Unhappy Troopers
Photo by Steve Kotchko
Posted 8/26/11
The sighs of relief expressed by Democratic Gov. Dannel Malloy and leaders of the SEBAC state employee bargaining group over final approval of the $1.6 billion dollar labor concessions deal were short-lived, thanks to a late and negative vote on the pact by the Connecticut State Police Union. An overall labor peace is not in the cards.
Troopers rejected the pay elements of the concessions deal, and in doing so, exposed themselves to layoffs because Malloy’s job protection guarantee that rescinded pink slips was promised only to state employee unions that voted “yes” on the pay provisions.
Was this a game of chicken? Did the troopers believe their public safety role was so imposing that Malloy would find savings elsewhere and avoid police layoffs? Hard to say.
For a day, Malloy hemmed and hawed a bit, telling reporters he was exploring all options. One day later, the guv said layoffs would move forward as planned and 56 rookie troopers, just out of police academy, but already on patrol duty would be laid off. The Governor said all state employees knew the risk and those who voted “no” have to deal with the consequences. In addition to troopers, Correction Department supervisors who also rejected the pay concessions, will see 21 pink slips in their ranks.
“When the Governor says something he means it,” said Roy Occhiogrosso, Malloy’s senior advisor. “He has an entire state to manage, and when he says ‘here’s what’s going to happen’, he has to follow through.”
Troopers just don’t see it that way. They feel they’ve sacrificed enough in recent years in terms of pay and benefits, and were simply exercising their rights in voting “no” on added concessions they did not like. Of course, other state employees had similar complaints about the demanded “givebacks”, but chose to accept the deal to save jobs and prevent further strife.
Reuben Bradford, the Public Safety Commissioner, who has authority over the State Police ordered 34 layoff notices to affected troopers on August 24, and said the remaining 22 layoffs will take effect by September 8. Bradford will transfer troopers now doing investigative or administrative duty to replace the laid-off troopers on patrol to insure public safety. He said that may mean a “refresher” course in road skills for some troopers who’ve been behind a desk for years.
The Commissioner called the trooper layoffs “very unpleasant” but also said it is very likely all 56 laid-off troopers could be back on the job within three to six months—if they haven’t taken employment elsewhere. That’s because the trooper force has a large number of pending retirement requests. Asking veteran troopers with valued investigative or administrative posts to get back into the cruiser and go after speeders could spur more retirement requests.
A jaded observer could say the entire trooper layoff saga seems like a political exercise to prove that Gov. Malloy would carry out his layoff threat for naysayers on the concessions deal, even if it involves state troopers who believed their public safety jobs made them safe from pink slips. Only time will tell.
One thing is clear. For now, there is no love lost between the trooper union, the Malloy administration, and for that matter, SEBAC leaders.
Some 200 troopers held a public rally on the steps of the State Capitol to protest Malloy’s actions. A few days later, Andrew Mathews, president of the trooper union, a State Police sergeant, and an attorney told reporters he was being removed from his State Police legal post, and sent back to patrol duty. He sees it as a reprisal for the union’s stance, and an attack on job protections offered to other state employee union presidents. A Malloy spokesman termed that charge “ridiculous.”
If Andrews and the trooper union are looking for traditional support and “solidarity” from other state employee unions they could be out of luck. At their rally, in addition to rapping Malloy, the troopers demanded legislative action allowing them to go it alone as a union in future contract negotiations. They don’t believe the SEBAC coalition has their best interests in mind.