Detective Suffered For OT Complaint;

BCB Finds Retaliation
Detective Suffered For Overtime Complaint


The Board of Collective Bargaining has ruled that several NYPD supervisors retaliated against a Detective after he contacted his union because he was denied overtime work.

MICHAEL PALLADINO: Symptom of bigger woes. The supervisors, including the Deputy Inspector of the NYPD's Counter Terrorism Division (CTD), who has since been reassigned, suddenly revoked Det. Vincent Sorrentino's Internet access, took away his department-issued cell phone, and ordered him to walk a foot patrol outside the secret center in Brooklyn.

Earned Coveted Role

Detective Sorrentino was assigned to the CTD in November 2004, after a decorated career in the field. His combination of a military background with expertise in communications, a teaching license, and close to 15 years' experience in the NYPD made him an attractive candidate for the transfer to the specialized unit.

His initial assignment at CTD, however, was with the Explosives Team, where he was required to research technology relating to blast effects, field-test new products, complete reports on the methodology of past terrorist attacks, and make recommendations for new programs and training plans.

During the BCB hearing, he acknowledged that he lacked background in explosives, but testified that he tried to educate himself on the subject with library books and Internet research, as well as requesting more formal training.

His initial evaluation covering May 2004 through 2005, completed by Sgt. Donna DeNatale, was stellar. On the review, she commented that he displayed "tremendous drive and initiative" and characterized him as "an asset to this unit as well as to the department."

Tabbed for Promotion

In July 2005, she recommended that he be promoted based on his performance history.

During his first year at the CTD, Detective Sorrentino worked significant amounts of overtime. At the CTD, security concerns have led the NYPD to not employ cleaning staff or maintenance workers, leaving those duties to officers assigned to the division via overtime.

In July and August, Detective Sorrentino exceeded the department's unofficial 35 hour monthly overtime cap, he testified. As a result, in September he was asked by a supervisor to curtail that overtime.

Deputy Inspector Joseph Cordes, who was responsible for personnel matters at CTD, testified at the BCB hearing that the department looked to "equalize" programmatic overtime among all the Detectives and officers at CTD. As a result, the department set a baseline of 35 hours per month, according to Detective Sorrentino.

Surprising Accusations

On May 23, 2005, he was reassigned to the Utilities Team. The Board noted that a June 21, 2006 memo - dated after he reached out to his union for help on Jan. 19, 2006 - explained that the transfer was due to his lack of interest in explosives, failure to properly detail his case files, and a vacancy in the other area.

Lieut. Patrick Devlin, the commanding officer of Threats Reduction Infrastructure Protection unit, testified that the later date on the memo was a typographical error.

On Jan. 5, 2006, Lieutenant Devlin along with Sgt. Larry Francis labeled Detective Sorrentino as one of the unit's four "low performers."

The Board's 32-page decision noted that Sergeant DeNatale, Lieutenant Devlin, Deputy Inspector Cordes, and Sergeant Francis all faulted Detective Sorrentino for not appropriately documenting all his work.

The Board, however, ruled that an interim performance evaluation filled out by Sergeant Francis went "well beyond the demonstrable defects in Sorrentino's performance." The board noted that Sergeant Francis testified on cross-examination that Detective Sorrentino was "a great guy doing good work."

The poor assessment was designed to "light a fire" under Officer Sorrentino, according to Sergeant Francis.

Suspicious Evaluation

The Board said it was "concerned" by the comment on the evaluation "which suggest that Francis did not individually consider the areas as to which he was grading." The timing of the evaluation, which was completed after Detective Sorrentino asked his union for help concerning his overtime work, was also "suspicious," the BCB concluded.

"Francis's radically revised, across-the-board lower scores in areas, such as integrity, unrelated to Sorrentino's established difficulties in keeping records, is highly probative that .. anti-union animus caused, at a minimum, the lower numerical scores on the interim evaluation," the decision stated.

The bad evaluation and subsequent denial of overtime, the Board unanimously concluded, was in retaliation for Detective Sorrentino involving the union, the Detectives Endowment Association.

DEA President Michael J. Palladino hailed the decision. "I think it sets a precedent for situations like this going forward," he asserted. "This behavior occurs every day in different commands all over the city, where supervisors use overtime as a tool as discipline, and then when the members reach out to their unions for assistance the same supervisors retaliate, which is just intolerable."

Calls Caps Illegal

He added, "This all is about these illegal cash overtime caps that are imposed on the members by their supervisors, and this is why in my contract I have a side letter that will create some type of communication between the union and the department about these cash caps."

The situation for Detective Sorrentino deteriorated on March 14, 2006, when his Internet access was blocked, his department cell phone taken away, and he was placed on a perimeter security post outside the facility.

Deputy Inspector Cordes and Lieutenant Devlin explained at the hearing that the Internet was blocked because he was using it for non-departmental purposes, such as viewing Yankee memorabilia sites.

Notably, Mr. Cordes candidly testified that he, as well as many others at CTD, had used the Internet for personal interests, including checking private e-mail accounts and reading various periodicals.

The Board noted that the foot post had previously been used to punish personnel and that it was normally unmanned and was always under video surveillance. "Likewise, the deprivation of Sorrentino of a cell phone and Internet access on the same day suggests a continued course of punitive behavior," the BCB ruled.

As a result, the Board ordered the NYPD to post a cease-and-desist notice to employees on all bulletin boards.