My Battle falling on deaf ears of Templeton Town Officials

My Battle falling on deaf ears of Town Officials

The Conservation Agent was hired in February 2008 at a Grade 6, Step 3. In a Letter dated March 2008, the Personnel Administrator stated the agent would be paid at Grade 6, Step 3 $15.85 per hour with an extra $4.15 per hour from the wetland protection fund. (How is this fair? This is double dipping.) The MGL 40 8C that the Conservation Chairman is always quoting does not give authority to just throw extra money in the agent’s pay. As a matter of fact the Massachusetts Conservation Commissioners Assoc. handbook specifically states that Conservation Commission agents and staff must follow any Towns personnel policies and by-laws. It also states under H.B. 4.3.2 a Town Meeting vote is required to spend any money from the Wetland Protection Fund. So the agent was paid a total of $20.00 per hour from the time he was hired in Feb. 2008 to June 30, 2008. It never went before Town Meeting. Wasn’t this also a violation of the Personnel Policy which was accepted by the voters? How is this fair to other employees? No other department is allowed to do this not even the Sewer Department which has an enterprise fund. As a matter of fact a few years ago, the then Chairman of the Board of Selectmen took pay away from the Sewer Commissions secretary even after their budget was voted at Town Meeting because it was in violation of the Personnel Policy he claimed. The Agent was hired at a Grade 6, Step 3, $15.85 per hour, yet he was always paid more.



In June 2008, a letter from the Board of Selectmen states that due to a vote at the Annual Town Meeting (May 2008) approving a 3.5% cost of living raise and a step (not grade)raise. Effective July 1, 2008 all employees who had been employed for more than six months would get a 3.5% cost of living and a step raise. The agent had been employed for only 4 months as of July 1. However the letter sent to the Conservation Commission (signed by the BOS) stated the agent would go up one “step” to Grade 10, entry step, and his pay would increase $.79 per hour to$23.32 per hour. Well, as of when does $20.00 per hour plus an increase of $.79 per hour equal $23.32 per hour? Well this moved the agent up four grades (not 1 step plus cost of living, without it ever going to Town Meeting vote. Did I get the taxpayers’ attention yet?? All other employees moved 1 step with in their grade and a 3.5% cost of living. Again, how is this fair to others? What’s the point of a personnel policy? Or does the policy only apply to some.

Now in FY 2010 someone noticed that the Agent’s position had never been voted at Town Meeting to move up four grades from a Grade 6 to a Grade 10, so it was put on the warrant for the May 2010 Town Meeting, where it was voted to be taken off the article. The agent then went back to a Grade 6 maximum step of $19.97 per hour.
Now according to my calculations, he was hired at a Grade 6, Step 3, the increase of 3.5% cost of living and one step for all employees who had work for six months, by vote of the May 2008 Town Meeting meant that as of August, 2008, August 25th to be exact (FY 2009) he should have gone up to Grade 6 Step 4, (see new pay chart effective July 2008) This is $17.07 per hour. Every other non union employee only went up 3.5% cost of living and one step. The agent has been overpaid since he started. The Conservation Chairman has constantly given the agent extra money and the agent has taken it! Over $16,800.00 to date. They both knew this was ILLEGAL! As a member of the Conservation Commission since 1999, I have never seen the commission’s yearly budget brought to a Conservation meeting for a vote by the commission, so that proves that Chairman has been sneaky.

Now in July, 2010 the agent started working 23 hours a week instead of his usual 20 hours. Was this just because the money was just there? When this was brought to the Chairman of the Board of Selectmen’s attention by myself, the Conservation Chairman was told that the agent was to work only 20 hours. So his pay went down to 20 hours for one week only, then he resumed being paid for 23 hours per week. At the September 20, 2010 Conservation Commission meeting the commission voted to give the agent three hours more a week. They voted to increase his hours after he was already submitting and being paid for the increase for the last three months. (I voted NO) But neither the Treasurer nor the Town Clerk can get more hours for their assistant.
It has become obvious that the Conservation Chairman and other members of the conservation commission believe that the laws in town, particularly the Bylaws regarding the acceptance of the personnel policy do not apply to them or the Conservation Commission. When are these violations of the bylaws and Personnel policy going to be addressed? Even my request of an investigation by the Chief of Police was full of inconsistent answers from the Conservation Chairman, Agent and the town accountant. What if all departments violated the personnel policy? Why is it that only two members of the Board of Selectmen listen to me?
We have done the non union employees and the voters a great disservice by not abiding by a Town Meeting accepted Personnel Policy for all non union employees. How can we expect citizens to follow the town bylaws when one of our departments does not?