Borough police contract in arbitration
Scheduling issues continue to plague the Brentwood Police Department after last week's arbitration between the borough and Teamsters Local 205.
An arbitrator heard both sides of the scheduling issue, along with all other terms of police employment, although Mayor Ken Lockhart insists there are three sides to this story.
Council has been overstepping its boundaries, taking away the scheduling powers given to the mayor by attempting to enact a new method of police scheduling, Lockhart said.
The borough solicitor George Gobel met with Teamsters Local 205 arbitrator Steve Greenberg and neutral arbitrator Clark Winter last week to continue talks of establishing the police contract.
Lockhart left the session early after Winter denied his attorney, Michael Colarusso, to serve as a fourth arbitrator.
"The mayor had no right to designate a fourth arbitrator," said Gobel.
Lockhart said without representation in the arbitration, council will continue to overstep borough and state code to take away his rights as the mayor.
"If I don't have my attorney serve as my arbitrator, I won't get in my fair shake with this council," said Lockhart. "Borough and state code gives the mayor authority over the schedule."
Lockhart plans to file another lawsuit to appeal the award if the arbitrator rules in council's favor. The first lawsuit Lockhart filed will remain in place, regardless of the arbitration's outcome.
Gobel declined to comment on Lockhart's potential second lawsuit.
Council and the Teamsters determined a scheduling system allows officers to schedule themselves based on seniority, which Lockhart and Police Chief Robert Butelli never enacted.
"Last year, at one point, we had three officers on worker's compensation and one left in February," said Lockhart. "Our schedule used rotating shifts and a floater, who covered 147 shifts and saved us a lot of overtime."
In November 2006, council passed an ordinance to "eliminate the question of council's ability to enact the (police) schedule."
The lawsuit, along with one filed by the borough challenging the validity of Butelli's contract, has been sitting in the court system with no indication of when action will occur.
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer friendly version
- send to friend
- 415 reads
Dear South Hills Record,
I enjoyed your article on the Police Departmemt Contract debate and would enjoy a follow up story with a few more facts. I am interested in the issues at hand and how they relate to my taxes. Could you tell us what the process is of arbitration and what the cost is for such a process? Is the arbitration process "binding" and can you explain the meaning of this ? Is it legal for the Mayor to have a 4th arbitrator and who would be responsible for those legal costs? The Mayor state dthat he would file an appeal if the arbitrator rules in favor of Borough Council. Does that mean that if the arbitrator does not vote the Mayors way that he will file an appeal regardless of the due process with my tax money footing the bill?
What is a "floater" on a police department schedule? Does this person work all shifts or a steady shift? Is the "floater" traditionally the most junior officer and therefor expected to "fill-in" as the Mayor has stated? How much overtime was spent this year on overtime as compared to say the past two or three years?
Does the Borough Code give the Mayor absolute power over the Police Department schedule and if so how is the issue up for arbitration.
......... I hope that my questions do not pose a conflict of interest with your newspapers support of politics...... I just figured that this was heating up to the point of my taxes being stretched to the breaking point.
P.S. Has the arbitrator issued a ruling as of yet ???
I agree with you...Why is our mayor wasting OUR tax dollars for all of these appeals and lawsuits? He has a responsibility to explain to the tax payers WHY it is that taxpayer money is going to such a wasteful cause.
I still think we should merge the police with Baldwin. Then maybe they could agree on a schedule. Last time I checked when the union votes on something-that is the protocol that should be followed. It's ridiculous and the mayor should be held accountable. THE TAXPAYERS SHOULD HOLD THE MAYOR ACCOUNTABLE.
By the way...council and public works, THANK YOU for fixing the lights. They look much better!!
Once again another example of wasted taxpayers money, who else would be paying for it. I totally agree and have stated it before, the Police should merge, rinky dink small town police dept.s are becoming A thing of the past. It only benefits the communties involved,the departments are eligible for bigger and better grants and govt. funding, better discounts on purchasing, etc.,etc. And I really think our police department qualifies as rinky-dink.