Lynnfield Could Save Up To $40K/Yr. With Unemployment Reforms

If the state were to implement reforms aimed at municipal workers who file for unemployment under questionable circumstances, the town of Lynnfield alone could save as much as $40,000 per year, said Town Administrator William Gustus during a conversation with Lynnfield Patch on Friday.

Recently, Gustus sent a letter to Governor Deval Patrick seeking state assistance on the issue - and in the space of several days, the effort showed signs of getting some results, not to mention ongoing attention from the regional media.

(Editor's Note: For the background information in this story, scroll down and check out the various links at the bottom. For the material from Friday, read on.)

So far, the story has mostly revolved around retired Lynnfield police officer Hartley Boudreau, 70, and his successful application for unemployment benefits, despite the pension and part-time detail wages he also receives. However, Gustus indicated that the town only learned of the decision to give Boudreau unemployment benefits around February 21st.

On February, 23, Gustus sent his letter to Governor Patrick in response and proceeded to tell selectmen and local media about it at the end of that Monday's evening's selectmen's meeting. That initial report was low-key and almost seemed like an afterthought in light of the various budget presentations that much of the meeting had focused on - and especially in light of the attention the story has since received in a fairly short period of time.

"I got the (unemployment) decision and I started bouncing off the walls. I was like, this is wrong. I've got to do something about this," said Gustus on Friday.

Boudreau seems to be more of the spark that ignited a situation that was long building, and in numerous places well beyond Lynnfield. In fact, Gustus indicated that in Lynnfield, several town bus drivers in recent years have gone on unemployment at various points in the non-school year. 

According to the town administrator, a technicality in the law means that if the bus drivers were employees of the school department, they would not be able to collect unemployment when school is not in session. But since they are currently town employees, they can collect. Gustus indicated that he brought this matter to school officials in the past. However, they were apparently stymied by another regulation where if the drivers were shifted to the school payroll, a supervisor would then have to be hired - at a cost greater than what the town would save from making any changes in the first place.

"So it was the lesser of two evils at the time, and we just had to suffer through it," said Gustus, who also explained the town now has five bus drivers on its payroll and plans to bring that number eventually down to three by attrition.

Gustus mentioned the unemployment decision on a list serve website used by other Massachusetts town finance officials and soon saw numerous responses from across the Commonwealth involving various kinds of unemployment claims that were as dubious as they were expensive to local budgets. From there, Gustus wrote up the letter to Patrick.

Boudreau Benefits Not Terminated, Case Is Just Re-Opened

So far, Gustus indicated that he has not received a direct response from the Governor, although the Boston Herald and Fox 25 Boston both quoted Patrick earlier in the week as basically saying he would get to the bottom of the matter. That said, the town has received a letter from the chief counsel of the state's Department of Unemployment Assistance stating that the unemployment case involving Mr. Boudreau will now be re-considered.

To clarify - some media accounts seem to suggest that Mr. Boudreau has already lost his unemployment benefits. That is not actually the case as this is being written. Instead, the letter from Chief Counsel David Guberman states that "I have decided to reconsider the decision issued on February 17, 2012, in the above-referenced case."

"Based on the administrative record before the review examiner, including the audio recording of the hearing, I find no evidence to support the review examiner's finding," states the letter, which goes on to state, "The decision thus, was erroneous. It, therefore, warrants reconsideration."

Despite this, Guberman also writes that "I need not, and do not, decide actual facts of this or any other issue in the case. The D.U.A. Hearings Department will notify you of the date, time and place of the reopened hearing."

Background:

For the text of the .

For an article that includes .

For the initial Tuesday (Feb. 28) .