As Owner-Operators Depart—–

Civil, State, Federal Issues Involving Bus Owners, MTM Remain Unresolved

By John Voket

Imagine a Connecticut town with more than 30 family-owned businesses percolating along — certainly subject to the ebb and flow of the times and the economy — but generally holding their own.

Apparently beloved by most of their customers, there are occasional complaints. But after more than 80 years of serving the community, many would not have it any other way.

But in about a week, almost simultaneously, those businesses will close and the owners will — for all intents and purposes — walk away.

Newtown’s owner-operator school bus system will become a thing of the past as June turns into July and All-Star Transportation becomes Newtown’s new means of getting students to school.

There will likely be a flurry of “getting to know you” initiatives on the part of All-Star, and the company is already engaged in community activities like providing student driving safety outreach at the high school. But this week the question of “What will we do without you?” was the main topic of conversation as local bus owner-operators said farewell.

Several owner-operators have reportedly agreed to work for All-Star, and could potentially keep driving the same or similar routes in the fall, albeit in company buses and on company payroll. And there is the lack of resolution in a state labor case that could rule the owner-operators were not by legal definition contractors of the district, but employees.

That issue was first brought to the district’s attention by one of its own consultants who was hired to advise school officials on whether or not the owner-operator system should be scrapped in favor of a corporate bus company option.

If the state rules the bus owners were not, by law, independent contractors, a number of local officials, including James Gaston, remain gravely concerned about the cost to the town and school district. That is because the district could be compelled to bargain with the owner-operators at some future point — with the remote possibility that the owner-operators will be back again in some form as its own organized labor unit.

Bargaining Unit Question

In the original action, an attorney for the owner-operators contends the Newtown Board of Education has negotiated and bargained with the owner-operators’ contract committee for a series of successive five-year agreements going back several decades. And that because the district willingly engaged in multiple contract negotiations over time, the owner-operators qualify as a bargaining unit.

The district’s consultant, who was hired by Business Manager Ron Bienkowski, also flagged the way the district classifies the owner-operators as independent contractors, noting that the “district establishes strict work and performance rules” and the contracts provide for some defined benefits.

“The owner-operators are currently considered to be independent contractors, and therefore the district does not incur typical employee liabilities,” the consultant report states. “Although this certainly requires legal advice, based on our knowledge of other decisions in the school bus industry, and our reading of the IRS requirements, we are concerned about the independent contractor designation.”

Other officials, including First Selectman Pat Llodra, said the town will cross any bridge regarding possible IRS issues when or if anything comes of it. But she said the town is prepared in that event.

Then there is the private civil suit facing the district by Thomas Adams, a principal with MTM Transportation — a current transportation vendor for the district — and whose repair garage services and inspects a number of owner-operator vehicles.

Mr Adams’ complaint details a list of actions that he believes resulted in the All-Star bid being awarded in error. If that suit is successful, Mr Adams is asking the All-Star bid be rescinded.

Mr Gaston was vice chair of the Board of Finance when the transportation bid controversy arose, and was subsequently elected to the Board of Selectman. He previously said that any actions that resolve in favor of the owner-operators or MTM could result in eventual, individual civil suits against the town, district, school board, and other local officials and further financial exposure for the Board of Education.

Since the town is named as a defendant in the Adams’ civil suit, and he is now a selectman, Mr Gaston had to limit the scope of his comments. But prior to the filing of the suit, he advised the Board of Education to secure a consultant to try and help determine the potential cost of any liability depending on the outcome of the labor board case, the Adams suit, or any federal action related to the apparent misclassification of the owner-operators in federal tax documents.

Mr Gaston said prior to the Adams suit, that he advised the owner-operators to consider forming or putting in place some sort of formal organized structure in case the school board wanted to challenge the All-Star contract.

“I don’t know if either parties pursued my suggestions,” Mr Gaston said. “And while I would like to, I have been advised by council to not comment further because of my new position on the Board of Selectmen, and the town’s connection to the Adams suit. Although I can say that I don’t believe the town is exposed in that action.”

Officials Weigh In

During the past year, a number of other town officials, past and present, have come to the defense of the local drivers or criticized the former school board’s decision. Cody McCubbin, who ran and was later elected to the Board of Education, addressed the owner-operators issue among several concerns in a September 2011 letter to The Bee.

“Over the last few months, I’ve been witnessing this type of lack of communication between the Board of Education and its constituents. Whether it’s the issue of the owner-operators, special education, or the EAs, I’ve witnessed one parent after another go in front of the BOE and plead their cases on deaf ears,” Mr McCubbin wrote. “Over the last few months, decision after decision has been executed in a vacuum with no regard to those who matter most, the voters and the parents whom they represent.”

Former selectman and school board member and current Police Commission Chairman Paul Mangiafico wrote in a letter of the then-pending decision to put the bus contract out to bid, “The owner-operators currently in place have been performing this service for eight decades for the town with generally good performance and great admiration and acceptance by the parents of our school children and others.

“It appears that our school administration leaders have their hearts set on opposing the will of the people with the potential endorsement of most of our elected board members who also seem to be complicit in the movement. As a former board member, I respectfully urge you to not go down this road,” Mr Mangiafico said.

Former council representative and current Parks Commissioner Jan Lee Brookes pointed out in a June 2011 letter that “Newtown’s O-Os contribute to the well-being of the community in many important ways. O-Os donated their services and buses during the entire night of the June Relay For Life. They brought people from Dickinson Park to the annual Christmas Tree Lighting celebration. Two O-Os allowed their buses to be used as drop-off points for food donations to restock Newtown’s depleted food pantry. O-Os volunteer without fanfare or recognition because they care about the community.”

And three representatives of the Republican Town Committee, including Dennis Bloom, Shirley Paproski and Mitch Bolinsky, who has since become employed by All-Star as a driving instructor, wrote, “For eight decades, school children in Newtown have been transported on buses owned and driven by an alliance of neighbors and friends, in whom we trust. These residents have been strong threads in fabric that is our community. More than bus drivers, they represent familiarity and security to children. To parents, they’re symbols of reliability and accountability. To the town, they’re taxpayers.”