|
|
PBA ousts
rival union in state vote The Florida Police Benevolent Association ousted a rival cop
union today in a bitterly contested election that was strongly influenced by
political clout in the recent legislative session. The Public Employee Relations Commission counted ballots from
police officers working in about a dozen state agencies. The result was 1,122
for the PBA and 588 for the International Union of Police Associations, with
90 officers voting for no union representation at all. There were 2,939 police officers eligible to vote in the mail
election. Eddie Johnson, elections supervisor for PERC, said the
commission will certify the results in 15 days unless IUPA files a challenge.
An IUPA spokesman said union officials had not yet received official notice
and deferred comment until they study the results. David Murrell, the PBA's main
lobbyist, credited the victory to pay raises and longevity salary hikes
gained for police officers in the past legislative session. Murrell said the PBA's promise to split off a separate bargaining unit for
the Florida Highway Patrol was also a big favor in the victory. The PBA has long been one of the strongest state employee unions
in Florida. Senate President-designate Ken Pruitt, R-Port St. Lucie, wrote a
letter praising the PBA as a driving force for law enforcement shortly before
the union election started and the union used its influence with Gov. Jeb Bush and many high-ranking legislative leaders as a
selling point in the election. IUPA defeated the PBA six years ago for the law-enforcement unit
and held off a comeback attempt in 2003. But the PBA got enough petition
cards March 1 to force a new representation election. The PBA still represented Florida Department of Law Enforcement
special agents and officers in the state prison system and correctional
probation officers. IUPA represented the FHP and officers in several other
agencies, including the Departments of Environmental Protection, Juvenile
Justice, Transportation and Business and Professional Regulation. City approves
contract with police officers From the Springfield News Sun, June 23, 2006 Springfield city commissioners approved a two-year contract
Monday with the Springfield Police Patrolmen’s Association that calls for no
raises in the first six months for the 95 patrolmen. It then provides for some raises on July 1 — 30 cents per hour
for the top pay step six and 28 cents per hour for step five. On Jan. 1 additional raises will be applied — 29 cents per hour
for step six and 27 cents per hour for step five, as well as a 2.25 percent
increase to all steps. The step increases bring the
patrolmen’s pay closer to the wages of firefighters and paramedics, said Jeff
Rodgers, the city’s personnel director. The contract also changes the residency requirement, allowing
officers to live in a contiguous county if they have a hardship and the city
manager agrees. Commissioners, who met in special session, also rejected a
fact-finder’s recommendations issued last week of a 1.5 percent increase in
2006 and 2.25 percent in 2007. The city proposed no raises in 2006 and an increase tied to what
non-union workers receive in 2007. The union sought a 5.02 percent increase
in 2006 and 2007. The union and city sat down again after the report and
negotiated the new terms. Mayor Warren Copeland thanked the union for working with the
city. “We’re very appreciative of their recognition of the finances of
the city and their willingness to make some sacrifices, along with our other
employees, to get us in a better financial situation,” he said. Pay deal
still sickens Ogden cops From the Salt Lake Tribune, June 28, 2006
OGDEN - After a weekend out with the “blue flu,” police officers
here ended their two-day protest and were back to work Monday. Tuesday several officers spoke out at a City Council meeting,
seeking one more chance to amend the city's new pay structure. “We believe it to be unfair and we see it as punishment for the
impasse,” said Ogden police Sgt. Troy Arrowsmith,
who serves as president of the Ogden Police Benefits Association. Of Ogden's 590 full-time employees, 282 don uniforms each day to
fight fires or crime. In wage negotiations this spring with city administrators,
regular city employees agreed to accept a 2 percent bonus and 5 percent merit
increase based on achieving a “3” on the employee performance scale, which
tops out at five. However, the city's negotiations with firefighters and police
officers ended in impasse. And the city's recently adopted 2006-07 budget
requires public safety personnel to score between a 4 and a 5 to receive the
full 5 percent wage increase - a 3 would only get them 2 percent. One of several criteria to reach that magic number involves
writing more traffic tickets. While the word “quota” wasn't used, the traffic
officers would need to double their tickets from 50 to 100 a month, while
patrol officers, required to write 12 citations per month, will now need to
issue 20. “This sliding scale is more of a tax on citizens,” Arrowsmith said. “We became officers to take criminals
off the street. You've taken that authority away from us” - by requiring them
to focus more time on errant motorists. Councilwoman Dorrene Jeske said she agreed that police officers had been
treated unfairly - but felt it was too late to do anything about it this
year. “The time is past in this budget session,” she said. Councilman Brandon Stephenson said the city had offered
something fair and reasonable, within its limited revenues. All employees will receive a 2 percent bonus this July using
one-time money leftover from last year's budget. However, officers would have
preferred a 2 percent cost of living increase instead to enhance their
retirement and raise their base pay. Last year, employees received 2 percent cost of living and 5
percent merit increases, but no raises were given the two previous years,
said City Council Executive Director Bill Cook.
“I'm outraged by what you're doing to our police and
firefighters. You're playing games with them - they stand between us and the
dark side,” Owens said. Police and city at odds over contract From the San Mateo Daily Journal,
June 28, 2006 Stalled
contract negotiations between Police have been working without
a contract since Sept. 1 and contract negotiations have reached an impasse
after meetings with state negotiators failed. Now, the Police Officers
Association is beginning what they call a “public education campaign” which
kicked off with a full-page newspaper ad and 75 members of the police
department and their families crowding City Hall Monday night. “The City Council expects above
average performance, but does not want to compensate its police officers for
superior police service. The Police Officers Association is seeking a salary
based on the established average and equal treatment for benefits. To do
otherwise would be unfair,” said POA President John Harp. Meanwhile, City Manager Ed
Everett said police were offered a strong package and remain
the highest paid police officers in It’s the police officers who
refuse to return to the table, Everett said. The POA’s
surprise appearance at the City Council meeting and the newspaper ad spurred
the city’s own press release. “My colleagues on the City
Council and I have a great deal of respect for the professionals in our
police department, and for the work they do,” said Mayor Barbara Pierce. “The
fact that they are the highest paid officers in San Mateo County speaks to
that.” The POA is seeking a 2.8 percent
raise as agreed upon in its previous contract. The raise is based on a
comparative survey of similar cities within a 20-mile radius of Redwood City,
including South San Francisco, San Mateo, Palo Alto, Mountain View, Santa
Clara, Milpitas and Union City. The city wants to freeze police
salaries as it did with other departments. Police, however, claim other labor
groups have better health-care benefits, which include a vision program. It
also points to better benefits the City Council receives and Everett’s recent
pay raise as further reason why they should receive a raise. The city has a history of
strained labor negotiations with the police department that is fueling the
fire. “It’s been a string of
unfulfilled promises by the city,” said Redwood City police Officer Ray
Fowler. Three of the last four contract
negotiations went to impasse, Fowler said. The last contact was signed in
2003, after a full year of negotiations that culminated in three months of
mediation. At that time, police received a 6.51 percent pay increase and a 3
percent at 50 retirement plan, according to information previously published
by Rains, Lucia and Wilkinson LLP, the law firm representing the POA. The 3
percent at 50 retirement plan allows for police officers to retire at the age
of 50 with 3 percent of their salary for each year they work. For instance,
an officer with 30 years experience can get 90 percent of their pay when they
retire at 50. At the moment, there is no end in
sight and the stalled negotiations are expected to continue. Fed Up With Negotiations Failure? Are
you wondering why you are failing even though you are doing all the things
the "big boys" do or following the advice of the negotiations
"experts?" The answer is easy. They are wrong - plain and simple.
Alright,
that's "kickin' their butts." The only
problem is - it does not work. If it did, New York and Philadelphia
would be the highest paid departments in the country.
In
case you did not recognize this method, it is the trendy "interest
based" or "win-win" method. It is actually good stuff. The
only problem is that it usually fails for police associations. It is too
tempting for the city to "jump ship" and retreat to positional
bargaining after you "drop your pants." When you finally end up in
arbitration, the city has every document, idea and concept that you have, but
you have little or nothing from them. Under the "expert method,"
negotiations are nothing but a deposition of you by the city. |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
Copyright ã POLICEPAY.NET,
Inc. 2006 All Rights Reserved |
||||||||||||||||
The POLICEPAY Journal
Published
by:
POLICEPAY.NET,
Inc.
Oklahoma
City, OK 73102
(405)
234-2235