The Connecticut State Board of Labor Relations (BLR) recently dismissed a complaint brought by the Derby Police Union claiming the city of Derby had violated the Municipal Employee Relations Act (MERA) by changing a supplemental payment for workers’ compensation. The BLR found the city did not violate a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) when it did not consider overtime pay in calculating the weekly wages of an officer who was receiving workers’ compensation.

Under the CBA between the city and the police union that was in effect at the time of the dispute, police officers were owed supplemental pay when they were out of work due to a work-related injury or illness. The amount of supplemental pay they were owed was the difference between their full weekly pay and the amount they received through either total or partial temporary disability worker’s compensation benefits in a week. An officer’s full weekly pay was based on their total wages, including overtime, earned in the 52 weeks preceding an injury.

The BLR found that Derby had used that formula to calculate supplemental payments since at least 2009.

In November 2023, Joe DiMartino beat incumbent Richard Dziekan in the mayoral race, leading to a change of administration in the city.

According to the BLR’s decision, prior to March 2024, a Derby police officer, who is not named in the decision, sustained a work-related injury and began receiving disability pay under the CBA’s section on supplemental payment. But the city payroll manager did not include overtime pay the officer had earned in the previous 52 weeks in calculating the officer’s weekly pay. When Brian Hall, Derby’s finance director, reviewed the relevant section of the CBA with the mayor and corporation counsel, they took the position that the payroll manager had correctly determined the officer’s weekly pay.

The police union argued the city violated MERA by changing the existing practice of calculating the officer’s total wages. MERA prohibits “refusing to bargain collectively in good faith with an employee organization which has been designated in accordance with the provisions of said sections as the exclusive representation of employees in an appropriate unit.”

The city argued that the CBA allowed them to change how supplemental pay was calculated because it defines full pay as “regular straight time weekly wages,” which they argued excludes overtime by definition.

The BLR found that the city had not violated MERA.

The BLR instead found that the CBA allowed the city to “depart from the existing practice of calculating the Supplemental Payment.” They also found Derby “did not repudiate the collective bargaining agreement by excluding overtime earnings from the officer’s weekly full pay for the purpose of calculating the Supplemental Payment.”

“Principles of contract law govern interpretation of collective bargaining agreements and it is well established that a contract is to be given effect according to its terms where the language is clear and unambiguous.” the decision stated.

The BLR found that the CBA defines full pay as “an amount that is equal to the police officer’s regular straight time weekly wages” and that the common meaning of straight time had “only one reasonable interpretation,” which meant that weekly full pay for the purposes of determining a supplemental payment did not include overtime wages.

Editor’s note: A previous version of this story incorrectly stated that Richard Dziekan was indicted for participating in the January 6, 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.