Dog Control Resolution dies – “It’s not the money, it’s the principle,” says Town Sup

[Lee Chowaniec]

Failing approval was a resolution whereby any individual appointed to an unsalaried part-time position as Dog Control Officer in the Town of Lancaster Dog Control Department shall be compensated for the actual number of hours worked, except that, in the case of an unscheduled call-in required as a result of a dangerous dog presenting a threat to public safety as determined by the Town of Lancaster Police Department or Dog Control Officer, and also in the case of an unscheduled call-in to care for or feed a dog in Town of Lancaster custody and for court appearances required by their official duties as a Dog Control Officer for the Town of Lancaster, any such individual shall be compensated for the greater of four hours or the actual number of hours worked.

The resolution was sponsored by Council member Robert Leary. Before the voting took place Supervisor Ruffino interjected that he did not oppose the dangerous dog call-in recommendation but objected to the four - hour pay entitlement for call-ins for dog feeding and court appearances. He and council member David Mazur contended that tweaking staff scheduling could alleviate the sick call in problem and eliminate the need to call in another DCO to fill in and pay four hours of pay when that individual may spend only 10 minutes of actual work time.

Leary and Council member Adam Dickman argued to no avail that the DCO’S on call make only $13/hr., have other jobs, are obligated by State Law to care for dogs in custody, where getting individuals in on weekends is extremely difficult, where call-in situations are extremely rare, and where the cost of providing such services would only amount to a few hundred dollars a year.

Supervisor Ruffino closed by saying that it was not the cost, but the principle and further review of the scheduling was needed.

Leary and Dickman voted yes, Ruffino and Mazur no. The resolution died as it did not receive the majority of votes for approval.

Comment

It is my understanding that the DCO Department is staffed by four individuals – a DCO and Assistant DCO (summer) working 35 daytime hours and two part-time off-shift scheduled DCOS (19 hours per week). 108 hours of paid coverage over 168 hours in a week.

The police handle all dog complaints. When needing DCO assistance during the day, DCO Officer Jean Karn is notified and will respond. Off-shift, the police have the scheduled list of call-ins. If that individual cannot respond, Karn is called and often responds if she cannot get someone to take the call. The town is hesitant to pay Karn overtime and when she responds she is risking liability coverage.AS are police officers who too often accept the risk of handling a dangerous dog without proper training or equipment and getting the dog to the kennel without bothering Karn.

All this risk for $200 per year. Hopefully, the town works something out as even Supervisor Ruffino earlier sponsored a resolution to approve the dangerous dog proposal, which was tabled at the prior meeting for further review.

[gorja]

Welcome to the real world.
I work unpaid off shifts all the time when I can't get coverage for a call-off.
I'm of the belief that it's the responsibility of the department head.

I do agree that if an employee was called in on their off shift for a dangerous dog situation, they should be compensated for the 4 hours.
I do not agree that an employee being called in just to feed the dogs should just go home and get paid 4 hours.
If no one will run in and work a few hours feed and clean, then I'd say the head DCO should just run in and feed them, just my opinion.