Trending
MINGO JUNCTION -- There seemed to be more questions left than answers following Thursday's meeting of village officials, the latest in a series stemming from two employee grievances.
Those grievances -- which allege a hostile work environment -- were filed in June by two village firefighters who have since been terminated by Mayor Judy Ruckman on the grounds that they allegedly abandoned their jobs, leading to a voluntary discharge.
Village council disagrees with Ruckman's decision to terminate the employees, who are now threatening litigation based on alleged retaliation, according to Ruckman.
Council met with Ruckman for more than an hour in the council chambers Thursday. Council held two prior meetings on July 18 and 25, with the first being an initial hearing with the complainants at the Mingo Junction Senior Center.
That hearing started a countdown for council to devise a resolution to the grievances, or else a third party arbiter would be necessary, as per the village fire department's collective bargaining agreement. The responsibility of resolving the grievances comes to council following its inability to be resolved first by the fire chief and then by the mayor, according to Councilwoman Jodilynn Fitzgerald.
By the time it concluded, Thursday's meeting showed no progress toward a resolution, and another meeting had not yet been scheduled.
According to Ruckman, the grievances originated June 11, when firefighters Wesley Ostroff and Rebecca Perry approached her and said they felt "terrified" and did not want to work with the department's Assistant Chief Nick Moore.
Ruckman said she corresponded with then-Fire Chief Brandon Montgomery -- who has been on paid leave since June 14 due to an ongoing Bureau of Criminal Investigation probe into alleged misconduct -- to establish a meeting between all involved parties and resolve the situation. The meeting was set for June 24.
In the meantime, Ostroff and Perry did not return to work. Ruckman said she spoke with then-interim Fire Chief Aaron Dickey -- replaced now by Austin Raymond -- to get the meeting date moved forward. All parties agreed to hold a meeting June 17, she said.
Come the June 17 meeting, Ostroff and Perry arrived with a temporary protection order against Moore, a move that Ruckman claimed put the village in a "predicament" by superseding its actions to resolve the issue. Ruckman said she consulted with Village Solicitor Craig Allen, who said it would be best to send the two home and take time to assess.
Ruckman said that on July 19 she offered Ostroff and Perry the opportunity to return to work on shifts opposite to Moore's. Both said they'd be willing to do so, provided certain stipulations were put in writing. Ruckman told them an attorney with the Public Entities Pool of Ohio advised her not to put anything in writing, as it could act as a binding document.
Ruckman said she contacted Ostroff and Perry again July 2 and asked if they'd return to work, to which they replied that they understood themselves to be on unpaid leave until the hearing for the protection order against Moore, which had been continued to a later date.
A third text from Ruckman on July 3 received no answer, prompting Ruckman to terminate Ostroff and Perry's employment five days later based on the "five days, no-call no-show" stipulation in the collective bargaining agreement.
Council is in agreement that Ruckman's decision to terminate Ostroff and Perry was incorrect, according to Councilwoman Patti Mannarino, adding that council members believe no action should have been taken against them before the protection order hearing.
Ruckman claimed the protection orders were ultimately not upheld following the hearing.
Thursday's meeting was meant to bring some answers, Ruckman said, but no progress could be made due to the absence of Allen and the PEP attorney.