Arbitrations

 

08/14/08 Det. Todd Rego
Det. Nate Sanders
Det. Kevin McCoy		 vs City of Tampa Read PBA Brief Read Arbitrator’s Opinion
Summary: Grievants hit the wrong house during a search warrant and were issued Written Reprimands.  The arbitrator ruled that “the City did not apply its rules, orders, and penalties even-handedly and without discrimination to all employees” (the Tactical Operation Commander was not disciplined).  Thus, “the City did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the City had just cause to discipline the Grievants with Written Reprimands.”  The arbitrator reduced the discipline to Letters of Counseling.
11/29/08 Sgt. Gene Strickland vs City of Tampa Read PBA Brief Read Arbitrator’s Opinion
Summary: This arbitration consolidated numerous incidents the grievant was disciplined for including being demoted to the rank of Corporal.  The issue was whether or not the grievant was demoted from Sergeant to Corporal with just cause and, if not, what was the appropriate remedy.  The consolidated incidents were 1) a Reprimand he received for carrying an unauthorized weapon, allowing his corporal to carry an unauthorized weapon and his authoring a report of the incident; 2) a Letter of Counseling he received for Supervisory Responsibility because he wasn’t present when his squad stopped an uncooperative traffic violator who was eventually Tasered and arrested; 3) a 4 Day Suspension he received for being involved in a gun battle (where he was wounded) with a Felony Murder / Robbery suspect outside his jurisdiction and the arrest procedures he utilized; 4) a demotion from Sergeant to Corporal for his lack of supervision during ongoing sexual harassment of a female on his squad (most of which occurred outside his knowledge and while he was recovering at home from being shot).  The arbitrator Denied each of the 4 consolidated grievances, determined that the Grievant was an excellent law enforcement officer but not suited for the position of Sergeant and its supervisory responsibilities.  He held that the Employer had established just cause for the Grievant’s demotion.
12/16/08 MPO Mark Sullivan-Tamboe vs City of Tampa Read PBA Brief Read Arbitrator’s Opinion
Summary: The grievant was accused of Sleeping on Duty twice and, in both cases, adamantly denied sleeping.  As a result, he was Terminated for Untruthfulness.  The Union and a doctor contend that the grievant suffers from a diagnosed condition known as “Shift Work Sleeping Disorder” and that he might have been suffering from this condition on the dates in question.  Since the person suffering from this disorder typically does not realize he is asleep at the time, it is possible that the grievant’s denials of sleeping on duty were actually truthful statements even if they were inaccurate.  The arbitrator Denied this grievance and supported the City’s Termination of the grievant.
12/23/08 Off. Robert Fleege vs City of Tampa Read PBA Brief Read Arbitrator’s Opinion
Summary:The grievant completed a Medical History Questionnaire when applying for a job with the City and answered “no” when responding to questions about potential issues.  It later became known to the City that the grievant applied for compensation with the VA for some of these issues 6 days after answering the City’s Medical History Questionnaire.  The grievant was investigated for Untruthfulness because he later stated that he suffered from some of these same issues as a result of working in the U.S. military.  The grievant supplied a plausible explanation.  The grievant’s 5 person Complaint Review Board voted unanimously that the charge of Untruthfulness should not be sustained, however, it was ultimately sustained by the City and he was terminated.  The arbitrator Denied this grievance and supported the City’s Termination of the grievant.
01/02/09 Det. Nate Sanders vs City of Tampa Read PBA Brief Read Arbitrator’s Opinion
Summary: The grievant, a vice detective, was instructed by his supervisor to log 39 audio tapes as evidence but failed to do so.  He was disciplined for Attentiveness to Duty and Insubordination by being given a 1 Day Suspension.  The point in dispute was whether or not the grievant had been Insubordinate.  The arbitrator Denied the grievance and supported the City’s 1 Day Suspension of the grievant.
03/18/09 Lt. Dwayne Johnson vs City of Tampa Read PBA Brief Read Arbitrator’s Opinion
Summary: This arbitration involves two grievances.  Under the first, the grievant was ordered by the City to submit to a Fitness for Duty Examination.  The grievant was asked to sign a form prior to this examination that would allow the psychologist to release his medical and psychiatric records to the City.  The City maintains that the grievant was ordered to sign this form.  The grievant was willing to take the examination, but temporarily refused to sign the form until he could consult with a union representative.  It should be noted that the release of this medical information to the City is illegal without the consent of the patient.  The City investigated the grievant for Insubordination and a 5 person Complaint Review Board unanimously ruled in favor of the grievant.The Board determined that the psychologist’s ambiguous statements made to the grievant regarding the release of whatever medical and psychiatric information he deemed relevant went beyond the scope of whether the grievant was fit for duty or not.  It was their opinion that a reasonable officer would believe that this was an unlawful order, as it would violate their Medical Privacy rights.  The grievant was also in the process of seeking legal advice regarding the medical release forms provided by the psychologist when he was deemed to be insubordinate.  Lastly, the Board noted a considerable difference between the final medical release form that was ultimately signed by the grievant and the original form presented to him.The grievant was charged with Insubordination and suspended for 1 day.The second grievance involves an evaluation.  The grievant was given three (3) Below Expectations in an evaluation for the above described incident which occurred after the rating period.  This violated department SOP which was confirmed by an assistant chief.  The arbitrator sided with the City and upheld the 1 day suspension, but sided with the PBA and ordered that the three (3) Below Expectations be purged from the grievant’s records.
06/02/09 Det. Nate Sanders vs City of Tampa Read PBA Brief Read Arbitrator’s Opinion
Summary: The grievant, a vice detective, and his partner fell asleep during a narcotic operation that otherwise was a success and ended with the arrest of the defendant and seizure of heroin.  Although the City claimed that the grievant and his partner were the primary “eyeball” for this operation, this was unsubstantiated by the testimony of City witnesses, the grievant and his partner.  The grievant was disciplined for Sleeping on Duty and Demoted from the rank of Detective.  The arbitrator Denied the grievance and supported the City’s Demotion of the grievant due to the seriousness of the offense and his past disciplinary history.
09/23/09 Det. Thersea Dennis vs City of Tampa Read PBA Brief Read Arbitrator’s Opinion
Summary: The grievant, a Hit & Run detective, admitted to leaving work early over an extended period of time (from January to August 2008) and submitting inaccurate time cards covering those hours.  The City estimated that she misused over a hundred hours during the period investigated at a total cost to the City of several thousand dollars.  She was terminated for Submitting Inaccurate Time Cards and Attentiveness To Duty.  The PBA argued 1) that the allegations were less serious than “theft of time” which was the phrase used by the City, 2)she admitted to the allegations, 3) the lack of GPS records to review before her testimony to IAB, 4) problems with the investigation, 5) unequal treatment and 6) the degree of discipline.  The arbitrator Denied the grievance and supported the City’s Termination of the grievant.
11/04/10 Lt. Dwayne Johnson
 vs City of Tampa Read PBA Brief Read Arbitrator’s Opinion
Summary: On 03/13/08 the grievant filed a discrimination charge based on race and disability with the EEOC against the City of Tampa.  The City alleged that Johnson was untruthful in his sworn statement to the EEOC because he stated that the City suddenly suspended him, took away his weapon and sent him to a psychologist for a fitness for duty evaluation (the City contends that Johnson was not suspended and was only relieved of his weapon in response to a court order).On 03/10/09 Johnson met with Major Sophia Teague concerning a complaint he had with the police department.  Johnson denied that Major Teague ordered him to follow procedure with regard to setting an appointment with Chief Stephen Hogue before meeting with Mayor Pam Iorio.  Ultimately Johnson left Major Teague’s office, went to Chief Hogue’s office and immediately spoke with Mayor Iorio at City Hall.  The City contends that Johnson was insubordinate by failing to comply with a lawful order issued by Major Teague, his commanding officer.On 03/18/09 Johnson had another arbitration case where he was suspended for 1 day due to insubordination from an incident that took place on 03/13/08.  The City alleged that Johnson’s sworn testimony at the hearing conflicted with his sworn EEOC statement and they pursued an untruthfulness complaint against him.On 04/29/09 Internal Affairs opened an investigation into the events of 03/10/09 and the department determined that Johnson’s testimony was false regarding his accusation that Major Teague gave untruthful statements regarding the chain of command.On 10/16/09 Johnson was suspended for 2 days for his alleged failure to take supervisory action to investigate and resolve an employee’s questionable behavior over a 6 month period (from April 2008 to October 2008).  Johnson maintained that he did not observe any behavior out of the ordinary.This arbitration was a result of the union grieving both the 2 day suspension and a notice of dismissal that Johnson received from the City.  These cases were combined into one arbitration.  The allegations included Insubordination, Untruthfulness in an IA Investigation, Untruthfulness in EEOC Statements and Neglect of Supervisory Duties.  The union also challenged that the City violated the 180 day rule.The arbitrator ruled that he did not have jurisdiction over the 180 day rule, but that the Florida courts did.  He also ruled that the case was not procedurally flawed because Chief Hogue failed to meet with Johnson during a Step 3 grievance procedure.  The arbitrator Denied the grievance and supported the City’s Termination of the grievant as well as his 2 day suspension.
02/28/11
 Sgt. Joe Caravella
 vs
 City of Tampa Read PBA Brief
 Read Arbitrator’s Opinion
Summary: Sergeant Joe Caravella was interviewed as a witness during the course of an Internal Affairs investigation involving other parties.  Eventually, after numerous interviews, he became a subject officer and was ultimately terminated for Truthfulness in Departmental Matters, Cooperation with Departmental Investigations and Conformance to Law by the City.  The allegation of untruthfuless was based upon conflicting testimony from other parties, making the standard of proof used by the arbitrator an important factor.  The City argued for the Preponderance of the Evidence standard while the Union argued for Clear and Convincing Evidence.  In the end, however, the arbitrator ruled that there was just cause for the termination.  It should be noted that Sgt. Caravella has always maintained his innocence, even to the point of refusing to accept deals and forcing the City to fire him (in lieu of retiring).  He lost tens of thousands of dollars in sick time buyout because of this, but his reputation was important enough for him to fight for.