Solano County sues union over fired welfare worker’s job status
FAIRFIELD — Lawyers for Solano County have sued a county employees’ union, trying to keep a fired county employee from getting his job back.
The lawsuit filed this week against Service Employees International Union Local 1021 was spurred by an arbitrator’s decision for Luis G. Quintero, a former eligibility benefits worker in the Department of Health and Human Services.
Quintero was fired in September 2010. SEIU challenged the firing and last year, after two days of hearings, arbitrator James G. Merrill ruled that Quintero had broken clear policies and rules. However, Merrill said the misconduct Quintero did on the job did not merit firing. Instead he deserved a 30-day suspension before returning to his old job, along with getting all his back pay and benefits since the firing.
The county’s lawsuit claims Merrill’s ruling can’t stand because it goes against the bargaining agreement the union signed in 2008 about how to deal with employee discipline. While the arbitrator can rule for or against a disciplinary sanction, a compromise can’t be taken, which is what county lawyers say is what Merrill did. The county wants Judge D. Scott Daniels to rule the arbitration decision invalid and to affirm the decision to fire Quintero.
Quintero had worked for the county for less than two years when in 2009 he updated the welfare benefits case file for a recipient who was a family member. “(Quintero) helped maintain public assistance of the food going to his own kitchen,” the lawsuit states.
Quintero was caught and the computer records tracking who accesses any file were solid evidence that Merrill considered in deeming Quintero broke the rules. Quintero also got into trouble over claims made by another welfare recipient, a single mother, that he provided confidential case information to her ex-boyfriend, the father of her child.
She recognized Quintero from family law court hearings that Quintero attended and served as a language interpreter in court for the ex-boyfriend. The mother complained to Quintero’s bosses. Computer records reflected Quintero worked on the mother’s file five times in 2009 and 2010, according to the lawsuit.
Merrill ruled the accusations raised by the mother were not solidly backed by supporting evidence, so they should not cost Quintero his job.
Daniels is scheduled to first consider the lawsuit in May.
Reach Jess Sullivan at 427-6919 or at jsullivan@dailyrepublic.net.
Short URL: http://www.dailyrepublic.com/?p=137355
Posted by Jess Sullivan
on Feb 17 2012.
Filed under Crime-courts, Top stories. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
I read your article with great interest. I am shocked that you used Mr. Quintero by name, did not present a balanced story or get his comment. The arbitrator ruled in favor of Mr. Quintero. It states that Mr. Quintero “worked on the mother’s file five times” in the year; however, eligibility workers field about sixty calls a day which equates to over 14,000 calls in a year. That puts some perspective to five times. When Mr. Quintero or the other eligibility workers are assigned to be “Worker of the Day”, their job is to address the needs of whoever calls and not cherry pick who they assist. He was doing his job. It is the County that employs contradicting policies. Mr. Quintero is an exceptional worker. I cannot believe that the County, who claims to protect confidentiality, breeched confidential information by stating ” public assistance of the food going into his own kitchen”. Talk about hypocrisy! The County is spending enormous taxpayer dollars to tarnish the reputation and integrity of a hard working person. The County agreed, as per the MOU, to abide by arbitration; however, it appears that the County does not honor its employees or the court.
Lawsuits are a matter of public record and it appears that this article is solely based on the legal complaint submitted to the court by the county; so yes, it may appear to be one-sided. The county believes is has legal cause to bring the lawsuit and not abide by the arbitrator’s decision because it goes against the bargaining agreement signed in 2008 and because they claim the arbitrator took a compromise. That may or may not be true, but judges, arbitrators and juries sometimes make mistakes. If the decision had gone the other way and Mr. Quintero thought he had legal grounds to disregard the arbitrator’s decision, he would have his right to sue as well. The key is having legal grounds to sue, which is more than just not wanting to abide by the decision. The county may be spending money to sue, but I’d rather have them do that and nip this in the bud than open the door for the union to disregard the bargaining agreement in the future. The union will have its say when they submit an answer to the court, and I assume the DR will report on that when the time comes.
I’m not saying that Mr Quintero should have been fired or just suspended but he should never have worked on his relative’s case. He should have recused himself. That’s like a judge sitting over a relative’s criminal case or a cop investigating a relative’s crime.
Just about every Government agency I know…including the one I work for, there is 2 sets of rules for employees to follow.
The RULES the rank and file have to obey and follow to a tee…And the rules Managerial employees have to follow. And that folks is why employees need union representation….because employees in management don’t use the same rules for themselves!
Thats hogwash!! And you know it. Your management staff are the ones that set the standard through example. Your union, SEIU, protects works that should be fired and would be fired in the private sector. SEIU stands other way of county officials replacing slugs, thieves and liars with hard working people. SIEU uses cheap embarrassing propaganda tactics to try win their way. SEIU loves to attack management. Let the court system decide who’s not following the MOU. I’m glad the county is using a court to solve the issue….. At least we will know who the liars are.
I have learned not to care too much for unions since discovering that a pharmacy employee was a known drug addict and higher than a kite most days, yet she kept her job for more than two years because the union backed her. I don’t know what’s become of her of late, but I’m hoping the union finally came to their senses and allowed the pharmacy to fire her. If you come to work high, you get fired. If you cheat, you get fired. Steal? Fired! At least that’s the way it used to be.
Ok, I am in a union but I have to admit, sometimes the rules that management has to follow in dealing with disciplining union members are insane. We actually have in our contract that my employer can not fire anybody who does not report to work for two days in row and didn’t bother to call in. So, a union employee can decide two days in a row to not bother coming in to work and not bother calling in. Why did we ever even fight to get that in our contract? If you don’t show up for work and you don’t let your boss know why, you should be fired, simple as that. Strangest rule I’ve ever seen.
However, if we did not have a union, I would have already lost most of my health benefits, half of my vacation and been forced to take two weeks of unpaid leave a year. During the last contract negotiations, that is what management was demanding. I also would not have received a cost of living raise during a time (8 years) when we were pulling in a record amount of money. So, yes unions are sometimes bad but sometimes they are good.
Let’s see here…The County overreacted in a disciplinary action, spends a year going through a grivence process, looses, and now jumps to the courts because they don’t like the verdict? How much money is this costing the taxpayers? Why have arbitration in a contract if the Arbiter can’t override the decision of Management? The Arbiter did say Mr. Quintero did do something wrong, but it didn’t warrant him losing his job. Sounds like to me that the Management Team in Health & Human Services needs some training on reasonable disciplinary tactics. It also makes me wonder if there aren’t more examples of a reactionary Management floating out there. The County lost this one. Plain and simple.
I am speaking generally, not necessarily of this issue. The managers I see at H&HS agencies (as well as a lot of government agencies) have been moved up the ranks, thus you have a non business professional being a manager. They have no concept of HR so they don’t know how to properly deal with employee issues, so it becomes a legal nightmare. I can totally see his supervisor not properly dealing with the issue correctly and then when the poo hits the fan the supervisor throws him under the bus. Then it is County Counsel’s turn to try to clean up the mess.
I think that the individual, Mr. Quintero, is being overshadowed by your opinion of SEIU. The decision as to which arbitrator would review the case was agreed to by all parties involved.I find it ironic that, even in the comments, people are reluctant to use their names. Imagine how you would feel if it was your name plastered in the paper – even though the decision was ruled in your favor. I prefer to look at the privacy rights of the individual and his family, who in this case, is being denied. There are good and poor employees in every industry and Mr. Quintero is a good guy. If you don’t care for SEIU, that is your right; however, Mr. Quintero is being held out as a scapegoat. Union dues are paying for him, your tax dollars are being spent because he entered in a date received, with his supervisors knowledge.
I have used this name online for quite some time and don’t plan to use my real name simply because I don’t want to run the risk of being harassed in person by someone who disagrees with my opinion. The Internet has made it too easy to find personal information and there are too many vindictive people out there. That said, I responded to Mr. Quintero’s post below about privacy, and if my name were wrongfully and maliciously plastered in the paper, there would be legal repercussions for those responsible. Also, if Mr. Quintero’s supervisor knew what was going on, was he/she also held responsible in some way? That would seem only fair.
I am shocked that you used my name in the article, I never received any phone calls and no one question me. You did not present a balanced story or get my comment. The arbitrator ruled in my favor. You stated that I work on my mother’s case five times. Worked? I never issue any benefits to my mother lets make this very clear. Moreover, county of Solano had no policy in place on how to handle family cases.
It is important to mention that during arbitration, Solano County stated I was doing my job. It is the County that employs contradicting policies. I am a good worker and I take my job very serious. I cannot believe that the County, who claims to protect confidentiality, breeched confidential information by stating “public assistance of the food going into my own kitchen”. Hypocrites! The County is spending enormous taxpayer dollars to tarnish my reputation and integrity. The County agreed, as per the MOU, to abide by arbitration; however, it appears that the County does not honor its employees or the court.
I will be more than happy to talk to you about this case. Give the opportunity to tell you the truth, with real facts.
Luis Quintero
So, Mr. Quintero, had the case gone the other way and the arbitrator ruled against you, you would not have sued the county to get your job back, even if you saw a LEGAL REASON that the arbitrator’s decision was flawed? I really would like to know. People sue for their jobs back all the time. As I mentioned earlier in the comments, lawsuits are PUBLIC RECORD. From what I can tell, this article is based only on the papers that the county filed with the court — again, public record. This is what the county alleges you did. If you can prove that this is incorrect and that they are lying to be malicious and make you look bad, you have the right to SUE THEM. And if you do, that will be public record as well and you will receive your vindication. Good or bad, that is the way our legal system works. Obviously, you did something questionable based on the arbitrator’s notation about the 30-day suspension. In the private sector and without the SEIU to go to bat for you, you would have been fired. Under the union’s special set of rules to protect their members at all costs, a 30-day suspension says a lot to me. I also have a question about the whole employee privacy thing. I take it that you believe that a public employee guilty of questionable actions should have his privacy protected? So the guy who did shoddy safety inspections on the Bay Bridge deserved to keep that information between him and his boss? I am not saying that you did anything on that scale, but if you believe that his case should have been public information and yours private, where do you draw the line? Just curious.
He should be fired. He knew what he was doing and it disgusts me when a Union wants to defend this person.
Quintero makes a good point, the “County does not honor its employees or the court.” The County is corroded to the point where only $$$ matters. IS SICK
Mr. Quintero made a mistake and acknowledges it. According to the arbitrator, the County overreacted. They fired him for an offense he didn’t commit, but the arbitrator ruled that he should be suspended for the offense he did commit. He was a highly-regarded employee who went way above and beyond the call of duty. Unfortunately, a manager–upon hearing a complaint from a member of the public–overreacted. The manager failed to investigate and simply fired Mr. Quintero. That’s why Unions exist. To right wrongs. Are there times when a bad employee is “saved” by his or her Union? Absolutely! Those instances only occur when an employer violates labor law and the Union is required under Federal law to represent the employee–whether the Union wants to or not. Let’s think about this: We have a well-respected arbitrator with decades of legal experience. On the other side, we have a rogue County department that has cost the County tens of thousands of dollars in arbitration fees and in lawsuits by current and former employees. Maybe this is the County’s version of the “Hail Mary” pass. Either way, before you denigrate either Mr. Quintero or his Union, you should review the history of lawsuits filed against the County by current and former employees. While not all suits went to trial, it’s probably safe to assume that those that were settled resulted in some compensation to the employee.
What I find interesting is that Mr. Quintero was found to have done something worthy of a 30-day suspension (was it with or without pay?) under the union’s rules. Given that unions are notoriously extremely protective of their members, Mr. Quintero’s infraction could NOT have been inconsequential or minor. His misdeed cannot be ignored. In the private sector, he would most definitely have been fired. Ask the retail clerk fired for ringing up his own soda because he did not want to waste any of his short break waiting for a co-worker to do it for him. Even though all the money went into the till, he still lost his job because the company rules dictated that he not process his own purchases. Avoid the mere appearance of wrongdoing. Recuse yourself when necessary. Have a co-worker handle it.
I am not entirely unfamilar with the legal system and know that even the wisest and most experienced among us make mistakes from time to time. And there is a process in place to rectify that. The county, if it has legal grounds to do so, is entitled to participate in that process, just as Mr. Quintero does should he ever need to. I also know that sometimes our legal system makes it so prohibitively expensive to win a case that even those with the law on their side choose to settle because it is less costly than continuing the long, drawn-out battle. I fully support the county’s use of money if it means that there is less monkey business in the future. For every person who is caught, there are many more who aren’t.
So, just to be clear: If the court throws out the County’s complaint or returns a verdict favorable to the Union, you’ll post here that justice has been done?
The information provided in this article is based on “public record” yes, it does not however provide any specific information that is relevent with respect to the Policy and Procedures in place and that were supposedly breached. As a former H&SS employee (who voluntarily terminated not that this should be an issue with regard to my integrity), I can state from experience that Mr. Quintero as a worker was diligent and professional. He is a man of integrity who may have made an error in judgement but that is not for us to decide. He has had to live with the actions of a wishy-washy administration that states Policy is ABC and then doesn’t even follow their own regulations. Let’s not pass judgement on a man that “appears” to have made a questionable decision. As for the Union, in a perfect world, one wouldn’t be needed but we don’t live in a perfect world.
So you’re saying that the arbitrator got it wrong and that Mr. Quintero merely “appeared” to make a questionable decision (but not really) and therefore did not even deserve a 30-day suspension? Imperfect world indeed and an imperfect judge/arbitrator it would seem. More support for why we have an appeals process. This is all so amusing to me.