Mon 24 Jan 2011
Purest Form of Democracy: Raging Grannies to the Fore
Posted by WillR under ChapelHill , CivilLiberties , Government[3] Comments
You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Purest Form of Democracy: Raging Grannies to the Fore”.
I’ve been asked numerous times where I think the truth of the matter lies by folks who know I try to keep up with what is going on in Town and will call it as I see it.
Simple answer? I don’t know.
Lots of questions. Many raised over and over by the two’s supporters.
I’m certainly sympathetic to Mr. Clyde and Bigelow’s situation – it is a very tough economy and getting a new job with a cloud hanging over their heads will be difficult to say the least.
I definitely think the Town made a boneheaded mistake in hiring CAI, a firm known for its anti-union bias.
From what has been reported, the case against the two workers seems tenuous and more deserving of management intervention than dismissal.
Their reported grievances, unfortunately, are nothing new to me. Over the last decade, I’ve spoken to several dozen employees throughout our Town who have claimed similar malfeasance, discrimination, abuse and impropriety.
If you listened to last night’s petitions you certainly got a sense of the scale of the claimed injustice – including the Town making it impossible for them to get benefits (if possible, see below) – far from a petty action.
But what of the Town’s case? We don’t know because of the personnel process it is following precludes disclosure.
That is why I’m encouraging the Personnel Board to open, as requested by the two workers, the appeal proceedings.
At that point, I expect the Town to lay its case out fully – with great specificity. I expect the Town to establish why normal management procedures failed, as they seemed to have (and, afterwards, explain how that failure is being remedied) and explain clearly why the workers were fired.
I would hope that the Town also explains what yardstick they judged the two’s actions against. Is it true, as has been claimed by some of the workers’ supporters, that other employees with far more serious infractions (even criminality) haven’t been dismissed?
If the Town did send “a pile” of documents to the Employment Securities Commission (ESC), was this typical or were the two singled out?
As far as unemployment, the ESC is pretty clear why the two aren’t getting it:
Not sure how much discretion ESC has, though it does say may rather than shall.
This is not the whole story. The truth will come out. The ESC ruled against the town in my case.
Harv, if I hadn’t heard of similar management issues over the last decade, if I wasn’t hearing the alarm raised by folks I have found quite trustworthy, I’d put the whole thing down as disgruntled terminated employees that are trying to make waves.
I look forward to seeing the Town make its case. It will certainly be interesting to see if the Town’s response was commensurate with the proven infractions (I expect there will be specific proof, right?).