Page 19 - March 2022

police work that she had dedicated herself to for many years. In January 2022, she transferred to another District and chose to work the midnight shift to minimize the disruptions to her family life caused by the cancellation of RDOs. She ex- plained that now, only she will absorb the impact of the can- cellation of an RDO. No matter when there is a cancellation, she will be available for her family during the day to prepare lunches and dinners, be there for bath time and help with
homework.
Like many mothers, however, she downplayed the impact
her decision has on her own life. The fact remains that her sleep is still off and she gave up important specialized work with the Department.
While this is an article about a Chicago Police Officer who is also a mother, it is also an article about the Department’s failure as an employer that professes, at least publicly, to care about officer wellness.
The Department can plan for seasonal crime, request vol- unteers and focus on specific areas in the City without requir- ing every sworn police officer to work without certain days off for months at a time. In addition, the FOP negotiated Article 20.9 to discourage the Department from canceling days off without adequate notice so officers can have some semblance of control over their own lives. This provision states that days off assigned on change day “shall remain unchanged for the duration of each 28-day police period except for: ...” The ex- ceptions that follow do not include canceling days off to ad-
dress seasonal crime increases.
The Department has taken the position that it does not have
to have a good reason for the cancellation of RDOs and does not have to provide 28 days or any notice for such cancella- tions because the agreement also provides that the “employ- er’s right to assign officers for duty while on regular day-off status is unrestricted and unchallenged. The employer agrees, however, that in each such event it will pay the officer so as- signed the optional premium time under Article 20 of the agreement.”
According to the Department, this provision provides the Department with the right to cancel any and all RDOs as long as the City pays officers premium time for the days worked. An arbitrator will decide whether the Department has the right to cancel days off for any reason and without notice as long as the Department pays officers premium pay. Regardless of the arbitrator’s decision, the City has failed the police officer de- scribed above and all other police officers who can no longer balance their personal lives with their work lives.
The police officer described in this article lost her love of the job and many of the joys in her life due to the Department’s scheduling of all sworn officers on their days off to address foreseeable crime spikes in the city of Chicago. I am certain she is not the only one affected by this scheduling. This is a great and avoidable loss for the Chicago Police Department and the city of Chicago.
CHICAGO LODGE 7 ■ MARCH 2022 19