City Hall clerk paid not to work
September 17, 2023 6:48 PM Subscribe
Buffalo buffalo'd.
posted by LeRoienJaune at 8:22 PM on September 17, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by LeRoienJaune at 8:22 PM on September 17, 2023 [2 favorites]
Nice work if you can get it ;-)
posted by dg at 8:57 PM on September 17, 2023 [7 favorites]
posted by dg at 8:57 PM on September 17, 2023 [7 favorites]
It's like the opposite of the Milton glitch.
Reading the article, props to the Investigative Post for doing the legwork, literally chasing down some public figures in Buffalo's halls of government. I wonder how they actually got wind of this in the first place?
If she stays on the payroll through November of next year, she’ll hit her 30th anniversary as a public employee, qualifying her for a state pension at 60 percent of the average of her highest three consecutive years of earnings.
No words, so beautiful.
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 9:04 PM on September 17, 2023 [9 favorites]
Reading the article, props to the Investigative Post for doing the legwork, literally chasing down some public figures in Buffalo's halls of government. I wonder how they actually got wind of this in the first place?
If she stays on the payroll through November of next year, she’ll hit her 30th anniversary as a public employee, qualifying her for a state pension at 60 percent of the average of her highest three consecutive years of earnings.
No words, so beautiful.
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 9:04 PM on September 17, 2023 [9 favorites]
This is some great investigative work, but I anticipate this being turned into the latest facts about why unions are bad. This clerks “bank error in your favor” is nothing compared to the billions lost to wage theft by corporations each year.
posted by mrzarquon at 12:43 AM on September 18, 2023 [18 favorites]
posted by mrzarquon at 12:43 AM on September 18, 2023 [18 favorites]
I appreciate the work done by the reporters, but it seems to me that they missed the point of this story, which was probably an unprovable case against the person combined with someone in the system who did not believe the investigation results and did not want her back at the office. If they had grounds to dismiss and/or charge her, they likely would have done it years ago.Instead they left this hanging over her head for seven years.
One of the many reasons unions fight for this kind of protection for employees is that an accusation is much easier to make than it is to prove. People shouldn’t lose their livelihoods while that goes on, nor should an accusation be a painless way of sidelining or eliminating somebody from the workplace. I saw a situation like this when I worked for Big Bureaucracy, where a guy had been through multiple investigations, all coming back “unproven,” but management refused to believe him. He collected his salary for more than a decade, before they paid him off to take early retirement, and people used to openly wonder “how he could have so little pride.” Personally, I think he was probably quite proud of sticking it to the fools who had destroyed his career and then couldn’t even get it together to fire him.
The thing is that if you’re going to make such accusation, you have to have a way of disproving them, and being satisfied with the results, as much as proving them. Here, it seems that they have to satisfy them with ruining the accused Google results, and perhaps poisoning her relationship with her current employer. I hope this is resolved one way or the other, and that both she and the taxpayers of Buffalo get a fair shake.
posted by rpfields at 1:59 AM on September 18, 2023 [22 favorites]
One of the many reasons unions fight for this kind of protection for employees is that an accusation is much easier to make than it is to prove. People shouldn’t lose their livelihoods while that goes on, nor should an accusation be a painless way of sidelining or eliminating somebody from the workplace. I saw a situation like this when I worked for Big Bureaucracy, where a guy had been through multiple investigations, all coming back “unproven,” but management refused to believe him. He collected his salary for more than a decade, before they paid him off to take early retirement, and people used to openly wonder “how he could have so little pride.” Personally, I think he was probably quite proud of sticking it to the fools who had destroyed his career and then couldn’t even get it together to fire him.
The thing is that if you’re going to make such accusation, you have to have a way of disproving them, and being satisfied with the results, as much as proving them. Here, it seems that they have to satisfy them with ruining the accused Google results, and perhaps poisoning her relationship with her current employer. I hope this is resolved one way or the other, and that both she and the taxpayers of Buffalo get a fair shake.
posted by rpfields at 1:59 AM on September 18, 2023 [22 favorites]
The Buffalo Fire Department seems pretty good at burning money. You'd think they would be decent at putting the fire out. My first question is who audits the BFD's books? The auditor should have made at least a footnote saying there were one or more employees out on paid administrative leave also noting that, in at least one case, for multiple years.
When a teacher is taken out of a classroom but not fired, they put them in a rubber room so to speak and make them at least show up everyday and do little or nothing but be on the clock.
The article noted she was accruing sick leave, pension time and paid vacation.. She will either start taking that for probably as long as until her 30 years, or will be paid a large lump sum when she does officially retire or leave. If you are getting paid not to work, why would you ever take vacation or call in sick? Let it accrue for more paid no work time.
What I also find curious, is the author never identifies how they were alerted to the situation. Odd that. She went back to using her maiden name so maybe her ex husband (if she has one) ratted her out.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 2:16 AM on September 18, 2023 [4 favorites]
When a teacher is taken out of a classroom but not fired, they put them in a rubber room so to speak and make them at least show up everyday and do little or nothing but be on the clock.
The article noted she was accruing sick leave, pension time and paid vacation.. She will either start taking that for probably as long as until her 30 years, or will be paid a large lump sum when she does officially retire or leave. If you are getting paid not to work, why would you ever take vacation or call in sick? Let it accrue for more paid no work time.
What I also find curious, is the author never identifies how they were alerted to the situation. Odd that. She went back to using her maiden name so maybe her ex husband (if she has one) ratted her out.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 2:16 AM on September 18, 2023 [4 favorites]
Why'd they lean so hard on "this lady is collecting money without working for it!!!"? Gotta capture those outraged eyes?
"City government puts employee on paid administrative leave for 7 years, doesn't notice (?)" is the story here. It's not about what SHE did, it's what THEY did. THEY put her on leave and left her on it.
But there's nothing else to say because no one in the city government will talk to the author so just say Jill's name a lot I guess.
posted by Baethan at 3:26 AM on September 18, 2023 [27 favorites]
"City government puts employee on paid administrative leave for 7 years, doesn't notice (?)" is the story here. It's not about what SHE did, it's what THEY did. THEY put her on leave and left her on it.
But there's nothing else to say because no one in the city government will talk to the author so just say Jill's name a lot I guess.
posted by Baethan at 3:26 AM on September 18, 2023 [27 favorites]
One of the many reasons unions fight for this kind of protection for employees is that an accusation is much easier to make than it is to prove.
If the article’s presented reasons for the leave are accurate, she changed her own withholdings in payroll - that should be pretty easy to prove or disprove; it would be on her paystub.
Given the amount of financial distress she was in, it’s possible there was more - a lot of overtime seems on the books and it seems a bit odd that her salary was up or down during the leave. But my suspicion is they lost track of the leave.
posted by warriorqueen at 4:20 AM on September 18, 2023 [4 favorites]
If the article’s presented reasons for the leave are accurate, she changed her own withholdings in payroll - that should be pretty easy to prove or disprove; it would be on her paystub.
Given the amount of financial distress she was in, it’s possible there was more - a lot of overtime seems on the books and it seems a bit odd that her salary was up or down during the leave. But my suspicion is they lost track of the leave.
posted by warriorqueen at 4:20 AM on September 18, 2023 [4 favorites]
Kinda smells like the original allegation was bullshit and the city didn't want to deal with it.
posted by wierdo at 4:24 AM on September 18, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by wierdo at 4:24 AM on September 18, 2023 [2 favorites]
As I read through this I wondered if she had a connection to someone in the city government and then ran across thiss "Repman — under her married name, Parisi — donated $2,980 to the mayor’s campaign committees between 2007 and 2015, according to state campaign finance records. She gave $200 more to the Committee for Change, a defunct campaign committee that was run by Brown’s former deputy mayor, Steve Casey."
For national politics that's a tiny donation but is a big one for municipal races especially for a clerk.
posted by sepviva at 4:25 AM on September 18, 2023 [3 favorites]
For national politics that's a tiny donation but is a big one for municipal races especially for a clerk.
posted by sepviva at 4:25 AM on September 18, 2023 [3 favorites]
latest facts about why unions are bad.
This... honestly doesn't seem like anything the union caused? Good unions will provide their members with a vigorous defense against the initial allegations of wrongdoing and at the hearing, but generally their attitude towards disciplinary proceedings is to want to get them completed one way or the other: if the employee is not at fault, they certainly want that win, and if they are at fault, best to have that tooth pulled all at once. Certainly everyone interviewed with the union for this story seems to have felt that way and was honestly bewildered at the fact that this case was in limbo.
Why'd they lean so hard on "this lady is collecting money without working for it!!!"?
Yeah, I don't get that either. From the headline I was expecting a Forgotten Employee vibe, where she was actually expected to do work and somehow ended up an administrative orphan that didn't have any particular job duties. But she was on paid leave. If your employer explicitly tells you to sit tight, do nothing, and get paid for it while they sort your case out, that is in fact what you are supposed to do in response. If they leave you there for seven years, that's on them, not you.
The only part that seems potentially hinky on her end is her acceptance of full-time outside work while on that leave. IANAL and have no idea whether either as a contractual detail or as general employment law that would implicitly surrender her (on leave) extant full time job. In that case, she would, I'd think, have responsibility to inform her former employer that she no longer worked for them.
posted by jackbishop at 4:38 AM on September 18, 2023 [11 favorites]
This... honestly doesn't seem like anything the union caused? Good unions will provide their members with a vigorous defense against the initial allegations of wrongdoing and at the hearing, but generally their attitude towards disciplinary proceedings is to want to get them completed one way or the other: if the employee is not at fault, they certainly want that win, and if they are at fault, best to have that tooth pulled all at once. Certainly everyone interviewed with the union for this story seems to have felt that way and was honestly bewildered at the fact that this case was in limbo.
Why'd they lean so hard on "this lady is collecting money without working for it!!!"?
Yeah, I don't get that either. From the headline I was expecting a Forgotten Employee vibe, where she was actually expected to do work and somehow ended up an administrative orphan that didn't have any particular job duties. But she was on paid leave. If your employer explicitly tells you to sit tight, do nothing, and get paid for it while they sort your case out, that is in fact what you are supposed to do in response. If they leave you there for seven years, that's on them, not you.
The only part that seems potentially hinky on her end is her acceptance of full-time outside work while on that leave. IANAL and have no idea whether either as a contractual detail or as general employment law that would implicitly surrender her (on leave) extant full time job. In that case, she would, I'd think, have responsibility to inform her former employer that she no longer worked for them.
posted by jackbishop at 4:38 AM on September 18, 2023 [11 favorites]
Yeah, I’ve been involved in union-related administrative actions from both sides, and, while the collection of information and preparing the case take a while, the actual process is usually an afternoon at most. This smacks of carelessness, incompetence, or malfeasance at higher levels n the administration. As pointed out above, payroll fraud relies on being hard to notice, not hard to prove.
The reporter, in my opinion, did a really bad job, missing the real story because it was hard to research.
posted by GenjiandProust at 4:42 AM on September 18, 2023 [2 favorites]
The reporter, in my opinion, did a really bad job, missing the real story because it was hard to research.
posted by GenjiandProust at 4:42 AM on September 18, 2023 [2 favorites]
Smearing Unions....sloth at government......scammy worker....corruption at city hall.....taxpayer rinsing....
Repman Rashōmon?
posted by lalochezia at 4:43 AM on September 18, 2023 [1 favorite]
Repman Rashōmon?
posted by lalochezia at 4:43 AM on September 18, 2023 [1 favorite]
you go girl
posted by AlbertCalavicci at 5:24 AM on September 18, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by AlbertCalavicci at 5:24 AM on September 18, 2023 [3 favorites]
I'm trying to understand how serious the initially alleged actions would have been: can't any employee have their tax withholding changed by updating their W-4? Is this an internal issue of not following the proper administrative procedures, a federal tax records issue due to not filing an updated W-4, or would she have actually been stealing money from either the local or federal government if the records weren't eventually reconciled?
posted by schnellp at 5:31 AM on September 18, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by schnellp at 5:31 AM on September 18, 2023 [1 favorite]
Sounds like she did a great job at that tampering! Very clever.
I could easily imagine that quitting might bring on the idea that she was at fault. There's so much weird shit that goes down at the advice of lawyers in terms of fault and admission of guilt and etcetera. Also, why do we always do the "half a million" "quarter of a million" to make money sound bigger? $70,000 x 7 years is $490,000. Apparently the national median income is approximately $75,000. It's $25,000 in Buffalo so while this is a decent wage, it's not astounding. After 7 years, one would assume any investigation failed to yield proof of malfeasance and therefore she out to be paid out her retirement or reinstated.
posted by amanda at 8:02 AM on September 18, 2023
I could easily imagine that quitting might bring on the idea that she was at fault. There's so much weird shit that goes down at the advice of lawyers in terms of fault and admission of guilt and etcetera. Also, why do we always do the "half a million" "quarter of a million" to make money sound bigger? $70,000 x 7 years is $490,000. Apparently the national median income is approximately $75,000. It's $25,000 in Buffalo so while this is a decent wage, it's not astounding. After 7 years, one would assume any investigation failed to yield proof of malfeasance and therefore she out to be paid out her retirement or reinstated.
posted by amanda at 8:02 AM on September 18, 2023
US median individual income is $40,480 [0], a lot less than $75k.
[0]: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N
posted by crazy with stars at 8:48 AM on September 18, 2023
[0]: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N
posted by crazy with stars at 8:48 AM on September 18, 2023
Median household is $75,000... which feels incorrect. Pre-pandemic, it was hovering around $56,000 with median individual at $26,000. It jumped ~$20,000 in three years?! There have been gains to labor in the interim, but $20,000?!?!
It really feels like something is goosing those numbers.
posted by Slackermagee at 9:00 AM on September 18, 2023 [1 favorite]
It really feels like something is goosing those numbers.
posted by Slackermagee at 9:00 AM on September 18, 2023 [1 favorite]
Median household is $75,000... which feels incorrect. Pre-pandemic, it was hovering around $56,000 with median individual at $26,000. It jumped ~$20,000 in three years?! There have been gains to labor in the interim, but $20,000?!?!
In real (i.e. inflation-adjusted) terms median household income in the US has actually decreased significantly in the past few years, from a 2019 peak of $78,250 to $74,580 in 2022. Median household income increased in absolute terms during that time period, so this is primarily due to inflation outpacing wages.
posted by jedicus at 9:53 AM on September 18, 2023
In real (i.e. inflation-adjusted) terms median household income in the US has actually decreased significantly in the past few years, from a 2019 peak of $78,250 to $74,580 in 2022. Median household income increased in absolute terms during that time period, so this is primarily due to inflation outpacing wages.
posted by jedicus at 9:53 AM on September 18, 2023
If the article’s presented reasons for the leave are accurate, she changed her own withholdings in payroll - that should be pretty easy to prove or disprove; it would be on her paystub.
Maybe difficult to prove intent, though. If nobody ever told her this isn't allowed, she could always claim she thought it was fine as long as you square up with the IRS in the end. I assume it's harder to fire someone over one "mistake" than over one instance of fraud.
Obviously nobody wants to keep an accounting clerk who's doing anything weird with the books, but they may have made it harder to fire her by not giving her a written warning the first time they spotted it and keeping a close eye on her afterwards.
posted by smelendez at 10:55 AM on September 18, 2023
Maybe difficult to prove intent, though. If nobody ever told her this isn't allowed, she could always claim she thought it was fine as long as you square up with the IRS in the end. I assume it's harder to fire someone over one "mistake" than over one instance of fraud.
Obviously nobody wants to keep an accounting clerk who's doing anything weird with the books, but they may have made it harder to fire her by not giving her a written warning the first time they spotted it and keeping a close eye on her afterwards.
posted by smelendez at 10:55 AM on September 18, 2023
The reporter really seems to be trying to spin this story hard to make the clerk seem shady. Why highlight her surname change in the headline?
It seems pretty clear that this is more of a problem with the system than with the individual.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 12:10 PM on September 18, 2023 [3 favorites]
It seems pretty clear that this is more of a problem with the system than with the individual.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 12:10 PM on September 18, 2023 [3 favorites]
would she have actually been stealing money from either the local or federal government if the records weren't eventually reconciled?
It seems that she didn't increase her actual gross pay or anything, but she adjusted the tax withholding so she ended up with more net pay, then changed the records back after the payroll run. That way, the records look correct and the gross outgoing is still the same so, even if they found her out, she didn't actually steal anything and she would have had to pay the extra at tax return time. Given she was in dire financial straits at the time, it's not hard to see why she did it. Not only did she not steal money from the local or federal government, she didn't steal from her employer either - it was her money all along.
I agree the article was pretty lazy and I also noticed how much it made a point of using her full name, both current and former. I wonder if someone in the department knows the reporter and is playing a game of tit-for-tat?
This whole thing is 100% on the department. They put her on indefinite paid leave and then forgot about her. She did nothing wrong and was doing exactly as she was told. Even the getting another job thing is probably fine - nothing wrong with doing some extra work while you're on leave, providing there isn't a clause in her employment contract prohibiting other employment or requiring approval first.
posted by dg at 2:43 PM on September 18, 2023 [3 favorites]
It seems that she didn't increase her actual gross pay or anything, but she adjusted the tax withholding so she ended up with more net pay, then changed the records back after the payroll run. That way, the records look correct and the gross outgoing is still the same so, even if they found her out, she didn't actually steal anything and she would have had to pay the extra at tax return time. Given she was in dire financial straits at the time, it's not hard to see why she did it. Not only did she not steal money from the local or federal government, she didn't steal from her employer either - it was her money all along.
I agree the article was pretty lazy and I also noticed how much it made a point of using her full name, both current and former. I wonder if someone in the department knows the reporter and is playing a game of tit-for-tat?
This whole thing is 100% on the department. They put her on indefinite paid leave and then forgot about her. She did nothing wrong and was doing exactly as she was told. Even the getting another job thing is probably fine - nothing wrong with doing some extra work while you're on leave, providing there isn't a clause in her employment contract prohibiting other employment or requiring approval first.
posted by dg at 2:43 PM on September 18, 2023 [3 favorites]
Repman/Parisi is accused of altering two of her own paychecks years ago (changing deductions "to increase her biweekly take-home pay by a few hundred dollars"), after 20+ years on the job. In 2021 her recorded salary was $68,692, and in 2022 it was $72,686. We're three-quarters into 2023, and she's already been paid $71,509.
If that leap is from a raise, it rivals the salary increases the Buffalo Common Council voted to give the mayor, the comptroller, and themselves (effective next year). Nov. 7 is the general election for BCC's Fillmore District, btw; that district's current councilman, Mitch Nowakowski (quoted throughout the article) is up for re-election.
posted by Iris Gambol at 2:57 PM on September 18, 2023
If that leap is from a raise, it rivals the salary increases the Buffalo Common Council voted to give the mayor, the comptroller, and themselves (effective next year). Nov. 7 is the general election for BCC's Fillmore District, btw; that district's current councilman, Mitch Nowakowski (quoted throughout the article) is up for re-election.
posted by Iris Gambol at 2:57 PM on September 18, 2023
she didn't actually steal anything and she would have had to pay the extra at tax return time. Given she was in dire financial straits at the time
I don’t know about the US. But in Canada, adjusting your income tax withholding would be fine because it’s on you to pay it at the end of the year. However, there are other withholdings, like in Ontario, the employer health tax, and Canada pension plan contributions, where the employer would be liable, if they didn’t remit those withholdings.
It does seem disproportionate. But having access to payroll is a pretty serious responsibility. I used to document separately any changes I had to make to my payroll information or for anyone that was personally associated with me.
posted by warriorqueen at 3:42 PM on September 18, 2023 [1 favorite]
I don’t know about the US. But in Canada, adjusting your income tax withholding would be fine because it’s on you to pay it at the end of the year. However, there are other withholdings, like in Ontario, the employer health tax, and Canada pension plan contributions, where the employer would be liable, if they didn’t remit those withholdings.
It does seem disproportionate. But having access to payroll is a pretty serious responsibility. I used to document separately any changes I had to make to my payroll information or for anyone that was personally associated with me.
posted by warriorqueen at 3:42 PM on September 18, 2023 [1 favorite]
Speaking as a dues-paying union member, I don’t have much sympathy for the lady and I would expect answers from my union leadership as to why someone is being paid to not work for over seven years. Their job is to defend people from overreach but also to make sure bad apples aren’t left to rot the membership. That being said, if the city has a grievance, then they need to shit or get off the pot.
Personally, the whole situation smells funny.
Suspending and/or firing someone for changing their withholding strikes me as extreme. Whenever I change my withholding, I have to fill out a new W4. I suppose just going in an changing it without completing the required paperwork is a violation of IRS rules but that seems minor in the grand scheme of misdeeds a bookkeeper can do.
My guess is there is more to this story. Possibly the city tried to force her out for other reasons that lead to other, messier questions? This lady is either the fall guy for someone else or she was being paid to keep quiet, lest she drop a dime on larger shenanigans.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 7:37 PM on September 18, 2023 [2 favorites]
Personally, the whole situation smells funny.
Suspending and/or firing someone for changing their withholding strikes me as extreme. Whenever I change my withholding, I have to fill out a new W4. I suppose just going in an changing it without completing the required paperwork is a violation of IRS rules but that seems minor in the grand scheme of misdeeds a bookkeeper can do.
My guess is there is more to this story. Possibly the city tried to force her out for other reasons that lead to other, messier questions? This lady is either the fall guy for someone else or she was being paid to keep quiet, lest she drop a dime on larger shenanigans.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 7:37 PM on September 18, 2023 [2 favorites]
Suspending and/or firing someone for changing their withholding strikes me as extreme.
I think it's pretty significant that she was a payroll clerk. You really don't want someone in that position who is into secretly changing the data.
posted by tavella at 11:15 AM on September 19, 2023 [3 favorites]
I think it's pretty significant that she was a payroll clerk. You really don't want someone in that position who is into secretly changing the data.
posted by tavella at 11:15 AM on September 19, 2023 [3 favorites]
« Older Oh joy (scratch, scratch) | They figured out a thing! Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by gurple at 8:18 PM on September 17, 2023 [1 favorite]