Page 21 - March 2018 FOP Newsletter

files or electronic files, for which the benchmark for destruc- tion or the provisions related to litigation or arbitration are applicable or there are exceptions provided therein.”
As a result of a series of unfortunate events, the arbitrator (in the Lodge’s opinion), backpedaled. In a subsequent rul- ing, on April 28, 2016, the arbitrator issued his final award, in which he reversed his earlier finding and denied both griev- ances, stating, “The grievance is denied at this point in time for the reasons of the public policy involved in the request of the U.S. Department of Justice, and only for this reason, as set forth in the opinion.”
Both the City and Lodge each filed suit in the state court: The City filed its petition to vacate the award on July 26, 2016, and the Lodge filed its answer and counterclaim to enforce the award on August 26, 2016. In vacating the award, on Oct. 18, 2017, the circuit court held, “In conclusion, enforcement of the arbitral award violates a well-defined and dominant public policy to preserve government records...Moreover, destruction of important public records, such as the police disciplinary files at issue here, undermines principles of gov- ernment transparency that are so vital to the preservation of the rule of law.”
The Lodge filed a timely appeal with the Appellate Court, with its initial brief due on March 22. The City’s response is due in April.
Body-worn cameras. In February, I wrote about the ALJ’s Nov. 8, 2017 decision involving the City’s illegal expansion of body-worn cameras (BWC), in which the Department refused to bargain with the Lodge over any impact or effect of the BWC Pilot Program, relating to officers’ safety and/or disci- pline — despite multiple demands. In her well-written deci-
sion, the ALJ ordered the City to bargain with the Lodge over the safety and disciplinary effects of its decision to expand the pilot program. At the time, the City had the ability to chal- lenge the decision by filing an appeal with the Illinois Labor Relations Board.
In an interesting turn of events, the City has informed the Lodge that it would like to engage in effects bargaining, as in- structed by the ALJ. In other words, instead of filing an appeal to challenge the decision, the City appears prepared to com- ply with the law and negotiate (in good faith) over the impact of the expansion.
CR Matrix. Finally, as reported at the end of last year, on Nov. 8, 2017, an ALJ issued an order finding the City in viola- tion of the state labor law when it “unilaterally implemented the CR Matrix because the CR Matrix is a mandatory subject of bargaining and the Union did not waive the right to bargain over it.”
Not surprisingly, the ALJ found that the new guidelines di- rectly impacted how the City disciplined all bargaining unit employees and therefore is a term and condition of employ- ment that could not be unilaterally implemented by the De- partment.
The ALJ ordered the City to rescind the unilaterally imposed CR Matrix and guidelines and, more importantly, rescind any disciplinary action imposed upon any bargaining unit mem- ber using the new matrix. The City was also required to bar- gain with the Lodge in good faith over the City’s decision to create a CR Matrix and guidelines moving forward. Shocking- ly, the City refused. Instead, it filed an appeal, to which the Lodge responded on Jan. 22. The parties now await a decision from the full board. d
CHICAGO LODGE 7 ■ MARCH 2018 21