The give and take negotiations between Mayor Joe Ganim’s administration and City Council President Tom McCarthy who also serves as deputy director of Labor Relations have appeared to hit an impasse. Ganim made a pledge on the campaign trail to eliminate conflicts of interest such as city employees serving on the City Council approving their own wages and benefits. Ganim has tried to schmooze McCarthy out the door to preserve a reasonable relationship with the head of the legislative body. McCarthy has been negotiating a separation package with the city through his lawyer labor specialist and ex-mayor Tom Bucci. Even Democratic Town Chairman Mario Testa has tried to serve as a broker in the deal. Bucci and Testa are cousins. We don’t call it OIB for nothing, right?
The city has taken the position McCarthy is an employee who serves at the pleasure of the mayor. Bucci has countered not so fast, you must remove him for cause or in lieu of that make him a financial offer he cannot refuse.
All kinds of numbers have gone back and forth between the city and McCarthy to resolve the matter amicably. McCarthy asked for more than a year’s pay plus extended health benefits. The city countered at substantially lower. Hey, take $20k and go away. Bucci and McCarthy said we’ll see you in court. The city upped the ante a minor bit.
Testa and McCarthy have had a strong relationship. McCarthy, unlike former Mayor Bill Finch, has provided something that touches the pleasure center of the 70-year-old chairman: RESPECT. But even the town chairman’s advice has not yet swayed McCarthy to accept the city’s departure offer.
When it comes to the craft of negotiation, Ganim is as cold-blooded as they come. But he’s not so unreasonable he cannot give the other side a way out if it gets him to the greater goal of preserving relationships. That’s why they call it politics. Ask for a lot, offer a little, find a reasonable balance, we all live to fight another day.
Associate City Attorney Mark Anastasi is heading up negotiations on behalf of the city. Ultimately Ganim must sign off on the deal. But then if it hits a higher financial threshold, guess what? It must go to the City Council.
Yeah, you can’t make this stuff up.
But at some point Ganim may say, okay cut him loose and we’ll figure it out.
Why not simply lay McCarthy off? Eliminate the position for economic reasons to reduce the expected deficit. Then, recreate the job in the city clerk’s office. Brilliant!
Is McCarthy a classified employee? If so (he is not), the city charter prescribes he may have a hearing with the civil service commission.
It appears these ‘negotiations’ are purely political, more specifically a Democrat party matter the Bridgeport taxpayer will pay for.
I suppose you could say I’m negotiating a separation package too. My separation was orchestrated by McCarthy with no warning so I had no option but to file a suit in federal court.
Tom, your idea is sound. Lay him off. I suspect the amount of time he actually spends on city business could easily be handled by the existing staff, no need to recreate the position elsewhere (and yes, I got the allusion).
There’s another significant issue your solution solves by ducking it. If Bucci gets his interpretation validated by a court, then this will set a precedent and make it virtually impossible to get rid of people in any discretionary jobs, and if they try to get rid of people by fabricating performance issues, it’s just more income for Bucci.
I’m sure Mark could use the threat of the above to pressure McCarthy into accepting the city’s offer.
Tom, is it a bit ironic Bucci represents both you and McCarthy?
Tom,
Your idea is hardly original, though wonderfully appropriate. Does most of OIB understand this is what McCarthy caused to happen with your position at budget time 2012? Do folks realize simultaneously McCarthy added a like-employee position to the City Clerk’s staff? Does anyone see depriving our City Council of appropriate support has led to members depending entirely on administrative staff in most recent years?
Does it seem Ganim is making good on his campaign promise, one employee at a time? And regarding negotiating by and for Tom McCarthy, who wears too many hats to be able to tell which is most treasured, we find him retaining outside counsel to secure the best advantage over taxpayers FOR HIM PERSONALLY. Ironic that Bucci has so many cases against the City in any given year, isn’t it? Perhaps he should be hired as a consultant to reassemble our labor/employment/table of organization issues. Cut waste? Make things more understandable for taxpayers and employees? Cut down on time and $$$-wasting suits? When it comes down to negotiating, let’s put a price tag on what Council leader Mac has already cost us, and diminish any sense of generosity going forward!! Respectfully offered!! Time will tell.
Shame on Tom Mccarthy, he’s had it all for too long and still he can’t leave with dignity. This is the kind of stuff that will bite him in the butt if or when he runs for public office again.
Tom was mentored by Finch, any doubt why Tom is trying to get every penny possible from the city? While Finch knew his time in Bpt politics was finished, Tom on the other hand should take a step back and look at the big picture, because you know he’s running for mayor eventually.
“because you know he’s running for mayor eventually”
Harvey, I am always interested in Bridgeport rumors and prophecies. Let me record your statement as likely the latter. In that regard, it seems to me at this moment the City is more vulnerable financially than it has been in a long time. And if people do not rightly see that vulnerability at the moment, partly because many are still celebrating Finch is out and Ganim is in. What Ganim is expected to do at this moment by many is fascinating.
** He is facing a large budget deficit in the current year, not of his making and entirely ascribable to the Finch team for basic errors, hopeful revenue anticipation, and failure to show how heavily impacted the Police Budget is in terms of extra pension obligations (that Finch knew about, but never before shared with the taxpayers after signing the Police into CT MERS a couple years ago) borne by City taxpayers but kept from everyone until now.
** Even if he finds ways to cut lots of little expenses, he will face using up most if not all of the $10-12 Million of City Fund Balance that was at $55 Million when he was in office originally and the Finance Review Board left.
** A volatile stock market can reduce already depleted values in the Pension A plan pushing the ratio of personnel costs in the City budget ever higher while we must pay those retirement incomes to retired public safety officers whether we have assets in a fund or not. (And we continue to pay off the Pension Obligation Bond Ganim 1 set in motion originally, for another 14-15 years.)
** How are various court actions looking from a City point of view? What settlements are facing us that we may not be aware of? Wheelabrator effect when Supreme Court rules?
** Look at the Agenda for next CC meeting. Remgrit tax settlement? What’s the dollar story here? The City continues to avoid putting $$$ values on matters being referred to Committees or coming up for decisions. Why? Don’t want people to become aware, annoyed, or thinking of other ways of dealing with issues?
** Airport driveway fiasco, and other “mayoral office” games TMac was party to. If Tom is seen as departing the employment scene with an obscene reward (to be paid by taxpayers) at a time he never took responsibility for so many things he was central to and a part of, why would people support him in the future with his current venality in full display?
What type of lens or foundation would Tom use to support himself eventually? Something solid to stand on, how about using the benefit of all those days away from the City attending Conferences around the US with all expenses paid by JOE LUNCHBUCKET, Taxpayer extraordinaire to fully use his $9,000 “non-taxable” stipend? Has Tom heard any best practices he later set in motion for the CC, or the City, or his District? Time will tell.
“Why would people support him in the future with his current venality in full display?” Mr. Marshall, not saying I would support him necessarily, but as we saw in the last election, anything is possible.
*** Well McCarthy, now that the shoe is on the other foot it’s time to cry for understanding, no? Granted no one likes losing their job and maybe their position of power on the council, and you’ve always been respectful when needed, however it’s probably time to pick up your things and move on. With all the political folk you know, it should be easy to find another gig! *** Good Luck to you, Tom. ***
Eliminate all Deputy positions! The City is not that big and complex and the budget can’t support such positions. We need more doers and less overhead.
A few thoughts.
First, a year of extended benefits is bad for both McCarthy and the Mayor. For McCarthy it is politically toxic, making it look like he is using his official position for personal gain. For the Mayor it is bad politics and worse policy. How do you give those benefits to a politically connected employee and then deny them to the next laborer or painter you lay off?
Second, the fact a position is outside the classified service doesn’t necessarily mean the incumbent can be fired at will. That is especially true when the firing is arguably the result of the employee’s political activity.
It’s time to end this charade. Tom McCarthy needs to think about whether it is in his best interest to go down this road. Joe Ganim needs to fish or cut bait. If he wants to make a change and thinks he can legally fire McCarthy, he should get it over with. If not, he needs to find a way to make the best of the situation.
Using the taxpayers’ money to buy political peace should not be a option.
First of all let’s eliminate the position of Deputy Director. This position was created for Tommy Mac alone and in light of the budget crisis it is deemed not necessary. Secondly, inform Mr. McCarthy he has no bumping rights. And thirdly, Ganim should unfund the stipend account, again blaming it on the budget crisis. Let the word out it was Tommy Mac’s unwillingness and inability to control this account that also led to this action. Get the council mad at the Mac Man and let them blame him and his greed for losing their Golden Goose.
Turn the council on Tommy Mac and he has nowhere to go.
Tom has has been given plenty of notice already. When Finch lost the primary he should have known he would have to find another job if he wanted to stay on the Council. Every viable candidate said he could not do both. Tom chose to stay on the Council. That’s his right and choice. As a result, it’s time to terminate him. It is the people’s money. The budget is a mess and taxes are already too high. Just do it!!!