 |
555 U.S. Highway One South Suite 240 Iselin, NJ 08830 Phone: 732.636.0040 |
|||||||||
|
WELCOME to the Law Firm of Mets Schiro McGovern & Beckett, LLP |
|||||||||
Firm News
October 11, 2011 – Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington On October 12, 2011, James M. Mets will participate in the case of Florence v. Burlington at the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of various New Jersey County Corrections Unions. Mr. Mets and Associate Attorney Brian Manetta filed as amicus curiae on behalf of PBA Locals 109 (Hudson), 167 (Mercer), 177 (Somerset) 199 (Union), and 249 (Burlington), supporting the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals approval of strip searches as a means of preserving the security and safety of correctional facilities. You can read the Firm's brief and all other filed documents and decisions by going to: Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington September 29, 2011 – North Brunswick PBA and SOA v. Township of North Brunswick In the matter of the arbitration between the Township of North Brunswick and North Brunswick PBA and SOA, PERC Docket No. AR-2010-085. By an Award dated July 11, 2011, Arbitrator Gerard Restaino sustained a grievance filed by PBA Local 160 and the North Brunswick SOA regarding the Town’s denial of reimbursement of the tuition for the college level Certified Public Manager’s Program. For more on this case click here. September 29, 2011 – Teamsters Local 97 v. UMDNJ UMDNJ and Teamsters Local 97, PERC Docket No. AR-2011-603 (Job Rate System). On July 20, 2011, Arbitrator Joel Weisblatt issued a decision sustaining a grievance filed by Teamsters Local 97 against the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey. Local 97 was represented by James M. Mets, Esq. For more on this case click here. August 31, 2011 – Federal Suit Filed Mets Schiro & McGovern, LLP files suit in Federal Court as part of a coalition of unions and labor attorneys challenging recent pension and benefits changes for public employees. A copy of the complaint can be viewed by clicking here. August 08, 2011 – Interest Arbitration Award : Monmouth County Sheriff PBA Local 314 On June 13, 2011, Arbitrator Thomas Hartigan issued his Award in County of Monmouth and PBA Local 314. The Award granted PBA Local 314 unit members salary increases of 1.5% on all steps retroactive to 1/1/09 and 3.0% increases at top pay on 1/1/10, 1/1/11, 1/1/12, and 1/1/13 for a total increase at top pay of 13.9% over 5 years (a 2.8% per year average). In addition the PBA was Awarded additional leave time and required to pay a nominal increase for prescription drugs. The PBA was represented by James M. Mets, Esq. Click here to read the decision. July 15, 2011 – Arbitration Award : Wilmington Housing Authority v. OPEIU, Local 32 In November 2009, the Wilmington Housing Authority interviewed five candidates for promotion to the position of Assistant Housing Manager. Four of the candidates were already employed by the Authority, and one worked outside the agency. In February 2010, the Authority promoted the outside candidate over the four internal candidates. The contract between the WHA and our client union, OPEIU Local 32, provided at Section 12.01 that “Whenever possible, promotions and vacant positions within the bargaining unit shall be filled from within the bargaining unit if there are qualified employees to fill such positions.” Local 32 filed a grievance alleging that at least one of the four internal candidates was qualified for the position, and that the employer’s actions violated Section 12.01. The employer admitted that at least one of the internal candidates was qualified, but alleged that it had a right to hire the “most” qualified candidate available. The employer further argued that the term “whenever possible” gave the employer the discretion to pass over qualified internal candidates over more qualified external candidates. Arbitrator Barbara Zausner rejected the employer’s arguments, and sustained the union’s grievance. She wrote that “as the union points out, the contract language is clear and unambiguous in dictating that vacancies such as the one at issue shall be filled from within the bargaining unit as long as there is a qualified internal candidate and it is otherwise ‘possible.” The Arbitrator concluded that since at least one of the internal candidates was qualified for the position, the employer had to promote that person to the job. The Arbitrator ordered that the promotion be given to one of the internal candidates, retroactive to the date of the initial appointment, with full back pay, seniority and benefits. Click here to read the decision. June 28, 2011 – Arbitration Award : Township of Middletown v. PBA Local 124 The question in this case was whether the Township had to pay its officers for their attendance at a psychological evaluation that was mandated by the Township as a condition of promotion. In this case, eight officers were sent for an evaluation over the course of two days in July 2010. Six of the officers were sent while they were on duty, and they were all paid for the day. Two officers were sent on their day off, and when they sought compensation of their attendance, the Township refused. PBA 124 pursued the grievance on behalf of those two officers, arguing that attendance at a psychological evaluation mandated by the employer as a condition of promotion constituted “work” under the collective bargaining agreement. Arbitrator Hartigan agreed, finding that since the other six officers had been paid, and since the Chief of Police admitted that attendance at the exam was sufficiently “work-related” to justify paying those six officers, that the Township had treated attendance at the exam as work for the purpose of compensation. The Arbitrator rejected the employer’s defense that attendance was “voluntary,” finding that the exam was required by the Township as a condition of promotion. Police unions which have a similar requirement imposed by their employer should review this decision carefully to determine whether such an action would be appropriate under their particular contract, given the arbitrator’s findings. Click here to read the decision. April 13, 2011 – NJ Supreme Court Reverses Employee’s Termination In an important case concerning the role of the Courts in reviewing Civil Service Commission decisions, the Supreme Court in In Re Stallworth unanimously reversed the Appellate Division’s decision which had resulted in the disciplinary termination of Anthony Stallworth, a 17–year employee of the Camden County Municipal Utility Authority. The Supreme Court held that the Appellate Division “exceeded its proper scope of review when it reversed the penalty imposed by the Civil Service Commission.” The Commission had previously determined that termination was too severe and had imposed a four–month suspension. According to Attorney Peter Paris, the Supreme Court’s decision "confirmed the Civil Service Commission's role as the primary arbiter of Civil Service employee discipline — not the courts.”
March 16, 2011 – Horizon Blue Cross / Blue Shield v. OPEIU Local 32 The employee was terminated by Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield because she was alleged to have violated the employer’s performance standards. Local 32 challenged the discharge as unjust. Arbitrator Dan Hussey found that the employer had failed to give the employee proper training and had failed to follow its own performance improvement plan to correct her deficiencies. He also questioned the employer’s application of its performance metrics on the facts presented. He returned the employee to work with benefits, seniority, and limited back pay. Click here to read the decision March 16, 2011 – Middletown Township v. PBA Local 124 In August 2009, Rush Holt appeared at a Town Hall event in Middletown NJ to talk about health care reform. Because of the anticipated large turnout, the Police Chief decided to staff the event with officers on overtime. However, he limited the offer of overtime to the Patrol Division, with the result that a number of senior officers in the Detective Bureau and other Departments did not get assigned. The Township argued that it had a right to make the assignment as it did because it was a “Patrol” assignment and because of the short notice of the need for overtime. Arbitrator Joe Licata disagreed, and found that officers in other departments were qualified to perform the overtime and were entitled to the assignment based on seniority. He ordered the Township to cease and desist from further violations and directed the parties to negotiate a method of assigning overtime to all departments on short notice. Click here to read the decision
February 08, 2011 – Associate Peter B. Paris argues before the New Jersey Supreme Court Mets Schiro McGovern & Beckett associate Peter B. Paris argues before the Supreme Court on an issue important to all Civil Service Employees with respect to the Civil Service Commission’s use of progressive discipline. See Peter Paris’s oral argument here “Super Lawyers, Corporate Counsel Edition” James Mets, Esq. has been selected to appear in the November 2010 “Super Lawyers, Corporate Counsel Edition.”
Case Decisions
Click Here for more Case Decisions |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contact us about your legal matter today! |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
