SINCE THE LATE 1950'S, THE CONCEPT OF EQUAL PAY FOR POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS HAS BEEN UNDER ATTACK FROM PERSONS IN THE FIELDS OF LABOR RELATIONS, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT. MEMBERS OF THESE GROUPS ARGUE THAT POLICE OFFICERS SHOULD RECEIVE HIGHER PAY THAN FIREFIGHTERS. PROS AND CONS OF PAY PARITY ARE EXAMINED, AS WELL AS PROBLEMS INVOLVED IN PAY PARITY. THERE MAY BE JUSTIFICATION FOR PAY PARITY, BUT ITS APPLICATION MAY BE INITIALLY DIFFICULT FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE PARTIES TO SUCH A RELATIONSHIP AND ARE UNFAMILIAR WITH ITS ADMINISTRATION. PERSONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE NEGOTIATION OF PAY PARITY SHOULD DEFINE WHAT PARITY MEANS AND WHAT AREAS IT COVERS IN THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ENVIRONMENT. OTHER PROBLEM AREAS TO BE CONSIDERED ARE THE LOWER HOURLY RATE THAT FIREFIGHTERS EARN AS OPPOSED TO POLICE OFFICERS, THE ALLOCATION AND PAYMENT OF COMPENSATORY TIME, THE DERIVATION OF A FORMULA TO ALLOW FIREFIGHTERS TO EARN BENEFITS SIMILAR TO POLICE OFFICERS, AND THE USE OF SUCH FORMS OF BARGAINING AS COALITION BARGAINING. THE CONCEPT OF COALITION BARGAINING MAY BE A LOGICAL APPROACH IF POLICE AND FIREMEN EMPLOYED BY A MUNICIPALITY ARE COVERED BY THE SAME PENSION SYSTEM AND WORK UNDER SIMILAR RULES AND REGULATIONS. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT PAY PARITY FOR POLICE OFFICERS AND FIREFIGHTERS SHOULD BE CONTINUED UNLESS GREATER EVIDENCE CAN BE SHOWN TO PROVE IT IS NOT FEASIBLE, ALTHOUGH REFINEMENTS SHOULD BE INSTITUTED TO DEAL WITH PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED BY PUBLIC SAFETY UNIONS AND CITIES IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF PARITY ARRANGEMENTS. REFERENCES ARE CITED. (DEP)