This is a reply to John Delmonico's post regarding William McManus that
was circulated on March 4, in response to a post from Rybak's office:
for the full effect read from the bottom up. I would also be helpful to
read http://www.startribune.com/stories/1557/4643665.html from the Star
Tribune.
Roberta writes:
It is interesting that the folks who seem to be complaining about "not
being told" are the very people who could, and should have researched
McManus, independently. It must be easier to shift blame to the "no one
told me" theory then it is to take responsibility for their
recommendation. Where was Delmonico (or any other selected) during the
interview process? What happened? Didn't anyone on the search committee
ask McManus if he had ever implicated the city that employed him in a
lawsuit because of an act of discrimination, or any other reason for
that matter?
There is nothing in the link that Delmonico provides that sheds any
light on the Barbara Temple case other then it existed as a plea in the
Court of Montgomery County in Ohio. There have been thousands of
lawsuits brought by women (and men) for discrimination related to
employment.
John Delmonico may have felt compelled to respond to David Fey's post
regarding illegal discrimination by William McManus (in Dayton) because
as he alleges, he was an un-informed member of the search committee for
a new Minneapolis police chief however, he may have responded because
the Federation represents a number of female officers, one of whom has
been suspended in the due process of an investigation. It may be that he
has chosen to be preemptive, taking the position that McManus is a chief
that fires females, even if Gerold is dismissed as a result of her own
actions. And, by the way, do you think that Delmonico's position might
indicate he anticipates the need for a defensive strategy?
And, the Star Tribune quotes the lawyer who is trying to move the Temple
case forward as an appeal against the City of Dayton, as a civil matter
based on an equal pay issue after the Department of Justice denied the
suit. Why wouldn't this attorney take advantage of a situation in
Minneapolis that would further his case in Dayton, even if the
similarity ends with gender and the only real impact is in the court of
public opinion? Neither the Star Trib, nor Delmonico offer anything
except supposition; spinning general comments that could lead to an
erroneous conclusion. Equal focus on the facts, with full disclosure
would be nice.
It might be a good idea to let the investigation of the suspended
officers in the Duy Ngo case play out before jumping to a Minneapolis
conclusion. From a position in community, it appears people are
solidly behind William McManus. So, be careful out there, remember, he
has a three year contract!
Roberta Englund
Folwell Neighborhood
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Delmonico" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 2:58 PM
Subject: Response to Email from Mayor Regarding Illegal Discrimination
by
William McManus
> As a member of the search committee, I feel compelled to respond to
the
> email issued at the Mayor's direction. The Mayor's email is
misleading in
> many respects.
>
> 1) First, althouth the email references a lawsuit filed against Chief
> McManus and the City of Dayton by a female deputy chief fired by
McManus,
> the email fails to mention that, separate from the lawsuit, the
Cincinnati
> Area Office of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
("EEOC")
> made a finding that Ms. Temple was fired by McManus "because of her
sex
and
> in retaliation for complaining about an employment act which is
illegal
> under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964." A copy of this
document
> can be accessed by clicking on the following link:
>
http://www.clerk.co.montgomery.oh.us/pro/image_onbase.cfm?docket=6371639
> The City of Dayton did not appeal the EEOC finding.
>
> 2) Although the lawsuit was dismissed on the grounds that Temple was
an
> "at-will", appointed employee, she has appealed the ruling and,
therefore,
> there has not yet been a final disposition of the suit.
>
> 3) The Mayor was quoted in the StarTribune this morning that he knew
of
this
> sustained EEOC finding before he selected McManus.
>
> 4) Despite knowing this information, the Mayor failed to disclose the
> existence of the EEOC sustained finding to us as the members of his
own
> search committee.
>
> 5) As reported in the StarTribune, the Mayor also failed to disclose
the
> existence of the EEOC finding to Councilmember Niziolek, the chair of
the
> Council's Public Safety and Regulatory Service Committee (to which the
> Police Department reports). Other council members have told me
personnally
> that they were not advised of this sustained finding. Further, I have
heard
> from other sources that the existence of the EEOC finding was not
disclosed
> to the City Attorney, the City Coordinator and other high ranking City
> officials.
>
> 5) Although the Mayor and McManus may now claim that this EEOC finding
is
> "nothing," by failing to disclose this information to the search
committee
> (and apparently most if not all of the City Council), the Mayor has
deprived
> us all of the opportunity to reach our own conclusion as to the
importance
> of this serious information. Moreover, I personally resent the fact
that
> the Mayor has substituted his own judgment on this matter for my own
ability
> to digest and assess the impact of this information. While I cannot
speak
> for any of you or for the members of the City Council who were not
made
> aware of this information, I certainly would have protested against
the
> selection of any candidate who has been found to have discriminated
against
> a person from a protected class in violation of Federal law.
>
> 6) I have confirmed with persons who have performed background
> investigations for new recruits as patrol officers that the MPD has
> routinely rejected job candidates who have had
discrimination/harassment
> problems at a prior employer. This raises the question in my mind as
to
> whether the City of Minneapolis has a double standard for rank and
file
> patrol officers as opposed to Department heads.
>
> 7) I represent many female officers who were initially upset that the
City
> hired an external male candidate over two highly qualified internal
female
> candidates (one of whom the Oldani Report ranked as more qualified
than
> McManus). Now that it is known that the City passed over qualified
females
> to hire a male known to have discriminated against a female, they are
> outraged and ready to begin picketing the offices of the Mayor, City
Council
> and Police Chief. They are convinced that the City does have a glass
> ceiling and those that are qualified to serve in ranking positions of
> authority have told me that they are beginning to look to leave the
MPD
for
> a department that will afford them a fair opportunity for advancement.
The
> City may also have assumed a greater risk of future legal liability by
> hiring a department head who was already at least once found to have
engaged
> in illegal discrimination.
>
> I urge all of you to read the EEOC finding and, unlike the Mayor, I
> encourage you to reach your own conclusion about this new information.
You
> shoud feel free to discuss your concerns with any member of the media
that
> may contact you and you may also wish to make your feelings known to
the
> Mayor and the members of the City Council. Please feel free to
contact me
> if you have any questions.
>
>
> Sgt. John Delmonico
> President, POFM
>
> -----Original Message-----
From: Champa, Bill A [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 6:28 PM
Subject: Update
Hello:
I am sending this message to the Police Chief Advisory Committee on
behalf
of Mayor Rybak. It has come to our attention that you may be contacted
by reporters asking for comment regarding a lawsuit filed against Chief
McManus in Dayton, Ohio.
The lawsuit was filed by a Police Major who was fired by McManus. The
suit
was dismissed on summary judgment last summer. Please contact us if you
have any questions. David Fey, Deputy Mayor, can be reached at
612-673-3888.
Sincerely,
Bill Champa
Human Resources Generalist
612-673-3428
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
