Police Unions Demand Extra Pay For Accountability And Transparency

[beourbud]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/police-unions-more-money-body-cameras_us_57bc99ade4b00d9c3a1a6383?section=&

 

Police chiefs, officers and citizens across the country have gone on record in support of policy changes in response to controversial instances of police exercising extreme, often deadly force.

 

But police unions, which serve as mouthpieces for many rank-and-file officers, are responding by holding up the push for reform. Over the past few months, unions in a number of cities have stated that the only way they’ll accept change is if they get something in return.

 

In some cases, unions have taken a particularly hard-nosed approach to bargaining, seeking financial concessions from taxpayers in exchange for measures designed to ensure that officers are doing their jobs effectively and appropriately.

 

Earlier this month in Cincinnati, a local Fraternal Order of Police attorney sent a “cease and desist” letter to the city, saying that officers should only use body cameras if the city was willing to pay them more.

 

Daniel Hils, president of one of Cincinnati’s Fraternal Order of Police lodges, acknowledged that body cameras are coming whether he likes it or not. But to him, the devices mean additional expectations and responsibilities for officers, and should therefore translate to more compensation.

 

“We recognize [body cameras are] the direction we’re going,” Hils told The Huffington Post. “But I believe this is a game changer, as far as complexity of the job. And this level of monitoring will result in positives and negatives about what it’s like to be a policeman. Because of that, I think it does require some additional compensation or at least bargaining for that.”

 

Taxpayers in the city were already expected to foot the $6 million bill for the 700 body cameras scheduled to be on the street by the end of the year. And Cincinnati already understands the value of these devices. Last year, footage from a body camera worn by a University of Cincinnati police officer provided key details surrounding the controversial fatal shooting of an unarmed black man during a traffic stop. A grand jury later indicted the officer on charges of murder and manslaughter.

 

 

Still, some experts on public sector unions see merit in Hils’ argument. And it isn’t unusual for unions to take advantage of a potential shift in their day-to-day functions, said Nelson Lichtenstein, director of the Center for the Study of Work, Labor and Democracy at the University of California Santa Barbara.

 

“You enhance the duties or add additional responsibilities to a job and then you want to be compensated for it,” he told The Huffington Post. “That’s what collective bargaining is all about.”

 

But some advocates for reform say demanding more money for officers to wear body cameras is insulting. Unions are now effectively holding transparency and accountability hostage, and treating basic oversight like a luxury item that isn’t included in the usual terms of service.

 

This sort of resistance conflicts with some of the broader messaging from law enforcement. Many police officers have said they support body cameras. Top brass apparently wants them, and law enforcement officials have said they’ll benefit both officers and civilians. Police departments, though not in Cincinnati, have scrambled to sweep up federal government grants to implement body camera programs. And all of this makes sense, considering the public is broadly in favor of them.

 

Yet earlier this month in Boston, the city’s Police Patrolman’s Association tried to put a halt to a body camera rollout after officers refused to volunteer for a pilot program. The city had previously reached an agreement stating participation would be voluntary, but when no officers came forward, the mayor said he’d push ahead and assign the devices to officers. The police union and city briefly sparred over which party had violated the terms of the contract, but Police Commissioner William Evans later confirmed to HuffPost that the Police Patrolman’s Association had failed to obstruct the process.

 

“One hundred officers have been selected to participate in the [body-worn camera] pilot program,” he said. “The officers were selected by an independent party … who will be performing the evaluation at the end of the pilot period.”

 

Nobody is eager to be put under constant surveillance on the job, so some of this resistance may be logical, says Jay Stanley, senior policy analyst with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. Considering the nature of police work, however, the public is always likely to be less sympathetic to their expectations and demands.

 

“Police officers have been granted the power by the community to use brutal and even in some circumstances deadly force,” Stanley told HuffPost. “So with great power comes the need for great checks and balances.”

 

And body cameras aren’t the only issue police unions are stalling.

 

A union in San Antonio recently fought back against an attempt by city officials to give the police chief greater power to reprimand repeat misconduct by his officers. Union leaders sought additional compensation ― beyond the current contract’s 14 percent pay increase over the next four years ― for agreeing to the higher standards. As it stands now, misconduct cases among cops in the city effectively disappear after two years.

 

Officers later voted for a version that didn’t include the reforms, which is now headed to the City Council for approval, amid outcry from local activists.

 

Police unions have been equally intransigent in Seattle, where officers in July overwhelmingly rejected a new labor contract with the city that would have included both wage hikes and accountability measures. The police department there has been under intense scrutiny over its failure to remedy unconstitutional policing practices as part of a 2012 consent decree between the Justice Department and the city. Earlier this month, a federal judge issued a harsh rebuke of the union, declaring from the bench that “black lives matter.”

 

Unions aren’t in the business of public opinion, of course. They’re intended to serve as unapologetic, unwavering advocates for police officers.

 

“Bad PR? The hell with it,” Lichtenstein said. “Union leaders want to consolidate their base and get re-elected in the next election.”

 

But just because unions may be acting in an entirely predictable way doesn’t make it any less concerning to those who see reform as an integral step toward restoring public confidence and trust in policing.

 

“When it comes to policy, all too often we have seen police unions pushing for officers to be given special treatment when it comes to investigations of critical incidents,” Stanley said. “That is something that police departments should not be able to do.”

[beourbud]

No Camera = No Gun

 

Problem Solved

[outsideinthecold]

No camera, no gun? That's an idea worth serious consideration. Especially if it applied to the Chiefs and Sheriffs.

[zaphod]

No camera, no gun? That's an idea worth serious consideration. Especially if it applied to the Chiefs and Sheriffs.

Especially if it applied to all LEOs with guns?   I think that's a good idea.

[imiubu]

"But some advocates for reform say demanding more money for officers to wear body cameras is insulting. Unions are now effectively holding transparency and accountability hostage, and treating basic oversight like a luxury item that isn’t included in the usual terms of service."

 

nuff said.

[+washtenaut]

Body cam footage can cut both ways.  During negotiations it needs to be pointed out that these body cameras can protect officers from false claims by citizens too. 

 

Let's say they justifiably use their gun to kill a citizen.  Rather than have all sorts of false accusations of brutality (think Michael Brown type situation), that body cam footage could exonerate the police officer, save his/her career, and perhaps keep him/her out of prison.  In negotiations I would tell the officers that they could have a pay increase for wearing the body cams but we have to find a way to pay for that. 

 

So....if the police officer wants the body cam footage at some point to exonerate himself, it would cost the police officers union a fee of say $100,000 per instance.  These funds could then be used to offset the requested pay increase.

[Restorium2]

I think it does require some additional compensation or at least bargaining for that.”

 

That's like a factory worker saying they need to get paid more to wear safety glasses. I have to admit I never tried that angle. I wonder how many cops are embarrassed about asking to be bribed to wear a camera? You would think that every decent cop would be embarrassed. 

[phaquetoo]

I think it does require some additional compensation or at least bargaining for that.”

 

That's like a factory worker saying they need to get paid more to wear safety glasses. I have to admit I never tried that angle. I wonder how many cops are embarrassed about asking to be bribed to wear a camera? You would think that every decent cop would be embarrassed. 

I wonder if they got more pay when their patrol cars were fitted with laptops?

 

a macomb county sherrif deputy gave me a ride from 59 hall rd. all the way to pearson rd and i-75 (long story)  but that a ss hat was making me wish I was still hitch hiking,,,,,,,it was raining cats and dogs and that phaq was doing 100mph all the way there and he was on the lap top chatting about the phaqed up situation my old lady (at the time) got me into!  I apreciated the ride but man it was one of the scariest rides I ever took (when I wasnt driving)!

 

They dont want any one to know they are power hungry phaq's

 

Peace

[beourbud]

Body cam footage can cut both ways. During negotiations it needs to be pointed out that these body cameras can protect officers from false claims by citizens too.

 

Let's say they justifiably use their gun to kill a citizen. Rather than have all sorts of false accusations of brutality (think Michael Brown type situation), that body cam footage could exonerate the police officer, save his/her career, and perhaps keep him/her out of prison. In negotiations I would tell the officers that they could have a pay increase for wearing the body cams but we have to find a way to pay for that.

 

So....if the police officer wants the body cam footage at some point to exonerate himself, it would cost the police officers union a fee of say $100,000 per instance. These funds could then be used to offset the requested pay increase.

Fuckthat, this isn't about money this is about cops protecting officers from claims by killing the witness.

 

They don't deserve a raise, they need to weed out the pigs from the good cops.

 

Until Leo purges their own ranks they will all be perceived as bad and we will see repeats of Dallas.

 

No camera, no gun.....go out with your baton and see what a bad azz you really are.

 

The gun lobby , republicans and the NRA are responsible for the flood of weapons in the streets , the spread of bigotry and hate and the subsequent gun violence.

 

Vote every republican out, Do it for your children's future.

Edited August 26, 2016 by beourbud

[phaquetoo]

Fuckthat, this isn't about money this is about cops protecting officers from claims by killing the witness.

 

They don't deserve a raise, they need to weed out the pigs from the good cops.

 

Until Leo purges their own ranks they will all be perceived as bad and we will see repeats of Dallas.

 

No camera, no gun.....go out with your baton and see what a bad azz you really are.

 

The gun lobby , republicans and the NRA are responsible for the flood of weapons in the streets , the spread of bigotry and hate and the subsequent gun violence.

 

Vote every republican out, Do it for your children's future.

Does that mean you dont think we should have weapons?

 

You know that sentence is complete bullshitt,,,,most guns in the hood are stolen, I bet if no guns were stolen their would be no where near the amount in the hoods or in lil kids hands!

 

You cant just say repubs and the nra are responsible for the flood of weapons in the states,,,,,,,,if they outlawed every one who isnt a cop from having weapons we would be in deepshit!

 

I say open carry and vote for a person not a party!

 

I will have my guns untill my grand kids get them, and hopefully that wont be anytime soon!

 

Peace