PORTLAND, Maine — Justices on the Maine Supreme Judicial Court heard oral arguments Thursday in a case that pits 29 former Millinocket employees against the town over changes to their retirement benefits.
The employees are appealing a summary judgment handed down by Penobscot County Superior Court Justice Donald Marden last year. They argue that there are material facts in dispute, making the summary judgment an improper result of their breach of contract claim.
The plaintiffs, represented by John Hamer of Rudman Winchell in Bangor, have argued that the town breached their contracts when, in 2009, it changed its personnel policy, saying it would fund only 87 percent of their health insurance costs, according to case documents. Before that, the town had fully covered its employees’ and retirees’ health benefits.
“Any employment relationship is based on contractual obligations,” Hamer told the justices.
In 1991, the personnel policy was amended to say that the town had the right to change these benefits in the future, but those changes would affect only employees hired after Aug. 8, 1991.
Hamer argued that the policy change promised 100 percent coverage of health care for the rest of the life of any town employee hired before that date.
The town, represented by Jeffrey Piampiano of Portland’s Drummond, Woodsum & MacMahon, differs in its view of what that section of the personnel policy means.
Piampiano also argued that Millinocket’s policy is not a binding contract between the town and its nonunion employees, but rather an employee manual.
If questions remain about the language contained in the personnel policy, the case should go back to trial, Piampiano argued.
The bigger question is whether the Town of Millinocket lied to its retiree’s? Those 7 who lauded over the council meeting, seem to be no different then what they have been calling the Governor. Those 7 represent the Town of Millinocket so their is no different then they said it themselves. Regardless of what the Supreme Court says, the Town of Millinocket (its representatives) gave their word. So, what does the word of those 7 Councilors mean?
Nick also that percentage keeps dropping every year. I thnk it is 61% til June, then drops till 0.
what did the summary judgement say when it was returned? Again an article with no information.
town lied like usuall not the first time wont be the last . i think the MMA should get involved in the town and do a real audit . bunch of crooks they are .
If you can believe what you read here, which I can’t, there seems to be a lot of discrepancies to this article. First it states 29 former employees, then it finishes with statement about non-union members. People don’t be fooled by the play on words. This is about a UNION contract and obligations that the town leaders had agreed upon when things were ‘booming’ there.
The economy tanked the town leaders were more concerned about putting in a NEW pool and a walking trail with federal funds then honoring the TOWN’S commitment it had with those once, twice, perhaps even thrice time retired public servants.
Just think of the money wasted on this issue.
Clear Prop, contact…..pop, boom, bang,,,, ka-chug, ka-chug, ka-chug.
It is a novel in the making titled: My Time on the Mountain Top, by Willie Makeit & Betty Wont.
:-)
When employees get done they are kind of lumped into the town policy. Those that were on that council at the time feel that they did not make the decision and were not bound by it. The fact remains the town of Millinocket made the decision, so in fact as sworn Councilors for the Town of Millinocket when they changed it, then they went back on the Town of Millinokcet’s word, hence they went back on their word being sworn in councilors. Also only 29 decided to stay and go to court on the issue, I think their were originally around 50. So you see what the town has done, it has Bullied widows, elderly and disabled. And also some had died since. If they had kept it, in time it would of gone down, as it has been
It’s about all employees, not just union. I know a former non union employee and he said he is part of the suit.