In Our Opinion..., Labor In The News, Sandulli Grace In The News

Sandulli Grace Files Supreme Judicial Court Brief In Case Challenging Quinn Bill Cuts

Sandulli Grace Staff January 28, 2011

As you no doubt know if you are a reader of this blog, many police contracts contain provisions which seek to “modify” the educational incentive benefits granted by the Quinn Bill. Under the Quinn Bill, M.G.L. c. 41, §108L, qualified officers receive salary increases from 10-25% based on the attainment of criminal justice related college degrees. The Quinn Bill is a local option statute, meaning that it only applies in municipalities that voluntarily adopt it. In addition, the Quinn bill states that the state will reimburse Towns for one half of monies spent on Quinn Bill benefits.

The contract provisions modifying the Quinn Bill generally allow municipalities to cut pay to officers in the event that the Commonwealth fails to fully reimburse 50% of Quinn Bill expenditures. In other words, the contracts allow the municipalities to pass 100% of a targeted local aid cut onto officers.

Because the Quinn Bill is not a statute that can be modified by collective bargaining, several lawsuits have been filed across the state seeking to invalidate contract provisions that cut Quinn benefits. The first suit was filed by Sandulli Grace representing officers in Mashpee, where the local union is an affiliate of the Massachusetts Coalition of Police. Sandulli Grace also represents officers in a separate case filed in Boston.

Late last year, the Supreme Judicial Court agreed to pluck the Boston case out of Superior Court and hear it in the first instance. Today, we filed our brief in chief in the case. You can read it here. The case is actually quite straightforward – the Quinn Bill cannot be legally modified by collective bargaining, and therefore officers must be paid their full benefit, regardless of any collective bargaining agreement allowing otherwise. While the Boston case was transferred to the SJC before any decision was rendered below, the Middlesex Superior Court did issue a finding consistent with our position last month in a case involving North Reading. You can read about the North Reading case at pages 11-13 of our brief.

We’re very hopeful that the SJC will agree with us and rule that police officers who have diligently pursued advanced education for the benefit of their employer and themselves should be paid their full Quinn Benefits. After the City of Boston files its brief and we reply, the court will set the case for oral argument. We hope that this will occur in the spring, and that we have a decision not long thereafter. Of course, we’ll keep you posted.

In Our Opinion..., Labor In The News

PUBLIC EMPLOYEES: THE NEW SCAPEGOATS

Alan Shapiro January 6, 2011

In an article published yesterday by former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, entitled “The Shameful Attack on Public Employees,” Professor Reich rebuts the most common myths about public workers. Included among these myths are:

Public employees earn more than private sector employees
Public sector pensions are crippling the country
Bargaining rights for public employees have caused state deficits to explode

None of these statements withstand factual scrutiny yet they are repeated by many politicians and business leaders as if they were gospel. The question is “Why?”

Professor Reich convincingly argues that this attempt at pitting public v. private sector workers masks what is really happening in our country:

“[C]orporate executive pay … continues to rise as corporate profits soar”
Wall Street bonuses are higher than before taxpayers bailed out the financial industry
Hedge-fund and private-equity managers continue to pay 15% federal tax, while the rest of us pay close to or more than double that
“[T]he top 1 percent is now raking in a bigger share of national income than at any time since 1928, and paying at a lower tax rate.”

As Reich summarizes the situation:

Don’t get me wrong. When times are tough, public employees should have to make the same sacrifices as everyone else. And they are right now. Pay has been frozen for federal workers, and for many state workers across the country as well.

But isn’t it curious that when it comes to sacrifice, Republicans don’t include the richest people in America? To the contrary, they insist the rich should sacrifice even less, enjoying even larger tax cuts that expand public-sector deficits. That means fewer public services, and even more pressure on the wages and benefits of public employees.

It’s only average workers – both in the public and the private sectors – who are being called upon to sacrifice.

The Big Lie is a strategy that has been employed by some political figures over the last century to win over public opinion in an attempt at seizing power. The Nazis in Germany and Joe McCarthy here in the 1950’s are prime examples. As someone once said, “Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.” We need to make the current crop of political leaders accountable for what they say.

Alan H. Shapiro

Sandulli Grace, P.C.

Labor In The News, Sandulli Grace In The News

Leigh Panettiere of Sandulli Grace, P.C., Advances Pro Bono Legal Project for Veterans

Sandulli Grace Staff October 28, 2010

As co-chair of the Boston Bar Association’s Labor and Employment Section as well as its pro bono subcommittee, Sandulli Grace Attorney Leigh Panettiere is spearheading an effort to gather experienced labor and employment lawyers in Massachusetts to volunteer their services to the men and women who serve us in the U.S. Military. In coordination with the Volunteer Lawyers’ Project and Shelter Legal Services, Ms. Panettiere’s committee is arranging to send labor lawyers to “Yellow Ribbon Events” taking place in the next few months. Veterans and their families are invited to attend Yellow Ribbon Events and seek legal and other advice regarding the impact their military service has on their lives. The guidance of labor and employment lawyers is often sorely needed, especially post-deployment.

A large number of returning service members are police officers facing the challenges of re-integrating into the police force after active military service. Most returning veterans do not have the financial resources to obtain the necessary legal advice on their own. The goal of this project is to make returning to work easier for veterans and their families, as well as educating employers on the rights of returning veterans. We encourage our union clients to get involved in this effort.

A training session will be held on Monday, November 1, 2010 from 6:30 to 7:30 p.m. at the Boston Bar Association. An experienced trainer will be on hand to update the volunteer attorneys on USERRA and other labor and employment statutes that are typically implicated when a returning veteran seeks services. Any attorney interested in attending the training, volunteering his or her services to veterans, or getting involved in coordination efforts as part of the pro bono subcommittee should contact Leigh Panettiere at lpanettiere@sandulligrace.com, or (617) 523-2500 Ext. 18.

Stay tuned for updates on this project at www.sandulligraceonline.com.

In Our Opinion..., Labor In The News

SJC’s Boston Housing Authority Decision Invalidates Contractual “Evergreen Clauses”

Sandulli Grace Staff October 23, 2010

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court today issued a significant decision impacting public sector collective bargaining in Massachusetts. The court struck down the validity of contract extension provisions that appear in most of our clients’ collective bargaining agreements. These provisions are called “evergreen clauses.” In Boston Housing Authority v. Nat’l Conf. of Firemen and Oilers, Local 3, SJC-10569 (Oct. 22, 2010) (slip opinion), the Court held that these mutually bargained-for clauses, requiring contract provisions to remain in force until the parties reach agreement on a new contract, violate Massachusetts General Laws c. 150E § 7(a), which states “[a]ny collective bargaining agreement reached between the employer and the exclusive representative shall not exceed a term of three years.” M.G.L. c. 150E § 7(a) (West, 2010). Because evergreen clauses effectively extend the terms of a contract beyond the three-year limit set out by the Legislature, this legislative mandate trumps the parties’ agreements.

This decision is a significant change in the law governing public sector unions. For thirty years, evergreen clauses have been approved by the Division of Labor Relations despite the language of section 7(a) of G.L. c. 150E. By invalidating them today, the SJC has handed public sector labor unions a major challenge and have altered the playing field.

There is no question that today’s SJC decision makes it harder for public sector unions to represent their members in collective bargaining. However, the decision will also cause consternation in the employer community, as everyone works to determine its exact contours. While the SJC struck down evergreen clauses, it also noted that the clauses are firmly in the public’s interest, not just the interest of unions. “We recognize that an evergreen clause is designed to maintain the status quo in labor relations and provide for a continuing code of conduct while parties negotiate a new bargaining agreement.” The court further noted that evergreen clauses “foster labor peace.” Thus, the elimination of the availability of evergreen clauses upends BOTH sides of the labor relations table.

Due to the significant departure from established precedent presented by this case, we will take the time necessary to digest its full impact and devise strategies to deal with its implications. For our police and fire clients, the binding arbitration provisions of the Joint Labor Management Committee statute potentially provide some safe harbor from the most draconian implications of the decision. For now, we encourage all public sector unions to work together to find solutions to this problem. We will continue to update you on developments and reflections on how to minimize the negative impact of this decision.

Labor In The News, Sandulli Grace In The News

Superior Court Rules Police Officers Entitled To Quinn Bill Benefits

John Becker October 4, 2010

A Boston Police officer and a Wellesley police sergeant received good news this week when Superior Court judge Carol Ball ruled that the state Board of Higher Education had to certify their master’s degrees in criminal justice as eligible for benefits under the Quinn Bill educational incentive program. [The decision can be found here.] Boston Police Officer Miguelangelo Pires and Wellesley Sergeant Glen Gerrans, with the support of their unions, the Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association and the Massachusetts Coalition of Police, sued the Board of Higher Ed after the Board refused to allow them to earn Quinn Bill educational incentive benefits for their master’s degrees.

The case arose after the Legislature amended the Quinn Bill – which provides salary increases for police officers who earn advanced degrees in law and law enforcement – to tighten the academic requirements for the educational institutions where officers were earning their degrees. The new academic restrictions eliminated a number of schools from the list of eligible institutions, but a grandfather clause in the legislation stated that anyone enrolled in one of the previously-listed schools before January 1, 2004, could continue in that program and his or her degree would qualify for Quinn Bill benefits. Both Officer Pires and Sgt. Gerrans registered for classes in the Boston University master’s program in the fall of 2003, but they didn’t start classes until after January 1, 2004. After they completed their degrees in 2005, the Board of Higher Education refused to approve them. According to the Board, ‘enrolled’ meant ‘taking classes’, so in its view Pires and Gerrans weren’t enrolled in time to fall under the grandfather clause.

The officers approached their unions, who enlisted the help of Sandulli Grace attorneys Joseph Sandulli and Susan Horwitz, who attempted to negotiate with the Board of Higher Education to resolve this issue, which did not involve many officers. Ultimately, negotiations broke down and Sandulli Grace attorney John M. Becker filed a lawsuit on behalf of Pires and Gerrans against the Board of Higher Education. The officers argued that the plain meaning of ‘enrolled’ is to register and that the Board’s interpretation of enrolled as taking classes was inconsistent with common understanding and legal precedents. This week, a Superior Court judge agreed with the police officers and ruled that they were covered by the grandfather clause and so are entitled to Quinn Bill benefits for their master’s degrees. As the judge stated, “the meaning of ‘enrolled’ is limited to registration, and as such, reflects the intent of the Legislature to permit police officers who have registered for degrees in criminal justice programs certified by the Board prior to January 1, 2004 to benefit from their efforts toward obtaining further education.” Congratulations to Officer Pires and Sgt. Gerrans – their efforts toward obtaining further education are finally paying off.

Labor In The News, Sandulli Grace In The News

City Of Boston Ordered To Pay Police Union Members $16.5 Million To Resolve Longstanding Labor Dispute.

John Becker August 23, 2010

It is a case that began way back in September 1994, when the City of Boston (“City”) first assigned Boston Municipal Police (“Municipal Police”) to patrol the Boston Housing Authority (“BHA”) housing developments without first bargaining with the Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association (“BPPA”). Now, 16 years later after protracted litigation, the City has finally agreed to pay damages owed to the Boston police officers who should have performed the work. The Massachusetts Division of Labor Relations (“DLR”) this week issued a Stipulated Order which instructs the City to pay $16.5 million to affected officers according to a method agreed to by the parties.

The Order puts an end to a saga that began even before 1994. The BPPA, which represents patrol officers employed by the Boston Police Department (“BPD”), had objected to the creation of another, second-tier police force in the City – the Boston Municipal Police – from the start. But when the City assigned Municipal Police to patrol the BHA developments, the BPPA filed a charge of unfair labor practice with the state labor board, then called the Labor Relations Commission (“Commission”). The charge accused the City of violating G.L. c. 150E, section 10(a)(5) when it subcontracted BPPA work to the Municipal Police without first giving the BPPA notice and an opportunity to bargain. A hearing officer of the LRC upheld the BPPA’s charge after a hearing (at which the BPPA was represented by Sandulli Grace Attorney Susan F. Horwitz) in 1996, and the full Commission affirmed the decision in 2000. See City of Boston, 23 MLC 133 (1996), affirmed by 26 MLC 144 (2000). The City then appealed to the Mass. Appeals Court, where the BPPA, represented by Sandulli Grace Attorney John M. Becker, in 2003 was again successful. See City of Boston v. Labor Relations Commission, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 1102 (2003). Finally, after the Appeals Court decision, the City removed the Municipal Police from the developments. The force was eventually disbanded, with some of its members transferring to the Boston Police Department.

Back in 1996 and 2000, the Labor Relations Commission ruled that the City must: return to the status quo before the violation (and remove the Municipal Police from the developments); make officers whole for any financial losses; and bargain before making any changes. The Commission ordered the City and the BPPA to attempt to determine the damages, but numerous meetings over many years were fruitless, largely because the City took the position that it owed no damages. As a result of this dispute, the parties asked the Commission for help. By 2010, the Labor Relations Commission had become the Division of Labor Relations, and scheduled a series of meetings with the parties. First the parties attempted to mediate a settlement, without success. Then, the DLR held three days of compliance hearings, where the BPPA was represented by Sandulli Grace Attorneys Amy Laura Davidson and John M. Becker, in an effort to establish the amount of damages. It was out of this process that the parties developed a series of stipulations that led to the Stipulated Order issued by the DLR this week.

The Stipulated Order distributes the damages in a fair and equitable manner among current and former members of the BPPA. First, the nine-year damages period is divided into quarters beginning October 1, 1994 and ending September 30, 2003. Then, each person who was an active member of the BPD and a dues (or agency fee) paying member of the BPPA on the first day of each quarter is entitled to a payment for that quarter, up to a maximum 36 quarters. (This means some of those entitled to payments will be retired or promoted into higher ranks.) Then it gets a little complicated. The total amount of damages ($16.5 million) is then divided by the total number of quarters worked by all eligible individuals, for the payment-per-quarter. Every individual will receive the payment-per-quarter for each quarter that he or she is eligible. Because the total number of individuals and quarters has not yet been determined, we don’t yet know the payment-per-quarter, so we can’t yet tell individuals how much they will receive. This will take a little time, but the BPPA and the City hope to have the process substantially completed in the coming months.

Throughout the years, the leadership of the BPPA has never stopped fighting for a fair result to bring back to their members in this litigation. With this week’s Stipulated Order, they’ve reached their goal.

Labor In The News, Sandulli Grace In The News

Attorney Joseph Sandulli To Again Teach At The Labor Guild

Alan Shapiro August 22, 2010

As he has for many years, Atty. Sandulli will be teaching a course at the Labor Guild’s School of Labor Relations. Classes run in two sessions on Monday evenings from September 13 through November 15, from 7:00 – 9:30 p.m. in Weymouth.

Joe’s class, entitled “Labor Strategies,” focuses on how to coordinate legal action, political action, public relations and negotiations to deal effectively on the range of labor-management issues in both public and private sectors. The class will also feature guest speakers who are actively involved in these respective endeavors.

The Labor Guild is a longstanding program of the Boston Archdiocese to educate “men and women members of unions, management, and others who are interested in furthering sound labor-management relations.” In addition to Atty. Sandulli’s course, there are a number of other valuable offerings in the upcoming fall period.

Joseph Sandulli was the 2008 winner of the prestigious Cushing-Gavin Award for his nearly four decades of outstanding service on behalf of labor unions to the labor-management community.

For more information, please go to the Guild’s web site or call 781-340-7887.

Labor In The News, Sandulli Grace In The News

Sandulli Grace and MassCOP win confirmation of arbitration award reinstating officer fired for running out of leave, and holding that FMLA benefits are a floor of rights which can be improved in negotiations

Sandulli Grace Staff July 26, 2010

Officer Tyrone Patruno was injured off the job, and then fired when he ran out of his paid time off and his unpaid FMLA leave. The Barre Patrol Officers’ Union, MCOP Local 340, AFL-CIO, was represented by Attorney Leigh Panettiere of Sandulli Grace, P.C. The Arbitrator agreed with the Union’s argument and found that there was a practice of offering light duty to officers injured off the job, and further that there was no justification for the Town to refuse to Patruno’s request for extended unpaid leave to recover from his injury.

The Town appealed the arbitrator’s award, arguing that the arbitrator exceeded his powers by requiring the Town to give more than the three months of leave guaranteed by the Family and Medical Leave Act. The court rejected the Town’s argument (as did the arbitrator) on the basis that the FMLA is a floor of benefits and the parties are free to negotiate a greater benefit in their contract. Patruno was ordered reinstated to light duty pending a doctor’s decision that he is fit for full duty, with back pay to the date his doctor cleared him to work light duty.

Public employers cannot unilaterally impose FMLA policies, because they impact availability of paid and unpaid leave, as well as compensation and job security — all mandatory subjects of bargaining. Based upon this rule of collective bargaining law that was reaffirmed in the Barre case, Sandulli Grace advises its clients to watch for new FMLA policies, and contact their union representative if they believe an employer has imposed a policy without bargaining.

Download the decision…

Labor In The News, Sandulli Grace In The News

Mashpee Quinn Bill Case Update: Judge Denies Town’s Attempt To Muddy Case – Plaintiffs Will File For Summary Judgment In Their Favor

Sandulli Grace Staff July 26, 2010

Barnstable Superior Court Justice Gary Nickerson has rejected the Town of Mashpee’s attempt to forcibly join the Mashpee police Union to the lawsuit brought by several Mashpee Police Officers who contend that the Town violated the law when it cut their Quinn Benefits. The Officers, represented by Sandulli Grace, successfully argued that the case involved a violation of the law by the Town, and that their union was not a proper party. “The Town was trying to muddy the issue in the case by seeking to join the Union as a party. We’re pleased that Judge Nickerson rejected this attempt, as we can now move forward to seek a ruling on the merits,” said Sandulli Grace Partner Bryan Decker, lead counsel on the case.

In the suit, the officers contend that the Town of Mashpee violated the Quinn Bill (found at G.L. c. 41, §108L) when it reduced Quinn payments to officers. The Town reduced the payments due to the state’s cutting of Quinn funding to municipalities. “The Quinn bill is a wage law that guarantees certain level of pay to officers who better themselves and their departments by seeking education. This is no different than if the Town sought to pay officers less than minimum wage. I certainly feel for the cities and towns that have suffered a back door local aid cut via the state’s underfunding of the Quinn program. However, that doesn’t allow those cities and towns to cut the pay of officers. Two wrongs most certainly do not make a right,” said Decker.

It should be noted that while the Union was properly found to NOT be a proper party to the suit, the plaintiffs’ union, the Massachusetts Coalition of Police, is fully supporting its members in their attempt to be paid all of the wages the law guarantees to them – including their Quinn Bill wages.

Labor In The News, Sandulli Grace In The News

Bppa Members Paid $2.23 Million In Damages For City’s Unilateral Implementation Of Flsa Pay Period Sandulli Grace Successfully Argues Case At Mass Supreme Judicial Court

Sandulli Grace Staff July 26, 2010

After a seven year battle, the City of Boston has finally paid Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association (BPPA) members damages relating to the unlawful unilateral implementation of a 28 day/ 171 hour Fair Labor Standards Act pay period in 2002. In total, 1765 officers received $1,781,091.11 in damages plus $449,628.44 in statutory interest, for a total damages payment of $2,230,719.55. Because the BPPA refused to bow to the City’s change in 2002, BPPA members are the only BPD sworn personnel benefitting from the shorter pay period.

This case had its origins in the 2000 lawsuit brought by over 800 patrolmen (represented by Sandulli Grace attorneys Bryan Decker and John Becker and with the support of the BPPA) alleging violations of the FLSA due to the City’s failure to include Quinn Bill and night shift differential in the calculation of FLSA overtime. In fact, it turned out that the City wasn’t even calculating FLSA overtime, and in 2004, the officers were awarded over $750,000 in damages and attorney fees. Attempting to cut its losses, in spring 2002 the City announced that it wanted to implement a longer FLSA pay period. A longer pay period allows the employer to stretch its overtime liability, resulting in lower payments to officers. Because the issue implicated officers’ pay, the BPPA demanded to bargain. The City refused, and unilaterally implemented the change at the start of July, 2002.

The BPPA challenged that unilateral change by filing an unfair labor practice charge with the Massachusetts Labor Relations Commission. The City contended that it did not need to bargain the change with the union, and the BPPA was the only union to challenge the change. Sandulli Grace attorneys Bryan Decker and Patrick Bryant represented the union before the LRC, which ruled in the union’s favor in 2006, finding that the decision to change the FLSA pay period was a mandatory subject of bargaining, and ordered the City to restore the traditional 7 day/40 hour pay period. Rather than comply, the City appealed the case, and the state’s Supreme Judicial Court took the appeal. Bryan Decker argued the case before the high court, and in 2009 the Court upheld the finding in the Union’s favor.

Following the SJC decision, the City finally agreed to implement the 7day / 40 hour work period. BPPA members have been receiving FLSA overtime on a weekly basis since late last summer. The City then undertook to calculate damages for the period from 2002 until 2009, which resulted in the $2.23 million dollar payout this summer.

(A longer, more detailed report on this case appears in this month’s Pax Centurion, the BPPA’s Official Newspaper).