A blog about Politics and News.
About citybeat


Real Name:
Gretchen Wenner
Address:
1707 Eye Street
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Member Since:
November 01, 2007
Last Signed In:
November 18, 2009
Profile Views:
1859
Blog Views:
37855
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
Wednesday night meeting
Bike riders: Watch for drilling rig on bike path!
Canyons meeting under way... Bldrs Exchange drama...
Recycling wackiness
State's property values decline for first time since 1933...
City seeking applicants for Board of Building Appeals
Homebuilders v. city (and county): Latest buzz
Council, Weds night: development "freeze?"
Suing Bakersfield: Pork hits fan?
And they're off! City Council seat beckons...
Archives
November 07
December 07
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
October 08
November 08
December 08
January 09
February 09
March 09
April 09
May 09
June 09
July 09
August 09
September 09
October 09
November 09
Get e-mail updates from this blog, and download to print on the go with the
City Beat Printcast.

Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL

Share!


citybeat - > City Beat -> Police and city: new suit, old wrinkle
Police and city: new suit, old wrinkle

Here's another molehill in the city vs. police drama: a lawsuit over standby pay.

 

How this will play into current negotiation ugliness is anyone's guess.

 

Add the budget drama on top, and this little suit has the potential to be the proverbial straw, or match, or...you fill in the blanks.

 

-- Gretchen Wenner, staff writer

 

 

 

 

Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by citybeat on Wednesday, June 3, 2009 at 06:40 PM
Report a Violation
Viewed 422 times
16 comments from 10 users

1

posted by randomfactor on Jun 6, 2009 at 04:38 PM

It's an 'armless joke.

posted by NancyII on Jun 6, 2009 at 04:29 PM

I'd bet my left arm on that one.

posted by randomfactor on Jun 6, 2009 at 03:37 PM

The Venus de Milo is a statue of limitations.

posted by NancyII on Jun 6, 2009 at 02:02 PM

Statue of limitations?  Does it come with pigeons?

(sorry, I couldn't resist.  ;-)))

posted by learnem on Jun 6, 2009 at 06:14 AM

the city also sits idlly by while its employees surf porn all day on the internet...in the new city building to boot too

posted by vanityfair on Jun 5, 2009 at 08:20 PM

This is ridiculous. The City should pay the money owed to the officers and move on. Geez. This is a no-brainer for many reasons ... 

posted by citybeat on Jun 5, 2009 at 01:11 PM

Steve-

 

Whoops, my bad!

 

Didn't see your reply there at the bottom.

 

Inside- good observation. I suppose we'll all find out soon enough.

 

- Gretchen

 

posted by insidegal on Jun 5, 2009 at 11:19 AM

Sounds like the City might be taking the position that the affected officers "sat on their rights" and by not filing timely claims for standby compensation, basically forfeited their entitlement to some of the retroactive pay?   Probably not a position that is fair to the officers,  but maybe a legally defensible one.  Seems like this could/should have been resolved by City officials without forcing a lawsuit.

posted by SteveMcqueen187 on Jun 4, 2009 at 09:33 PM

Gretchen; I was answering the question from "Insidegal" above mine as "Yes".  I was employed at the police department during the time of the disputed payments....

posted by citybeat on Jun 4, 2009 at 05:06 PM

McQueen-

Yes, they were officially on standby.

 

At least, from what I've read in the filing that doesn't seem to be an item of dispute. And BPD began making the payments, as noted.

 

The issue now seems to be (and again, we're in lawsuit mode so mouths zip up and we have to wait for legal filings) 
WHEN the retroactive pay will begin.

 

The contract was put in place in April 2004. Payments started in November 2008.

 

So that's roughly three and a half years we're looking at.

 

Thanks for comments and questions!

 

-- Gretchen

 

 

 

posted by SteveMcqueen187 on Jun 4, 2009 at 04:57 PM

Were these officers officially put on standby by BPD management?  

Yes

posted by insidegal on Jun 4, 2009 at 12:57 PM

It can not be a clear cut as the article would seem to indicate ... or is it?  I just can not see a responsible official choosing to fight a clear cut loser of a case  .. there has to be more to the story?    Were established procedures followed by these officers to obtain standby status? Were these officers officially put on standby by BPD management?   or maybe the officers believe they were in some sort of unofficlal kind of standby status ??   

posted by LookMaNoTeeth on Jun 3, 2009 at 10:28 PM

Gee, I wonder how Tandy is going to "punish" the police now?  What will be taken away now?  I guess only time will tell.

posted by leobme on Jun 3, 2009 at 09:27 PM

What is wrong with the city? They made a mistake. Don't waste our taxpayer money fighting this when we support our officers and would like them paid fairly.

posted by DogGone on Jun 3, 2009 at 09:09 PM

pay up sucker!


posted by SteveMcqueen187 on Jun 3, 2009 at 07:41 PM

Pay the money you owe Tandy now or later with additional fees and penalties. It's your choice but you will pay.....

1

  (You need to be signed in to leave a comment)

Advertisement