In July the Common Council voted to prevent the Police Department from changing police work schedules from the current five days on, two days off to a four day on, two day off schedule. Police Chief Patrick McMahon presented the proposal as one which would have a neutral effect on city finances, and allow a schedule which would be better for protection as well as enhancing police family life. Opposing Council members argued that the proposal would cost the city too much money by allowing to work 17.4 less days per year. The Police union took the matter to arbitration, where a judgment has not yet been rendered.
Wednesday night, the 4-2 schedule was a subject of debate at the Personnel Review Committee where it was added to the agenda just as the meeting began.
Chairperson Vinnie Loffredo added the topic because the mayor and the Police administration had decided to initiate an "experimental" version of the 4-2 schedule which would be in effect between the middle of December and April. Personnel Director Deborah Milardo called the decision operational, and said it was within the power of the mayor's office and the contract language.
Loffredo disagreed.
"In light of the fact that it was already rejected once by the Common Council, I don't know how we can let it go forward," Loffredo said.
He offered a proposed Council resolution which would reject the 4-2 schedule on the basis that it is costly, and that since it has already been used in several communities around the state, it could not be considered experimental.
Union President Dave Fuchs said that the schedule was indeed experimental because it relied upon an written agreement between the city and the union and could be ended at any time, for any reason, by either party.
"It creates a financial obligation for the city, and it must come to the Council for approval," said committee member Tom Serra, who supported Loffredo's rejection of the schedule.
Committee member Deb Kleckowski opposed the proposed resolution saying that the experimental schedule could be "beneficial to the city and to the force."
"Most importantly it encourages family stability and psycho-social stability for our officers," Kleckowski said.
"I don't find this acceptable at this point," Loffredo countered. He added that the city should wait for an arbitrator's decision before adopting any new schedule. "The way that this has been brought forward, I find it highly suspect."
The committee voted unanimously to draft a strongly-worded letter to the Board of Education, urging the Board to allow union workers to donate sick time to a cafeteria worker who was struck ill, and has only been able to return to work on a limited basis.
The Board of Education rejected the union's offer to allow the sick worker to use borrowed sick time, a practice the union contends has been accepted many times in the city.
"It's inhumane to deny this request when a worker is in such need," Kleckowski said.
3 comments:
good. giving the police an extra week off each year with pay is unfair. family time ? everyone makes sacrifices why should they be any different. so glad the city is waking up and doing the math.
" >>>>Simple math (1+1=2) dictates that if a person works 4 days (32hrs), then has 2 days off (16hrs), then works again on the seventh day of the week (8hrs), the person is actually working 5 days (40hrs)out of every seven days.
That logic holds true only for the first 4 weeks of a 6 week cycle.
week 4 - w o o w w w w
week 5 - o o w w w w o
week 6 - o w w w w o o
You can see there will be an extra day off for two of every 6 weeks. Over a year's time, that amounts to 16 extra days off (the 2 extra days off will occur about 8 times a year).
Sorry. No sale.
I don't think any city can afford this schedule for police AND the budget the Middletown teacher's union expects including pay for every extra little minute worked. This is becoming the reverse of a welfare state when the rest of us are slugging through a 10 hour work day with no defined income pension or not being able to find a job, period.
Post a Comment