District Attorney Kathleen Rice is no friend of working moms

What a callous disregard for women in the workplace. She is firing people left and right. This is what happens when you hire your sister-in-law as Chief of Staff.

The Nassau County PR Department should star the both of them in a feature film: Dumb & Dumber with Al Yankovic singing the theme song: You are so Pathetic.

I hear Rice has a glass eye and dresses funny in private.

At first I was surprised when reading this article because it sounded kinda petty. But now I see that this has more to do with something else. When they say "part-time", Newsday did not explain that these are people who are really working full-time but are paid 3/5 or 4/5 of thr salary (depending on whether they work 3 days or 4 days per week) and get all thr health benefits and pension, etc.

I agree with ending this practice. If you want to work part-time, agree on an hourly rate, give up the benefits and really become part-time like the rest of the real part-timers that work for Nassau County.

If the DA is to allow these people to continue working full-time at 3/5 with full benefits, then the DA has to offer this to all full-timers!

At first I was surprised when reading this article because it sounded kinda petty. But now I see that this has more to do with something else. When they say "part-time", Newsday did not explain that these are people who are really working full-time but are paid 3/5 or 4/5 of thr salary (depending on whether they work 3 days or 4 days per week) and get all thr health benefits and pension, etc.

I agree with ending this practice. If you want to work part-time, agree on an hourly rate, give up the benefits and really become part-time like the rest of the real part-timers that work for Nassau County.

If the DA is to allow these people to continue working full-time at 3/5 with full benefits, then the DA has to offer this to all full-timers!


Typical amateur administrator mistake. You know what the bottom line is? Getting the goddamn job done. If these lawyers are good keep them in whatever capacity you need to. If not get rid of them. Coming up with this BS arbitrary ruling of ther full time or the highway is a classic mistake of an inexperienced administrator.

At first I was surprised when reading this article because it sounded kinda petty. But now I see that this has more to do with something else. When they say "part-time", Newsday did not explain that these are people who are really working full-time but are paid 3/5 or 4/5 of thr salary (depending on whether they work 3 days or 4 days per week) and get all thr health benefits and pension, etc.

I agree with ending this practice. If you want to work part-time, agree on an hourly rate, give up the benefits and really become part-time like the rest of the real part-timers that work for Nassau County.

If the DA is to allow these people to continue working full-time at 3/5 with full benefits, then the DA has to offer this to all full-timers!


Typical amateur administrator mistake. You know what the bottom line is? Getting the goddamn job done. If these lawyers are good keep them in whatever capacity you need to. If not get rid of them. Coming up with this BS arbitrary ruling of ther full time or the highway is a classic mistake of an inexperienced administrator.

Not really...it is a very smart move to bring in more political cronies from Brooklyn, etc. She is sattacking mothers who will have no choice when faced with a decision of thr families or the office, to tend to thr familes. Therefore, a job opens up, and is now filled with another crony.....makes sense.

[the rules]

too ba dmommy dearest-=get to work just like Nancy Miklos in the COuunty and her part time gig.

too ba dmommy dearest-=get to work just like Nancy Miklos in the COuunty and her part time gig.

Don't forget Rita Anderson and her part-time scam!

It's time for some posters to grow-up, and be honest with themselves. Let's not jump to conclusions before the facts are in. Further, Ann Givens, reporter,and Andrew Smith, her editor. are guilty of dishonest journalism.

The Newsday piece, 23 June '06, written by the above reporter, lamenting the plight of part-time mother ADAs was typical Newsday garbage journalism. Fundamentally, it was the best example of why people don't trust Newsday and have abandoned reading Newsday. Publisher, Tim Knight, had better tighten his journalist standards for his staff,or he might be re-assigned.

The message of the piece was a whining, sobbimg, moaning and crying sympathy story about "defenseless and disadvantaged" part-time assistant district attorneys who also happen to be mothers. The piece also wrongly portrayed Kathleen Rice, District Attorney, as a mean-spirited, bad boss because she demanded her ADAs to be full time or resign.

Let's remember! Bng elected District Attorney makes one the boss of the operation with full responsibility and authority to do the job for the people. Period! And as the boss, Rice can and will set standards for her staff's qualifications and performances.

And for the record, reporter Givens, was informed, up-front, the policy of working full-time or resigning was initiated by Rice's predecessor, DA Denis Dillon. Givens deliberately ommitted that vital information from Newsday readers. Not reporting full and complete information is the equivalent of dishonesty, lying, and misleading her readers.

A Newsday retraction is in order!

[Good Boy]

Thank you Jeff, but the fact is she has been bad news from the start. One mistake after another making it clear she is not up to doing the job. She is going to hurt the county and a lot of "good" people because she's to arrogant to learn the job.

[jeff's attorney]

My client is guilty of numerous felonies when he served a commissioner of the board of elections, please go easy on him, he'll plead guilty to bng an a*shole

[anderson and miklos]

u lost!

[Denis Dillon III]

You voters got what they wanted...The numbers are all ready showing, she does not have a clue....I may run again, because she has been nothing short of a train wreck.....

[Betty Friedan]

What a callous disregard for women in the workplace. She is firing people left and right. This is what happens when you hire your sister-in-law as Chief of Staff.

The Nassau County PR Department should star the both of them in a feature film: Dumb & Dumber with Al Yankovic singing the theme song: You are so Pathetic.

Do the newspapers still really love thr pro-choice female DA who must now be considered anti woman...unless she is a relative paid near the six figures for doing secretarial work.

[Single Moms 4 Rice]

Lets keep the old gal single!

Anyway to send her on a one way trip back to Philadelphia :?:

Makes you want the Gulotta/Dillon days back more and more.

[Nassau Esq.]

What if a Male DA had pulled the same stunt with the working moms in his office? I would be willing to bet Newsday would have it as a front page story with photos of the women with thr children and a lead editorial chastising him. Not to mention the inevitable Federal lawsuit.

[IF only]

If the queen had balls she be king. Stop daydreaming she won she beat Dillon that makes her the boss. End of story

Shes still got nicer legs than dillon though :D

Shes still got nicer legs than dillon though :D

but which one has the bigger pair of b*lls... Dillon trying to get his daughter elected to the Legislature, or Rice hiring her sister in law?

Kathleen needs a caseload of Gillette razors and maybe then one can compare with Denis Dillon's legs.

What makes the women lawyers in the DA's office so special that they can only work partial schedules with benefits. Don't tell me it's because they need to be home with thr kids!

All working parents would love to be home with thr kids, so if that argument is what's presented, then all should be on reduced schedules with full benefits.

Oh, and by the way, didn't anyone of these lawyers hear about the latest invention? It's called child/day care. They should look into it. I hear it's sweeping the nation - millions of parents, single or otherwise, are using it.

And money won't be the issue. After all, if they go full time, they'll get 100% of the salary they are only getting 65% (more or less) of now.

What makes the women lawyers in the DA's office so special that they can only work partial schedules with benefits. Don't tell me it's because they need to be home with thr kids!

All working parents would love to be home with thr kids, so if that argument is what's presented, then all should be on reduced schedules with full benefits.

Oh, and by the way, didn't anyone of these lawyers hear about the latest invention? It's called child/day care. They should look into it. I hear it's sweeping the nation - millions of parents, single or otherwise, are using it.

And money won't be the issue. After all, if they go full time, they'll get 100% of the salary they are only getting 65% (more or less) of now.

if you go to the da's office youd think you were at NOW. its like 100% female. most people fired wree men.

[Mom Lawyer Taxpayer MAD]

Give me a break. These county employees already get away with too much crap. They don't even have to work a 7 hour day to be considered full time (it's only 6 hours and 3/4 minutes), they accumulate days off faster than they can use them and disappear in the middle of the day for hours on end doing "errands" or whiddle away hours during the working day on personal calls and using the internet to look up summer camps for the kids. I am a full time mother too AND I work as a full time lawyer in a NYC law firm. I work twice the hours these so -called full time county employees work and get 1/4 the time off. No personal days, no sick time - only a measly vacation. And no - compared to some of the Suozzi salaries he is paying these county attorneys - in civil and criminal agencies - my salary isn't terribly higher. AND I am expected to PRODUCE! Another thing not required by these political appointees. Most of my attorney friends are in the same boat as me. None of us complain because thats the profession and the choice we made. But to listen to these whimpy, spoiled, government hacks cry themselves to bed at night is disgusting. If you ask me, they are all getting away with far too much for far too long and it boils my blood that I am paying for it.

So go down to the Nassau Democratic Committee Headquarters, write a check and you'll have your cushy job in Mineola. Stop whining like a baby. :)

[Good Boy]

Rice is a bad democrate.

[not important]

Give me a break. These county employees already get away with too much crap. They don't even have to work a 7 hour day to be considered full time (it's only 6 hours and 3/4 minutes), they accumulate days off faster than they can use them and disappear in the middle of the day for hours on end doing "errands" or whiddle away hours during the working day on personal calls and using the internet to look up summer camps for the kids. I am a full time mother too AND I work as a full time lawyer in a NYC law firm. I work twice the hours these so -called full time county employees work and get 1/4 the time off. No personal days, no sick time - only a measly vacation. And no - compared to some of the Suozzi salaries he is paying these county attorneys - in civil and criminal agencies - my salary isn't terribly higher. AND I am expected to PRODUCE! Another thing not required by these political appointees. Most of my attorney friends are in the same boat as me. None of us complain because thats the profession and the choice we made. But to listen to these whimpy, spoiled, government hacks cry themselves to bed at night is disgusting. If you ask me, they are all getting away with far too much for far too long and it boils my blood that I am paying for it.
You are an ignorant idiot. You clearly have no idea what the job of an Assistant District Attorney or County Attorney is. You sound stupid and jealous. I am confident that your salary is significantly greater than the 75,000 some of the government lawyers with 20 years experience are making. Shut up and stop whining.

[e philips]

no mas importante

[Current Nassau Lawyer]

Give me a break. These county employees already get away with too much crap. They don't even have to work a 7 hour day to be considered full time (it's only 6 hours and 3/4 minutes), they accumulate days off faster than they can use them and disappear in the middle of the day for hours on end doing "errands" or whiddle away hours during the working day on personal calls and using the internet to look up summer camps for the kids. I am a full time mother too AND I work as a full time lawyer in a NYC law firm. I work twice the hours these so -called full time county employees work and get 1/4 the time off. No personal days, no sick time - only a measly vacation. And no - compared to some of the Suozzi salaries he is paying these county attorneys - in civil and criminal agencies - my salary isn't terribly higher. AND I am expected to PRODUCE! Another thing not required by these political appointees. Most of my attorney friends are in the same boat as me. None of us complain because thats the profession and the choice we made. But to listen to these whimpy, spoiled, government hacks cry themselves to bed at night is disgusting. If you ask me, they are all getting away with far too much for far too long and it boils my blood that I am paying for it.
You are an ignorant idiot. You clearly have no idea what the job of an Assistant District Attorney or County Attorney is. You sound stupid and jealous. I am confident that your salary is significantly greater than the 75,000 some of the government lawyers with 20 years experience are making. Shut up and stop whining.

Sounds like we struck a chord. As a Current Nassau County Lawyer, I can tell you the above-posting is as accurate as all get out. Incidentally - Bureau Chiefs in Goodman's office are earning over $90,000 with Senior Attorneys and Deputy Bureau Chiefs earning close. Some of them don't even have 10 years of legal practice experience and most have little to no experience in the area they supervise. Hell, I was out of law school 5 years and was hired at $65K myself. I'm just hanging around until my partners and I get our office together and then I'm bailing. The only thing the poster got wrong is the 6 hour day. I'd average the big shots are putting in 4 hours and Rnharz has nothing to do for his over $100K salary.

Let's face it. Rice's whole career has been a contract. She has no managerial experience and has screwed up cases in both the Brooklyn DA's office (is she still bng sued for subjourning perjury, or did they settle? You know if she has been vindicated we would have seen it in the papers) and in Philly.

So, she can't try cases, she can't anage an office, she clearly has no common sense. So other than Beyers family money, what does she have the entitles her to be DA?

Oh yeah, she graduateed at the bottom of her class from Touro.

:twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

[shesnosandradayoconner]

Women's Bar Association is about to slam her too.

She's sinking fast.

Can anyone say "One term DA?"

Or will the Beyers family buy her another term. What is the deal with the Beyers? What do we know about them?

Why do they get to pick a forgn DA for us?

[Andreama Wyatt]

When will I be subpoenaed and be forced to testify against Jeff and the criminal acts that he approved of when he was commissioner.

And poor Jeff, how long will it be until rice fires him or indicts him or the feds will do the same, ooo, I just won in solitaire, pass me another sandwich bill and my large diet coke.

[Daly Mirror]

Yes!

[Daly Mirror]

Yes!

[Daly Mirror]

Yes!

[Women's Bar]

Women's Bar Association is about to slam her too.

She's sinking fast.


Why would Andrea slam Rice when Goodman did the exact same thing and the Women's Bar gave her an award?

Makes no sense to me.

[Ignorance on here]

Talk about stupidity

How many times do we see posters write about working part time and keeping benefits.

What they should know is that the county and virtually every employer that offers benefits sets the cutoff at 20 hours for benefits. sOt these women who worked 3/5 or 4/5 were entitled to befts just like ever other employee.

[Lawn mower co]

Talk about stupidity

How many times do we see posters write about working part time and keeping benefits.

What they should know is that the county and virtually every employer that offers benefits sets the cutoff at 20 hours for benefits. sOt these women who worked 3/5 or 4/5 were entitled to befts just like ever other employee.

Still a grad of a lawn mower company... what do you expect?

News | Entertainment | Sports | Jobs | Cars | Real Estate | Apartments | ShopLocal | Place An Ad am New York


Rice gets a scolding
Nassau DA’s order for part-timers to go full-time or quit draws ire of state law group and plans for survey

BY ANN GIVENS
Newsday Staff Writer

July 11, 2006

Angered by Nassau District Attorney Kathleen Rice's demand last month that a dozen women working part-time in her office ther come back full-time or quit, the New York Women's Bar Association has launched a statewide campaign aimed at pressuring law offices to be more family-friendly.

Rice's policy has been denounced by some as unfair and insensitive to working mothers. But Rice has said that at a time when her office is understaffed, the move is necessary to prosecute crime aggressively.

State Women's Bar Association president Elaine Avery said she plans to mail surveys to law offices across the state -- particularly government offices -- asking for information about policies on part-time and flex-time employment and family leave, among other things. The 3,500-member organization will then pressure the offices it says have the worst policies, Avery said.

"We strongly disagree with her decision," Avery said of Rice. "These are experienced attorneys [who are affected by this policy], and I think the public deserves for them to stay on."

Rice's spokesman, Eric Phillips, said the Women's Bar Association has unfairly politicized an issue that is rooted in the office's financial and staffing limitations. With a limited number of prosecutors available to the office, he said, it is crucial that all the people in those positions be full-time.

He also said Rice hopes to create new part-time positions, in time, for lawyers who are not prosecuting cases.

"To take this decision and to spin it into a political issue, given what this district attorney has done for women in her first six months in office, is both irresponsible and narrow-minded," he said.

Rice said in an opinion article in yesterday's Newsday that she has increased the number of women in management positions from two under her predecessor, Denis Dillon, to seven today. Her decision to end part-time jobs for prosecutors was made to protect Nassau County residents, not to hurt women or families, she said.

"Simply put, criminals do not work part time; nther should prosecutors involved in investigations, trials or appeals," Rice wrote in the article, which ran a day after The New York Times took Rice to task on its editorial page for her decision.

Phillips said that, of the 12 part-timers given the choice between coming back full-time and leaving, two have decided to leave.

But Avery said the fact that people are coming back full-time doesn't necessarily mean that they are happy to do so. "Many came back full-time, but given the ultimatum of having no job, that just means they had to make decisions in accordance with thr families," she said.
Copyright 2006 Newsday Inc.

What do you expect from someone who has had everything in her life handed to her by money and connections. She has no concept how real people, people who got what they have strictly on merit, actually live.

[Working Dad]

So when do I get to job share so I can spend more time on the golf course - err - I mean - sharing in my family responsibilities and doodling the full time Nanny - errr - I mean - rearing my children ???

I think you should pay me twice the salary so I can work half the time.

http://jaciclement.e-pfb.net/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articld=1124&blogId=203

The New York Law Journal is not digging her any more than the soon to be unemployed mommy's!

:twisted:

[Mothers v. Kathleen Rice]

I didn't write this. It is something Newsday refused to print and someone sent it to me:

As one of the part-time employees affected by Kathleen Rice's
decision to do away with part-time work, I was deeply offended by the
editorial entitled "Rice deserves some leeway - The part-time policy
wasn't working." (I am writing anonymously from someone else's e-mail
because I still am on the payroll of the District Attorney's Office.
You are free to contact me at this address, however, and as soon as I
am no longer an employee, I will be willing to speak for
attribution). I am dismayed that Newsday has accepted without
question the various reasons stated by Ms. Rice for doing away with
part-time and relied upon those reasons in the editorial piece
without first checking thr veracity. Doing so would reveal that
most of the reasons given are ther misstatements of fact or utterly
untrue. I will try to address them in the order given in the editorial:

1) There are 15 women affected, not 12. Two have left the office,
two have or will be resigning as of 9/1/06, many have said that they
are returning but are looking for other jobs, and at l one is on
maternity leave and was given until January 1, 2007, to make a decision.

2) To the best of my knowledge, only three women worked a schedule
that entailed leaving before 5:00 p.m. The schedule for these three
women required working daily until 2:20, not 2:00. However, were you
to speak to any of them (and a complete list can be obtained from
Administration), you would find that they were rarely able to leave
that early.

3) To the best of my knowledge (I do not personally know each of the
15 women), none of the affected women worked as trial prosecutors
(can you imagine any judge or defense attorney allowing a prosecutor
to say [as DA Rice claims that they have] that it was 2:00 and they
had to go home?). And I believe those whose work required any time
in the courtroom job-shared and worked full days. Most of us were in
positions that involved little to no contact with police officers,
victims or witnesses. We worked in Investigations, Rising Star
(community outreach), the Appeals Bureau, Arraignments, or writing
search warrants. Moreover, other District Attorney's Offices (such
as Queens County) have part-timers in bureaus that occasionally do
require trial work. In those cases, the part-timers return to full-
time status (and recve full-time pay) for the duration of the trial.

4) Denis Dillon did not stop part-time employment. In fact, a new
job-sharing position was created in 2005 by Mr. Dillon for two women
who asked to work part-time. The truth is that the Office can
sustain only so many part-time positions, and Mr. Dillon addressed
requests for part-time employment on a case-by-case basis.

5) I have never heard of resentment for part-timers among our
coworkers. Almost every attorney in the District Attorney's Office
works overtime, including part-timers. I do not know of any part-
timer who ever ran out the door, foisting thr work off on someone
else. Part-timers simply work through lunch, take work home or
arrange to stay late as needed. And, just like the full-timers, they
are not compensated for these extra hours.

6) Part-timers are not a burden on the taxpayers of Nassau County.
Many part-time (and for that matter full-time) employees do not take
health benefits because they are covered by thr spouse's plan. And
while those on the health plan do recve the same benefits as full-
timers, thr other benefits (i.e., sick time, vacation time, and
pensions) are pro-rated. Because most part-timers carry full-time
case loads, the taxpayers get a bargain - 100% work for 80% or 60%
pay and less accrued time.

7) While Ms. Rice has hired several female executives, bureau
chiefs, and deputy chiefs, it should be noted that she also fired one
female bureau chief and one female deputy. Moreover, she has tripled
the size of the executive staff and increased the overall number of
management positions, allowing for the hiring of these women (I am
not criticizing these actions, I am only noting that these positions
did not exist in the Dillon administration). The number of female
line assistants has not increased significantly; there always have
been a large number of female assistants in the Office.

8) The Office is not strained by the number of lines allotted by the
legislature because of part-time employees. Indeed, although I am
not sure that still is true, at one time, job shares (i.e., two
people working the same job at 50%) counted as one line. If that
still is the case, and Ms. Rice honestly is concerned about the
number of her lines, it would be better to limit all part-timers to
job shares (as is done in Suffolk County) to conserve the lines
instead of doing away with part-time altogether. Moreover, if Ms.
Rice does not think she has enough lines, she merely needs to ask the
Legislature to increase the number and then fit those new lines into
her budget. In any event, any "strain" is not due to part-time
workers; it is due to the fact that many low-level trial assistants
left the office shortly after the new administration took over (the
two events are not necessarily connected -- people tend to leave a
DA's office after they have completed thr commitment for private
practice, and that usually happens after the first of each year).
That problem will be largely alleviated in September, when the new
class of 25 line assistants begins thr employment.

9) Ms. Rice's statement that she will allow for part-time employment
once the office is "reorganized," but will not permit such positions
in litigation, investigations or appeals, means that there will be
almost no place these part-time attorneys can work because no bureau
other than the Complaint Unit, which is at present staffed by two
attorneys, meets that criteria. The truth of the matter is that
there are many bureaus in the office (such as Arraignments, Appeals,
certain investigative bureaus, and the former Rising Star program
[which Ms. Rice has effectively eliminated]) that lend themselves
quite well to part-time work.

10) Finally, I believe that only one or two of the women involved
have only older or grown children; most have toddlers, preteens, or a
mixture of teens and younger children. Moreover, no effort was made
by the Office to find out why any of these women (including those
with older children) are working part-time. Had they done so, they
might have discovered that some of us have children with special
needs, severe medical problems, or other disabilities, and others
have suffered personal tragedies. For these women, working full time
would be extremely difficult, if not impossible. But even if Ms.
Rice were legitimately concerned that people who no longer needed to
work part-time were taking such spots from others who needed -- and
wanted -- to work part-time, all she need do is institute the same
policy as the Manhattan DA's Office: part-time status is given for
two years, and must then be reapplied for. If no one else with a
greater need has requested that slot, the person's part-time status
is continued for two more years, and so forth.

Ms. Rice has made it sound as though part-timers are causing the
Office numerous problems and as though many other women are clamoring
for, and have been denied, such positions. This simply is not true.
Most women do not want to work part-time. It is a difficult choice
-- by going part-time, one's chances of advancement within the Office
become nil. Moreover, part-timers never have the luxury of staying
late to finish work whenever they need to do so; arrangements must be
made for buses, carpools, after-school activities, etc. Instead,
they work on weekends while others are enjoying thr lsure time.
And they do so at a reduced salary. We do all this however because
we elected to have children (something Ms. Rice knows nothing about)
and then determined (unlike some members of management) that it was
better for our children if we raised them instead of having
housekeepers do so. It is a choice that each of us have willingly
made, and we are now unwillingly bng made to choose between those
children and jobs that we love. Ms. Rice might vow to run a
"progressive, family-friendly" office, but unless she plans to open a
day care center or allow women (and men if they so desire) the same
part-time opportunities given by every other District Attorney in the
greater metropolitan area, the County Attorney, the Attorney General,
the United States Attorney, and many private law firms and companies,
that vow will go unfulfilled.

What an eloquent letter.

Newsday should have rpinted. Send it to the Times, The NY Observer and the LI Press. Send it to the local weeklies.

Send it channel 12 and channel 55

:shock:

I didn't write this. It is something Newsday refused to print and someone sent it to me:

As one of the part-time employees affected by Kathleen Rice's
decision to do away with part-time work, I was deeply offended by the
editorial entitled "Rice deserves some leeway - The part-time policy
wasn't working." (I am writing anonymously from someone else's e-mail
because I still am on the payroll of the District Attorney's Office.
You are free to contact me at this address, however, and as soon as I
am no longer an employee, I will be willing to speak for
attribution). I am dismayed that Newsday has accepted without
question the various reasons stated by Ms. Rice for doing away with
part-time and relied upon those reasons in the editorial piece
without first checking thr veracity. Doing so would reveal that
most of the reasons given are ther misstatements of fact or utterly
untrue. I will try to address them in the order given in the editorial:

1) There are 15 women affected, not 12. Two have left the office,
two have or will be resigning as of 9/1/06, many have said that they
are returning but are looking for other jobs, and at l one is on
maternity leave and was given until January 1, 2007, to make a decision.

2) To the best of my knowledge, only three women worked a schedule
that entailed leaving before 5:00 p.m. The schedule for these three
women required working daily until 2:20, not 2:00. However, were you
to speak to any of them (and a complete list can be obtained from
Administration), you would find that they were rarely able to leave
that early.

3) To the best of my knowledge (I do not personally know each of the
15 women), none of the affected women worked as trial prosecutors
(can you imagine any judge or defense attorney allowing a prosecutor
to say [as DA Rice claims that they have] that it was 2:00 and they
had to go home?). And I believe those whose work required any time
in the courtroom job-shared and worked full days. Most of us were in
positions that involved little to no contact with police officers,
victims or witnesses. We worked in Investigations, Rising Star
(community outreach), the Appeals Bureau, Arraignments, or writing
search warrants. Moreover, other District Attorney's Offices (such
as Queens County) have part-timers in bureaus that occasionally do
require trial work. In those cases, the part-timers return to full-
time status (and recve full-time pay) for the duration of the trial.

4) Denis Dillon did not stop part-time employment. In fact, a new
job-sharing position was created in 2005 by Mr. Dillon for two women
who asked to work part-time. The truth is that the Office can
sustain only so many part-time positions, and Mr. Dillon addressed
requests for part-time employment on a case-by-case basis.

5) I have never heard of resentment for part-timers among our
coworkers. Almost every attorney in the District Attorney's Office
works overtime, including part-timers. I do not know of any part-
timer who ever ran out the door, foisting thr work off on someone
else. Part-timers simply work through lunch, take work home or
arrange to stay late as needed. And, just like the full-timers, they
are not compensated for these extra hours.

6) Part-timers are not a burden on the taxpayers of Nassau County.
Many part-time (and for that matter full-time) employees do not take
health benefits because they are covered by thr spouse's plan. And
while those on the health plan do recve the same benefits as full-
timers, thr other benefits (i.e., sick time, vacation time, and
pensions) are pro-rated. Because most part-timers carry full-time
case loads, the taxpayers get a bargain - 100% work for 80% or 60%
pay and less accrued time.

7) While Ms. Rice has hired several female executives, bureau
chiefs, and deputy chiefs, it should be noted that she also fired one
female bureau chief and one female deputy. Moreover, she has tripled
the size of the executive staff and increased the overall number of
management positions, allowing for the hiring of these women (I am
not criticizing these actions, I am only noting that these positions
did not exist in the Dillon administration). The number of female
line assistants has not increased significantly; there always have
been a large number of female assistants in the Office.

8) The Office is not strained by the number of lines allotted by the
legislature because of part-time employees. Indeed, although I am
not sure that still is true, at one time, job shares (i.e., two
people working the same job at 50%) counted as one line. If that
still is the case, and Ms. Rice honestly is concerned about the
number of her lines, it would be better to limit all part-timers to
job shares (as is done in Suffolk County) to conserve the lines
instead of doing away with part-time altogether. Moreover, if Ms.
Rice does not think she has enough lines, she merely needs to ask the
Legislature to increase the number and then fit those new lines into
her budget. In any event, any "strain" is not due to part-time
workers; it is due to the fact that many low-level trial assistants
left the office shortly after the new administration took over (the
two events are not necessarily connected -- people tend to leave a
DA's office after they have completed thr commitment for private
practice, and that usually happens after the first of each year).
That problem will be largely alleviated in September, when the new
class of 25 line assistants begins thr employment.

9) Ms. Rice's statement that she will allow for part-time employment
once the office is "reorganized," but will not permit such positions
in litigation, investigations or appeals, means that there will be
almost no place these part-time attorneys can work because no bureau
other than the Complaint Unit, which is at present staffed by two
attorneys, meets that criteria. The truth of the matter is that
there are many bureaus in the office (such as Arraignments, Appeals,
certain investigative bureaus, and the former Rising Star program
[which Ms. Rice has effectively eliminated]) that lend themselves
quite well to part-time work.

10) Finally, I believe that only one or two of the women involved
have only older or grown children; most have toddlers, preteens, or a
mixture of teens and younger children. Moreover, no effort was made
by the Office to find out why any of these women (including those
with older children) are working part-time. Had they done so, they
might have discovered that some of us have children with special
needs, severe medical problems, or other disabilities, and others
have suffered personal tragedies. For these women, working full time
would be extremely difficult, if not impossible. But even if Ms.
Rice were legitimately concerned that people who no longer needed to
work part-time were taking such spots from others who needed -- and
wanted -- to work part-time, all she need do is institute the same
policy as the Manhattan DA's Office: part-time status is given for
two years, and must then be reapplied for. If no one else with a
greater need has requested that slot, the person's part-time status
is continued for two more years, and so forth.

Ms. Rice has made it sound as though part-timers are causing the
Office numerous problems and as though many other women are clamoring
for, and have been denied, such positions. This simply is not true.
Most women do not want to work part-time. It is a difficult choice
-- by going part-time, one's chances of advancement within the Office
become nil. Moreover, part-timers never have the luxury of staying
late to finish work whenever they need to do so; arrangements must be
made for buses, carpools, after-school activities, etc. Instead,
they work on weekends while others are enjoying thr lsure time.
And they do so at a reduced salary. We do all this however because
we elected to have children (something Ms. Rice knows nothing about)
and then determined (unlike some members of management) that it was
better for our children if we raised them instead of having
housekeepers do so. It is a choice that each of us have willingly
made, and we are now unwillingly bng made to choose between those
children and jobs that we love. Ms. Rice might vow to run a
"progressive, family-friendly" office, but unless she plans to open a
day care center or allow women (and men if they so desire) the same
part-time opportunities given by every other District Attorney in the
greater metropolitan area, the County Attorney, the Attorney General,
the United States Attorney, and many private law firms and companies,
that vow will go unfulfilled.


Here's the deal. Let anyone who wantgs to work part time do so. The caveat is that no one working part time shall recve benefits. Not Health, not dental, not vision, not sick or vacation time.

Once you make these people true part-timers, I think common sense will say that these women will all gladly return to full time status.....and then hire child care, like the rest of us have to.

[patronage sux]

get with the program and work full time or be off with ya!

tough shit republicanst

[Good Boy]

It's a shame that newsday will not print the truth anymore and continues to spin the press releases of this administration. The best thing that could happen to Long Island would be having a second paper. Reporting one side of the news makes for having dumb voters and the proof is in the pudding.