|
|
2006 OUTLOOK FOR NEGOTIATIONS ORDER
A COPY TODAY (It is free) (click on the Link above)
Metro
contract will get another look Labor
dispute might go to arbitration From the Las Vegas Sun, November 29, 2005 Metro Police, Las Vegas and Clark County
officials say they will put aside past differences and work together to
hammer out a new four-year police contract with union officials. The county has repeatedly sided against Sheriff
Bill Young and city representatives on the Metro Fiscal Affairs Committee,
who have supported a proposed 25.6 percent compensation increase over four
years for rank-and-file cops. However, the three parties have hired a lawyer --
Chicago-based labor and employment law specialist Ted Clark -- who will
represent all of them in future dealings with the Metro Police Protective
Association, the union that represents the police officers. "They're all basically one front going
forward," said Karen Keller, Metro's executive director of finance.
"That's the management side versus the union side, which the (Police
Protective Association) is on." The Fiscal Affairs panel will meet today to
decide whether to use binding arbitration or a preliminary
"fact-finding" process to settle the dispute. Young and union
leaders have said the voluntary fact-finding would be a waste of time, and
want to reach a legally binding decision as soon as possible. County Manager Thom Reilly said the county is
likely to follow whatever direction Clark gives after consulting with all
three clients. "I think we would probably support what our
legal counsel recommends," he said. Binding arbitration, the likely next step, is
similar to a court proceeding in that the arbitrator has judge-like power to
impose a decision. However, arbitration is faster and less
expensive, and allows both sides of the dispute to set predetermined limits
on the decision. For instance, management could place a cap on how much the
arbitrator could award, and the union could set a minimum standard. The more likely scenario is that each side will
submit its own contract proposal, after which the arbitrator will decide
between the two, with the possibility of additional negotiations throughout
the process. Like a judge, an arbitrator can examine evidence,
such as transcripts of meetings and other documents, to determine which side
the law favors. The Police Protective Association filed a lawsuit
Oct. 31 stating that Nevada laws governing the Fiscal Affairs Committee do
not give it the authority to deny police contracts. However, Reilly has called the lawsuit
"theater." A two-page document outlining ground rules for the
negotiations, dated Feb. 2 and signed by representatives of Metro and the
union, invalidates the union's case, he said, because it includes a condition
that "all agreements are tentative and subject to final approval of the
Association members, the Sheriff, and the Fiscal Affairs Committee." Young has been at odds with Clark County
throughout the dispute thus far, criticizing the County Commission for
removing Commissioner Tom Collins from Fiscal Affairs in mid-October, before
the committee voted 3-2 against the contract. Collins, who had been an outspoken supporter of
the compensation increase, was replaced with Chairman Rory Reid because the
majority of commissioners said they opposed the contract. But Keller said it is time for Metro, the county
and the city to move beyond past differences. "That phase is behind us now," she
said. 2 voted against the
pension deal While former San Diego city pension board member Diann Shipione has received
most of the attention for opposing the now notorious 2002 agreement that
allowed the city to continue to pay less into the system, she was not alone. There was a second vote opposing the deal from
San Diego police Officer Thomas Rhodes. Yesterday, during the third day of a preliminary
hearing for six former board members charged with breaking state laws in
connection with that agreement, Rhodes took the stand to say often bluntly
what he thought of the deal. "It wasn't kosher," he said, a phrase
he repeated with some variations several times during the day. Prosecutors contend the six former board members
broke state conflict of interest laws in 2002 when they approved a city
proposal that continued a practice begun in 1996 to underfund
the pension system. Approval of that agreement was linked to a
package of enhanced pension benefits that were granted to city workers
including the board members in separate labor contracts. Charged are Cathy Lexin,
former human resources director; Ron Saathoff,
president of the firefighters union; John Torres, vice president of the
Municipal Employees Association; former city treasurer Mary Vattimo; former acting auditor Terri Webster; and analyst
Sharon Wilkinson. State law bars public officials from voting on
contracts in which they have a financial interest, with some exceptions. The
defense contends the two elements were not connected, there was no financial
interest at stake, and the law was not broken. Rhodes was serving as the secretary of the city
police union and was involved in contract talks with the city in 2002. He
said that when he first saw the proposal he balked. He testified that the benefits being contingent
on the board's approval of the funding proposal clearly went beyond the scope
of the board's duty. He said the deal was contrary to the training he
received when he joined the board in 2000. Rhodes, who has since left the board, said the
linkage between the underfunding and the benefits
placed trustees in an inappropriate position. "We shouldn't have been doing that," he
said. "We shouldn't have been voting on it at all." Under questioning from Deputy District Attorney
Steve Robinson, Rhodes said it was clear that the underfunding
known as Managers Proposal 2 and the enhanced pensions were coupled. "Any question that there was a relationship
there?" Robinson asked. "No question," Rhodes responded. Under cross-examination, Rhodes acknowledged that
he did not tell lawyers for the board or other trustees about his objections
to the proposal. Bob Rose, the lawyer for Torres, also quizzed Rhodes about a
benefit that went into effect for all city workers on July 1, 2002, when the
city picked up a percentage increase in the amount employees would contribute
to the system. Rose implied that was a "financial
interest" similar to the ones the defendants are accused of benefiting
from, and Rhodes should have not voted or should have disclosed that
interest. Rhodes said he did not excuse himselfbecause
he believed that the police who were stalemated in talks with the city
would not receive that benefit. Rose kept after the point. "Do you have any idea," he asked,
gesturing around the well of the courtroom where the defendants and their
lawyers were seated, "why you are sitting on the witness stand and not
here in one of these seats?" "I did the right thing," Rhodes quickly
retorted. Rose later asked if Rhodes had asked for immunity
when he spoke with prosecutors during their investigation. Rhodes said he asked for it and was told it was
"not available." He added that they were only interested in him as
a witness. "I didn't have anything to fear," he said. The hearing continues today. Charitable Giving and the FOP When
you need police, you call 911 and they respond. So when police call you
asking for donations, you may be inclined to give back. 10
Investigates goes behind the badge to expose how those dollars are really
being spent. They
are heroes in our communities, and when they call asking for donations the
community responds. One
donor says, "I give to them whenever they call. The police, the fire
department; all those things. Another
donor, when asked if they would be inclined to give if they got a call from
the Fraternal Order of Police, says, "I do give to them. That's the one
only." The
Fraternal Order of Police Foundation hires professional fundraisers. They
work out of an office on Westerville Road. Last year, responding to those
phone calls, the community donated $449,000 to the FOP Foundation, but most
of that money never got to the FOP. Seventy-seven
percent, or $346,000 went straight into the pockets of the professional
fundraisers. Kip
Morse with the Better Business Bureau says, "The name of the good police
officers of central Ohio is getting tarnished because 77 percent is not what
the consumers and donors would expect." Even
more surprising is what the FOP does with the 23 percent of the money they do
keep. Earlier
this year, before the hurricane hit New Orleans, police officers from around
the country, including more than 80 from central Ohio traveled to the Big
Easy for the National FOP Conference. Using money donated by the community,
the FOP foundation shelled out $65,000 to help pay their travel expenses.
That's not something they tell you on the phone. When
asked if he thought if people would donate if they were told the FOP was
raising money to help pay for police officers to go to their FOP conference,
FOP Treasurer Brian Spann says, "Probably not." Spann
says the telemarketers are supposed to say that some of the money donated
goes to the education and athletic fund, but in two of the calls 10TV
recorded, there was no mention of education. 10TV was told all of the money
goes, "for the families of an officer who may be killed or injured in
the line of duty." That's
not true and Spann says the actual breakdown on how donated money is spent
varies from year to year. "This
year we've spent a little bit more on officers killed, not killed, passed
away or died. Spent a little bit more on that this year. Last year we spent a
little bit less. So every year is different," says Spann. Out
of $10 donated, the first $7.65 goes to the professional fundraiser.
Spann says the remaining $2.35 cents is divvied up three ways, to give to
other charities, pay for trips to FOP conferences and officer relief. When
asked, Spann said about seventy-eight cents out of $10 was going into officer
relief. When
one donor heard that information, they said they would not be giving to the
FOP anymore. This
is not meant to discourage giving, but rather to make sure that you give
wisely. Experts say, if you want to give to a
charity that's dialing for dollars, hang up on the telemarketer and send the
check directly to the charity. City OKs
rise in police wages From the Daily Iowan, November 30, 2005 The Iowa City City
Council unanimously approved a tentative agreement to increase police
officers' wages over the course of three years on Tuesday. Talk of police strike dismays Mayor Ryan From the Republican,
November 27, 2005 SPRINGFIELD - Mayor
Charles V. Ryan said he was surprised, then confused, upon reading police
were considering going out on strike to protest stalled contract talks. "What are you
striking about if ... you have the right to bargain and you have an employer
who wants to bargain, and if they weren't successful at the table, they can
go to binding arbitration," Ryan said Wednesday. "A strike,
there's no reason for it. Plus it's illegal," he said. Thomas M. Scanlon,
president of Local 364, International Brotherhood of Police Officers, said in
The Republican Wednesday that officers are considering a strike because they
are fed up with lack of a contract and with frozen wages. Police have never
struck here and state law prohibits public employees from striking. Frustration among
labor unions has been a constant as the city struggles with a budget crisis.
Most city workers have been without new contracts and pay raises for two to
three years. The patrolmen's union
contract expired June 30, 2003. The local has 382 members. Scanlon said striking
is a step the union is weighing carefully, with officers fully aware of their
law enforcement responsibilities. But, he said, many
officers have lost patience with a city that is itself violating law by
failing to provide raises as required under the previous contract and failing
to bargain in good faith. Among steps officials
have taken to deal with the city's budget troubles are imposition of a wage
freeze on all workers and establishment of the Springfield Finance Control
Board. The mission of the
state-appointed control board is to stabilize finances and its authority over
local officials is sovereign. The city budget of
$452.8 million has a deficit of $6.5 million, whittled down from the $21
million deficit in the previous fiscal year. Ryan, a member of the
control board, said Scanlon is wrong because the city and control board have
bargained in good faith and want to keep meeting with the union to reach a
contract. "I'm surprised
he's talking that way ... The attitude of the city is it wants to have
negotiations, it wants to have a contract, but in order to do that, we have
to have somebody to sit across the table from," Ryan said. Albert Lea
(MN) city staff and Teamsters Local 320 representing the Albert Lea Police
Department are heading back to the negotiating table after the city council's
decision Monday night to not approve a three-year contract for the ALPD.
Other city employee unions, the American
Federation of State, County and Municipal employees, which covers public
works and parks employees, and the International Association of Fire
Fighters, which covers the Albert Lea Fire Department, agreed to a three-year
contract with a 2- percent salary increase each year. City staff and the teamsters will agree on steps
taken after that point, which could include mediation and arbitration.
Mediation is where an impartial party is brought in, but their decision isn't
binding. With arbitration that person's decision is binding.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Copyright ใ POLICEPAY.NET, Inc.
2005 All Rights Reserved |
||||||||||||||||||||||
The POLICEPAY Journal
Published
by:
POLICEPAY.NET,
Inc.
(405)
234-2235