Jury employee still working 2 years after job ended

Advocate staff photo by BILL FEIG -- Traffic zips by Baker speed cams on LA-19(Main St.) in Baker, La.. Looks like things are turning into a pushing match between the Pointe Coupee Sheriffs Department, DAs office and the Police Jury over trying to implement a speed enforcement program in the parish. Story will be a follow to Thursdays article where Juror Justin Cox tried to call out the sheriff and DA for being misinformed about the program. The Sheriff and DA say Cox isn't giving the jury "all the facts" about using traffic cameras. Cox wants to model Pointe Coupee's program like the City of Baker's which uses speed cams to catch speeders. Photo shot on Friday Nov. 30, 2012, in Baker, La.. MAGS OUT / INTERNET OUT / ONLINE OUT / NO SALES / TV OUT / FOREIGN OUT / LOUISIANA BUSINESS INC. OUT / GREATER BATON ROUGE BUSINESS REPORT OUT / 225 OUT / 10/12 OUT / IN REGISTER OUT / LBI CUSTOM PUBLICATIONS OUT / MANDATORY CREDIT : THE ADVOCATE/BILL FEIG /

NEW ROADS — A part-time employee of the Pointe Coupee Parish Utility Department was temporarily removed from the clock Tuesday night until the Police Jury’s Personnel Committee determines why she is still being paid even though jurors nullified her job slot two years ago.

The Police Jury voted 6-3-1 Tuesday night to refer the matter to committee after Juror Justin Cox said the part-time position had not been approved by the Police Jury since August 2010.

Cox said the employee was still working for the parish, sometimes getting paid for as many as 75 hours during two-week pay periods. Jurors Clifford Nelson, Russell Young and Cornell Dukes voted against Cox’s motion.

Jury President Melanie Bueche chose to abstain from voting Tuesday night.

Jurors Albert Dukes and Allen Monk were not present when the vote was taken.

Dukes said he didn’t see why there was any rush for the jury to act so quickly to resolve the matter.

“It’s been going on for three years,” Dukes said. “Let the Personnel Committee discuss it and then come back to the full jury with a solution.”

The Personnel Committee is set to meet Thursday.

Cox said he felt the Police Jury needs to address the issue immediately because, given the amount of hours the employee was working, the parish could find itself obligated to pay for her benefits and health care coverage.

Employees who work more than 32 hours a week are considered full-time, Cox said.

Jurors Nelson and Cox got into a heated debate on the issue.

Nelson argued he presented the matter to the Police Jury and no one spoke out against letting the employee continue working.

Cox countered there were no meeting minutes on file to back up Nelson’s claim.

“The policy is she shouldn’t be working at all,” Cox said. “She hasn’t been approved.”

“This is a young girl trying to make it,” Nelson said. “I told her she couldn’t work more than 32 hours until we get this straight. Why are you being so hard on this young lady?”

“We need to follow procedure,” Cox replied. “That’s the problem here; we don’t follow procedure.”

Comments

1) Comment by mmac11 - 04/24/2013

Looks like Mr Nelson should be investigated for ethics at a minimum and probably criminal violations. It sounds like he knows this person that should not be on the payroll and has continued to protect her. Maybe he's getting something in return for protecting her position? Everywhere around here there is nepotism on a scale I've never seen. The citizens deserve better of their government.

2) Comment by Woody - 01/23/2013

who kept track of her time and continued to sign her paycheck?

3) Comment by mcarter - 01/23/2013

It's amazing how much money is wasted due to fraud, cheating, etc.

4) Comment by mh1949 - 01/23/2013

I guess she knows the right people.

5) Comment by Attila - 01/23/2013

The people who voted for the there morons who did not want to immediately address this issue should start recalls against them. The fact that "this is a young lady trying to make it" and the statement " why are you being so hard on this young lady" demonstrates that Clifford Nelson needs to be charged with malfeasance. Oh wait, I forgot that the most of the constituents of the jury are already on the public dole...now I understand.

6) Comment by BRmoderate - 01/23/2013

agreed tradewinns, why have a police jury if their decisions are not going to be honored or enforced by employees/supervisors.

7) Comment by tradewinns - 01/23/2013

i know this is superfluous to the conversation BUT it's been THREE YEARS since a decision was made, not taken under advisement, but MADE! someone needs to lose their job over this and i don't mean just the lady in question. in fact the politicians which are suporting the decision to negate the previous ruling should go as well.