Dispute Over Nepotism Fuels Feud : Civil service: A union accuses the district attorney of violating county rules by letting a division head keep his new wife on staff.

Charges of nepotism within the district attorney’s office have stoked a long-running feud between Ventura County’s top prosecutor and the county Civil Service Commission.

The dispute centers on charges by an employees’ union that Dist. Atty. Michael D. Bradbury has violated county work rules by allowing the head of his Child Support Division to keep his new wife on his staff.

The Civil Service Commission, which will receive a report on the issue this morning, has scheduled an 11 a.m. hearing.

Even before the report is issued, however, Commission Chairman Robert Embry has accused Bradbury of sanctioning “blatant nepotism.”

And Bradbury, in turn, has blasted the Civil Service Commission as a longtime “tool of the union.”

“They act irresponsibly and they’re incompetent,” Bradbury said of the five-person commission Tuesday.

The harsh words reflect years of animosity between the veteran district attorney and the commission. Commissioners infuriated Bradbury by overturning his 1984 suspension of a deputy prosecutor and his 1985 firing of another.

The firing of William Maxwell, accused of sexually harassing a court interpreter and other offenses, was finally upheld last year by a state appellate court, but the appeal cost the county $100,000 in legal fees, Bradbury said. Embry said the decision represents the first time the commission has ever been overturned by a court.

“Since 1944, in all the hundreds of cases the commission has heard, there has been just that one case that failed to stand up to challenge,” Embry said.

At issue at today’s hearing is whether the district attorney can legally allow C. Stanley Trom, a former district attorney himself and chief of the office’s largest division, to keep ombudsman Margaret Escobar Trom on his 150-worker child-support staff.

The couple married in October, sparking protests from the Public Employees Assn. of Ventura County, which represents most of the county’s 6,000 workers and dozens of child-support employees.

The union cited a county policy that says “no person shall be employed in a position directly supervised by a member of his immediate family” without approval of the Board of Supervisors.

The supervisors refused to approve a rule waiver for the district attorney last fall. And they delayed action again Tuesday on his request to find that Escobar Trom’s assignment does not constitute a county rule violation or to waive the rule it violates. The supervisors will consider the waiver again after they receive the Civil Service Commission’s recommendation and report.

When Bradbury did not transfer Escobar Trom to another division, union Executive Director Harry L. Hammitt in February requested an investigation by the Civil Service Commission.

“Our members are concerned about this because they believe she has received favored treatment,” Hammitt said. “She gets prime overtime assignments. She gets time off to travel with her husband to conferences.”

Hammitt said some co-workers have felt for years that Escobar Trom held her personal relationship with their boss “over them directly” in disputes. “They felt they couldn’t take it to Stan,” he said.

Trom and Bradbury said Tuesday that Escobar Trom, a 19-year county employee, has received no favored treatment but in some ways has been treated worse than her colleagues because of her marriage.

Trom said his wife works about 10 hours overtime a week, which is less than many of her co-workers. She does take unpaid personal leave to join him at quarterly conferences, Trom said. But, he said, he has never turned down requests for unpaid leaves from any of his employees.

His wife took unpaid leave to attend a training conference with him in February, even though colleagues in her same work classification attended the conference and received full pay, Trom said.

“Margaret went to that conference on her own time and paid her own way just to avoid these kinds of crazy allegations,” he said. “So, in fact, if Margaret has been treated differently, it has been to her detriment.”

Escobar Trom, a mid-level supervisor, has not been promoted since 1984, well before she and Trom began living together, Trom said.

Bradbury has responded to what he acknowledges might have been a legal problem by having Escobar Trom report directly to Assistant Dist. Atty. C. Toy White, who evaluates her performance. But Escobar Trom still performs the same duties and works in the same office just down the hall from her husband.

“We looked at transferring her to another part of the office,” said Bradbury, whose office has 375 employees. “But there is no comparable position for which she has training. She’s worked her way up in the child-support division and that’s where her expertise lies.”

Bradbury said he also could not find a comparable position outside child support with similar pay. Escobar Trom makes $2,908 a month, at least $300 more a month than is paid for comparable jobs in other district attorney divisions, he said.

Bradbury said his only other option is to fire Escobar Trom, “which is absolutely ridiculous . . . and I would not do it.”

Hammitt, the union representative, said he is not trying to cost anyone her job, especially Escobar Trom, who is a union member.

“But there’s a perception of favoritism” that needs to be addressed, he said.

Embry, a professor at Cal Lutheran University in Thousand Oaks, agreed.

“This problem has existed for more than a year. He was in the same office with her during their period of courtship. And the same kinds of problems existed then.

“And now, I would ask Mr. Bradbury, why would he knowingly allow a violation of the nepotism rule?” Embry said.

Bradbury accused Embry of prejudging the case without reading his staff’s report and said the chairman should abstain from voting today. Embry said he would think about that.