.
Feedback

UPDATE: Fire Department Layoffs Resurface After Tie Votes On Union Agreement

City Council ratification fails 3-3 on two votes; 25 layoff notices go into effect on Tuesday, but will likely to be suspended

9:15 p.m. update

Twenty-five employees in the stand to lose their jobs after a City Council vote on whether to ratify a twice failed in a 3-3 tie.

Rocco Basilica, president of New London Fire Fighters Local 1522, said the layoff notices for the affected employees will go into effect at 5:30 a.m. on Tuesday. However, Chief Administrative Officer Jane Glover said Mayor Daryl Finizio will likely suspend the layoffs while the administration and union resume negotiations.

Basilica said the union concessions in the agreement included reducing staffing levels per shift from 18 to 16 personnel at a savings of $750,000 per year plus $463,000 in overtime. He said the union also agreed to forfeit a 2.25 percent raise in July and a 2 percent raise in January and give up nine positions. Basilica said the latter concession would include five vacant positions set to be unbudgeted as well as three firefighters’ positions and a fire inspector’s position, but that these would not result in layoffs.

Finizio said Chief Ron Samul told him that it would be necessary to to meet the funding level set in the council’s budget. The council initially from other areas in the budget, including salaries for administrative positions, to set funding in the department at the level needed to avoid layoffs. However, it agreed at the final 2013 fiscal year budget approval to after Finizio announced that the administration had reached a tentative agreement with the union.

Council opposition

Councilor John Maynard said he felt the agreement would result in $4 million in additional costs to the city. He said this cost would be necessary to start the department on the Municipal Employees Retirement Fund.

“The only savings in here is going from 18 to 16,” he said.

Councilor Adam Sprecace, who also opposed the agreement, said he did not make the decision lightly. He said he was also frustrated that he would be unable to explain his reasoning at the meeting since the details of the agreement should be confidential until it is approved.

“I understand that’s how negotiations work, but it certainly does serve to make my ability to explain myself nonexistent,” said Sprecace.

Following the meeting, Basilica had a vehement exchange with Sprecace after Sprecace asked whether he wanted to hear his reasoning for his vote. Basilica said he expected that Sprecace would support the agreement based on answers he gave on a questionnaire the union handed out to council candidates prior to the 2011 election. Sprecace said the details of the union agreement were given to the council with little time for consideration.

"We gave up everything," Basilica responded. "We compromised everything. For what? A f***ing pension."

Councilor Marie Friess-McSparran said she was unwilling to back the agreement until some areas were made clearer, particularly regarding pensions.

“I just think there’s so many unanswered questions in this,” she said.

President Pro Tempore Wade Hyslop asked for the council to reconsider the vote, then amended his motion to have the council go into executive session to discuss the agreement further. He said he was surprised that the council would turn down the agreement after prior efforts to avoid public safety layoffs.

“We’ve come to a point now where the fire department has basically conceded, in my opinion, a whole lot,” said Hyslop.

Friess-McSparran, Maynard, and Sprecace opposed the agreement while Hyslop and Councilors Donald Macrino and Anthony Nolan were in favor. President Michael Passero recused himself from the vote since he is employed as a firefighter.

The vote to go into executive session was unanimous. The council voted unanimously to reconsider the vote after convening in private for about an hour, but the vote again failed in a 3-3 tie along the same lines.

Union and administration reaction

Basilica said he did not expect that the agreement would get turned down and was “disgusted” with the development. He said the union gives out questionnaires to council candidates prior to elections, and that some councilors who voted against the agreement reversed their positions with the decision.

“It’s obvious some of the councilors are misinformed about what happened and they can’t read numbers very well,” said Basilica.

Basilica and Glover each said the negotiations were done in good faith. Glover said Finizio will make a statement on the decision on Tuesday, and will likely suspend the layoffs since OpSail 2012 is occurring this weekend and negotiations will resume immediately.

“We’re probably going back to the table tomorrow,” she said.

 

9:02 p.m. update

A vote on approving the agreement with the firefighters' union again failed in a 3-3 vote. The council met in executive session for about an hour and voted unanimously to reconsider the question.

Councilors voted along the same lines in the second vote, with Councilors Marie Friess-McSparran, John Maynard, and Adam Sprecace opposd and President Pro Tempore Wade Hyslop and Councilors Don Macrino and Anthony Nolan in favor. President Michael Passero recused himself from the vote since he is employed as a firefighter.

A full story will be posted shortly.

 

Original story

A City Council vote to ratify an agreement with the New London Fire Department union failed in a 3-3 tie tonight. The decision means 25 layoffs set to occur without an agreement will go into effect unless the vote is reconsidered.

The council is currently meeting in executive session to discuss the details of the plan, and might reconsider the vote when they reconvene.

Rocco Basilica, president of New London Firefighters Local 1522, said he was "disgusted" with the development. He said the union made several concessions, including reducing staffing levels from 18 to 16 and giving up two scheduled raises.

Councilor John Maynard said he thought the agreement would represent a significant cost to the city. Councilor Adam Sprecace, who also opposed the agreement, said it was a difficult decision and that he was frustrated that he was unable to give his reasons for opposing it since the details of the agreement should be kept confidential until it passes.

Chief Administrative Officer Jane Glover, who has overseen the city's negotiations with the department, said the layoffs will likely be suspended while negotiations resume.

This is a developing story.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from New London Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Jeff Brown May 22, 2013 at 04:09 pm
Great article, I think its ridiculous that some people are calling for his resignation over this.Read More Was it a dumb thing to do? Sure it was, especially when he knows there are certain people in this town just salivating at any chance to get up in arms about this administration. To me it's just a shirt and whoever is making them is probably going to see a boost in sales stemming from this.
Mark Felt May 22, 2013 at 03:32 pm
Kathleen, Baby steps, New London is in a bad way and any progress is good no matter what. Hope thatRead More something is being done or getting accomplished is a good thing. Hope ignites the soul. Very much like you ignite things Kathleen.
rob May 22, 2013 at 03:25 pm
Just look the other way again, we did that for the pot issue, we are letting illegals get licensesRead More even though they should not be here, so wear what you want, who cares there's no accountability.
Jason Morris May 22, 2013 at 01:30 pm
Jessica's previous two posts in other city's patch pages, with the exact same title (just schoolRead More district name changed) have been moderated/deleted. Recommend this corporate advertisement to get the same fate. The concerns are true, but it's an ad nontheless.
Jeff Brown May 22, 2013 at 04:17 pm
Not a very big deal to me, not a particularly smart move , but it's not a huge deal . Some of youRead More are gonna flip out about it because that's just what you do. Get a life and move on. That being said rob is right about being a representative of this city and acting like it .
rob May 22, 2013 at 03:19 pm
Jason, he took an administrative position to represent the City, this means 24 hours a day even ifRead More you don't get paid for it. You must be part of the clan.
Jason Morris May 22, 2013 at 01:21 pm
Ridiculous. How about we pay him for 24hours of 'representing NL' if the disgruntleds want everyRead More city employee to be 'professional' at all times? "we pay your salary, so we get to dictate your entire life...p.s. we hate your boss...wait! correction...we really don't like your boss"
Felicia Hendersen May 21, 2013 at 07:52 am
OMG this is too funny. Nice comparison.
Sue P. May 20, 2013 at 11:03 am
Very good comparison. I also wanted to add that the Ct. College students that believe what FinizioRead More has to say remind me of The Children of the Corn. After speaking with a friend we realized that Mayor Finizio is like a college student. I just wish he knew that real life does not work this way. New London has already played this game with the Giordano lady years ago. Remember her she was from Ct. College and also was going to make New London a hip city. We got homeless people and brownfields. So much for that idea. Been their done that. How about a new idea for once. Please don't think about shutting down State St. that too was a bad idea. Just ask Mr. Hyslop and Ms. Glover how their ideas worked out. It doesn't matter anyways it's all about the votes and getting your Children of the Corn on the Council. I mean come on drivers licenses for illigals who ever thought that one up.
J. Scagnetti May 20, 2013 at 10:07 am
I'd say more like G.I. Joe vs cobra, oh no wait, He man vs skeletor or maybe even the thundercats vsRead More mumra! Lol
Carol Haley May 19, 2013 at 07:14 pm
Here's the latest Spencer from the AP, if we can believe them: Traffic in southwest ConnecticutRead More could be a mess for as much as a week until service is restored to the commuter rail line affected by a derailment that injured scores of passengers, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy warned Sunday.
Spencer May 19, 2013 at 07:10 pm
Another blow to not only NL's but the entire Southern CT's economy! Guess who will be picking upRead More the tab?
Carol Haley May 19, 2013 at 05:26 pm
I read that Malloy is hoping Monday but there are problems with the tracks and that has to beRead More repaired. Taking a guestimate, if it isn't Monday, maybe the end of the week.
Richard Waselik May 22, 2013 at 03:40 pm
I would say that the Collective Bargaining Agreement would have to be looked at for his Union.Read More Mr. Hathaway is not in Local 1378. He is MEU. I would say, that this is an interesting question for our members. Local 1378's CBA does not go into this language, however it does state that prior to reorganization, the union must be notified to bargain the impacts (not exact language). This is not to say that the union has final say, or say at all as to how the administration shall operate, but the impact to the employees is what matters as well as the position in general. I will look into this language in reference to the Charter and forward it to the MEU as well. Thank you.
Kathleen Mitchell May 22, 2013 at 03:17 pm
The following is from NL's Charter, Sec 46. Does it mean that Bill Hathaway would be entitled to aRead More public hearing? "...Any officer or employee so removed, suspended, laid off or reduced in grade shall, if he so request, be furnished with a written statement of the reason therefor, be allowed a reasonable time for answering such reasons in writing and be given a public hearing by the officer making such removal, suspension, lay-off or reduction in grade, before the order therefor shall be made final..."
Richard Waselik May 22, 2013 at 10:37 am
I have not seen any details other than word of mouth at this time in reference to more being addedRead More to the pension plan after two years. I would not be surprised. This would be another instance in which the charter was violated and would have to be mentioned to the Admin. Committee. I would be willing to gamble that they were put into the employee pension plan as well.
Alphonse DeLachance May 21, 2013 at 08:30 am
I cannot believe that they lied! Who could have seen this coming.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 07:44 am
Pretty funny Spencer. But you don't want a museum there. You need something that generates taxes.Read More Museums are mostly non-profit thereby not generating any taxes. I know you were being funny. I was disgusted to read the developer couldn't show financial backing.
Kathleen Mitchell May 17, 2013 at 05:47 pm
Who would haveever thought of Wasp Spray? When you get the case of spray, be sure and drop a can offRead More at my house;>)
Jeff Brown May 17, 2013 at 03:46 pm
Good article, gonna have to pick up a case of wasp spray!