Education Panel Hears Teamsters Union Grievance

A grievance filed by the Teamsters union alleging high school administrators did not follow proper procedure when hiring a new employee was heard by the Suffield Board of Education Tuesday night.

Teamsters Union Local 671 business agent Roger Fenlason said the proper hiring process was not followed and the union felt an injustice was done to present, capabale employees. The union asked for the position to be awarded to the senior qualified internal applicant and that the applicant be given the opportunity during the 60-day trial period to demonstrate their ability to perform in the position.

“We only ask for what the collective bargaining agreement provides,” Fenlason said.

The Teamsters union represents non-salaried employees in Suffield, including paraprofessionals, secretaries, custodians and more.

Fenlason’s presentation stated facts in his argument that were not disputed by Suffield administrators. The position of special education secretary was posted as open on January 19, 2011 due to a notice given by a current employee.

The school’s goal was to have a new employee in the position by or before the beginning of February “so that they could go through a week of training before our staff member’s last day on February 11,” said Diana Kolodziey, director of Suffield Pupil Services and Special Education.

Apparently, the posting was made to both internal and external candidates at the same time which is common practice. The union was notified of the opening on the same date.

According to Kolodziey, seven internal candidates expressed interest but only five actually applied. Of the five candidates, only two were deemed qualified and both were interviewed. A pool of four finalists, two internal and two external, was determined and an external candidate was hired and began work on February 7. Interviews were conducted by a three person panel that included Kolodziey.

Fenlason cited the Teamsters union contract, noting that “each employee who is interested will have the opportunity to apply for said opening(s) providing he or she is qualified.”

Board member Robert Eccles noted that the issue centers on qualifications and who makes that determination. According to Kolodziey, the internal applicants were asked to provide updated resumes and several did not, therefore their qualifications could not be assessed. A resume was attached to the grievance.

“Did you have that resume when you looked at candidates to determine their qualifications at first?" Eccles asked.

Kolodziey replied that she did not have the resume at that time.

Fenlason has already pleaded this case to interim Superintendent of Schools Mary Greenlaw-Dixon and requested that the interviewing panel reconvene and interview the other internal candidates.

They did interview two of the three candidates, with the third dropping out of contention, and still determined that the external candidate was the best person for the job.

“We looked at a lot of criteria including secretarial skills and experience, knowledge of software, familiarity with special education and we determined that the candidate we hired was still the best person for the job, “ Kolodziey concluded.

“I believe we followed the process and provided fair and impartial review of the candidates," Greenlaw-Dixon said.

The Board has by contract five days to make a determination on whether or not to uphold the grievance. If they find the union’s case is not valid, the union has the right to appeal and take the issue before a state board of mediation where a final ruling will be determined.