The New York State Public Employment Relations Board has handed down a judgement against the the City of New Rochelle which sources say could wind up costing the City close to $1.5 million. In a decision last month, Administrative Law Judge Angela M. Blassman ruled in favor of the Police Association of New Rochelle which had alleged in a complaint going back to 2006 that the City of New Rochelle Police Department had violated the Public Employees Fair Employment Act when it assigned nonunion superior officers to work special-duty details previously performed exclusively by Association unit employees.
The complaint was filed on April 18, 2006. A hearing was held on October 3rd, 2007 and the decision was handed down on October 21, 2009. The Police Association of New Rochelle represents about 10 police officers and detectives.
The Judge ordered the City of New Rochelle to immediately “cease and desist” assigning off-duty detail work to senior officers, restore all work to members of the Police Association, make whole employees in the Police Association for lost wages and benefits at the maximum legal rate and conspicuously post a notice of the decision.
The charges stem from disputes that go back almost 10 years and came to a head when the Police Commissioner took control over lucrative off-duty assignments and began handing them out to senior officers instead of police officers and detectives as had been the case for many years.
Police are often hired for by private contractors for off-duty jobs where they were paid by private contractors to show a police presence, work a security detail or assist with traffic flow — working in full Department uniform, including their Department badge and gun. Contractors included department stores, fast food restaurants, temples and churches, the BID, New Roc, Iona College, the LPGA Tour event at Wykagyl Country Club
From 1991 until 2001, only Association members worked these highly sought-after jobs which pay well and require little work. Assignments were doled out through a monthly lottery drawing. In 2002, Police Commissioner Carroll issued an order prohibiting the performance of all off-duty jobs. The Police Association filed charges and a month later Carroll restored all off-duty work except for work near bars. In 2004 the City and the Police Association entered into an agreement which settled the 2002 off-duty work charge under which the work was established directly the Police Commissioner and under which the City billed the vendors (at a new higher rate) and the officers were paid directly by the City and a rate of “time and a half”. The new arrangement went into effect in 2005.
The charges resolved by the October 2009 decision were filed soon after the Police Association obtained a copy of an agreement with the Senior Officers Association under which SOA members, excluding Captains, are eligible for “Special-Duty Details” as designated by the Commission.
Stop the insanity
Bob, as a relatively new visitor to your site I have become increasingly alarmed at the recent and seemingly steady stream of revelations disclosed on your web site. It appears that citizens have consistently uncovered and/or reported alleged wrong doings within the City or school government operations. The alarming part of the story is that not much seems to get done at the administrative level, yet these stories appear to have an alarming ring of truth to them. A Commissioner’s errant/ inadvertant decision to change a long standing practice, cost to city 1.5 million. A Commissioner improperly/inadvertently gets Star and Veterans exemption on his property taxes to his multiple homes, cost to citizens tens of thousands of dollars. A Commissioner ignores the statute and fights injured firefighters on disability, cost
to citizens tens of thousands of dollars. Director overcharges city for administrative testing, cost to citizens thousands of dollars. Director hires alleged member of organized crime who has access to all personal information of city employees, cost to City and/or employee ,virtually unknown. School board, where would we even begin…
The points of my comments are this. Are the people we have entrusted to run our City acting in good faith with our, the citizens, best interest at heart? We have a City Manager getting paid well over $150,000 a year plus a car and benefits, does he have a clue about what’s going on in this city or is he just collecting his check. Conviently sitting idly by as all of these improprieties are committed. Why then are these Commissioners/Directors not held accountable for their actions? In a time of financial distress it is now more important than ever that those we entrust with a fiduciary responsibility to the citizenry be held accountable for their actions. Somebody please explain to me why those that we elect never seem to take actions against those that they appoint???
Overtime and pensions
The only thing that has not been acknowledged in this decision is what overtime is pensionable. In the past this has been a practice, allowing the overtime employer to pay the City of New Rochelle and then the City would pay the officer the overtime and contribute to his or her pension. Some time age I was told this was acceptable under certain conditions but I don’t know if this practice continues.
The answer is in the ruling
Click the link and open up or download the Judge’s decision and you will get the answer to this question and many others.