CS modification

[LdiJ]

He is a paid firefighter, so I assume the industry is doing okay as we are always in need of firefighters. That is me just assuming though. I am not sure if they are going to offer him overtime this coming year or not.

I think you are pretty correct in your assumption that he isn't earning less than he was 8 years ago and that his overtime probably isn't decreasing much, if any. With all of the benefits that firefighters and police officers receive there is a certain amount of overtime that is less expensive for state government to pay, than to hire more firefighters or police officers.

I doubt that he will prevail on his appeal. A 200.00 increase after 8 years is not much at all. I suspect that in the end he will spend far more on his attorney than he could save over several years even if he could convince a judge to order 500.00 a month instead of 611.00.

Dad's being a bit foolish in my opinion. His "appeal" isn't costing you anything at all, and I can just about bet that he had to pay his attorney about two years worth of his potential "savings" to have this new trial...and that doesn't even take into consideration what he had to pay his attorney the first time around.

 

[Ohiogal]

He is a paid firefighter, so I assume the industry is doing okay as we are always in need of firefighters. That is me just assuming though. I am not sure if they are going to offer him overtime this coming year or not.

Have you seen government budgets lately? They have laid off and cut hours of firefighters in MANY places. Just read the papers. Many who are not laid off have had their pay cut in order to still have a job. So don't assume.

 

[Ohiogal]

I think you are pretty correct in your assumption that he isn't earning less than he was 8 years ago and that his overtime probably isn't decreasing much, if any. With all of the benefits that firefighters and police officers receive there is a certain amount of overtime that is less expensive for state government to pay, than to hire more firefighters or police officers.

Based on what? I can assure you in MANY PLACES firefighters and police officers have dealt with layoffs, pay cuts and a variety of other things. Don't you read the papers? One such article http://www.wusa9.com/news/columnist/blogs/2009/08/baltimore-firefighters-given-choice-of.html:

Union workers in Baltimore are being asked to take 5 to 8 furlough days or risk layoffs to hundreds of city workers. Even without the concessions from firefighters and other represented employees, city officials expect almost 100 layoffs.

Mayor Sheila Dixon's administration is trying to close a $60 million budget gap.

Here are excerpts from Annie Linskey's article in The Baltimore Sun:


If union and nonunion employees are furloughed, the city would save $13.5 million and layoffs could be limited to fewer than 100.

Employees who are not represented by unions would save the city $3.8 million by taking furloughs. Union furloughs save the city $9.7 million.

If unions don't accept furloughs, city officials laid out an option where they would save the $9.7 million by laying off an additional 222 to 286 employees, according to the briefing. Baltimore employs about 15,000 workers.

Bob Sledgeski, the head of the firefighters' union, bristled at the idea of furloughs and lashed out at the city's finance director, Edward J. Gallagher, who he said has patched the city's $2.3 billion budget together with "baling wire and bubble gum."

Sledgeski said his 1,400 members already receive lower salaries than nearby jurisdictions. "I hope that he [Gallagher] is not going to make that lower," Sledgeski said.

Capt. Stephan Fugate, the head of the fire officers union, described either scenario - furloughs or layoffs - as "ugly." He said he worries that any reduction in the fire force will mean more closures of fire companies, which he believes would endanger neighborhoods and firefighters.

I doubt that he will prevail on his appeal. A 200.00 increase after 8 years is not much at all. I suspect that in the end he will spend far more on his attorney than he could save over several years even if he could convince a judge to order 500.00 a month instead of 611.00.

He can prevail on his objection if it is not based on FACTS and rather was based on what he used to earn before the economy went to pot. If they imputed an income and did not use his CURRENT ACTUAL income it can be overturned.

Dad's being a bit foolish in my opinion. His "appeal" isn't costing you anything at all, and I can just about bet that he had to pay his attorney about two years worth of his potential "savings" to have this new trial...and that doesn't even take into consideration what he had to pay his attorney the first time around.

That is an assumption. He may have an attorney that works for the union representing him. He may have prepaid legal.

You are just full of assumptions. What about some FACTS?

 

[mdmother]

Update

My daughter's father was granted his appeal trial which is scheduled for April 14th. I have a question. In the modification for CS, the state's attorney was my representation. I have been trying to get ahold of them since I received the paperwork on Saturday, but unfortuately, I cannot get ahold of the right person. I have left three different messages to no avail.

My questions are: Do I need to hire an attorney or with the state's attorney be my representation again? Do I need to provide anymore documentation than what I have already provided at the modification hearing?

I have received fabulous advice and thought that I would just ask again.

 

[Ohiogal]

My daughter's father was granted his appeal trial which is scheduled for April 14th. I have a question. In the modification for CS, the state's attorney was my representation. I have been trying to get ahold of them since I received the paperwork on Saturday, but unfortuately, I cannot get ahold of the right person. I have left three different messages to no avail.

My questions are: Do I need to hire an attorney or with the state's attorney be my representation again? Do I need to provide anymore documentation than what I have already provided at the modification hearing?

I have received fabulous advice and thought that I would just ask again.

WRONG. That state's attorney is NOT representing you. They are representing the STATE regarding child support. If you want someone representing you, YOU need to hire counsel.

 

[mdmother]

WRONG. That state's attorney is NOT representing you. They are representing the STATE regarding child support. If you want someone representing you, YOU need to hire counsel.

Thank you. That was my question. I wasn't sure and thought I would ask. You have answered my question and I appreciate it.

 

[mdmother]

Update

Well, just wanted to thank everyone who helped me with advice and answering my questions pertaining to child support.

We went to the appeal hearing on April 14th, and the same judgment was ordered that was ordered before. The State's Attorney presented her case for the state and his lawyer presented his side which was that his house would go into foreclosure, that because I was the one who moved he shouldn't have to pay daycare, and that his overtime not be calculated. The State's Attorney had a chance to have a say against what his lawyer said and she brought up the fact that since the initial hearing in January he has since bought a brand new 2009 truck and if he can afford a new truck (he had another truck but he used it to trade it in--and had no payment on it as it was already paid for) then he can afford to pay more money towards his daughter. The judge agreed and said that if he didn't like the fact that I moved and created the daycare situation, he should have contested it 2 1/2 years ago when I moved. So it all worked out and we are now done. I am sure when daycare runs out in a year and a half, he will go back for another modification, but at least for now, it's done for a while!

Thanks so much for all of your help. I really appreciate it!