Labor and Public Employees Committee
JOINT FAVORABLE REPORT
Bill No.: HB-6382
AN ACT CONCERNING THE STATUS OF PROBATE COURT SYSTEM
Title: EMPLOYEES.
Vote Date: 2/18/2021
Vote Action: Joint Favorable
PH Date: 2/9/2021
File No.: 28
Disclaimer: The following JOINT FAVORABLE Report is prepared for the benefit of the
members of the General Assembly, solely for purposes of information, summarization and
explanation and does not represent the intent of the General Assembly or either chamber
thereof for any purpose.
SPONSORS OF BILL:
Labor and Public Employees Committee
REASONS FOR BILL:
Since they are considered "at-will" rather than state employees, Probate Court employees do
not receive the same pay or benefits as their State counterparts.
RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:
BEVERLY K. STREIT-KEFALAS, PROBATE COURT ADMINISTRATOR
The CT Probate Court system is a unique judicial system with judges elected and actively
involved in their communities. Judges are the employer for their own courts and hire the staff
they feel have the experience and skills necessary to meet their needs. When the courts
consolidated, one of the benefits was to reorganize the 117 disparate compensation and
benefit packages. The budget committee determines these rates based on a system of
performance and market data. Regardless of challenges faced by the system, the fiscal and
physical health of the court staff has been and is of paramount priority. During the pandemic,
emergency meetings were held to approve compensation plans and protect the physical
safety of the court staff. Employees were not laid off or lost any paid time. The current
structure fits the unique circumstance of the Probate Court system. It ensures that all
employees are compensated in accordance with a cohesive, uniform and equitable criteria,
while ensuring an appropriate local authority and relationship over employee selection and
supervision. This bill leaves numerous critical issues unanswered and fails to specify the
entities with which a union representing Probate Court staff would bargain. Separate
negotiations with every judge would yield 60 separate contracts with varied provisions.
If negotiations were conducted by the Probate court Administrator's office, the bill would
effectively make them responsible for many decisions that are presently handled by the
judges. They ask these questions:
Would Probate Court clerks have to be attorneys, similar to Superior Court clerks?
Would Chief Clerks be excluded from collective bargaining as managers and supervisors of
court staff?
Would court staff be assignable to different court locations as needed or would judges retain
the ability to manage such as work assignments?
Would determination of work schedules no longer be set by the local judge?
Would the Probate Court Budget Committee be eliminated?
Would the Probate Court Judges and Employees Retirement System remain separate from
the State Employees Retirement System?
Would vesting requirements for retirement benefits change?
These are some of the questions raised by this bill. She has significant concerns about the
adverse impact it would have. She opposes the bill.
NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:
BRIAN ANDERSON, LEGISLATIVE COORDINATOR
There is no policy reason probate court employees can't have a union, however, a few years
ago, Council 4 assisted some of these workers in trying to pass a bill to allow them to
unionize. Some of them were fired for doing so. This shows the need for a law to protect the
workers in their attempts to exercise the basic human right of organizing.
STEPHEN ANDERSON, PRESIDENT, SEIU LOCAL 2001
It is remarkable that some CT workers do not have the right to form a union. This bill simply
gives probate court workers the right to form ONE if they so choose. It is a step forward to
giving collective bargaining rights to these workers.
EVA BERMUDEZ, ORGANIZING DIRECTOR, CSEA SEIU LOCAL2001
The men and women of the probate courts are part of our social fabric just as educators and
health care workers. The probate system takes care of people during stressful times of their
lives, such as disputing guardianship of a child or setting the estate of a loved one.
Employees of all 54 courts that consolidated in 2011 are not state employees and therefore
not allowed to bargaining rights. Every decade has brought the probate system closer to
parity. Now is the time to allow probate workers a voice in their own destiny.
GRETA BLAU, PROBATE COURT SYSTEM EMPLOYEE
She had serious life-threatening health issues this year and was forced to miss a lot of work.
With COVID issues, she was hesitant to go back to the office and asked to work from home
since many other state employees were able to do so. She was denied. She questioned the
PCA policy about who was essential and who was not. She was told that her job was
considered essential because the probate courts needed to keep processing documents,
Other courts in the state, even those who deal with children's matters, were closed and
employees were working from home. She was receiving radiation therapy, but was able to
work throughout her treatments, skipping lunch and leaving at 3:45 five days a week for a
month to go to treatments because she didn't want to lose future accruals of time off.
Historically, power does not yield on its own: the oppressed had to fight for progress. It is sad
Page 2 of 7 HB-6382
that some of the judges are strongly against the unionizing. The system treats its employees,
85% of whom are women and a portion are black, latin or other people of color, like children.
They have absolutely no say in any rules and don't get to choose who makes them, just
follow them. This year would have been much different and more bearable for the dedicated
and hard-working probate clerks had they been allowed to unionize previously. They are
asking to be able to "consider" unionizing, to be treated fairly, job security, raises when they
are supposed to be paid and the same benefits as state employees at the same cost. This is
not unreasonable.
JACKIE BUCKLE, CHIEF CLERK, NORTHERN FAIRFIELD COUNTY PROBATE COURT.
She has been a dedicated employee of the Probate Court System for close to 30 years.
Probate clerks deserve to be recognized and treated the same as state employees. The
disadvantages of not being recognized are devastating both personally and financially.
There is no job security because they 'serve at the pleasure of the judge'. Although the
health insurance they have is the same as the state employees, they pay at least twice as
much for the same insurance. They are dedicated, capable and loyal employees who
deserve the same opportunities and protections as other state employees.
PAT CHASE, DERBY PROBATE CLERK
Courts remained open throughout the pandemic and clerks were not allowed to work from
home. As COVID spread through their very small office, they had to work separately. Most
recently they asked for a seat on the budget committee but were told the statute doesn't allow
this. They have no say in health benefits and pay significantly more for the same plans as
SHPCA and the judges. Women comprise the majority of the clerk positions and many are
single parents. Their pay is not comparable with others in the system. The majority of clerks
are smart, sympathetic, knowledgeable and kind to the people they serve. They just want to
be treated fairly and equally.
SHARON WICKS DORNFELD, ATTORNEY, DANBURY RESIDENT
A considerable amount of her practice is representing individuals as Conservator in the
Probate Courts. She also practices in Superior Court. It has never been clear to her why
clerks working in these two courts, whose work is indistinguishable, should be treated
differently in terms of compensation benefits, work rules and the right to organize. Clerks in
Probate Courts usually handle cases brought by self-represented individuals and have more
interaction with members of the public than Superior Court clerks. Because they often work
with citizens who are often newly bereaved or frantic about the care of a loved one, these
clerk's competence, patience and kindness is demonstrated time and time again. She finds it
ridiculous that the Probate System is required to be self-supporting and Probate Clerks share
the responsibilities but not the rights and privileges of other State employees. There may be a
fiscal issue involved, but cost should not outweigh fairness.
JUDGE JOSEPH EGAN (Ret.)
Probate clerks have often been referred to as the "backbone of the system" but haven't really
been treated as such. When the cost of insurance is factored in, they take home less now
than in 2010 when the courts consolidated. These clerks perform the same functions and
have the same duties as those working in Superior Court. There is no reason they should not
be treated the same.
Page 3 of 7 HB-6382
BRAD HEERING, EMPLOYEE, TOWN OF BETHEL
He works a lot with the Probate office located in Bethel Town Hall and wanted to submit his
support of this bill. He sees the work they do and believes they should be treated as State
employees.
KAY JEANETTE, CHIEF CLERK, DERBY PROBATE COURT
She testified last year to support the bill which would allow collective bargaining to ensure
health benefits, job security and pay increases. Over the years, clerks have asked to be part
of the budget committee only to be told that the statute doesn't allow this. When clerks have
an issue of grievance, there is no place to go. Clerks that have interest in collective
bargaining are fearful this will be held against them and some told if they don't like the way it
is, just leave. Being fearful or nervous is understandable, especially during this past year of
not knowing what tomorrow will bring. They should have the chance to have the same
opportunities as other state employees.
LAURA LANEHART, ASSISTANT PROBATE CLERK, NORTHERN FAIRFIELD COUNTY
PROBATE COURT
Despite court consolidation, nothing has changed. She left the position of Probate clerk in
Bethel, then came back to where she is now. Since 2010, the hourly rate paid 10 years
before, was the same when she returned. It was discouraging to learn the starting pay rate
for a newly hired assistant clerk in 2019 was LESS than what she made 10 years ago. Since
they work at the pleasure of the judge, probate clerks are not state employees, they are at-
will employees. They have no advocate or job security. They are afraid to speak out
because of the very real possibility they could lose their job. But even if they did, who would
listen? Judges are up for election in 2022, and if a new judge is elected, they could very well
lose their jobs. If they stand up to be heard today, they run the risk of retaliation, either from
the current judges or possibly the new one. She should not be afraid to speak up. They have
had to return to work during the pandemic and did not have the option to work from home.
These are uncertain times for everyone. Added anxiety and stress is overwhelming. Without
the dedication and hard work of the clerks, the probate system would not function. They
deserve fair treatment, better pay, benefits and equality. Ending this starts here with this
committee. Please take this to the Governor's desk.
MERISSA LAWLOR, ASSISTANT CLERK, DERBY PROBATE COURT
She has been working at the same job since graduating high school 15 years ago. Nine
years later, her pay was just $5 more an hour. When she had a child, she was working 30
hours a week and had to go on State Assistance and move back home with her parents.
Health costs increased and she was making even less. Cost of daycare is high, and with
home schooling being necessary and not being allowed to work from home, life has been
difficult. She now pays $700/month for health insurance while Probate Court Administration
pays a much lower rate. Despite what judges may testify or tell you, they are treated unfairly
and unequally.
Page 4 of 7 HB-6382
SAL LUCIANO, PRESIDENT, AFL CIO
Probate court judges are the only elected members of the CT judicial branch. They have
exclusive discretion in selection and compensation of their court staff, making them at-will
employees serving at the pleasure of an elected judge. If the judges lose or do not seek
reelection, they often lose their jobs. They can also be fired for speaking up. They are
underpaid compared with state employees in the Judicial branch, where the benefits are
bargained rather than determined by a court budget committee. They should have the right to
organize, engage in collective bargaining and enjoy the same salaries, benefits and job
security as the State Judicial employees.
JULIA MARTINEZ
She cited and compared differences and inequities between probate clerks and state probate
court employees, including pay rates, health benefit costs, and job security. The
discrepancies are far too great to be ignored. They need the right to collectively bargain. The
statute that says "we serve at the pleasure of the Judge" must be changed.
SHERRI McPARTLAND, CHIEF CLERK, WATERBURY REGIONAL CHILDREN'S
PROBATE COURT
Her testimony said probate court employees should finally be given someone to advocate for
them. Probate Court Administration is made up of state employees and virtually everything
they do is dictated by State of CT protocol. Many employees are not testifying because they
are afraid of retribution from their judge who may not want changes, but she is lucky enough
to have worked for judges who are supportive of fair and equal treatment for their employees.
Although not speaking on behalf of all clerks, she has been contacted by many employees
who are tired of being treated as state employees when it comes to pay freezes, but ignored
when it is time for merit increases, COLAs, and the costs of health insurance. They are not
necessarily asking to be made state employees, but are asking for the same benefits and
protections that are already provided to state employees. Most importantly, they are asking
for the ability to have a union advocating on their behalf. No one else is doing so.
JOHN MURPHY, UNITED AUTO WORKERS, REGION A
The UAW believes in collective bargaining for all workers, and workers in the probate court
system are no different. While the budget committee of the probate court may have strived to
improve and standardize wages and benefits, the workers themselves have no say. If they
choose to vote in favor of unionization, they will have the right to elect their own officers to
represent them in negotiating a contract regarding wages, hours and working conditions.
Every worker deserves access to a grievance and arbitration procedure that guarantees
fairness and due process.
JOANN NELSON, FAIRFIELD RESIDENT
She told of her several experiences working with the probate court, two adoptions, the death
of her husband and the settlement of her mother-in-law's estate. The clerks were extremely
helpful with all the aspects of overwhelming paperwork and documentation. They walked her
through it all with patience. The clerks are extremely important to the system and do an
excellent job for everyone who interacts with them.
Page 5 of 7 HB-6382
NEW ENGLAND HEALTHCARE EMPLOYEES UNION, DISTRICT 1199
This bill extends bargaining rights to probate court employees who have been left out of laws
allowing them to bargain because they are not classified as state employees. Many are at-will
employees who are significantly underpaid with their counterparts in the judicial branch. The
right to organize would provide them a voice and even the playing field when it comes to
wages, benefits and working standards.
MONICA WALTERS, ASSISTANT PROBATE CLERK, NORTHERN FAIRFIELD COUNTY
PROBATE COURT, BETHEL CT
She finds it hard to believe probate clerks do not have the same rights and privileges as other
court workers. They pay higher health premiumssometimes double of what PCA pays.
They can go years without raises and their salaries are significantly lower. Since they work at
the pleasure of the judge, there is tremendous fear by many clerks of saying anything about
these issues because it could result in the loss of their job. It is time they are recognized for
the work they do and the stigma associated with them is removed. This is the change
needed to ensure there is transparency in the probate system.
STACY ZIMMERMAN, SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, SEIU
SEIU strongly supports the ability of probate workers to form a union if they choose and
modernize the probate court system. CT ranks 40th per capita of public employees to
population, yet we still provide tremendous and needed services to residents. Since John
Rowland's era, there has been a contained assault on our public sector. This is an
opportunity to demonstrate we respect and value these workers and the sacrifices they made
throughout their service. This bill rights a wrong that transpired during the last modernization
of the probate system. The inequities of the existing system have become crystalized with the
pandemic finding some people working from home, some in the office and some seem safe
while others are acting as if everything is normal. This has been a legitimate drag on morale.
We must not let the fear of change by some officials stand in the way of creating a functional
and equitable probate court system for the future.
NATURE AND SOURCES OF OPPOSITION:
ALBERT R. CUSCO, WESTPORT RESIDENT
He cited the history and changes in the probate system since 2009. He feels in the current
system, where there is a fee system, the probate system makes favorable decisions to firms
and attorneys. His personal experience began when his grandmother died. She was one of
his business partners. She had paid a professional estate planning attorney to draft her will
and business contracts and agreements, but shortly after her death, his life was turned
upside down by the probate court system and the attorneys who prey on the vulnerable and
the elderly. He was forced to sell his farm market property at a loss to pay the attorneys, etc.
He no longer has a business or income and is now indigent because of the actions of the
Westport Probate Court. He