Firefighter Brantley To Be Reinstated

I don't get this. Why don't they just quickly reconvene another commission meeting and re-fire him, his time without the silly technical violation. The guy is a convicted criminal and felon and he doesn't belong on the fire department, especially where his conviction involved attempted bribery of a fellow NHFD officer. Talk about conduct unbecoming. Really, the city and the NHFD are a joke.

New Haven seems to have problems doing anything properly following the rules of law is involved. The case against this firefighter is not the issue, nor is his employment status. The fact that representatives of the city with legal guidance have been allowed to violate the law is. We, the taxpayers, will now foot the ensuing bills for back pay etc. not to mention already having paid someone overtime to cover every shift that firefighter Brantley would have been working. As folks say, you can't make this stuff up.

So what we have is a felon, improperly fired, now being put back on our payroll. So start the process again, and fire him. There is no reason to have a guy working for us who is both a felon and his felony was to hatch a plan to hose New Haven taxpayers. As for being in good standing with the union, that's fine. He wasn't in good standing with the city which is why it moved to fire him. The city should stand by its decision, and now move to fire him.

As for a manpower issue - there is no manpower issue. That's a myth.

Does this mean that Brantley gets back pay too?

New Haven at it's finest...what a classic! Now this guy will be untouchable. Maybe he'll get a cushy job collecting firefighter pay and pension while riding a desk, like Briscoe is doing.

OK

If the commissions termination was voided by an FOI mistake, reconvene, hold no closed door executive sessions, and fire him in the bright light of day. We can't have firefighters who've been convicted of bribing other firefighters; plain and simple.

This is an outrage. As taxpayers we should be furious over this. It's one step forward five steps back with this department. The fire commission must be lost in space. How can they not know how to run a meeting on employment matters? The Chief is not much better. This guy is a felon, there is no way he should be going back to work. At the most he should be on unpaid leave pending his appeal, which is a long shot. What a terrible message this sends. This screams union stunt as loud as can be. Paca seems to. Go out of his way to keep the firemen union happy at our expense. First a completely unnecessary contract extension that is costing us dearly, special incentives for favored members and now this, what else? This is an ill advised decision if there ever was one. SMH blatant irresponsibility at the expense of taxpayers. Where is john rose in all this? SMH. Harp has to go, where's Elicker? How is it possible that the fire department can be turning away applicants with some misdemeanors and at the same time turning a felon loose on the taxpayers? I smell a rat and another lawsuit at the taxpayers expense.

Welcome Back Aaron! This should have never happened; this was an injustice. You are a good man and a good firefighter. You have taken a beating over the past year. I am glad you had the fortitude to keep fighting. We are behind you 100%. - FF Troy Adam, NHFD

@ Troy - So you think we should employ felons? Even though he attempted screw New Haven taxpayers, his boss, you think that's just peachy? Wow.

What a joke...

To the haters.You need to read.City employees who are members of collective bargaining units are contractually entitled to due process throughout any disciplinary action, and in this case,due process was unwittingly and unintentionally denied,Do not Blame Firefighter Aaron Brantley,Blame the city's Board of Fire Commissioners who violated FOI rules in their decision to fire him.Power to the unions!!!!

3/5,

Power to corruption and felonious behavior! Hurray!

I'm smelling that snake oil that you smell so much 3'5's.

@three-fifths: if this kind of crazy is what you get when you have municipal unions, then it's time to do away with them. Plus, it seems the smart, responsible, & easy solution to what was hyper-technical violation on the vote to terminate is to reconvene and fire him again, not put him back on the force. Taxpayers and those the NHFD serves in emergencies deserve better than this. Would YOU want a felon who tried to bribe someone so he could dishonestly make money off a bogus discrimination claim going into your mother's or your grandmother's bedroom or into anyone's house on a call???

Again to all of the union haters. Show me how the union is to blame when The state Freedom of Information Commission declared Brantley's termination null and void after finding that the city's Board of Fire Commissioners had violated FOI rules in their decision to fire him.Show me. All the union did was to defend Firefighter Aaron Brantley against the charges that the Board of Fire Commissioners said he was guilty of. That is the job of the union. How many people have been found guilty in a court of law and have beat the charges due to the fact that there rights are violated. Power to the Unions


My bad I forgot what happens if Firefighter Aaron Brantley wins his court appeal?

This is not the product of union trickery but the product of hiring Marcus Paca who has no legal or labor and employment knowledge.

The ignorance of his statement speaks volumes. "[i]n this case, due process was unwittingly and unintentionally denied," city Labor Relations Director Marcus Paca said.

According to the decision thats on the FOIC website the freedom of information commission doesn't state anywhere that Mr. brantley was denied "due process". They do not adjudicate due process issues. What it states according to previous articles and the decision is that they did not go in to the executive session properly. So their decision to terminate him is void. The foi commission doesn't decide the merits of the case and their decision clearly states that. Here's an excerpt;

What isn't voided are the charges that Fire Chief Wright forwarded to the fire commission board. So Mr. Brantley should return to the status quo prior to the fire commission boards vote which according an article in the indy dated May 16, 2014 was un-paid leave with fire department charges pending against him.

The bigger question is why is Marcus Paca handling this matter at all.? Its an FOIC decision. A case that was handled by the Corporation Counsels office. Why isn't John Rose, the Corporation Counsel, handling the compliance with this decision? Why is he absent from the press release? He probably had to read about it also.

As for being denied anything its us the taxpayers that are being dimwittingly and intentional denied the truth by late evening cover up press releases.

Elm City Lifer --

Your anger at Marcus Paca seems to be misplaced. If you read the NHI account of the proceedings that led up to the City's snafu, you would see that Mr. Paca was nowhere in the mix.

http://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/illegal_meetings_could_up-end_brantley_termination/

While there were many contributors to the 2 illegal executive sessions that led to the FOIC voiding the termination votes of the Fire Commission, Mr. Paca was not among the actors.

Further, a fair reading of the FOIC decision you provided could, in fact support the statements that you take issue with. ... ["This Commission's review is strictly limited to the respondents' compliance with the FOIA and any remedy ordered is strictly "to rectify the denial of any right conferred by the [FOIA]." ... I would read this sentence as syaing that the Fire Commission's violation of the protections given to the public by the FOIA law, also violated Mr. Brantley's due process rights to not have his job terminated by an illegal closed session proceeding.

Even though you feel Mr. Paca's resume is short on the qualifications you think necessary for his position, the evidence to date is that he is doing an excellent job under difficult conditions.

Razzie

What you think the law means and what it actually means are two different things. The fact is the FOI commission didn't void the charges brought by the Fire Chief against Mr. Brantley it simply and clearly voided the vote.

That's why it reverts back to the status quo which is a firefighter who is a convicted felon that is on un-paid leave with fire department charges pending before the fire commission board. Those charges were not dismissed by the FOI Commission.

It was a procedural error by the fire commission board that violated at best Mr.Brantleys rights under the open meetings law. Not his due process rights. It certainly didn't wash away the charges pending before the board.

I guess to put it in layman' terms it's like a judge who gives incorrect instructions to a jury and the defendant gets found guilty. The appellate court will dismiss the verdict but the charges against the defendant still stand and another proceeding takes place. This is why lawyers should handle the legal matters for the city. Not a layman.

PS. Your right that Mr. Paca was not involved in any of the proceedings, I did not say he was with the exception of his agreement to reinstate him because of an FOIC decision and that's my point. He should not be. It's a legal matter, leave it to the lawyers.

Elm City Lifer --

I don't see anything in the story or press release that says it was Mr Paca's decision to reinstate Brantley. perhaps I missed something?

And I don't wish to belabor the point, but my understanding is that all citizens are given the constitutional right to not have their life, liberty or property taken away by government actions that fails to meet the statutory requirements -- in ths case, the statutory requirements of the Open Meeting laws. Again, perhaps I missed something.

@Razzie. Whether the vote technically violated FOIA or "due process" is irrelevant at this point. That is ElmCityLifer's good point, which is to go back, cure the techncal defect and re-fire him. At most, the city should offer to just pay Brantley for whatever attorney fees he paid to get the "technical foul" call by the FOIC. (and even that assumes he paid Atty Cofrancesco anything - she's union counsel and may have charged Brantley nothing). It remains that he should STILL be fired. If there is a rule that no felons can be hired and work in the NHFD, maybe the answer is a lawsuit challenging the city's act of placing him back in that office. It's not fair to all those who were excluded/fired because of criminal conduct or felony status to see Brantley given a pass. And my guess is that he's being given a pass for reasons of race or politics, or both. Seems the city is just exploiting the FOIC decision in order to get Brantley back on the job. That is a gross disservice to the public.

SwampfoxII --

My comments have nothing to do with the question of whether Brantley should be reinstated. My concerns above deal ONLY with the unfounded personal attack that ECL launched against a person who had nothing to do with the termination or reinstatement decision on Brantley's status. I also question the wisdom of the reinstatement. However, that does not give me the right to attack the professional competence of the city official whose only connection with the matter is that he was quoted in a press release.

In a similar vein, I found your last comment to be over reaching and uncalled for. ["And my guess is that he's being given a pass for reasons of race or politics, or both. Seems the city is just exploiting the FOIC decision in order to get Brantley back on the job."] If you have even a shred of evidence to back up that claim, I would be glad to see it. If not, perhaps the true disservice to the public are comments of the type you and ECL toss around so freely.

posted by: SwampfoxII on June 2, 2015 12:34pm

If there is a rule that no felons can be hired and work in the NHFD, maybe the answer is a lawsuit challenging the city's act of placing him back in that office

He appeal his outside case.My understanding is that under the appeal of his case he can work.

To Razz and3/5
Our union president said the deal to bring Brantley back was made by the labor director paca. That should answer your question.Nope there is nothing that says you get to work because your case is on appeal he is still a convicted felon even as his case is being appealed.