Connect with us

Montana

Labor complaint over firing of Montana Highway Patrol trooper to continue

Published

on

Labor complaint over firing of Montana Highway Patrol trooper to continue


HELENA — A labor complaint filed over the firing of a Montana Highway Patrol trooper is set to move forward, after a state investigator found there was enough evidence to justify a full hearing.

The Montana Federation of Public Employees, the union that represents troopers, filed an unfair labor practice charge earlier this year against MHP and the Montana Department of Justice, which oversees it. They claimed Trooper Alicia Bragg, a union leader, was fired because she provided a summary of an MHP employee satisfaction survey to the union, and that DOJ was trying to intimidate employees from exercising their rights as union members. They said, because the document dealt with working conditions, there was a clear right to communicate with the union on that issue.

DOJ denied the union’s claims. They said Bragg’s firing was warranted because she had violated a direct order not to share the document, and that she or MFPE could have asked administrators to provide the document but didn’t. They said the information in the survey was not specifically a “condition of employment.”

In order for the unfair practice charge to continue, an investigator with the state Board of Personnel Appeals had to determine there was “substantial competent evidence” to support the claim. They said there was in this case, saying the climate survey did deal with “terms and conditions of employment” that employees have a right to discuss, and that Bragg’s statement that she shared the information for the benefit of her coworkers indicated an action of “mutual aid or protection.”

Advertisement

This decision was only an initial step in the process. The investigator said the Office of Administrative Hearings will now take over the case to determine whether DOJ and MHP committed an unfair labor practice.

“It was my right, and my responsibility, to communicate about troopers’ working conditions with our union staff,” Bragg said, in a statement released by MFPE Friday. “Everyone at DOJ and MHP serve in law enforcement roles, and I hope this finding of probable merit is a reality check for our leadership. They’re on the wrong side of the law and they’re failing to back our troopers.”

“It’s settled law that union members have a right to advocate for each other and better working conditions.” said MFPE President Amanda Curtis in a statement. “I’m glad the Board of Personnel Appeals sees this for what it is, a local union president acting well within her rights to fulfill her responsibilities.”

In addition to the labor complaint, MFPE also filed a grievance with DOJ, which is currently going to arbitration. In their release, the union said they and the department had agreed to postpone the full hearing in this case until that arbitration is completed.

Sgt. John Metcalfe, MHP’s public information officer, released a statement to MTN of behalf of the agency.

Advertisement

“We deny the union’s allegations and maintain we did nothing wrong,” he said. “This ruling was nothing more than a procedural step and will have no impact on the final outcome. We look forward to defending our position throughout the rest of this process.”





Source link

Montana

Wind damage highlights insurance challenges for Montana homeowners

Published

on

Wind damage highlights insurance challenges for Montana homeowners


It’s the talk of the town this week — powerful winds ripped the roof off Lincoln Elementary School on Sunday, leaving students, teachers, and residents in shock.

The incident has sparked concern among homeowners who are now worried about how such weather damage could impact their own homes—and what their insurance would cover.

According to Tauna Locatelli, owner of Advantage Insurance, most insurance policies have a set deductible for things like fire or theft, but wind and hail damage deductibles are often much higher, or even based on a percentage of a property’s value.

Quentin Shores reports – watch the video here:

Advertisement

Wind damage highlights insurance challenges for Montana homeowners

“Right now our industry is going through a really challenging time, especially when it comes to wind and hail in Montana. Several carriers are going to a standard ‘all peril’ deductible for everything other than wind and hail. So, it could be $1,000 for all but wind and hail, $2,500 wind and hail,” Locatelli explained.

A deductible is the amount homeowners must pay before insurance covers the rest. For wind and hail, that deductible can be steep.

Advertisement

“Some companies are going 1 or 2% of a coverage value, so that’s the building value. If it’s insured for $500,000 and you have a 1% deductible, you’re looking at a $5,000 deductible for wind and hail, which is what we get in Montana,” Locatelli said.

It’s important for homeowners to know their deductible—if repairs cost less than the deductible, insurance won’t pay anything.

Filing small claims can also impact your rates; Locatelli said, “Because if you have a $3,000 patch job claim and you have a $5,000 deductible, you really don’t want to file that because you’re not going to get anything in. That claim is going to follow your insurance record for five years.”

Age of property factors in as well. If you have an older roof, insurance may not fully cover its replacement.

“You’ve now lived half the roof life. Well, insurance is about indemnity and putting you back in the same condition you were in before the loss. You can’t put a 16-year-old roof on a home, so at 16 years, they’ll now pay 50% of that roof instead of 100% because it’s already lived half of its life. And then it drops each year as it goes by,” Locatelli added.

Advertisement

The bottom line: Keep your property maintained, review your insurance policy, and think carefully before filing a claim—especially as Montana faces more intense weather.





Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Missoula and Western Montana neighbors: Obituaries for March 11

Published

on

Missoula and Western Montana neighbors: Obituaries for March 11





Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Montana AG letter alleges Helena violates law banning ‘sanctuary cities’

Published

on

Montana AG letter alleges Helena violates law banning ‘sanctuary cities’


HELENA — On Monday, Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen sent a letter to the City of Helena claiming the municipality is not in compliance with the state’s law banning “sanctuary cities.” The letter comes just under a month after the State of Montana launched an investigation into a city resolution on Helena Police policy and Helena’s involvement in federal immigration enforcement.

In the letter, Knudsen laid out the ways he believes the city’s resolution violated state law. The attorney general gave Helena 15 days to respond or reverse the policy. If the city does not comply, his office will pursue legal action.

“Helena’s resolution appears to contain blatant violations of this law,” wrote Knudsen.

MTN News

Advertisement

On January 26, 2026, the City of Helena adopted a resolution clarifying when and how the Helena Police Department will cooperate with federal immigration officials. The vote was 4 to 1. The Helena commission seats and the mayor are elected in non-partisan races.

In the letter, Knudsen alleges the resolution established “a broad sanctuary city policy” that seeks to protect every illegal immigrant, regardless of whether the individual had committed a serious crime or not. The state further claims the resolution gives illegal immigrants “special privileges” in plea deals and establishes a “free-for-all policy” where a police officer can request the unmasking of Department of Homeland Security and ICE officers.

Knudsen has requested that the City of Helena, in their response, specifically describe in detail how the resolution complies with Montana law, provide emails and correspondence from city staff and the commission regarding the resolution.

Helena City manager Alana Lake told MTN in a statement: “The City of Helena is aware of the issues being raised by the Attorney General’s Office and is reviewing the matter. While we cannot discuss the details of a potential legal issue, the City is committed to transparency and compliance with the law. The City takes these matters seriously and will continue to cooperate with the appropriate authorities while remaining focused on serving our community.”

City of Helena Commission Chambers

MTN News

Advertisement

Passed in 2021, Montana House Bill 200 prohibits a state agency or local government from implementing any policy that prevents employees or departments from communicating with federal agencies regarding immigration or citizenship status for lawful purposes. It also states governments must comply with immigration detainer requests if they are lawfully made.

HB 200 was backed by Republicans and passed with only Republican votes. Gov. Greg Gianforte signed the legislation into law on March 31, 2021.

Passage of the resolution by the Helena City Commission has drawn ire from conservative voices in Montana politics and on the national level.

ICE protest in Helena

MTN News

The resolution said the commission supported the Helena Police Department avoiding “committing its resources to federal action for which it has no authority,” such as entering into an agreement with the federal government to directly enforce immigration laws. Under federal law, immigration enforcement is conducted by federal agencies under the Department of Homeland Security. However, under the Immigration and Nationality Act, state and local governments can voluntarily enter into 287 (g) agreements with the federal government that allow them to enforce immigration laws.

Advertisement

The commission further supported HPD’s policy not to stop, detain, or arrest a person solely on suspected violations of immigration law, including assisting other agencies in an arrest based solely on immigration law.

DEEPER LOOK: Helena has seen a growing debate over ICE and local police involvement

In the resolution, the commission also supported an HPD officer, using their own discretion, requesting the identification and unmasking of a Department of Homeland Security Officer if the HPD officer “feels it will not be interfering with the actions of federal officers exercising their jurisdiction.”

“This adversarial relationship by local law enforcement toward federal officers itself undermines public safety and forces immigration officers to fear for their safety when they are simply carrying out their lawful duties,” wrote Knudsen.

The resolution further supports the City of Helena’s policy not to consider immigration consequences in a plea agreement with a defendant.

Advertisement
Montana state flag

Mack Carmack, MTN News

Montana state flag

The commission also supports the City of Helena not disclosing any sensitive information about any person – including immigration status, sexual orientation, or social security number – except as required by law.

“This is a restriction that directly conflicts with Montana’s prohibition on sanctuary jurisdictions, specifically ‘sending to, receiving from, exchanging with, or maintaining for a federal, state, or local government entity information regarding a person’s citizenship or immigration status for a lawful purpose,’” the attorney general wrote.

If a government is found to be violating Montana’s law banning “sanctuary cities”, the state could fine them $10,000 every five days, prevent them from receiving new grants from the state, and have their projects with the state re-prioritized. A government in violation can avoid penalties by becoming compliant with the law within 14 days of being notified of the violation.

Read the full letter from the Montana Attorney General to the City of Helena:

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending