It’s Impossible to Fire a Government Employee

My posts so far have been written based on my 28 years of public service/ law enforcement, and my 22 years activity in my organization/ union (as an employee representative, Chief Steward, and executive board member of both the local and state lodge). Initially I came up with a few ideas for posts, addressing topics from my law enforcement/ union perspective. Then I began to think that I should find something to write about other than topics based on my background, however, something last week made me decide to go forward and write on this topic.

Last week (I began drafting this on March 21st) there were news articles that the Florida Legislature was considering a 5% pay reduction for state employees as one of the measures of dealing with the proposed budget deficits. Although it wasn’t a strong or popular sentiment, there were some that thought this would be a way of getting rid of some state employees. After all, you can’t fire a government (municipal, county, state, or federal) employee, even when they’ve committed an act that warrants termination. Unfortunately this perception is perpetuated by some in a supervisory role in government that have had disciplinary action overturned, or reduced by an appeal board (civil service, arbitration, or PERC, etc).

However, it is not impossible to discipline or terminate bad employees; I say that after being on both sides of the argument (union rep. and supervisor initiating discipline). In my experience there are a couple of main reasons that employers loose discipline cases. First the supervisor or agency doesn’t take the appeal process seriously and as a result they do not prepare for it as they should. Also, their attitude comes across during their appearance and/ or testimony.

In law enforcement the supervisor needs to prepare for this appeal process as if they are preparing to appear in criminal court. Another problem is that supervisors don’t want to put in the time and effort; often time’s short cuts are taken, such as not documenting when an employee is counseled (or other corrective action is taken), such as date and time it occurred. Another problem is the agency or supervisor’s reputation, if they have been excessive in the past, not followed progressive discipline, this can have an impact on the action the appeal board (or arbitrator) takes. In the event of a serious violation that warrants termination over a lesser penalty the supervisor needs to articulate why.

If a supervisor has not worked an investigative assignment they should consider taking a case preparation class, although these courses are designed for preparing a court presentation the principles are the same. Finally, a supervisor needs to have a positive attitude, even if they have appeared before the appeal board in the past and “lost”.

There are people that do not belong in the law enforcement profession, and if the supervisor properly documents their actions and is consistent in the recommended actions this individual will be removed. More importantly, if there is a civil lawsuit filed because of this person’s actions the supervisor will be protected.

In closing, unions don’t like defending someone that doesn’t deserve the “people’s” trust, however, they can’t allow violations of policies or contract to occur as a way to get them out of the profession. If you allow a person’s rights to be ignored or violated, how can you protect others?

If you are fair, consistent, professional, and take the time to document your attempts to correct a violation or poor performance a government employee can be terminated. That’s my opinion, what’s yours.

Updated Blog Address

Originally I wanted to make the Internet name match the Blog name, "That's My OPED, What's Yours" was the working title as I was setting up the Blog. Unfortunately as I was saving a draft copy, I changed the title but hadn't realized that this working title had been saved into the web address.

I have been able to change it, and made it the link that I originally wanted
http://thatsmyopinionwhatsyours.blogspot.com

I also set it up to send you an email when I make a new post, so the purpose of this post is to let you know of the change in the address and to test the email notification.

As I make other changes I will let you know. Finally, and most important, I want to thank everyone for their input and suggestions to help me improve this Blog and be successful at this endeavour.

ENOUGH Already!

ENOUGH Already!
Saturday afternoon I was watching different news and business programs. From time to time the past couple of days (including today during a break) I was listening to some talk radio. The majority were talking about the Stimulus Package, how the Republicans have been in charge for the past eight (8) years, Rush Limbaugh, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi traveling in a government jet, and how much “pork” or “earmarks” are in the Omnibus Spending Package.

I believe that everything in life happens for a reason. Case in point, Saturday afternoon at approximately 5:30 PM the power went out at my house. Turns out that it was a transformer on a pole adjacent to my back yard, the power was out for me and three other neighbors. I won’t bore you with all the details, I’ll just say that it took eleven (11) and half hours to restore the power and while pulling the truck out of my yard FPL knocked my satellite dish out of alignment. Like I said everything happens for a reason, and the reason for this was that prior to the power failure I found myself yelling in frustration at my TV (as I watched one of the news programs) ENOUGH ALREADY!!!

I am so sick and tired of hearing about Stimulus Package, how the republicans have been in charge for the past eight (8) years, Rush Limbaugh, and how much “pork” or “earmarks” are in the Omnibus Spending Package. Democratic members of Congress and advisors keep saying that the Republicans have been in charge for the past eight (8) years, counting on the majority of people that have been moved to become involved in the political process aren’t familiar with how Congress and the line of succession works. No the Republicans haven’t been in charge for the past eight years, the president for those years was a Republican. If the Republicans were in charge for all of those years Nancy Pelosi would not have been the Speaker of the House for the past two, Harry Reid would not have been the Majority Leader of the Senate for the past two years.

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have been in their leadership roles because the Democrats have had the majority in both houses, they’ve been in charge. The Republicans need to quit criticizing Speaker Pelosi for flying in a government jet instead of the much cheaper commercial airlines. Regardless if you like her or not the Speaker of the House is second in line of succession. After the 9/11 attacks security was increased for the Speaker of the House, realizing that the line of succession needed to be protected in order to ensure that our government could continue to function should the President and Vice President both be incapacitated. If it really bothers you, then change the line of succession back to the Secretary of State being second and the Speaker of the House being fourth like it used to be (I think it was during the 60’s or early 70’s that the succession was changed). If you’re not sure if I’m correct about the Speaker’s position all you have to do is Google Secretary of State Alexander Haig or the attempted assassination of President Regan and see the big “flap” that was raised when Secretary Haig said at a press conference while the president was in surgery that he was in charge (because of the line of succession) until the Vice President returned to the White House.

In case members of Congress hadn’t noticed, the Stimulus Package passed and was signed into law. In other words, it’s over. There were valid arguments, many points raised by the Congressional Budget Office, but it’s over for now. If the Congressional Budget Office is correct and the Stimulus only generates 1.5 or 2 million jobs instead of the 3 to 3.5 that the President says, if it takes 2 to 3 years to actually stimulate the economy instead of the immediate to 1 year, then raise those issues. How about a novel idea; fix the problem. Stop making statements that causes doubt in the stability of our financial system, I am tired of having to grab the bottle of Zantac before reading my latest statement. At this rate I would have done better to take all my severance pay and DROP monies and placed one BIG bet at the tables in Vegas instead of investing the money.

Let me preface this by saying that I regularly listen to Rush Limbaugh’s program. I don’t always agree with him, but he does raise valid points and criticisms, on both the Democrats and Republicans. Rush does generate discussion. Having said that I believe in the grand scheme it was a mistake for the President and his Chief of Staff to continually go after Rush. You are the President, why lower the prestige of the office to attack a private citizen. Unless of course you are also going to attack program hosts on Air America, like Al Franken.

Your continuous comments about Rush are causing people that don’t mind thinking for themselves to research what you claim, and if they continue to find that what you claim doesn’t quite match up with the facts you can lose their support. I went to CSPAN’s web site and watched Rush Limbaugh’s entire speech to CPAC. I thought it was a very good speech; he raised some valid points, and actually praised President Obama’s skills as a speaker. Another negative if you’re not a fan of Rush Limbaugh is that you keep his name in the headlines, which is something that Rush really doesn’t need any help at. The only good thing that has come out of the Rush attacks is that it distracted people from the issue of the “earmarks” in the proposed budget, or the fact that “earmarks” that President Obama either submitted or cosponsored last year as a Senator were being revised to remove his name from them.

If you have problems with the proposed budget/ Omnibus Spending Package, don’t vote for it as is. Try to amend it, or if you are not allowed to amend vote against. And finally, don’t you dare tell me later that you voted for it but didn’t read it. I couldn’t swallow that with the Stimulus Package. How can a congressperson say that they voted for something because it is good for the country and then admit that you didn’t have time to read it.

If Congress wants to save money; how about abolishing the Congressional Budget Office? The CBO reviewed the Stimulus Package, cited some problems, and instead of addressing the issues their report was ignored.

Anyway, like I said, ENOUGH Already!!!! THAT’S MY OPINION, WHAT’S YOURS?

Blog Updates

I want to thank those that have looked at this Blog and emailed me with their feedback and suggestions. They are appreciated, and I know they were given by friends that want to help me produce a product that others will want to read and be a part of.

One suggestion for another way that people can follow this was to sign up with Twitter. I looked at it and thought it was an idea worth exploring (http://twitter.com/JamesMannFLFOP).

The picture I originally had appeared "washed out". A friend of mine offered to touch it up for me, he did a great job and also gave me a black and white version.

My friend is JC Mendez, JC is a photographer and artist. I really like JC's work, especially is black and white photos. JC is on Facebook and Twitter, his web site is is http://www.digital-vfx.com and I would encourage you to check out his work.

Thanks again for the suggestions to help me make this something that you would want to follow.


ORIGINAL






COPIES FROM JC

Public Employee Unions and Benefits (Part 2)

I won’t go into the history of unions, their membership and the purpose they serve (at least not now). Rather than that I want to talk about the benefits.

Over the past several years many public sector employees have been able to obtain defined benefits (pensions) so that they are nearly competitive with the private sector. However, just as the private sector, the public sector is moving to a defined contribution for new employees.

Whenever a government entity has budget problems, or is just looking at making changes, they like to talk about how extravagant the government employee benefits are. The same politicians that people don’t trust on other issues, who’s credibility is such that if they said it was a bright sunny day tax payers would go find a window to look out and double check, are all of a sudden believed without question. When they want to attack government employees benefits their word is taken as gospel and no verification is needed, or sought (nor is the pensions that they set up for themselves included in that conversation or put on the “chopping block”).

I could make the arguments about how law enforcement officers (LEO) and firefighters (FF) deserve the pensions that they have because they risk their lives; that they deal with circumstances that others run away from. I could also argue about how in some school districts the teachers also risk their lives, in addition to preparing our children to be the future leaders. These would be valid arguments, however, as soon as you raise those points you turn off a lot of people. They say, that’s true but they chose that job.

Rather than that, let me make another point, but first I’d like to ask you a couple of questions.

1. Would you take a job in which you were not entitled to overtime pay if you work more than 40 hours a week?

2. Would you take a job in which you were subject to work a double shift if others don’t come to work (and again were not guaranteed to receive overtime pay when that happens)?

3. Would you take a job that when you retired would cause your Social Security Benefits to be reduced by up to 60%, even if you had all you quarters and/ or worked at another occupation after you retired?

I’ll leave it at 3 questions for now.

As I said, I am not going to mention risking you very own life, being exposed to disease(s) and illnesses that could threaten your life and your family. If you answered no to these questions you wouldn’t be a firefighter or law enforcement officer. If you answered no to number 3 you wouldn’t be a public school teacher either.

When most people choose to go into public service they aren’t aware of, or even consider the above questions.

Questions 1 & 2

Law enforcement and firefighters are exempt from the Fair Labor Standard Act (FLSA) regulations requiring that an employee be paid overtime when they work more than 40 hours a week. It is commonly referred to as a “207K exemption” or” Section 207 (K) exemption.”

Section 207 (K) has a schedule of the Maximum Non-Overtime hours Law enforcement and firefighters have to work before they are entitled to overtime pay. It ranges from 43 hours (LEO) or 53 (FF) in a seven day period, to a maximum 171 hours (LEO) and 212 hours (FF) in a twenty-eight day period. Some agencies require that you actually work those hours, if you take a personal or sick day you aren’t paid overtime. Others only require that you be on payroll for those hours, if you take a sick day or personal time and are carried on payroll you will be paid overtime. Government entities can declare their LEO and FF exempt and there is a process for that.

During the past few years’ law enforcement and fire departments have been having trouble hiring new personnel, they are not able to keep up with the attrition. This is resulting in LEO’s being held over for a second shift in order to have enough manpower to cover the streets and not have public safety jeopardized. The good side is it is easier for LEO’s to reach the working hour requirements; the negative is the increased worker comp. and other liability. Officers are working on the streets when they are exhausted, this endangers their safety and could reduce their ability to respond to situations.

Some public sector employees actually contribute to their pensions, in addition to Social Security. If those that serve your community do, you’re never told that by politicians as they reticule those pensions (nor do they tell you about the pension they will receive for only serving a few years as an elected official). For decades public sector employees either had no pensions, or they were poor, no where close to private sector pensions.

Many were enhanced and got much better in the late 80’s and 90’s. What happened in the 1980’s? The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO). Because many LEO’s retire earlier then other public employees and start other careers, this tends to have a greater impact on them. Their Social Security benefits may be reduced up to 60% because of these pieces of legislation. More information is available from the Grand Lodge, Fraternal Order of Police.

Public sector unions represent their membership to ensure a decent wage so that they can care for their family. They also help ensure that employees are treated fairly and are not subjected to hostile working conditions. Management has complained in the past about the need of a professional work force, one that is free of corruption and favoritism to the wealthy in society. Paying a decent wage, comparative with the private sector helps reach and maintain that objective. BUT politicians can’t continuously go back and forth on this issue; either you want a professional work force or not. Public sector unions and benefits help achieve those objectives.

Now let me climb down off my soap box and say that I realize that there are union leaders that do not espouse to the philosophy of working with management, some have the attitude of give me, give me, give me. In those cases the individual locals should be addressed instead of the preverbal shot gun approach. Just as all politicians aren’t corrupt; neither are all unions. To quote another generation “you don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.”

As I mentioned before the priority of management and labor should be fixing any problems, then if you feel the need place blame go for it. THAT’S MY OPINION, WHAT’S YOURS

Public Employee Unions & Benefits (Part 1)

It appears that for the past few months it has been fashionable to “lump” all unions into the same category, then criticize and verbally attack. They are all “painted with the same brush.” Not all unions are alike, just like democrats, republicans, liberals, and conservatives aren’t the same. With President Obama’s election unions became an easy target because they endorsed and supported President Obama.

However, not all unions or employee organizations endorsed or supported then Senator Obama’s candidacy. Some actually had a Political Screening process that included questionnaires and/ or interviews. At the conclusion, despite then Senator Obama’s charisma and public speaking abilities, some disagreed with his stated policies and legislative goals. They did not believe that these would be in the best interests of their membership and community.

Then the U.S. automakers went to Congress asking for billions in order to remain solvent and avoid bankruptcy. They came back and then the latest Stimulus Package was passed. At this point the attacks started again on unions, citing the United Auto Workers (UAW) refusal to make concessions. They were blamed for the imminent demise of the U.S. auto industry. I’m sure that if the Stimulus Plan fails, or is not as successful as President Obama has presented, the UAW will receive some blame/ credit. Did the UAW refuse to make concessions, or did they refuse to make anymore? I was not in the meetings trying to negotiate modifications to the contracts so I can’t say for certain what happened.

What I can tell you is that public employee unions have stepped up in the past to help government in times of fiscal crisis, case in point that I am intimately familiar with is the City of Miami, Florida. Politicians that weren’t even in an elected office at the time have taken credit, however, the police, fire, general employees and sanitation workers unions played a major part in the city’s survival and its bond ratings being raised from junk status. The majority of people that choose public service as a career do so because they want to make a difference in the community, and truly believe in public service. They carry that over into their union/ organization leadership.

For those that aren’t familiar with what happened (in Miami), there was a federal corruption investigation. The Budget Manager was caught by the fed’s and turned informant in order to get a reduced sentence. Long story made short, a commissioner and the City Manager were arrested. Another part of the problem was that the department that was supposed to be an independent reviewer of the Finance Department was moved under the control of the Budget Director during consolidation of city functions. They reported to the very person that they were supposed to be a “watch dog” over. Additionally, the city would under estimate their liabilities and over estimate their assets, including counting one time funding sources as recurring revenue. Then at the end of the budget year, in order to comply with the law requiring a balanced budget, monies would be transferred from projects or grants to the general revenue fund so that it would appear that the budget was balanced (and there was no deficit). Then on the first day of the new budget the monies would be transferred from the general fund back to the trust or grant fund, thereby causing an immediate deficit to the new fiscal year’s budget.

After the arrests the new City Manager scheduled a weekend of budget meetings in order to try and figure out exactly what the city’s status was. Initially the manager refused to allow the unions to attend the meetings, apparently forgetting about Florida’s Government in the Sunshine laws. After we went to court and were granted an emergency injunction the city agreed to let us attend, but we were not allowed to contribute. This lasted half a day, until the manager realized that we had been looking and were able to uncover information that he was not provided (the unions had been questioning the budget figures for some time).

After that first day the city administration sought to work with us (the unions) to try and save the City of Miami. We worked with the administration to reduce costs, ease the burden on the tax payers, and generate revenues. We, the unions, made concessions and postponed benefits until the financial stability of the city was attained. We were also instrumental in the governor appointing an oversight committee to approve any expenditure the city wanted to make in the mean time. Obviously if a major municipality were to fail the state would be severely impacted.

We worked at finding a resolution for more than two months and this was an abbreviated account of what occurred. The point is that once the city decided not to take an adversarial position with the unions, and chose to work together as partners to try and find solutions, solutions were found. The unions recommended concessions that the city’s management hadn’t “put on the table”. It was hard, but we all came through it.

The point is that everyone, government officials, union leadership, need to stop pointing the finger and try to assess blame for the financial mess. Instead of being advisories they need to work together as partners to fix the problem. Once the problem is fixed, then you can worry about placing blame if you feel the need, I think it would be more constructive to make sure this didn’t happen again. After all if you’re not careful history will repeat itself. THAT’S MY OPINION, WHAT’S YOURS

In the second part I will talk about employee benefits

Upcoming Posts

As issues arise I will post addressing them, and any other topics that you suggest.

Ideas for upcoming posts will talk about how impossible it is to terminate a government employee?

I've got a couple of emails asking about FLSA and the Section 207 (K) exemption, so I may post a little more info and list a couple of references.

Introduction

This is my first Blog, and this first post may be a little long. However, I thought I’d start out by telling a little about myself and why I decided to start a Blog.

I have been involved in law enforcement for 28 years, retiring from the City of Miami after nearly 27 years of service. It has always been my belief that when working in the capacity of a law enforcement officer I should remain neutral and not take sides on issues. It’s not that I don’t have an opinion, or that I am afraid to share my opinion, I feel that I owe it to the citizens that give me a paycheck not to take sides while working in that capacity.

Having said that; my mother was always very active in politics, and she passed the love of politics on to my brother and me. I believe (thanks to her influence) that through an exchange of ideas and contrary points of view we grow and make our society a better place for all. I enjoy listening and watching various commentary programs, not just those that I agree with.

As a student I used to enjoy Current Affairs, History, and debates. After becoming a law enforcement officer I became active in the Fraternal Order of Police, and eventually I was elected to the Executive Board of my local lodge and later the Florida State Lodge. As an Executive Board member I was, and am, an advocate for the membership’s positions on many issues. These issues are not only law enforcement; they are a variety of issues because I am a strong believer that we (FOP) should be active in our communities.

Over the past two or three years I have become disgusted with the change that has occurred with some in our communities. We are no longer tolerant of different ideas or positions on issues. If you disagree with some they either become hostile, or resort to disparaging references towards those that disagree. I am also sick of the “labels” that are put on people because of the political party they choose to belong, or not belong to. This attitude had crept into our elementary, middle and senior high schools.

Shortly after the 2000 presidential election my girlfriend and her daughter (Jessica, 8 years old at the time) went out to dinner. While we were discussing the aftermath of the election I noticed Jessica looking at me with a puzzled look. Finally she asked me if she could ask a question. She asked if I was a republican, and then if I was a police officer? Then she asked how I could be a police officer if I was a republican? Jessica went on to explain that her third grade teacher had announced to the class that republicans were crooks, and since teachers were instructing facts she was confused about how I could be a police officer.

During this past election discussions in some classrooms have been that if you were African American and disagreed with anything that then Senator Obama said, or questioned any of his proposals, you were not being true to your race. If anyone else, who didn’t vote for Senator Obama, questioned or disagreed with President Obama and his policies are racists. Teachers have stated these views publicly.

It appears as if freedom to think for yourself, to question authority, the freedom to make your own decision is an extinct ideology. This really angers me; I try to instill in young people the same ideals that my mother did in me. I wasn’t sure how to address it, appealing to the school system is a waste since they are the ones teaching intolerance for independent thinking.

I had almost given up the fight until the Stimulus Package was passed by Congress. As part of a class assignment Jessica, now 16, had to write an essay about the Stimulus Package’s passage. I was out of town on business and she called me and asked if she could read her essay to me. I was impressed with the thought that she put into this, so much so that I asked her to please email me a copy. Later when I was checking my email for her essay I learned of a Blog that a coworker from the police department had started. It was then that I thought of starting this Blog.

From time to time I will share my thoughts and opinions on issues and events based on my background and life experience. More importantly I wanted to have somewhere in which different points of view can be shared, including those of the youth. I hope that this Blog will help serve that purpose, the youth are our future, and they do have their own opinions (it is an option separate from the social sites they use). These opinions are important, even though we may not always want to hear them (probably because we’re afraid that we will have to face the fact that we are not always the more mature).

In the Movie Network the main character, a news anchor, tells his audience to go to their windows, open the window and shout “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore.” This Blog is my proverbial window and I hope that you will join me in a civil exchange of ideas.

Thank you for your time.