October 28, 2013
By Anthony Rice
This article demonstrates how arbitrators might view similar free speech claims differently. In Elko County, a sergeant's discussion about the sheriff's proposed staff reorganization was allowed to circumvent the chain of command since the speech was protected by the First Amendment. However, in City of Wapakoneta, a fire captain’s speech was required to go up the chain of command because the speech was not protected.
Filed Under: Constitutional Rights, Free Speech Rights, Legal Rights
October 24, 2013
By Mitchel Wilson
In Primas v. District of Columbia, the D.C. Court of Appeals overruled the lower trial court for dismissing a female, African-American Police Commander claims of sex and race discrimination, and remanded them for trial. The Court ruled that the Plaintiff’s complex theories on a manipulated retirement had sufficient merit to survive a summary judgment motion
Filed Under: Discrimination, Legal Rights, Race Discrimination
October 24, 2013
By Anthony Rice
![Megaphone ]](https://www.nationalpoliceandfirelaborblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Megaphone-.jpg "Megaphone ]")
In Minnick v. County of Currituck, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed a firefighter’s First Amendment claim because there was no link between his speech and the “adverse employment action.” Although Firefighter Minnick had attempted to organize a union and had engaged in arguably protected speech by complaining about equipment and safety issues, the court found no proof that his speech was a “substantial factor” in his forced transfer and later discharge.
Filed Under: Constitutional Rights, Free Speech Rights, Legal Rights
October 24, 2013
By Mitchel Wilson
In Orange County, Florida, 131 LA 1367 (Smith 2013) Arbitrator Harold Smith concluded that the decision to transfer a firefighter was not a disciplinary decision and therefore was permissible according to the provisions of the CBA even though an employee conflict prompted the transfer.
Filed Under: Contract Interpretation
October 17, 2013
By Mitchel Wilson
In City of Inkster, 131 LA 1179 (Brodsky, 2013), Arbitrator Deborah Brodsky concluded that the Michigan City violated the CBA when it deducted the pro rata remainder of equipment allowances paid to officers in a lump sum at the start of the year. The deduction was improper because the CBA only allows for the deduction when an officer is “terminated” but in this case, the officers were laid off and subject to return.
Filed Under: Arbitration Rulings, Discipline
October 17, 2013
By Anthony Rice
In City of Chicago, the arbitrator found that a police officer was misled into believing her medical insurance covered her therapy. The arbitrator held that it is fundamentally unfair to put the onus on the employee to understand an incorrectly labeled doctor’s referral slip, and then reach the conclusion her treatment is not cover without a pre-certification.
Filed Under: Arbitration Rulings, Discipline
October 17, 2013
By Anthony Rice
In Parrott v. Krasicky, the court denied a female police chief’s motion to dismiss a female police officer’s gender discrimination claim based on a hostile work environment.
Filed Under: Discrimination, Gender/Pregnancy Discrimination, Legal Rights
October 17, 2013
By Anthony Rice
In Southern Ohio Correctional Facility, the arbitrator relied on a correctional sergeant’s positive work history and the lack of conclusive evidence to determine termination was without just cause. But the arbitrator imposed a 5 day suspension concluding that the Sergeant’s use of force report, while not “intentionally dishonest,” reflected a failure of “cooperation” because it lacked “detail.”
Filed Under: Arbitration Rulings, Discipline
October 16, 2013
By David Worley
A District of Columbia federal court dismissed a Capitol Police Officer’s FMLA interference and retaliation claims in Gordon v. U.S. Capitol Police, 20 WH Cases2d 453 (D.D.C. 2013), when she could provide no evidence that her employer denied her FMLA benefits (interference) and no evidence that she experienced and adverse employment action because of her use of her FMLA rights (retaliation). Despite an angry supervisor’s response to her request, the court found insufficient evidence of an “adverse action.”
Filed Under: Disability Discrimination, Discrimination, Legal Rights
October 14, 2013
By Jim Cline
In Part One of this two-part series, we identified the growing problems associated with the Internet and its connected social media. Chiefly, we identified the problem associated with the new opportunities presented to public safety employees to be "stupid" in what they say or do on a much grander and more public scale. As we discussed, previous discipline cases addressed how to discipline officers and firefighters for misplaced communications to a narrow audience, such as the gathering of coworkers off-duty at the neighborhood bar. Now the Internet allows employees to event to the world.
