The city of Jamestown and the union representing its police officers and firefighters are arguing in court over an arbitrator’s decision over holiday pay for those who worked on the Juneteenth 2024 holiday.

Elliot Raimondo, city corporation counsel, filed a petition in state Supreme Court in late May asking Judge Stephen Cass to set aside a November 2024 arbitrator’s award setting aside a ruling that police officers and firefighters are entitled to holiday pay for working the 2024 Juneteenth holiday. The union members are asking Cass to require the city to make the payment as it did in 2023.

“The city believes that the arbitrator improperly found that the city municipal building was closed on June 19, 2024, on the basis that she considered county and state tenants as performing duties of the municipal government,” Raimondo wrote in a Memorandum of Law filed in the case. “Meanwhile, she did not consider the fact that every city department and the city as a whole was open for business on June 19, 2024. For this reason the arbitrator was in violation of CPLR Section 7511 and her order must be vacated.”

The same dispute arose over the 2023 Juneteenth holiday after the unions filed a grievance when the city didn’t provide holiday pay for people working June 19, 2023. In a Jan. 31, 2024, arbitration award, arbitrator Michael S. Lewandowski ruled that because the city’s municipal building was closed then the city owed holiday pay to union members who worked that day. In the 2024 case, the city and the unions disagreed over whether the holiday resulted in City Hall being closed for regular business, the language that is included in the union’s contracts with the city.

The same dispute arose over the 2023 Juneteenth holiday after the unions filed a grievance when the city didn’t provide holiday pay for people working June 19, 2023. In a Jan. 31, 2024, arbitration award, arbitrator Michael S. Lewandowski ruled that because the city’s municipal building was closed then the city owed holiday pay to union members who worked that day. In the 2024 case, the city and the unions disagreed over whether the holiday resulted in City Hall being closed for regular business, the language that is included in the union’s contracts with the city. The city argued that all offices were open even if not all offices were fully staffed, while the union argued that many services weren’t available even though offices were open because many staff members weren’t working and, at the same time, state and county offices in City Hall were closed.

Arbitrator Lise Gelernter ruled that while city offices were open for business, the municipal building was not open for regular business because several areas – the Police Department, state and county offices in the building, and Jamestown City Court were all off on Juneteenth, while the day was a still a holiday for many city workers.

“The public may have been able to walk through the building’s doors on Juneteenth 2024, but they were not able to conduct regular business in all parts of the building.”

Raimondo and the city are asking Cass to set aside Gelernter’s ruling. Charles DeAngelo of Fessenden, Laumer and DeAngelo and attorney for the city police and fire department unions, argued in his memorandum of law that judicial review of an arbitrator’s award is strictly limited to instances when an arbitrator blatantly exceeds their power. DeAngelo said Lewandowski’s 2023 arbitration over holiday pay for the Juneteenth holiday granted that holidays can be added to the union members’ contracts even if they were not listed holidays when the contract was agreed upon by the parties.

“Clearly the arbitrator’s award has a substantial basis in fact and as set forth below, her award cannot and should not be overturned on that basis,” DeAngelo wrote. “When the arbitrator interpreted the contract in the manner she did, she was performing the exact duties the parties had delegated to her. The arbitrator simply interpreted and applied the parties’ written agreement. Since the parties asked her to do exactly that, the city should not be heard to complain that the arbitrator did not agree with the interpretation the city requested. Under CPLR Section 7511, the fact that a losing party may be unhappy with an arbitration award is not a basis for the vacatur of that award.”