Pennsylvania city workers to take mayor to court over across-the-board minimum wage salaries

[웃 910]

Pennsylvania city workers to take mayor to court over across-the-board minimum wage salaries

Employees of a Pennsylvania city, who have all seen their salaries cut to minimum wage as the mayor grapples with budget problems, are hoping a judge restores their paychecks in full.

Scranton Mayor Chris Doherty cut everyone's pay -- including his own -- on Friday, saying the state's sixth-largest city is broke because the City Council blocked his proposed tax increase. Doherty, a Democrat, warned nearly 400 police officers, firefighters and public works employees about his doomsday plan, prompting a Lackawanna County judge to order the city to pay full wages to all employees, citing that it is a violation of their contracts. Hours later, the payday envelopes went out, and, despite the judge's order, they were light.

"This needs to be resolved," Scranton firefighter and president of the local firefighters union John Judge told FoxNews.com. "My members are getting a check for $7.25 an hour. These are people that are the head of their households. They have mortgages. They have other living costs. They are now going to have to throw their bills in a hat and randomly pick what gets paid on time."

The judge was not in his chambers Monday, but attorneys for the local city workers' unions were planning to go to court Tuesday morning to ask him to hold Doherty in contempt of court for violating the injunction.

In addition to scaling back wages, Doherty's move cut off overtime, worker's compensation and disability.

The city of Scranton has battled budget woes for years, but the problems reached a boiling point after the City Council blocked Doherty's plan to raise taxes to cover a $16.8 million shortfall, opting instead to borrow money to cover the budget gap.

"The mayor is trying to strong-arm the council into doing what he wants, but it's the city's employees that are paying the price," Judge said, adding that the workers in his department saw their paystubs go from about $1,500 every two weeks after deductions to a gross pay of about $600. "This is not a case of no cash. It's a cash-flow problem."

The cuts were sudden, as city employees were only given eight days' notice. Doherty also claimed last week that there is only $5,000 left in the city's accounts.

"The employees are the ones in the middle of this battle between the mayor and the council," said Sam Vitris, president of the public works union. "We've had four or five recovery plans over the years and none of them seemed to have worked. The stalemate between them has led the city to run out of money."

Doherty has maintained for months that if the City Council had not refused his 2012 budget proposal, which included a 29 percent tax hike, the city would not be in a dire situation. Doherty did not return repeated calls for comment.

http://www.foxnews.c...inimum-wage-in/

Edited July 10, 2012 by ☠

[X Factor 1,112]

This is a situation that reflects on a smaller scale what the federal government is facing with all the trillions of dollars of debt the country faces. There will come a day of reckoning.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Ah Public Sector unions..... should be outlawed.

Seriously though, the city if BROKE.

Obviously money was mismanaged over the years and someone has to pay the piper, and what better way than the people who's careers rely on a tax base to fund them.

A judge should magically restore salaries when there's no money to fund them? It's like union heads don't have logical reasoning. They're like a guy that thinks with his ####### instead of his brain when talking to a woman. All they think is "money money money" (sex sex sex) instead of trying to understand the situation that is at hand (i/e getting to know her).

The mayor isn't even a hypocrite either. He lowered his own salary!

[Harsh_77 718]

Ah Public Sector unions..... should be outlawed.

Seriously though, the city if BROKE.

Obviously money was mismanaged over the years and someone has to pay the piper, and what better way than the people who's careers rely on a tax base to fund them.

A judge should magically restore salaries when there's no money to fund them? It's like union heads don't have logical reasoning. They're like a guy that thinks with his ####### instead of his brain when talking to a woman. All they think is "money money money" (sex sex sex) instead of trying to understand the situation that is at hand (i/e getting to know her).

The mayor isn't even a hypocrite either. He lowered his own salary!

Agree the money was mismanaged…. In past city might have spent money on something that was not required.

At same time the Police officers, Fire Fighters, Paramedics or city worker do not deserve the minimum wage what he mayor is enforcing.

Judge only gave a judgment on legality of the contract signed between the union and the City.

If you ask me fire the city manager, mayor and city council who were incompetent in managing the city’s money.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Ah Public Sector unions..... should be outlawed.

Seriously though, the city if BROKE.

Obviously money was mismanaged over the years and someone has to pay the piper, and what better way than the people who's careers rely on a tax base to fund them.

A judge should magically restore salaries when there's no money to fund them? It's like union heads don't have logical reasoning. They're like a guy that thinks with his ####### instead of his brain when talking to a woman. All they think is "money money money" (sex sex sex) instead of trying to understand the situation that is at hand (i/e getting to know her).

The mayor isn't even a hypocrite either. He lowered his own salary!

You should tell your employer that you would be fine with your paycheck suddenly reflecting minimum wage and won't go to court to see to it that you get paid what your employer agreed to pay in return for your work.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

You should tell your employer that you would be fine with your paycheck suddenly reflecting minimum wage and won't go to court to see to it that you get paid what your employer agreed to pay in return for your work.

Private vs Public Dollars. There is a difference.

If a company has budget problems people can take a pay cut or get laid off.

It appears that the public sector would rather just sue their friends and neighbors instead of embracing the reality of the situation.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Private vs Public Dollars. There is a difference.

If a company has budget problems people can take a pay cut or get laid off.

It appears that the public sector would rather just sue their friends and neighbors instead of embracing the reality of the situation.

Nonsense. People have a negotiated compensation package and they are entitled to their compensation as long as their employment contract is in force. If the employer doesn't pay for the time worked as agreed, then one would go to court. It makes no difference in this scenario whether your employer is private or public.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Nonsense. People have a negotiated compensation package and they are entitled to their compensation as long as their employment contract is in force. If the employer doesn't pay for the time worked as agreed, then one would go to court. It makes no difference in this scenario whether your employer is private or public.

I see. Then you prefer the alternative of the city filing for bankruptcy.

There again, this is the huge problem with public sector unions. All they do is hold taxpayers hostage. Don't give a damn about budgts, don't give a damn about reality. It's all about 'gimme gimme gimme and ** my neighbors.'

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I see. Then you prefer the alternative of the city filing for bankruptcy.

I don't give a ** what the city does aside from honoring employment contracts it entered into. If they need to reduce staff levels, re-negotiate compensation or whatever then that's what they'll need to do. But as an employer you don't get to unilaterally change the compensation of your employees. You don't get to disregard valid, legal contracts without ending up in court.

[kytwell 179]

You cannot pay workers money you do not have. Unions can cry, yell and scream all they want. Scranton is broke. They have a shrinking tax base, so there goes the taxes. There's also un-funded state mandates. And limits in place to how much you can raise taxes due to Act 47 Rules (Scranton is a Distressed City). Scranton also has a long history of corruption.

http://www.timesleader.com/stories/W-B-Areas-Pizzella-to-plead-guilty-Thursday-to-corruption,105178

http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/another-school-director-to-plead-guilty-to-bribery-1.353290

http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/eleven-years-behind-bars-for-cordaro-seven-years-for-munchak-1.1264632

I'm not positive on what the requirement's are for a "city" but where I am in PA, we don't have a local police department. We use the state police to cover our township. We also don't have a fire department, we have an all volunteer department, same for paramedics. There are bordering townships that do have their own police, fire and EMS(ambulance) departments and that is what typically eats up the majority of their budget funds. Our baseball little league takes care of the townships ball fields. Also trash service is PAYT(pay as you throw) and we are free to contract with any hauler we please. The more services a township offers and has, the higher the taxes will be and the higher those budget outlays will be.

At least the mayor did it across the board and cut his own pay too. If Obama can come here to PA and raise a million dollars to benefit no one but his own employment, he could have left half of it here to help pay the police, fire and teacher unions that support him. Also we see rock stars doing tsunami and earthquake relief concerts to benefit foreign nations, why can't they do more things to support us back at home? I think the money is out there, we're just not getting it and when we do;we're sending it to the wrong places.

[kytwell 179]

I don't give a ** what the city does aside from honoring employment contracts it entered into. If they need to reduce staff levels, re-negotiate compensation or whatever then that's what they'll need to do. But as an employer you don't get to unilaterally change the compensation of your employees. You don't get to disregard valid, legal contracts without ending up in court.

Most of them will agree to a reduction in pay and wait to get a more friendly mayor in office to get raises again. They don't want to lose their benefits. If they get laid off, they're screwed when it comes to making the big money( retirement pension's). I'll see if I can locate Scranton's budget, but my guess would be they are probably paying out more to retirees than what they are paying current employee's. Scranton has been run into the ground by the Dem's for decades. State and federal budget cuts(starve the beast BS) have had a huge impact on it too through, but no one had the foresight to eliminate those positions or renegotiate compensation after the funding was reduced or eliminated; although it was mandated they still have it(the employee positions).

Edited July 10, 2012 by kytwell

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I don't give a ** what the city does aside from honoring employment contracts it entered into. If they need to reduce staff levels, re-negotiate compensation or whatever then that's what they'll need to do. But as an employer you don't get to unilaterally change the compensation of your employees. You don't get to disregard valid, legal contracts without ending up in court.

So here are your choices: A) Get Paid nothing. B) Get Paid something.

That's it. A city cannot magically produce money.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

So here are your choices: A) Get Paid nothing. B) Get Paid something.

That's it. A city cannot magically produce money.

Bull. The workers will get paid what they're due. And the city will pay not only what is owed the workers but also the cost of litigation. That will remain that way as long as we are a nation of laws.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Bull. The workers will get paid what they're due. And the city will pay not only what is owed the workers but also the cost of litigation. That will remain that way as long as we are a nation of laws.

I see, so the city will magically have to produce money out of thin air to pay salaries they cannot afford to pay to the pathetic unions.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I see, so the city will magically have to produce money out of thin air to pay salaries they cannot afford to pay to the pathetic unions.

The city has a contractual obligation to pay negotiated salaries to the workers. The city does not owe salaries to the union. You're a bit confused. As usual.