Page 19 - 01A2_CL7_DEC16.indd

require such release. Several state and federal court cases already have issued such rulings. Rather, the issue here is the City’s voluntary release of the recordings unilaterally, to the general public, without any request in discovery, FOIA or other legal process requiring disclosure.
The public release of those recordings does not facilitate policing. Instead, it acts as an impediment; it is a gratu- itous display by an administration facing fierce public crit- icism. The City opted to publicly shame its Police Officers, with a modern version of a scarlet letter, rather than forth- rightly address the criticisms it is facing. Accordingly, there is no reason why the City should not have bargained over the scope of video releases and Police Officers’ rights and restrictions concerning those recordings at the appropri- ate time.
Fortunately, after conducting a thorough investigation, the Labor Board found merit to Lodge 7’s charge and is- sued a complaint. Although the Labor Board denied Lodge 7’s request for injunctive relief, it did schedule a two-day hearing to be heard by an Administrative Law Judge begin- ning on January 25, 2017. At the hearing, each side will be allowed to call witnesses, offer stipulations and introduce exhibits. Once completed, the parties also will be allowed to file post-hearing briefs. Shortly thereafter, the ALJ will issue a Recommended Decision and Order (RDO). An RDO may be appealed within 30 days by filing what are called “exceptions,” and any supporting briefs, with the Labor Board. It is unlikely that a final disposition of the matter will occur before Lodge 7 begins its negotiations with the City over a successor contract. As always, we will keep the membership apprised of any new developments. d
CHICAGO LODGE 7 ■ DECEMBER 2016 19