Sudbury, there has been a relationship between the local police and fire rates,” Wilson wrote in his decision. “This relationship can be traced back to at least 2004 where there were identical rates or very close to identical rates.”
Those rates have not always kept pace with each other, the arbitrator wrote, but differences, particularly in the past five years, have been fairly minor.
“There were years (2017 to 2020) where fire rates were higher than the local police rates. There were years (2021-2023) where the local police rates were higher than the fire rates,” Wilson said. “Since 2020, the differences have been less than $300 per year.”
While the city argued the arbitrator should consider wage increases it negotiated with its indoor and outdoor workers when ruling on firefighter salaries, Wilson agreed with the firefighters union, and with previous arbitration rulings, that “local police rates are particularly relevant and should be accorded significant weight where there is a clear historical relationship (see, for example, City of Oshawa, 2022 CanLII 77749 (ON LA) (McIntyre); City of Guelph, 2017 CanLII 7602(ON LA) (Hayes)).”
Given the relationship between the pay rates for local police and firefighters goes back to at least 2004, for this and other reasons the arbitrator found that parity should be maintained in the new contract.
“In my view,” Wilson wrote, “the local police rates should be accorded significant weight given the clear historical pattern. When the collective agreement history is considered, it is apparent that the parties have given serious consideration to the arbitral jurisprudence that supports fire-police comparability.”
In determining the amount of the pay increase, Wilson had only the 2024 police salary to base his ruling upon so he set a new pay rate “that is likely to be close to the local police rate and have included a provision to maintain police-fire parity on the annual 1st Class Firefighter rate.”
Included in Wilson’s ruling on the new contract is a provision that covers accidental death benefits. That ruling is linked to an October arbitration ruling regarding the suicide of Sudbury firefighter Mike Frost.
In an Oct. 24 ruling, arbitrator Eli Gedalof found the city’s group insurance plan breached its collective agreement with the Sudbury Professional Firefighters Association because the chosen group plan was not in keeping with the city’s commitments under the collective agreement. Gedalof ruled the insurance was "inconsistent with the obligation” they have to the firefighters union.
The grievance was filed by the Sudbury Professional Firefighters Association on behalf of Frost, a suppression firefighter who began his career with the City on April 4, 2011.
The court papers state that in September of 2019, Frost took a paid leave of absence due to work-related post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). He attempted to go back to work, but he was “unsuccessful,” said the documents. Frost died by suicide on May 19, 2022 at the age of 40.
Gedalof ruled that the city’s decision to purchase insurance coverage that excludes a recognized work-related cause of death for firefighters (PTSD) breached the collective agreement. In his ruling, Gedalof wrote the city is “therefore liable to compensate the grievor’s estate for the failure to have provided the requisite insurance coverage.”
The new agreement ruled on by Wilson includes an amendment to clarify that the accidental death “benefit is payable in the event of a line of duty death due to occupational disease, whether or not the death occurs during or following active employment, as determined by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board.”
The full ruling can be read here.
*Correction: The $119,000 is the correct new first-class firefighter wage as of Jan. 1, 2026. This story originally included an incorrect number for this amount.
-with files from Jenny Lamothe
Mark Gentili is the editor of Sudbury.com.