N
neohiocop
Guest
To whom it may concern,
I have a good friend that I worked with as a Police Officer in Ohio. I have since retired on disability. The friend of mine who has been a Police Officer for 11 years in two separate Police Departments was recently fired for what the employer says noncompliance with their residency rule. I'll explain this further and if you can be of any help it would be much appreciated.
This officer was hired at my previous employer in January of 1998, two or three days after he was hired the employer made him sign a paper agreeing to move into the township 15 months after his hire date. The paper defines residency as ORC 3503.02 (see below). After having problems selling his home and finding a new home in the township, this officer asked the Township trustees for an extension on the 15 months. They denied the request with no explanation. Even though they have given extensions in the past. I must also make you aware of the fact that this officer was not well liked due to the fact he has stood up to the employer in the past and has hired attys. To fight several different issues for him and he won all of them. The employer I am speaking about goes by the good old boy mentality and this officer was from the old school and did not take them pushing him around like 99% of the other officers did.
After they denied his request the officer did move into the township without his family. This officer maintained a residence in the township from approx. April of 1999 to October of 1999 when the landlord informed him he would have to move out within two weeks due to the fact the landlords mother in law was moving in. Approx. 2 weeks prior to this officers wife began having health problems and lost her job, which put a big strain on their financial situation as well as needing him with her to help to care for their 3 year old daughter. Knowing full well that the township would not grant him an extension due to the past attempt this officer moved back in with his wife outside the township. In approx. march of 2000 when the township informed him he was under investigation for violating the residency requirement. At that time prior to any discipline hearing this officer rented an apartment in the township and established residency. Approx. 1 month after he moved the township fired this officer.
I have several questions for you if you can be of help.
#1. After reading this 3503.02 does the township have the right to tell this officer where is family must live? And being that this law was from 1972 I would assume there must be some kind of case law somewhere on this. The majority of the townships reason for the termination was due to this old law.
#2. This officer was made to sign this agreement after he was hired at the police dept. And out dept is under a collective bargaining agreement. Does the township have the right to basically go around the collective agreement and enter into a contract with this officer that is not in the collective bargaining agreement, nor the dept rules and regs nor the civil service laws? Is there not something called a yellow dog law that keeps them from doing this?
#3. This officer can show that the township has let other officers live apart from their spouses and has not taken disciplinary action against them. Nor have they fired others for much more serious even criminal offences. And this officer also have no previous discipline record nor was their and progressive discipline on this issue with him.
Any help you can be would be really appreciated. I'm very sorry for the long letter but he is really in need of some help.
<JD:"3503.02"§ 3503.02 Rules for determining residence.
Text of Statute
All registrars and judges of elections, in determining the residence of a person offering to register or vote, shall be governed by the following rules:
(A) That place shall be considered the residence of a person in which the person's habitation is fixed and to which, whenever the person is absent, the person has the intention of returning.
(B) A person shall not be considered to have lost the person's residence that leaves the person's home and goes into another state or county of this state, for temporary purposes only, with the intention of returning.
(C) A person shall not be considered to have gained a residence in any county of this state into which the person comes for temporary purposes only, without the intention of making such county the permanent place of abode.
(D) The place where the family of a married man or woman resides shall be considered to be his or her place of residence; except that when the husband and wife have separated and live apart, the place where he or she resides the length of time required to entitle a person to vote shall be considered to be his or her place of residence.
(E) If a person removes to another state with the intention of making such state the person's residence, the person shall be considered to have lost the person's residence in this state.
(F) Except as otherwise provided in division (G) of this section, if a person removes from this state and continuously resides outside this state for a period of four years or more, the person shall be considered to have lost the person's residence in this state, notwithstanding the fact that the person may entertain an intention to return at some future period.
(G) If a person removes from this state to engage in the services of the United States government, the person shall not be considered to have lost the person's residence in this state during the period of such service, and likewise should the person enter the employment of the state, the place where such person resided at the time of the person's removal shall be considered to be the person's place of residence.
(H) If a person goes into another state and while there exercises the right of a citizen by voting, the person shall be considered to have lost the person's residence in this state.
History
HISTORY: GC § 4785-31; 113 v 307(320), § 31; 118 v 223; Bureau of Code Revision, 10-1-53; 125 v 713(744); 127 v 83 (Eff 8-23-57); 134 v S 460 (Eff 3-23-72); 146 v H 99. Eff 8-22-95.
My friend already has hired legal council and his arbitration hearing was last week. They have 30 days to file their briefs and I’m trying to help him out in doing some research on this along with his atty. I was hoping someone out there might be of some help.
Thank you for your time
I have a good friend that I worked with as a Police Officer in Ohio. I have since retired on disability. The friend of mine who has been a Police Officer for 11 years in two separate Police Departments was recently fired for what the employer says noncompliance with their residency rule. I'll explain this further and if you can be of any help it would be much appreciated.
This officer was hired at my previous employer in January of 1998, two or three days after he was hired the employer made him sign a paper agreeing to move into the township 15 months after his hire date. The paper defines residency as ORC 3503.02 (see below). After having problems selling his home and finding a new home in the township, this officer asked the Township trustees for an extension on the 15 months. They denied the request with no explanation. Even though they have given extensions in the past. I must also make you aware of the fact that this officer was not well liked due to the fact he has stood up to the employer in the past and has hired attys. To fight several different issues for him and he won all of them. The employer I am speaking about goes by the good old boy mentality and this officer was from the old school and did not take them pushing him around like 99% of the other officers did.
After they denied his request the officer did move into the township without his family. This officer maintained a residence in the township from approx. April of 1999 to October of 1999 when the landlord informed him he would have to move out within two weeks due to the fact the landlords mother in law was moving in. Approx. 2 weeks prior to this officers wife began having health problems and lost her job, which put a big strain on their financial situation as well as needing him with her to help to care for their 3 year old daughter. Knowing full well that the township would not grant him an extension due to the past attempt this officer moved back in with his wife outside the township. In approx. march of 2000 when the township informed him he was under investigation for violating the residency requirement. At that time prior to any discipline hearing this officer rented an apartment in the township and established residency. Approx. 1 month after he moved the township fired this officer.
I have several questions for you if you can be of help.
#1. After reading this 3503.02 does the township have the right to tell this officer where is family must live? And being that this law was from 1972 I would assume there must be some kind of case law somewhere on this. The majority of the townships reason for the termination was due to this old law.
#2. This officer was made to sign this agreement after he was hired at the police dept. And out dept is under a collective bargaining agreement. Does the township have the right to basically go around the collective agreement and enter into a contract with this officer that is not in the collective bargaining agreement, nor the dept rules and regs nor the civil service laws? Is there not something called a yellow dog law that keeps them from doing this?
#3. This officer can show that the township has let other officers live apart from their spouses and has not taken disciplinary action against them. Nor have they fired others for much more serious even criminal offences. And this officer also have no previous discipline record nor was their and progressive discipline on this issue with him.
Any help you can be would be really appreciated. I'm very sorry for the long letter but he is really in need of some help.
<JD:"3503.02"§ 3503.02 Rules for determining residence.
Text of Statute
All registrars and judges of elections, in determining the residence of a person offering to register or vote, shall be governed by the following rules:
(A) That place shall be considered the residence of a person in which the person's habitation is fixed and to which, whenever the person is absent, the person has the intention of returning.
(B) A person shall not be considered to have lost the person's residence that leaves the person's home and goes into another state or county of this state, for temporary purposes only, with the intention of returning.
(C) A person shall not be considered to have gained a residence in any county of this state into which the person comes for temporary purposes only, without the intention of making such county the permanent place of abode.
(D) The place where the family of a married man or woman resides shall be considered to be his or her place of residence; except that when the husband and wife have separated and live apart, the place where he or she resides the length of time required to entitle a person to vote shall be considered to be his or her place of residence.
(E) If a person removes to another state with the intention of making such state the person's residence, the person shall be considered to have lost the person's residence in this state.
(F) Except as otherwise provided in division (G) of this section, if a person removes from this state and continuously resides outside this state for a period of four years or more, the person shall be considered to have lost the person's residence in this state, notwithstanding the fact that the person may entertain an intention to return at some future period.
(G) If a person removes from this state to engage in the services of the United States government, the person shall not be considered to have lost the person's residence in this state during the period of such service, and likewise should the person enter the employment of the state, the place where such person resided at the time of the person's removal shall be considered to be the person's place of residence.
(H) If a person goes into another state and while there exercises the right of a citizen by voting, the person shall be considered to have lost the person's residence in this state.
History
HISTORY: GC § 4785-31; 113 v 307(320), § 31; 118 v 223; Bureau of Code Revision, 10-1-53; 125 v 713(744); 127 v 83 (Eff 8-23-57); 134 v S 460 (Eff 3-23-72); 146 v H 99. Eff 8-22-95.
My friend already has hired legal council and his arbitration hearing was last week. They have 30 days to file their briefs and I’m trying to help him out in doing some research on this along with his atty. I was hoping someone out there might be of some help.
Thank you for your time