Township to Reimburse Some Employees for Past Furloughs

The township will soon have to reimburse Department of Public Works employees for furlough days after a decision was made in court in favor of the Teamsters Union Local 97.

Township employees, with the exception of the police department, were served 22 furlough days from July 16, 2010, until the end of the year. The township saved $450,000 but the employees took a 20 percent cut in their salaries by not working on Fridays.

“In 2010, we were faced with some really, really difficult economic times…Things were very gloomy at that time,” Mayor Gary Quinn said.

Quinn said the furlough plan complied with the Civil Service Commission’s guidelines and was submitted and approved by the state.

Teamsters Union Local 97 filed a grievance against the furlough plan. Tom Hartigan, an arbitrator from the state Public Employment Relations Commission, ruled in their favor, forcing the township to pay back $135,000, said Teamsters attorney Kevin P. McGovern of the law firm Mets, Schiro & McGovern.

“The law is the law. If we’re wrong, we’re wrong but it’s bewildering that the government says OK and then the court of law says you can’t do it,” Quinn said. “Unfortunately it’s another burden on the taxpayers that in my eyes should have never occurred.”

But during the summer of 2010, the Teamsters union, which represents 29 township employees, offered to suspend longevity payments, McGovern said. The offer represented $250,000 in savings over the course of two-and-a-half years.

“The township told us they weren’t interested. They had no principal,” McGovern said.

Quinn said the offer “didn’t amount to anything substantial.”

“In all fairness, [the offer] wouldn’t have saved as much money as quickly but it would have saved more money over time,” McGovern said.

The furloughs were implemented and the union challenged the township, contending the move was a violation of the employees’ contracts, he said.

“We never believed they could do that lawfully. By preventing them from working, it violated their terms of contract and it artificially lowered their salaries,” he said. “Too often these days unions are painted as unwilling to concede… you got a group here that got it and understood that the township had a problem and the taxpayers were on the hook and offered to do something to help.”

McGovern will be meeting with the township attorney next week to discuss possible solutions, he said. He expects the matter to be resolved by the end of the year.

Quinn asked each of the township committee members to review the issue and offer ideas by the next caucus meeting on Thursday, Oct. 27, he said.

The form of payout will depend on what the committee decides, Quinn said. They can offer to pay back the money each employee lost or compensate them in another form, such as additional vacation days.

The committee will have to look at the money available in this year’s budget, make room in next year’s budget or execute an emergency appropriation, Quinn said.

The township is also facing another grievance filed by the Communications Workers of America Local 1088, which represents 25 township workers.

“CWA has met before, during and after the furloughs took effect and tried to discuss and negotiate alternatives, settlements, etc. and the town did not agree to date,” Union President Ellen Vidal of Lacey said in an e-mail. “CWA is pursuing the proper steps to ensure our members rights.“

The union is currently working with the township to remedy the matter and negotiate while waiting for the court date, Vidal said. A decision is expected in January.