2 Union officers take case to state

Town blocked their promotions, pair say

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

BY JASON JETT

Star-Ledger Staff

Two Union police officers passed over in township police promotions last month have filed appeals with the state Department of Personnel, their attorney said yesterday.

Sgt. Robert Reiss and officer James Gilleece were the only officers "skipped" on an existing promotions list, and said they were passed over as reprisal for labor union activism.

Reiss is vice president of the Superior Officers Association in Union, while Gilleece is vice president of the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association.

"Of the more than one dozen supervisors who were promoted off the existing lists in question, the only two who were skipped were the only two candidates who just happened to be union officials whose membership is embroiled in disputes with management," wrote Timothy Smith, the South Orange attorney representing the two officers.

Municipal Attorney Daniel Antonelli said township officials deny the allegations made by Smith in his letter to the DOP.

"There are other officers on the promotions list who have not been promoted," said Antonelli. "The promotions process included oral examinations and job performance reviews. We scored the results, and Gilleece was fifth of six (officers), and Reiss was fourth of five (sergeants)."

Antonelli added, "The simple fact of the matter is other officers who have been involved in union activity have been promoted, which underscores how ridiculous the PBA allegations are in this case."

PBA President Dave Dougherty stood by the accuracy of the promotions appeal letter filed by Smith.

He said Reiss and Gilleece ranked fourth and six a few years ago when the list was first compiled, and everyone listed before them has been promoted.

"They were next in line for promotion," he said. "The township made promotions in order until they got to these guys."

Dougherty acknowledged that police officers who were union officials have been promoted in the past.

"There have been promotions when times were good," he said. "Times are not good right now. There has been a lot of contention, and this is retaliation."

In the letter to the DOP, Smith wrote, "Both officers are united in their appeal against the township for blatant disregard of civil service rules and regulations that prohibit a town from using union affiliation against an individual.

"The denial of both promotions is an obvious attempt at union-busting by the township," added Smith.

He continued, "Quite tellingly, and contrary to the appointing authority's assertions, the disciplinary/work histories of Sgt. Reiss and Patrolman Gilleece were among the most commendable/impeccable of all the candidates for promotion.

In a separate request to the DOP for interim relief, Smith asked that the township be ordered to immediately promote the officers, rescind the most recent promotions and stay the municipal police promoting process pending an investigation by the state.

It also called for a public sanction and fines against the township.

Jason Jett may be contacted at jjett@starledger.com or (908) 302-1509.



2 Union officers take case to state Town blocked their promotions, pair say Wednesday, October 10, 2007 BY JASON JETT Star-Ledger Staff Two Union police officers passed over in township police promotions last month have filed appeals with the state Department of Personnel, their attorney said yesterday. Sgt. Robert Reiss and officer James Gilleece were the only officers "skipped" on an existing promotions list, and said they were passed over as reprisal for labor union activism. Reiss is vice president of the Superior Officers Association in Union, while Gilleece is vice president of the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association. "Of the more than one dozen supervisors who were promoted off the existing lists in question, the only two who were skipped were the only two candidates who just happened to be union officials whose membership is embroiled in disputes with management," wrote Timothy Smith, the South Orange attorney representing the two officers. Municipal Attorney Daniel Antonelli said township officials deny the allegations made by Smith in his letter to the DOP. "There are other officers on the promotions list who have not been promoted," said Antonelli. "The promotions process included oral examinations and job performance reviews. We scored the results, and Gilleece was fifth of six (officers), and Reiss was fourth of five (sergeants)." Antonelli added, "The simple fact of the matter is other officers who have been involved in union activity have been promoted, which underscores how ridiculous the PBA allegations are in this case." PBA President Dave Dougherty stood by the accuracy of the promotions appeal letter filed by Smith. He said Reiss and Gilleece ranked fourth and six a few years ago when the list was first compiled, and everyone listed before them has been promoted. "They were next in line for promotion," he said. "The township made promotions in order until they got to these guys." Dougherty acknowledged that police officers who were union officials have been promoted in the past. "There have been promotions when times were good," he said. "Times are not good right now. There has been a lot of contention, and this is retaliation." In the letter to the DOP, Smith wrote, "Both officers are united in their appeal against the township for blatant disregard of civil service rules and regulations that prohibit a town from using union affiliation against an individual. "The denial of both promotions is an obvious attempt at union-busting by the township," added Smith. He continued, "Quite tellingly, and contrary to the appointing authority's assertions, the disciplinary/work histories of Sgt. Reiss and Patrolman Gilleece were among the most commendable/impeccable of all the candidates for promotion. In a separate request to the DOP for interim relief, Smith asked that the township be ordered to immediately promote the officers, rescind the most recent promotions and stay the municipal police promoting process pending an investigation by the state. It also called for a public sanction and fines against the township. Jason Jett may be contacted at jjett@starledger.com or (908) 302-1509. © 2007 The Star Ledger© 2007 NJ.com All Rights Reserved.