Police Respond to Concession, OT Issues

The following letter was sent to WESB/WBRR Monday morning:

The police officers of the City of Bradford Police Department would like to clarify some misleading facts that have appeared in The Bradford Era. We are not doing this to get into a war of words with anyone, nor will we make any further comments regarding these issues.

First is the issue of concession asked for by the city. Yes, we have rejected insurance concessions offered by the city in the past couple of years. The last concession offer made by the city was on December 17, 2010. Representatives of our bargaining unit were told by the city clerk and city solicitor that they needed an answer by December 18, 2010. Department representatives were also told that the insurance was not the main concern of the city, but that a retirement package was. A retirement package of 2 years post-retirement benefits for any officer age 55 years or older was offered to our department. Representatives were also told that the officer had to be 55 at the time this offer was made. This limited the offer to 1 officer even though we have 3 officers who are retirement eligible, with one of those officers turning 55 in 4 months. Again, representatives were told that the officer had to be 55 at the time of the offer. To compare offers, the fire department package was for 4 firemen and included post-retirement benefits for up to 7 years. They, too, had a firemen fall just short of their age requirement of 58 years.

To further clarify the union’s position regarding the retirement package we offer the following: Approximately 3 years ago, our department had officers that wanted to retire and had asked for a benefit package similar to the one offered by the city last year. Union representatives were told, by the city, that it wasn’t allowed or that they couldn’t do that. To offer a package now is a slap in the face to those officers who asked for one 3 years ago and were told no.

The second issue is the overtime totals that made their way into the paper. It is not proper or accurate to just subtract an officer’s base wage from the final gross wage and call the difference overtime. There are several factors that need to be taken into account when determining an officer’s overtime. Our contract spells out three factors that were incorrectly added to The Era’s totals. One is the added pay an officer receives for any promotion. An officer will receive a percentage of their base pay for each promotion received. This percentage will then be added to that officer’s base pay. All officers receive shift differential for hours worked between 3 p.m. and 7 a.m. This again is added to the base pay an officer receives. The third factor is the overtime pay an officer receives for testifying in court on their off duty time. The Era also added wages earned while working for the McKean County Drug Task Force. The officers are initially paid overtime by the city, but the city is then reimbursed by the district attorney’s office.

Clearly, there is going to be overtime in any work environment, but how that overtime is earned or paid out is different in all workplaces. We believe that if proper research had been done and the time taken to interview all parties involved, a different article would have been written.

It is time for the leaders of this city to stop using the press to enrage the public against the city employees and the benefits they earn. Contracts are negotiated, and benefits earned within that contract should not be used to generate distrust with the public.

Respectfully,
City of Bradford Police Officers

Update: The letter was faxed from the city police department's fax machine.

Comments

Can't PAY my TAXES! said…
Interesting points made in this letter and find it odd that not one mention has been made in the newspaper about the "Riel" issue. Looks like a battle is brewing, but who will win it? The TAXPAYERS Lose AGAIN! What do the "Overpaid CONSULTANTS" have to say; haven't heard a word. PUT the Report in the DRAWER-just like the MASTER Plan. LOL! Cry! PAY!
City UNiOn SupPorTer said…
Well said:
"It is time for the leaders of this city to stop using the press to enrage the public against the city employees and the benefits they earn. Contracts are negotiated, and benefits earned within that contract should not be used to generate distrust with the public."

Respectfully,
City of Bradford Police Officers
Concerned Taxpayer said…
"Clearly, there is going to be overtime in any work environment, but how that overtime is earned or paid out is different in all workplaces. We believe that if proper research had been done and the time taken to interview all parties involved, a different article would have been written."

I have to agree. Looked to me like that article was written only for the purpose of enraging the public.
No MORE Bologna! said…
What IS the "Riel" Story Here? City TAXPAYERS Want the TRUTH!
Anonymous said…
What about a "Right To Know" request from both the newspaper and the radio station to the City of Bradford? Everybody DESERVES The TRUTH!
Anonymous said…
Sounds to me like the police department overtime was probably pretty low if i read the letter correctly. With all of the drug busts going on, that's a lot of off-duty time put in. The letter states that all of that overtime money is reimbursed to the City by the District Attorney's Office. Keep up the good work officers.
A Concerned Neighbor said…
A Great Big THANK YOU! to All of the Police Officers who keep Us SAFE! More Anti-Drug busts are needed in Bradford!!!!!
A Concerned Neighbor said…
A Great Big THANK YOU! to All of the Police Officers who keep Us SAFE! More Anti-Drug busts are needed in Bradford!!!!!
Anonymous said…
The number of police officers has been cut, yet we expect them to do more to fight crime (DRUG DEALERS!) and not get overtime. Really?
Anonymous said…
Overtime in the BCFD is OK, but NOT in the BPD!
Anonymous said…
All Overtime MUST Be Reduced by better management & oversight of employees by their supervisors. City Department Heads(Mayor and Council members), the City Comptroller, City Clerk, and Human Resources/Personnel Manager ALL Are & SHOULD Be Held ACCOUNTABLE! This is No Way to Run a Business(City). Businesses Go Broke, Cities Go Into PA Act 47 Early Intervention Programs. What's the Difference. They Both LOSE!
Anonymous said…
Maybe Mr. Mayor IS Looking For The "Pot-O-Gold" at the End of the Rainbow! Do the Hired Consultants HAVE It? LOL!

Popular posts from this blog

Arrests in Operation Diamond Drop

Woman Charged with Posting
Nude Picture on Facebook

Two Arrested on Drug Charges