General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRay Tensing who murdered Sam Dubose is demanding his job back.
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2015/07/31/tensing-union-demands-uc-job-back/30932331/
Indydem
(2,642 posts)Then that is what the University of Cincinnati is required to do.
You can't run around willy nilly shitting on Unions Contacts because he killed a man in cold blood.
brush
(53,908 posts)I'm pro-union (although police unions are an entirely different animal than labor unions) but no union contract allows for a person indicted for murder to serve until the indictment is decided especially in the case of a gun-toting law enforcement officer.
Ahhhh . . . correction, ex-law enforcement officer. And that's probably going to stay that way.
Ms. Toad
(34,103 posts)which impacts compensation.
So I agree that he won't be able to serve (in a gun-toting capacity), he is almost certainly entitled to notice and an opportunity to be heard before they turn off his compensation.
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)I will stand by opposition to collective bargaining rights for officers with the enforcement power of the state.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)I'm only surprised he doesn't ask for additional pay for 'mental anguish' at almost being 'sucked under a car' and having blood and brains spatter on him.
MineralMan
(146,335 posts)PTSD, you know. If he is re-instated, I'm sure he'll apply for that right away.
brush
(53,908 posts)You and your buddies were caught lying about you being dragged by Dubose's car.
Plus you murdered an unarmed man.
You won't get that job back.
What? You think UC is going to have someone indicted for murder patrolling the campus.
If so, you've proven again what an incompetent idiot you are who is not fit to be a policeman.
Deal with it.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)oasis
(49,414 posts)Not gonna happen.
IcyPeas
(21,910 posts)This guy.
trump.
Huckabee.
no shame.
Gothmog
(145,627 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)I hope this guys termination wasn't screwed up. Of course it's probably moot since he is going to be going to jail for a long time.
Ms. Toad
(34,103 posts)With the caveat that I obviously have not seen the contract so I am basing this on similar contracts I have seen.
The complaint alleges, exxentially, that he was not afforded the due process they were required to give him prior to terminating him. Assuming the requirement is in there (it typically is), and assuming there is not a provision that makes termination automatic on indictment, I would be more surprised if he loses than if he wins.
That doesn't necessarily mean they have to put him back on active duty - but they almost certainly have to give him notice and an opportunity to be heard before dinging him financially. I would expect them to reinstate him in suspension, but to briefly restore his compensation just long enough to give him a hearing.
Beyond that, it will depend on what the contract says they have to prove to terminate him, or suspend him without pay.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)First time I had to supervise anyone I was told that no matter how fast you need someone gone, the most action you should take initially is to suspend without pay and send the person home and then let HR (and firm attorneys if necessary) work out the details beyond that.
Just so this kind of stuff does not happen.
Liberal_in_LA
(44,397 posts)MindPilot
(12,693 posts)Where else can you commit murder, and your biggest concern is keeping your job?
Where else--if some one happens to piss you off--can you beat them mercilessly and simply walk away?
Where else can you hunt and kill people just because of the color of their skin, and and then collect disability for PTSD?
Even a soldier in combat doesn't get the kind of pass cops in America do today. I think Tensing will walk, jut like all the others who came before.
cloudbase
(5,525 posts)Who the grievant is secondary. Sometimes that means providing thorough representation to a real asshole for the sake of helping out a good guy somewhere down the line.
This will likely wind up in arbitration (unless convicted prior to the arbitration-not likely) and the plain contract language and past precedent will likely be the deciding factor in the arbitrator's decision.