City Workers Win, Lose and Sue

We are well and truly underway…

PA state law ordinarily forbids labor arbiters from considering “the City’s ability to pay” when making decisions. Before we leave the necessary protection of Act 47 in 2019, can we change that law to its exact opposite: that arbitratorsmust consider it? It seems so much more sustainable and rational. Are we sure the PA Code does not contain a typo? (more)

Cheer up: It’s great thatsome City workers may now live where they want, feel they must, and as they please. Well maybe not “great” in that we would stronglyprefer you choose to live here for many reasons. But the ridiculous (though popular) notion that an employer gets to rule over a worker while resting or at leisure is fading. Bear in mind, it is not as though police-community relations in Pittsburgh have been saturated with neighborly trust and empathy thanks to the residency rule — and we should all agree the City stands to benefit considerably from casting a wider net. (more)

Finally, Palmosina v. Peduto, Costa & Acklin will make its way through the legal system like a glacial pie fight.Was the former fired for political reasons? The answer almost definitely has to be: “Not really, but kinda.”Curious to learn what are the burdens of proof in such a case, and how much embarrassing-to-everyone-involved evidence each party is going to bring. One must imagine the government possesses far more ready data.

It has no real bearing on this one individual’s complaint, but we do think it’s remarkable that a year or two ago, 5 out of 32 [1,2]city Democratic ward leaders were working in the city’s Department of Public Works.That’s a freakishly strong correlation. How do we account for it?

8 thoughts on “City Workers Win, Lose and Sue

  1. Shawn Carter


    Have you never looked at the Ward Chair application?

    The first question is, “Are you currently employed by the City of Pittsburgh Department of Public Works?”

    And the next line says, “If you answered yes, skip to the signature section.”

      1. MH

        I’m not a lawyer, but I’m baffled that an arbitrator can do that. I assume there will be a lawsuit about this. The arbitrator’s decision about the ambulance driver who let the guy die in Hazelwood seemed bad, but at least that sort of specific question of contract seems something appropriate for arbitration.

  2. Anonymous

    How long will it take you to comment on the Mayors new picks for Boards and Authorities?
    I can’t wait to hear your observations

    1. Bram Reichbaumbramr101 Post author

      On a cursory glance, they all look excellent but this one could be trouble.

      UPDATE: The Parking Authority is destined to be one of our most scrutinized and consequential boards. Interesting to see Aradhna Oliphant land there, and intrigue-lighted to see Cathy Qureshi. Word to the wise: grab a coffee with your predecessors!

      1. MG Guy

        Potter’s just trying to stir the pot … er, and he might have inadvertently let some sexism slip. Oliphant’s wife is highly competent and accomplished in her own right. She’s a reasonable choice for a board position.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload the CAPTCHA.