Aldermen table the "memorandum of understanding" with the Fire fighters union (click here for the Call story>)
I have read this forward and back wards and so far all I can come up with is that the Crestwood Fire fighters do not want to be restricted from "political activity" in Crestwood.
Now at the last meeting "His Honor" made the remark that they are restricted from campaigning (in town if they work here) and the City Attorney has given his opinion (audio on City web site close to the end) that they cannot do it, so what's the problem completing the M.O.U. ?
I hope we can get this put to bed and soon as the April elections are fast approaching and there must be a firm understanding in place before the start of the "silly season."
Tom Ford
NO. 861
Now at the last meeting "His Honor" made the remark that they are restricted from campaigning (in town if they work here) and the City Attorney has given his opinion (audio on City web site close to the end) that they cannot do it, so what's the problem completing the M.O.U. ?
I hope we can get this put to bed and soon as the April elections are fast approaching and there must be a firm understanding in place before the start of the "silly season."
Tom Ford
NO. 861
posted by Crestwood Independent at 14:25
36 Comments:
Didn't they campaign for you Tom?
3:)) PM Blogger: They did indeed as well as Roy Robinson and Darrell Wallach, and that's why I think it's important to have a policy one way or the other.
As for me, I couldn't care one way or the other which side this comes down on, I would just like to see it settled for once and for all.
Don't you too want this to be decided so we can get this signed and be at peace for the next three years ?
Tom Ford
Absolutely! I say let em.
9:41 Blogger: OK, one on the "for" side.
By the way, I an add a "poll" section with the "question of the week" if you think it would be interesting. Let me know .
Tom Ford
With this MOU, can Crestwood firefighters campaign for Crestwood issues and candidates? Has that answer been made clear?
Currently, from what I understand, the local can engage in activity, but local firefighters cannot campaign here.
Am I wrong or missing something? Please clarify?
11:16 AM Blogger: I guess were all waiting for a clarification on this, so if I get one I will post it.
Tom Ford
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
If the BOA, City Administrator, City Attorney, Union Negotiators, and All the others working on this can't agree on this, is there any hope that we the Citizens of Crestwood will understand what they come up with?
6:27 PM Blogger: Well John, in fact there is, these folks (Firefighters union) want to help (fill in the name) in the coming elections. Now the question is, are they going to be able to ?
Its not about the salary, or the seniority, or the days off, or the (pick one,) that's all been negotiated. It's now about the unions ability to use Crestwood employees in a Crestwood election.
Simple, but to the point !
Tom Ford
I vote yes for non partisan civil service.
Restore voter control and non partisan civil service.
"It's now about the unions ability to use Crestwood employees in a Crestwood election."
Tom,
That statement sounds like you are saying that the union tells Crestwood resident/employees how to vote. Or, that the union can bring in members from all over the county.
Do you think this agreement will be published so we can read it either before or after the BOA passes it?
12:16 AM Blogger: John I am sure it will be available (after the fact) when it's completed and signed.
If you want to see it now, send in a FOIA form (copy below) to Tina Flowers.
Tom Ford
Martha Duchild is a former Civil Service Board Chairman, perhaps she will share her knowledge of the MOU to date.
Tom Ford
I'd be happy to offer some clarification, which is based more on what I understood listening and attending the BOA meetings than my experience as a former member of the civil service board.
At the Feb. 8, 2011 BOA meeting, the MOU was on the agenda for the board's review, but the board was informed that night that due to the recent snow, the firefighters were unable to sign the contract. The board agreed to postpone the MOU review till the next meeting. It was expected that the firefighters would have signed the contract by then.
I attended the Feb. 22nd BOA meeting, and the MOU was on the agenda. Once again, the board was informed that, for whatever reason, the firefighters still had not signed the contract, therefore it was agreed to postpone the BOA review.
Before the BOA agreed to postpone the review, Alderman Schlink followed up on former alderman Steve Nieder's request at the Feb. 11th BOA meeting for clarification from the city attorney regarding political activity as it related to off-duty Crestwood employees and Crestwood elections.
The city attorney answered by saying it was his opinion, based on the Charter language, that Crestwood employees could not participate in Crestwood campaigns while off-duty.
Until the MOU is signed and brought before the board, we won't know if the firefighters union agrees with the city attorney's interpretation of the political activity section.
I hope this helps clarify any confusion.
Martha Duchild
"The city attorney answered by saying it was his opinion, based on the Charter language, that Crestwood employees could not participate in Crestwood campaigns while off-duty."
Can the BOA approve an MOU that violates the charter?
Can the BOA on its own change the charter?
I imagine that there is a proper procedure to change the charter, but it must be more involved than a simple vote by the BOA.
Modifications to the charter language require approval by the voting citizens of Crestwood.
1;38 AM Blogger: John, thankfully the good folks who set up the Charter locked in a system to change it that is "inviolate?"
There is supposed to be 10 years between Charter commission convening's to study possible changes.The last one was about 4-5 years ago so.......
Next after the Commission recommends something it requires the voters to vote it up or down, so the chance of the BOA changing it is ? (remember you still have 4 members who vote lockstep with "His Honor.")
Will they try it ? I really doubt it as the proverbial cat is out of the bag now.
So where does that leave the MOU ? Well the BOA can't vote on an "understanding" that doesn't exist (null and void till the Fire Fighters sign it) so we may see the Fire Fighters working without a contract.
The really interesting thing here is who promised what to whom, and why ? If this keeps up that too will come to light.
Tom Ford
The City Charter of Crestwood as follows. Please cut and paste it to your browser.
http://www.ci.crestwood.mo.us
/pdf/charter.PDF
Tom Ford
John,
The language in the proposed MOU is taken directly from the sections in the city charter and the city's civil service rules regarding employee political activity, so there is no way that there is a violation since the language from the charter is duplicated in the MOU. The issue centers around the interpretation of this language. The city attorney's interpretation of the charter/civil service rules language (and by extension the MOU)is, according to U.S. Supreme Court decisions regarding public employees and free speech issues, correct.
No, the BOA cannot approve a contract that is in violation of the charter, and it is the city attorney's job to ensure that the documents are consistent. The proposed contract is not in violation of the charter section on employee political activity, nor is the city attorney's interpretation in violation of the charter.
The BOA on its own cannot make any changes to the charter. They can propose changes, but any change to the charter requires a vote of residents.
Hope this answers your questions.
Martha Duchild
Thank you Martha, Tom, and Anonymous!
I think I have a better picture now of what is going on.
( BTW...Martha, I'm glad you watch this blog. Seems like whenever an unusual, or complicated issue comes up, you are there with a clear, concise, explanation, that even I can understand. THANK YOU!)
My question to everyone is WHY the City enters into ANY agreement with the FD? The city is under no obligation; the FD cannot strike, bargin for pay or benefits. The FD is nothing more than employees of the city and should not be given any additional protection not afforded to all employees.
7:56, Great question! one that should be asked of our mayor!!!
More appropriate would be the City
attorney. we know Roy does not have a grasp for all things legal.
Still not signed ! Did I miss an ice storm here ?
Tom Ford
Hmmmm, wonder what the holdup is with the MOU?
Maybe someone figured out that we don't need it!!!
Blogger, I hope so!!!
I have no idea what is holding up the signatories on this M.O.U. but this is getting a bit silly.
May we please sign this and move on ?
Tom Ford
No Tom, we should not sign the MOU and move on. The City should put on its big boy pants, not sign the MOU and move on with the business of the city.
1:34 PM Blogger: Perhaps i wasn't clear enough my friend. The City has made it's offers and good ones they are.
The Firefighters are the ones who haven't or won't sign (for whatever reason) so I agree with you, sign it, or tell us why you won't !
In any case, as we all witnessed in Wisconsin there are other remedies available to the City, will they use them ? I really doubt it as "His Honor" was just endorsed by the very same we await signatures from.
so you support what happened in Wisconsin?
I do.
Reagan had to fire the air traffic controllers in '81.
Government unions have the capacity to shutdown government if desired.
I have nothing against unions in the workplace, as long as they are not in government.
8:11 PM Blogger: I support the fact that any unionization of Government employees is the wrong thing to do.
If you would please read a bit on President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (icon of the Democrat party) you will see that in 1933-34 he felt the same way.
He stated that a union had no place in the Government, be it Federal, State or local. He was completely correct then, and I believe he is completely correct now.
When a person accepts a job that is fully funded by the taxpayer (themselves included) they should be willing to abide by the rules, regulations, and conditions of that employment as stated when they accepted the position.
Now if they wish to be employed by the private sector then I believe they should have the right to choose whether they wish to be in a union or not.
Now as you can see I am not anti-union at all, I just do not believe it is viable in the public sector, and I am in pretty good company, no ?
Tom Ford
Amen to banishing the public sector unions.
Lets focus on the Crestwood Fire Department. They do not belong to a union and the MOU should be abolished. Kurt Becker go away and play in Mehlville and Affton etc. Recruit elsewhere.
12:15 PM Blogger: Well in fact they do belong to a union of sorts (not AFL-CIO,) but a union none the less.
What most folks don't know is that Crestwood is a "FIRE DEPARTMENT" of it's own, and as such a sort of political entity with the right to unionize (at this time.)
Several comments have been made about the annexed area not being served by Crestwood, but guess what, it can't be as that area is in the boundaries of the Afton Fire District.
Look up the State Fire District boundaries (and regulations) and you will see that were into sort of an interesting area of the law.
Now all that said, both the Representatives of the Fire Fighters and the City have got to come together to make this work. The Mayor and the City Attorney have both publicly stated their positions as to the M.O.U. and I believe they are in concert with the City Charter, so...........
Tom Ford
Something to think about the next time the two sides get together on the M.O.U.
"If a man is called to be a streetsweeper, he should sweep streets even as Michelangelo painted, or Beethoven composed music, or Shakespeare wrote poetry. He should sweep streets so well that all the hosts of heaven and earth will pause to say, here lived a great streetsweeper who did his job well."
Martin Luther King
Let's get this behind us for we have far more pressing issues on the table !
Tom Ford
Still nothing on the agenda for 3/22/11 reference the M.O.U. ? Gee whiz why not ? The terms stated previously are more than fair, there have been no ice storms, so what's the hold up ?
Tom Ford
Post a Comment
<< Home