Local

[Print]  [Email]        

Retirement awards caught in Fenty-council spat

By: Michael Neibauer
Examiner Staff Writer
November 22, 2009

Four District government employees caught up in the latest dispute between the Fenty administration and the D.C. Council will be denied their promised early-retirement bonuses unless the council approves emergency legislation authorizing the release of the funds.

The four retirees applied for their early-out, easy-out awards, as much as $25,000 a person depending on their salaries, after the Department of Human Resources shut down the payments in mid-October. All agency chiefs were told that the fiscal 2010 budget adopted by the D.C. Council voided all bonus and special pay, including the retirement awards.

But Council Chairman Vincent Gray and Ward 3 Councilwoman Mary Cheh vehemently disagreed with the human resource department's decision. The prohibition, they said, did not include early-out, easy-out payments.

In a Nov. 12 letter to Mayor Adrian Fenty, the two council members explained that the budget prohibited bonus and special pay only "to send a very important signal to the citizens of the District of Columbia that during a time of economic hardship and high unemployment, the District government would not be giving out bonuses." "There is no ambiguity in the council's actions; those employees who were promised compensation as part of their separation should be made whole," Gray and Cheh wrote. "Those hard-working men and women who have served the District deserve no less." Attorney General Peter Nickles is supporting human resources Director Brender Gregory's interpretation of the budget move. In a letter to the two council members, Nickles offered an ultimatum: Adopt emergency legislation clarifying the intent of the budget provision, or the four retirement award applications will not be processed. "Please be advised that, given the council's failure to define the terms 'special pay' and 'bonus pay,' DCHR's interpretation of the pay provisions was not only logical and well-reasoned ... but reflected an earnest attempt to comply with the apparent intent of the council -- as you state yourself -- to recognize the District's current economic status," Nickles said. Cheh said she is preparing emergency legislation, but she continues to disagree strongly with Nickles. "The attorney general's interpretation is wrong," Cheh said. "There are clearly designated [budget lines] for bonuses and special payments. Those are the ones we zeroed out at a time when everyone else is belt tightening. To say we canceled [retirement awards] or eliminated them, that is just not true." Nickles declined to release the names of the four retirees. DCHR processed 58 award applications before Oct. 15, when the pay provision of the budget took effect.

mneibauer@washingtonexaminer.com



To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


Most Popular Headlines





 


 



 

Reader Comments

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Examiner or its staff. Comment box is limited to 250 words.

*******

Nov 22, 2009

We need a ratification of the DC code that would give the City Council the power to fire the attorney general.

 

Nov 22, 2009

I remember when the counmcil was asked to pass emergency legislation when Rhee was forcing principals to resign or retire. They never responded and many were forced to take reduced retirements and they too were hard working men and women of the government. Some teachers this year were forced to take reduced retirements, where was the council?

 

Sick of the Foolishness

Nov 22, 2009

Uh, were the retirees whose names are not being released Kappas?

We DO need ratification to fire the attorney general. DC also needs the power to impeach and put the mayor out of office.

 

1intheKnow

Nov 23, 2009

Doesn't come as a surprise to me that Nickles would try to block the bonuses. He opted his agency (OAG) out of the bonus program entirely (each agency was given the choice whether to participate). For both the 2008 and 2009 early/easy-out option periods.

All of which raises another issue: Is it fair that some long-term DC employees can get a bonus upon retiring while others can't, just because of which agency they're affiliated with? They all work for the same DC Government. Seems to me that people in similar situations should be treated equally. Isn't that the law in this country?

 


Post a comment


Email:
(This will not be displayed or shared. Privacy Policy)

Your Name:

Comment:




Local

Another snowball fight planned for Dupont Circle

The Official Dupont Circle Snowball Fight facebook fanpage has over 6,000 fans now, and it looks as if snowed in DC'ers will return for another battle. Full story

Politics

GOP winning war over Miranda rights for terrorists

Even as the administration defends its decision to grant accused Detroit bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab the right to remain silent, the president himself is hinting that things might be done differently in the future. Full story

Local

D.C. region braces for up to 20 more inches of snow

The National Weather Service has the entire D.C. metro area, from Prince William County north, under a winter storm warning for 10 to 20 inches of snow. Forecasters have had their eyes on this storm for days, but the projected snow totals were bumped up late Monday. Full story