From Brian Lockhart, CT Post:
Joe Ganim’s office insisted the returned mayor received no special treatment when he was allowed to pick up where he left off with his accrued benefits after resigning in 2003 following a corruption conviction.
It is true Ganim was not the first high-level City Hall staffer to be allowed to “bridge” his split service rather than start from scratch as a brand new hire.
But Hearst Connecticut Media has neither found nor been provided any clear written local policy or guidelines for granting certain Bridgeport employees the perk, or why it has been an internal decision involving neither the City Council nor the Civil Service Commission.
Full story here.
0
Kudos to Brian Lockhart and the CT Post for following up on this story. My comments from Lennie’s original posting follow.
Does Senator Moore have resources to research an elected person being a ‘bridge’ employee?
Feb 12, 2017 at 12:40 pm
Missing from the CT Post story was specific reference to what law this approach is based on. All the CT Post offered was it was “a policy decision” made by the administration, based in part on how the state handles the pensions of returning employees, and approved by Bridgeport Personnel Director David Dunn.
Personnel matters in the City of Bridgeport are dictated by union contract. Is this guideline in union contracts? Policies must be supported by law. What law is the practice used for rehiring retiring employees based on?
I instructed HR classes at UB and was involved in hiring at People’s in a former life. I never heard of the term ‘bridge employee’ and could not find it in Employment Law Daily or other reference resources. At one time, People’s had a guideline for rehire in which, for example, if an individual was employed for ten years, they must return to employment within ten years.
I am aware employment law treats elected officials differently than classified employees. People in elected office, for example, cannot collect unemployment insurance. The nature of their employment is different.
Given the CT Post no longer does investigative reporting, the level of research needed was not done. They just call people and get comments.
My sense is there is a labor law issue here.
Can an attorney offer to do some pro bono work?
Is the city council jumping on this and conducting research to see if a mayor who returns to office is treated like a classified employee?
Wit, Grit and Bullshit are the major skills of David Dunn, the head of the Civil Service Commission. Dunn will not give an HONEST answer to a question like this one and there is NOBODY who can make him give you an honest and true answer because all he will do is delay and give you spin and Mayor Ganim is happy with that.
It’s about time some people and organizations (such as Hearst/Connecticut Post) are developing some backbone dealing with Ganim, Testa and Company.
The article mentioned 6 months to return and be fully vested. Let’s see if a city council person has the balls to call the mayor on this.
10+ f’n years and the mayor is back where he left off. Un-be-f’n-lievable.
Tommy Mac won’t say anything. He wants to preserve his Bridge.
It’s called stealing from the taxpayers!!!
There is no way ex-convict Ganim should have accumulated nine years more seniority while doing time in a federal pen. Did Ganim take out his pension money when he left the first time?
Look at what we have in this damned city:
Ganim gets pension credits and all the other benefits of a 20-year employee.
Civil service gives the test for fire chief using e-mails. Who ever took an e-mail test for a $100K job? This administration is almost as bad as his first term. Joe Ganim is a scumbag.
Andrew Fardy, you answered one of the questions I had about this appointment. Were there any components of the test or was it only e-mail? Do we (people of Bridgeport) get to see the results of all three applicants? Or will this require me to walk into David Dunn’s office and ask. Would the results be FOIA.
Put it to a vote.
Up or down.
Let the people see who will vote for giving Ganim freebies.
And another issue for Ed Adams,Director, Government Accountability and Integrity.
I am 100% sure what Ganim did with keeping his seniority and other perks is wrong, immoral and a tad dishonest.