BOSTON POLICE

Well here we are again. The big dogs have settled. Now the ques­tion or QUESTIONS arise as to where this puts us? You should know however that the Commit­tee was fully prepared for this event and a complement to those members is that they are pre­pared for any contingency.

Let’s take a look at what is in­volved in the BPPA settlement and what the numbers mean.

A four year agreement.
Base wage increases as follows:

July 06: (retro) 2%, July 07: 2.5%, July 08: 3%, July 09: 3.5%
Increase of $150 in the Clothing Allowance effective January 2008.
Increase in the Weekend Dif­f e rential of 0.5% effective July 2009.
Increase in the patrolman’s Hazard Duty Pay of 1.5% effec­tive July 2008.
Increase in the patrolman’s 911 Response Specialist Pay of 0.15% effective July 2009.
Increase in Longevity Program of $500 at each step 10 years and 20 years.
Increase in member’s medical insurance contribution of 5% by January 2009.
Blue Cross/Blue Shield Master Medical will be eliminated by July 1, 2007 and replaced by a Blue Cross product “Blue Care Elect Preferred” the rate of em­ployee contribution will remain the same (75%-25%).
City offers an “Opt Out” pro­gram for Medical Insurance $1500. for single plan $2500 for family plan.
A modification to the Hair Drug Testing Program providing for career random urine testing in the event of a positive hair test.
Provision for an independent laboratory test in the event of a positive Psychemedics test. (Quest Laboratories will be the independent lab)
Three hair samples will now be taken with the third sample held for independent testing.
Residency relief for bargaining unit members after ten (10) years of consecutive full time service.
A provision securing the detail clerks position with a minimum of two clerk (other) positions in each District and some Units.
A supplemental income De­ferred Compensation Plan.
An Increase to the Longevity Steps by $500.00 per step (10 years and 20 years).

So those are the highlights or the lowlights, depending on your view.

Now where do we stand in all this?

On Wednesday, June 6, 2007 your Bargaining Committees did meet with the City to continue “negotiation”. I will define the term just in case the City happens to read this editorial (ne go ti a tion (noun) the reaching of agree ­ment through discussion and com­promise) as I think the City has negotiation confused with ulti­matum (ul ti ma tum (noun) a demand accompanied by a threat to in flict some penalty if the demand is not met)

So in order to aid the city’s bargaining team they were in­formed that the Boston Police Detectives Benevolent Society is ready willing and eager to NE­G OTIATE a fair and equitable agreement that reflects the needs of both parties, while acknowl­edging the value that members of this bargaining unit bring to this great City and Department. We will not, however sit and lis­ten to ULTIM ATUMS issued by members of a management team who believe there is some com­fort or security in having reached an agreement with a larger bar­gaining unit. Our Bargaining Committee has made it clear that we will not be treated as an after thought, we will not pick up the scraps left at another unions bar­gaining table.

We are not the BPPA, we are the BPDBS we perform different tasks, we have diff e rent and unique job assignments, we have different responsibilities. We therefore have unique needs. The BPPA does not negotiate our col­lective bargaining agreement , they haven’t since 1982, and they don’t do it now! The sooner the City recognizes that fact the sooner we will have a fair agree­ment.
As of this writing, to be painfully frank, the City is show­ing little or no respect for the hard work that our members per­form every day for this Depart­ment.

The City came to the bar­gaining table on Wednesday of­fering a contract reflective of the Patrolman’s. (with a take it or leave it attitude) It is obvious that the City has no intention of deal­ing with this bargaining unit in a fair or equitable manner (yet).

The BPPA has reached, what they obviously, believe is a fair a g reement. My congratulations to them. That’s their business. Now it is time to take care of our business. But make no mistake about it in this case one size does-n’t fit all.

So be patient stay strong and be ready to do whatever it takes to get the respect you deserve.

Our next meeting with the City is scheduled for 1:00 PM on Thursday, June 14, 2007. Fasten your seat belts, I see some turbu­lence ahead, this could be a bumpy ride.

An Inside View
More Than a Couple of Things.
Its all in the Details

It’s no secret that the BPPA has entered into an agreement with the City to “Classify” paid details, raise the hourly rate for the so called “Red Line” by four dollars per hour and change the “96 Hour Rule” to a 90 hour “defined” week, with no monthly cap. On April 7 the Society’s Detail Committee did meet with the City to discuss these same issues. Not surprisingly the city presented us with a “laundry list’ of issues including, but not limited to: a major change in the overtime training article, the withdrawal of our Health Insurance MUP, and Bi-weekly pay. We of course responded with a “ransom note” of our own, including but not limited to: Grading of Detectives with a 10-20 percent weekly increase. A five-dollar per hour increase in detail pay in lieu of the four dollar increase and the exemption of all “investigative” overtime as applies to the new 90 hour rule.

Needless to say our counter proposal was met with some “hesitancy”. Now I’m not a fan of beginning any negotiation session with these types of divisive demands as it tends to test the patience of both sides and sets the pattern for some contentious “one up man ship” bargaining. A second meeting was scheduled and on April 12, 2006 both sides did meet for some “meaningful” discussions of the matter, but again were unable to reach agreement. However during the course of that meeting, a unique issue came to the forefront. The City indicated that they wish to “civilianize” the Ballistics Unit.

They proposed that this would take about a year to complete. The problem, for the City, is of course, that we have four members that would be impacted by the move and the work product of the Ballistics Unit is undeniably ours, therefore a mandatory subject of collective bargaining. Facing those facts and not wanting to litigate the issue, the city “generously” offered to “swap” the detail issue for the four positions in the Ballistics Unit! Obviously that offer was quickly rejected. The Society counted with an offer to “redline” the four members presently assigned there and to add four additional positions of our assignment choice. This counter offer was rejected by the City and the matter remains, as of this writing unresolved.

THE DEATH OF CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS

Police contract negotiations, as practiced today are slowly dying. Good riddance. Too many police unions rely entirely on the activities that take place at a large wooden table in a bland room at city hall. Across that table sits a group of people that are despised by the persons on your side of the table.

The other side despises you as well. The police negotiators then make unreasonable demands, which are met with equally unreasonable answers from the city’s negotiators. Eventually, both sides present less than honest evidence to support their unreasonable positions. This is followed by scathing attacks on the other side’s unreasonable positions and dishonest evidence. This usually leads to personal attacks directed at the people on the opposite sides of the table. This process goes on for hours and is repeated either weekly or bi-weekly for a period of many months. Unable to reach an agreement, the issues are finally submitted for arbitration.

If you would like to break free from this dance of frustration, you must first learn how cities are structured and how they make decisions. City government is not a single entity. There are two separate personas – the political entity and the organizational structure. Think of two pyramids with three levels each. The political pyramid’s base is the electorate – all of the citizens in the city. The next level is the legislative level – the city council. The top level is the executive level – either the mayor or the city administrator. The other pyramid has the city employees as its base. The second level of this pyramid is the administrative level – think departments and department heads. The top level is the same as the political pyramid. It is the executive level – either the mayor or the city administrator. These two pyramids operate as separate entities that are dependent upon the other. Things that work with one pyramid fail when applied to the other. The most important thing to remember is that one is a democracy and the other is a monarchy. Actions that receive praise in the democratic pyramid may cause one to be sent immediately to the guillotine if done within the monarchy. Heavy-handed actions that work in the monarchy will get a person ostracized in the democratic model.

The political pyramid is a democracy. Power and money flow from the bottom up. The electorate hires the legislative, which then hires the executive, or at least controls the money that the executive needs to function. The organization pyramid is just the opposite. It is a monarchy. Power and money flow from the top down. All organizations that produce goods and services are organized as monarchies. You cannot organize production around a democratic model. It does not work. General Motors is organized as a monarchy. So is Joe’s Taco Stand and every city, county, state, and federal government. Even businesses have this two pyramid concept. Instead of having the electorate and the legislature, they have stockholders and the board of directors.

Organizationally, think of the city administrator as the King. The police chief is the Duke of Police. Many of you become frustrated because you expect the police department to be run as a democracy. That’s not going to happen. The department would fail as a democracy. Even your union is not a democracy operationally. If you examine the structure closely, you will find that your union has the same two pyramid structure. Unfortunately, police union presidents see the police department somewhat like the House of Representatives, with the Chief as the Speaker of the House and themselves as the Minority Leader. Police chiefs see the department as the army, with themselves as General and the union president as a “pain in the ass”. Within the police department the union does not exist. It is just another external force that has to be dealt with. From the start there is a schism between the police department and the police union, waged by the police chief and the union president.

There are two things that the union wants every contract cycle – more money and more restraints on the chief. Other than some procedural matters, everything falls under one of these two umbrellas. More paid leave, better pension, and better insurance are simply more money. Additional rules for grievances, discipline, and promotions are just more restrictions on the chief. Negotiations are almost always with the executive of the city. Seldom is it the mayor or the city administrator, but it is people within his executive level. Who are these people? The finance, human resources, and legal departments are all part of the executive branch of the city. Most police unions have strained relationships with the entire executive branch, including these three departments. The fire, parks, street, and utility departments are peer departments that seem benign to the police union, but finance, H.R., and legal are enemies. Why is this? Typically, the executive level of city government

functions much like a gatekeeper does for an HMO. Therefore, they are seen as blockers. They are. That’s one of their responsibilities. If they did not perform this function, city government would soon run amuck.

The police chief is normally either ignored or seen as an enemy combatant at the negotiating table. Many times he is viewed as the source of most of the union’s issues. You are at the negotiating table with the executive people and the police chief on the other side. You are unhappy with the executive and livid about the chief. So what’s the plan? You have a slate of changes, monetary and non-monetary. You want the executive to force your non-monetary items onto the chief – more restraints, and you want money pulled from the legislative branch to fund your monetary proposals.

With little knowledge about running a police department, the executive turns to their resident authority on police departments – the police chief. He advises them that their response to the nonmonetary items should be “no”. Actually, he said “hell no”. The lead negotiator for the city sanitized the remark. As good gatekeepers, the executive officers also slam the gate shut on the monetary items and immediately apply a padlock. From this point forward, negotiations resemble a bar room fight more than a business meeting. Eventually, both sides wear out and an agreement is reached or the issues are submitted to an arbitrator. Oh well, all’s well that ends well. Just ending is good. See you in three years and we will repeat this process. There was a time that a baseball player could hang out late and drink beer and still win tomorrow’s game for the faithful. Mickey Mantle and Billy Martin did exactly this and led their teams to the World Series every year. Try that today and see where you get. Baseball is so competitive now that a person who does not workout and control his diet is soon on the release list. Sheer talent and guts are not enough. This is a good analogy of what has occurred in collective bargaining negotiations. The other side has been pumping iron and eating wheat germ. Luckily, the city has only been working on defending against your current playbook. They have not developed an offense.

It has been said that we are all salesmen. We are all selling something, even if it is just ourselves. In marketing strategy, there are two ways to get your product to the consumer. Either you push it through the distribution system, or you pull it through. For our purposes, we are not going to make the distinction between selling and marketing. Suppose you have developed a new candy bar and you must decide which method you want to use to get your product to the consumer. You could go to

the local grocery store and explain to the manager how you have this great new candy bar and how his store could make a lot of money if he would put your product on his shelf. If he buys into that, he would immediately begin a process to bring your candy bar to the attention of his customers. This is pushing the product through the system. Your other alternative would be to advertise your product directly to the public. Customers would begin asking the manager if his store stocks the candy bar. When he discovers that customers are going to his competitor to buy your candy bars, he begins buying and stocking your candy bars. This is pulling the product through the process.

Your department is selling the product - police services. The electorate is the consumer. The product goes directly from you to the consumer. So what do we do? Do you push the services to the consumer as they come off of the conveyor belt? That’s what most unions are currently doing. Or, should you entice the consumer to pull the product from you? It should be obvious that them pulling is better than you pushing.

So, you can either push or pull. There are five places that you can apply a push or a pull:

1) At the electorate level

2) At the legislative level

3) At the executive level

4) At the administrative level

5) At the employee level

I have made it easy for you. Number 1), the electorate level is the best place and each following level is the next alternative. The administrative and employee levels are not very good points to push or pull. Relying solely on negotiations is pushing and pulling at the executive level, which is the third best,

or third worst, place to apply pressure. Again, you are asking the executive to pull on the legislature and to push on the chief. This is an inefficient way to obtain change. The starting place is with the electorate. You want to motivate the electorate to push the legislature. We do this by causing them to want the improved product you offer, which they are pulling from you. If you start at the legislative level, you will need to have this level pull on the electorate. The electorate will not react as positively as they did when a direct appeal was made to them. The legislature will also not be as motivated, because they are not the direct recipient of the product you provide. There are three ways to deal with these five groups:

1) Negotiate

2) Lobby

3) Politic

You should politic the electorate and the employees, lobby the legislative and administrative levels, and negotiate with the executive level. These are three different functions with three different methods and purposes. Politicking provides power. The electorate is the fountain of power and money for the city. Your membership provides the power and money for your union. Lobbying provides influence. The legislative and administrative branches are the sources of influence. Without the support of these two groups you have no influence. Negotiating provides results. The executive is the gate keeper. No significant change occurs without the approval of the executive. Power leads to influence. Influence provides the ability to obtain change.

Politic – You tell the electorate what your department is doing for them. You tell them how it could be even better. Tell them why it matters to them. Ask them to help you help them. Politicking is just another way of saying public relations. Public relations are about winning support for the good that your department is doing. It is not billboard signs that belittle the city and its leadership. It is not scathing letters to the editor. It is not protest rallies. It is positive and upbeat actions.

Lobby – Tell them what your department is doing for their constituents. Tell them how it could be better for their constituents. Tell them why it matters to their constituents. Ask for their support to help their constituents. Lobbying is not giving money to politicians. It is not endorsing candidates. It is about providing positive information.

Negotiate - Tell them what you are doing for the citizens of your city. Tell them how it could be better. Tell them that the electorate and legislative body want things to be better. Tell them what you will need to accomplish this. Negotiating is not about making demands. It is discussing problems and then seeking solutions that address those problems to the satisfaction of your city and your union. When should you politic and lobby? Perpetually! You should politic and lobby from now until eternity. Who should take the lead on politicking? The Police Chief! That is going be hard to accomplish if you are busting-him-in-the-chops every chance you get. Who should promote the lobbying effort? The union leaders, if they have demeanor to do it properly. Again, it is going to be a problem, if you endorsed losing candidates and said disparaging remarks about the current office holders. Remember, the chief is one of the people you want to lobby. Would your chief be very receptive to your overtures? For most of you the answer is no. How can you get the chief out on the speaking circuit, promoting your department and the officers that work for him? Obviously, you will have to do a lot of fence mending. At some point you must decide whether you want to get the money or get the chief. If you want the chief’s blood more than you want the money, you should resign your position in the union, probably the department too. For most unions, allocating funds for a paid lobbyist is one of the best investments they can make. The typical police officer is a poor lobbyist. Good police officers and good lobbyist are different personalities. The guy that has both usually ends up being the chief. In addition to a paid lobbyist, paying for a publicist can greatly improve your image. Controlling the message is very important. Even Zsa Zsa Gabor knows that. All of the things to be effective with negotiations cost money. Sadly, most police unions do not see this. They spend all of their funds on grievances and arbitration hearings, which are forms of negative public relations and lobbying. When it comes to contract negotiations, the typical police union is a tightfisted miser. Negotiations become nothing but a low-budget-amateur-hour. One of the most common lobbying obstacles is backing the losing candidate. The easy way to avoid this pitfall is to not endorse political candidates, and never give money to people running for political office in the government you work for. You do not need to. You are selling a product they all want. You are not lobbying for some boondoggle project of questionable value. With the exception of some pot smoking hippie that occasionally gets elected, all candidates support your department. Forget the anti-union rhetoric they preach to the local chamber of commerce. Stay out of the political races and deal with whoever wins. You do not have to buy their support. Even if you could, it is not very reliable support. The hardest thing for police unions to embrace is the irrefutable truth that politicking, lobbying, and negotiating are primarily acts of “sucking up”. Most union officials want to “kick ass”. If it worked, that would be great. It doesn’t. Relying solely on the negotiating table does not work either. If you want to succeed with negotiations, quit doing what feels good and start doing the things that work. To do this will require that you change your behavior and that you allocate significant funds to negotiating the contract. The success or failure of negotiations is in your hands.