In the past few days, at least three complaints were filed against Mayor Drew and the City of Middletown, alleging he and/or the city took actions prevent city employees from what they consider to be deserved advancements.
In one complaint, detailed in the Hartford Courant Wednesday, Board of Education Manager of Human Resources, Michele DiMauro, who already has a formal grievance issued against the city claiming gender discrimination in job advancement, delivered a letter to the Office of Equal Opportunity and Diversity Management. Also receiving copies of the complaint were the majority leader of the Common Council, Tom Serra and the minority leader of the Common Council Seb Giuliano. A copy of the complaint made this week, and the City of Middletown regulation which forms the basis for the complaint, can be seen below (click to enlarge).
The city, for it's part, is steadfast in it's denial of harassment of any kind, either that cited in the original grievance, or that noted in the more recent complaint.
In an email, City Attorney Brig Smith explained the city's position.
According to Attorney Smith: "The City is defending this grievance vigorously and denies the allegations entirely. Ms. DiMauro went through the same objective labor-management committee process as the other candidates. Her position was one of four recommended for review through the Maximus point-factor system, which has been mandated by the City’s and Union’s collective bargaining agreements for years. Under the system, job duties are run through a matrix to determine whether a position is entitled to a classification or compensation upgrade. When the duties as presented by Ms. DiMauro were run through the matrix, there was no grade increase recommended.
After Ms. DiMauro submitted additional information, we re-ran the point-factor analysis, which resulted in a one-grade increase for her position—the same increase that the other positions received. She demanded, however, at least a two-grade increase and filed a grievance. This is after already receiving six grade increases over her last two reclassification requests.
Her gender or political affiliation played no part in the reclassification outcome driven by the Maximus system. Her job duties did. Period."
Because DiMauro's complaint is against the mayor, and involves the City Attorney's office, DiMauro and her union have requested outside counsel to handle the complaint, and have also requested that the Common Council conduct an independent investigation.
DiMauro's complaint suggests that the mayor inappropriately intervened in the review of her job description and potential salary increase, and then in reaction to her filed grievance.
Another formal grievances was filed Wednesday against Mayor Dan Drew and the city by Local 6457 on behalf of Common Council Clerk, Linda Reed. This grievance claims age and gender discrimination during her time at the city's planning office. According to the union, Reed claims she was hired at a lower pay grade than a male counterpart, in the City's Planning Office, when she held a position there. She also contends that another younger colleague was hired at a higher pay grade.
The union has requested that this grievance be handled by the city's Office of Equal Opportunity and Diversity Management because the actions at the core of the complaint include the "potential involvement of the Office of General Counsel, the Human Resources Office and the Mayor's Office."
DiMauro also filed a follow-up complaint to her original grievance and harassment complaint. In a letter filed Wednesday by the UPSEU, the union contends that while investigating the original complaints by DiMauro, they discovered "a year-long, list-serve barrage of campaign solicitations being sent directly to DiMauro's workplace email at the Middletown BOE," from "Drew for Governor" links. The most recent solicitation was sent this week. The union claims these solicitations "may have been an effort to entrap, discredit, endanger the employment of, intimidate, discriminate against and/or harass DiMauro based on her political affiliations or associations."
Dan Drew's campaign for governor is currently being investigated by the State Elections Enforcement Commission after a complaint was filed that Drew solicited campaign donations from city employees. Drew has apologized for the use of those employee home addresses and called their usage an error.
Drew responded to the union, via email, stating that the most recent complaints were an error of his contracted social media and fundraising firm in Oregon, and that intimidation and harassment were not intended.
According to UPSEU vice president Ann Nash, "The mayor said it was a mistake made by a contracted campaign firm who didn't effectively scrub social media contacts from the solicitation list."
Apparently, while contacts with the with top-level domains of ".gov" were removed, others with ".edu" and ".org" may not have been. Recently, another potential gubernatorial candidate, Hartford's Mayor Luke Bronin ran into a similar problem when sending out solicitations for his exploratory bid for governor.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteDrew has an excuse for everything. Can't wait to hear the excuse he uses for dropping out of the race. Tic tic tic tic tic.
ReplyDeletewhy does the blog administrator selectively remove comments that dont agree . A blog is supposed to create a DISCUSSION. Unless it is being used as a weapon.
ReplyDeleteDearest Anonymous 10:59
ReplyDeleteIf you want to have an adult discussion, why don't you include your name? Is it because you want to say something nasty about someone, or make an unsubstantiated accusation without being identified yourself? We don't like this trollish behavior at the Middletown Eye.
Why do we refuse to post the negative, accusatory rants of cowardly anonymous trolls? Because we can. There are other blogs in this town where they accept this kind of factless-based nonsense. Seek them out, if you aren't already one of their regular posters.
Drop us a line if you remember your name?
My name is Ed, etc.
A name is not necessary in a blog post. Thus the opportunity to choose to be anonymous. THE CONTENT is the most important, I would be happy to provide any information you would like to verify a statement, I wasn't expecting such a vitriolic and pointed angry response .....Or maybe I was ! Cowardly Troll ? Please, insults are a sign of insecurity. Unsubstantiated ! I think not..... Perhaps you would like to look at the upcoming trial data which is PUBLIC INFORMATION. Then you can follow along. Its all there in BLACK and White. You can even go to the trial soon and view the evidence! We all can as a matter of fact ! The public needs to know whats going on on ALL sides of the political fence....not just your side.
ReplyDeleteDebate is good......especially when we have facts and HARD EVIDENCE. signed.....ANONYMOUS
Anon 7:46
ReplyDeleteLook at you. Making up rules for a blog post. I've got an idea. Start your own. Unleash your fury. Spew to your heart's content.
No? I didn't think so. It takes time and effort to be sure that what you right is factual. You know, evidence-based.
I'll tell you what. At this trial, wear a white carnation in your lapel. Maybe two. That way I can see it on your side of the political fence. I'll nod, but pretend not to see you. You can just wave and say, "Hi, Ed."
In the mean time. Unsubstantiated claims. Evidence-less insinuations. Empty-headed rants. Insults (other than to faint-hearted anonymous posters). Not on this blog.
Me, Ed.
Unfortunately, the Middletown Eye has no credibility as they publish, "anonymous" comments. The day the Eye stops this practice, I will start reading it regularly.
ReplyDeleteP. Tom Sylvester
When you stop printing "anonymous" comments, you will have credibility.
ReplyDeleteP.Tom Sylvester
No , justice will prevail. That's good enough for me.
ReplyDeleteYou take care now !
Sorry you feel that way Tom. We pride ourselves on credibilty - meaning that we print what we find to be true, and we're sure to always label commentary as such. In terms of the comments section, we've struggled over the years trying to decide what to do. Our standards are that we don't allow any unsubstantiated "facts," especially printed by Anonymous sources. We also don't allow gratuitous insults by anonymous commenters. Unfortunately, I take some personal, perverse pleasure in tormenting nasty anonymous posters. Probably shouldn't do that, but it seems that they have a free-reign otherwise in the web world, and I can't help but finding satisfaction in poking a few of them. Know that we delete lots of nonsense. We'll take your advice seriously, and hope you'll keep reading. We think you'll find some true things here that you won't find in other press sources. And thanks for not being anonymous.
ReplyDeleteGotta love the condescending righteousness of removing commentary from anonymous posters that the Eye disagrees with as deleting nonsense or unsubstantiated facts printed by anonymous sources.
ReplyDeleteLet's examine some "facts" promulgated by the Eye. First this is an online blog, not printed as represented.
The union employee's name is misspelled. It's Michele with one "l" not 2 as appears in the so called "factual" original post.
The union employee's title is Manager of Human Resources not Human Resources Director.
While the Eye occasionally likes to refer to itself as the press, implying it qualifies as journalism, it is a blog. We expect accurate spelling, titles and characterization from the press. We like this blog but characterizing it as press is like referring to Hannity as a journalist instead of a TV host.
Anonymous (with one "n") 11:47:
ReplyDeleteSince you enjoy condescension, orangutans like to pick nits too.
Since you don't argue with any of the actual facts in the story, we can only suppose you are a grammarian with a grudge.
Since you write anonymously, we can only assume you are a cowardly grammarian with a grudge.
Thanks for pointing out the "factual" errors. We can fix them. We're guessing you're beyond hope.
My name is Inigo Montoya...but you can call me Ed.
Wow. The City is cutting services for kids but some folks still think they deserve a raise or two. How utterly selfish.
ReplyDelete