Is it possible McCracken is coming back to the town asks resident

[Lee Chowaniec]

While rumors persist whether former Lancaster Crew Chief Terry McCracken was fired from his temporary new job at the Water Authority because he failed the civil service examine, lied on his application or was the victim of his own political party revenge, resident Mike Fronczak asked the town board whether it was possible for McCracken to return to the town in the position he resigned from.

Fronczak: He went on to other things and that doesn’t seem to be panning out. Is it possible Mr. McCracken is coming back to the town?

Supervisor Dino Fudoli: For financial purposes, I would say yes and I would support it. He has not applied; just so you know. Municipalities are not obligated to pay unemployment insurance. They will pay dollar for dollar what the system pays.

When I found out in the News that there was a problem with his employment at the Water Authority I asked our payroll supervisor what was the unemployment process to be followed. Are we still on the hook because he resigned from here and lost his job there? She replied that we are on the hook for 100% of his benefits. Suppose he decides to not work for the next two years and we hire someone for $65,000 to replace him. We would pay him from $30,000 to $35,000 in benefits for those two years.

So am I interested in it (bringing him back), I am not saying yes or no. For financial reasons, would that be in the town’s best interest…but so you know, he has not applied to come back. I was just looking at the financial perspective.

Fronczak: What benefits are you referring to?

Fudoli: Unemployment benefits. Businesses pay unemployment insurance. If somebody applies for unemployment that comes out of a pool that the state funds. Municipalities, because there are very few layoffs, there is no state run unemployment insurance. So when somebody applies for unemployment (town) we pay them direct, $400-$500 per week which comes out to $20,000 to $30,000 (per year).

Fronczak: I don’t understand where you are getting your numbers from when individuals only get 26 weeks of unemployment now.

Fudoli: You get over 90 weeks according to the state statute.

Fronczak: That was taken away. It is 26 weeks to my knowledge.

Fudoli: Okay, if that’s the case then it’s around $10,000. If it is 99 weeks, which I thought it was, and it expired, I didn’t know. But yes, we would be responsible for both, the new person hired, and McCracken’s benefits. I disagree with the state’s rule vehemently, but it’s the state’s rule.

Comments

Fronczak is correct. Unemployment benefits were reduced to 26 weeks of eligibility at the beginning of the year. Congress did not approve the extension.

Earning $73,571 per year, McCracken would be eligible for $410 weekly unemployment compensation. 26 x $410 = $10,660 – a far cry from the $20,000 to $30,000 first estimated by Fudoli.

If one set of rumors are true, there is no way the DEMS will bring McCracken back home.

[gorja]

I agree that we would be on the hook for unemployment benefits if McCracken was terminated just for not meeting qualifications of the job but if he was terminated for misconduct, I don't think he would qualify.

[gorja]

Would the same scenario apply regarding unemployment benefits if he would not have been reappointed in January? Is that why the same people keep getting reappointed? Shorty and itch always say what a shoddy job he does at the parks. Yet, he kept getting reappointed.

[gorja]

Another question, if he was to be re-hired, would he be hired as a new employee with a new employee's lower salary or as a 19 year employee with his old salary?

[NY The Vampire State]

He RESIGNED. How is Lancaster on the hook for ANYTHING?

[gorja]

He RESIGNED. How is Lancaster on the hook for ANYTHING?

Because he was let go from his most recent job, then unemployment does a look back for previous employment. If he quit the Lancaster job and never got the ECWA job, we wouldn't be on the hook. The real question is, "was he let go through no fault of his own"? If he was let go because ECWA was too stupid to check his qualifications before offering the job, then it's not his fault. If he falsified a company record (job application), then it is his fault. If it's just a political payback, I'd say, "GREAT JOB", but it would be considered not his fault.

[4248]

All right - let me see if I understand this - because he "resigned from his job in Lancaster" and was terminated from the ECWA - "by law" Lancaster has to pay his benefits and unemployment ? Show me where this is written - where can I find that law.

Me thinks their playing fast and loose with the word game here. Just like when the Supervisor exaggerated the cost to tax payers ! He was employed by the ECWA - he was let go from the ECWA.

Even if we do have to pay his unemployment - so be it - it will, in the long run cost tax payers less.

Hire him back and he will get full salary again $96-98,000.00 tax dollars a year - then add in benefits - tax funded $18-20,000.00 benefits a year , plus tax dollars added to his pension which will increase his tax funded rerirement for life. Bull**** !
-

So because his Political buddies feel sorry for him - he gets brought back ! Did Rich Reese get brought back - did he get made whole after the Dem Committee steam rolled him - No they ruined his life - trashed his family - ran his son out of the volunteer fire department - are you flippin kidding me here folks. Where was the out pouring of sympathy for what Dem Committee Leader and his friends did - ???????????????

All the BS campaign dirty tricks - like trying to label the Supervisor a drug pushing club owner who helped a young lady OD ! Are you kidding me folks.

A resident was taking pictures of illegal filling on property owned by Parks Boss T.M.'s number two man - they spread rumors and lies and tried to say the man was watching little kids - they tried to make him out to be a pervert. Are you people kidding me ?

If Supervisor Fudoli rolls over on this one - he should reregister himself as a Dem and quit being a RHINO. This is total abuse of tax payers money.

He sat in his office doing Committee Buisness for years - his guys tore down opponents campaign signs - his workers installed - and collected Dem Party Campaign signs.

So now they want to give him another tax funded job because it looks like he got what he gave others - Outrageous.

If this fly's - I vote Councilman Donna Stempniak for Lancaster Town Supervisor

.

This will be the number one issue in next years campaigns if I have to pay for the flyers personally.

Parks Boss/Party Insider RESIGNS - loses $98,000.00 ECWA job - gets reappointed by Lan Dem Insiders with the Blessing of our Town Supervisor !

This is what your Town Government does with your home owner tax dollars. You will now use your tax dollars to increase his life time pension - you will now use your tax dollars to pay his salary because Councilman Mr.---- & Mrs.---- conspired and hired him back after he resigned!

What part of this Political deal benefits Lancaster's tax payers - as far as job experience there's other employees who have already professed to doing most of the Parks Boss's duties - there's already a Town Worker who was appointed to take his place.

And so on - I will find more

[WNYresident]

Me thinks their playing fast and loose with the word game here. He was employed by the ECWA - he was let go from the ECWA.

Who usually covers the unemployment? The last employer or is it based on time worked at an various employers?

[WNYresident]

Parks Boss/Party Insider RESIGNS - loses $98,000.00 ECWA job - gets reappointed by Lan Dem Insiders with the Blessing of our Town Supervisor !

That is not going to happen. That would be wrong on more than one level. Dino will do the right thing. He needs to decide who he represents. The best interest of various political party players or the best interest of the property/business owners.

[gorja]

Originally posted by 4248:
All right - let me see if I understand this - because he "resigned from his job in Lancaster" and was terminated from the ECWA - "by law" Lancaster has to pay his benefits and unemployment ? Show me where this is written - where can I find that law.

Charging of Benefits
Base Period
When someone files a claim for benefits, we establish a base period. This period is either:
 The first four of the last five completed calendar quarters
or
 The last four completed calendar quarters before they filed the claim
We base a claimant’s entitlement and benefit rate on the amount of earnings during the base period.

Notification of Entitlement
When we determine that a claimant filing for benefits is entitled, we send the following notices to all employers whose experience rating accounts might be charged for their benefits:
 A Notice of Potential Charges (LO 400)
 A Notice of Protest (LO 400P)

It is important for employers to respond to these Notices timely and adequately with any:
 Discrepancies in wage information
 Potentially disqualifying information
Otherwise, their experience rating accounts may not be fully credited for benefits paid the claimant.
Do not return the form(s), unless you:
 Wish to change the wage data
 Know of any reason why the claimant should not collect

Charging Formula
1. First, we charge benefits to the account of the last employer for whom the claimant worked before they filed the UI claim. The last employer is charged seven times the claimant’s weekly benefit. Next, we charge benefits to all base-period employers proportionately to how much of the claimant’s total base-period wages were paid by each employer.

https://labor.ny.gov/formsdocs/ui/IA318.2.pdf page 6

[4248]

Ok - so now that my blood pressure came down -

Lancaster could be on the hook for $10,000.00 - correct ?


Now, if he gets rehired/reinstated we are on the hook for $19-20,000.00 tax dollars for benefits alone -

Then his tax funded salary of $ -----------

Then we also continue to contribute tax dollars and enrich his pension plan - for life -

As Supervisor Fudoli stated - "Financialy speaking" - if - and it should be the only consideration - if he was speaking of whats best for tax paying home owners. We are better of without him Mr.T.C.

Why are we constantly on the hook for all these displaced "Party Players" ?

Next thing you know they'll chop up the Parks Boss titles and turn it into two tax funded positions !

Why not take this opurtunity to for once save tax dollars - consolidate the Highway and Parks Department. Employees would have a wider chance at job advancement within a larger Department. Over time would be reduced - more employees could be cross trained in duties.

The Highway Department is getting new equiptment and finally doing road and ditch work. Continue that trend and include a flood control program.

Lets see how they spin this - we aren't responsible for peoples "Political Decisions" - he was strictly thinking of his own future - not Lancasters tax payers or County tax payers when he thought he could pull a fast one and double dip with a new tax funded job switch.

That's my opinion and I believe I am not alone.

Double Dip Town Councilman Donna Stempniak for Supervisor.

[Lee Chowaniec]

I would be extreme surprised if Mr. McCracken would be re-appointed to his old position. Just as surprised if he wanted back.

[4248]

So, you might believe a new position could be more likely - not putting words in your mouth - just askin !

Watching our new Supervisor roll over - while this Parks Boss thing unfolds - WOW!

Its amazing how people change their opinions/life's/ and even moral compass once they get a taste of how much easier it is to just go along.

In the case of the Parks Boss/Party Player he was raised playing the Party game - his faithful party family laid the ground work for him. He changes his personal life in order to get a leg up in the Political arena - shows no loyalty to anyone - then karma slaps him in the rear end.

How he helped punish those who stood in his committees candidates way - or anyone his developer friends wanted rolled over.

Someone said they believed he was "Set up by his own Party" - actually he helped create the ground rules for that type of actions. He's laughed and enjoyed watching others profit from the humiliation of others. Gave his "Sons of Patronage" the tools and power to become what they are.

Why would anyone feel sorry for these tax feed scammers - these Political Welfare recipients - why ?

[gorja]

Don't forget that one of the media sources had stated that the town was in talks with Peter Jerebko who could be the husband of the Depew Lancaster Boys and Girls club Board of Director's president, Lisa Jerebko. Aquino has had past ties to the club and Ruffino has had more recent ties to the club in its fund raising efforts.

[dmckay716]

It's my understanding that the town board struck out with their 1st candidate and have now focused their search on Mr. Jerebko.