Browsing this Thread:
2 Anonymous Users
Re: City might have to pay 2 fire chiefs because of union contract
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Gary-
The thing you missed though, is that taxpayers are going to be stuck paying a higher pension for this guy once he does retire.
Posted on: 2007/3/26 14:53
|
|||
|
Re: City might have to pay 2 fire chiefs because of union contract
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Just can't stay away
|
Thank god this guy is elder and going to be forced to retire in the next 6 months. Can you imagine if he was younger and the taxpayers would get stuck with two salaries for any legnth of time? God I sure wish that I got promoted based on my senority. I'd be close to CEO now. Regardless this is neglegience by the mayor, and I love how he is using ignorance as an excuse.
Posted on: 2007/3/26 14:41
|
|||
|
City might have to pay 2 fire chiefs because of union contract
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
City might have to pay 2 fire chiefs
Jersey Journal Monday, March 26, 2007 Let's call this one the tale of two chiefs, because by possibly violating a union contract with its fire department, Jersey City could find itself in the odd position of having to pay for not one, but two fire chiefs. A confidential letter penned by an attorney hired by the city indicates that the city "does not have strong defense," in opposing a grievance filed by Deputy Fire Chief Joseph Gallagher, who claims he was passed over for a promotion to fire chief - despite being No. 1 on the seniority list. Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah Healy instead appointed William Sinnott, who was fifth on the seniority list. The letter, dated March 7, from Florham Park attorney Stephani Schwartz of the law firm Schwartz and Edelstein, says Fire Department Director Armando Roman asked her firm's advice concerning the chief's promotion in January. At the time, Roman was warned that promoting Sinnott over Gallagher would potentially violate the union agreement. "Gallagher indicated an interest in the promotion," Schwartz said in the letter. The attorney also said the contract's language concerning provisional appointments says they must be based on seniority. "Numbers 2, 3, and 4 (on the seniority list) advised Jersey City, in writing, they were not interested in the position," Schwartz continued. "There are no other provisions in the contract which permit Jersey City to bypass someone on the seniority list for a provisional appointment," Schwartz said. If Roman sought advice pertaining to the appointment in January, it was already too late. Healy named Sinnott to the $155,677-a-year fire chief's post on Dec. 28. "Jersey City does not have strong defense in this matter," Schwartz continues in the letter. She goes on to suggest offering Gallagher a "monetary settlement." However, Gallagher said he's not interested in a settlement. He wants to be chief of the department. And why not? The $149,204-a-year salary he currently makes would increase, as would the size of his pension. But the mayor said he believed when he made the appointment and continues to believe now that he has the authority to appoint the fire chief. He claims he had no knowledge when he tapped Sinnott to be chief that he was bound by the union contract to name someone from the seniority list. "No one ever told me that," the mayor said. "When I served as a member of the Jersey City City Council, Deputy Chief Sinnott appeared from time to time to brief the council on various matters. "I was impressed with him then and I still am. He still lives in Jersey City." The mayor noted that Gallagher, who has been a Jersey City firefighter since 1965, will reach the state's mandatory retirement age of 65 in August, giving him barely five months on the job and requiring yet another appointment. On the other hand, Sinnott, at 63, can continue on the job for at least another year and a half before reaching the mandatory retirement age.
Posted on: 2007/3/26 14:12
|
|||
|