Page 180 - 01E_CL7_JAN19.indd

discipline” and that “the benefits of bargaining over the Trans- parency Policy do not outweigh any burden bargaining would impose on the respondent’s authority.” The Lodge filed its ex- ceptions and supporting materials, and the parties presented oral arguments to the board on Nov. 8. The Lodge awaits a de- cision.
In a fourth charge filed with the Labor Board, the Lodge al- leged that the City has unilaterally modified several general orders relating to the use of force policy, once again, without bargaining with the Lodge over their impact or effect on bar- gaining unit employees’ terms and conditions of employment. The Lodge filed its position statement and supporting docu- mentation on April 16, and the case remains active, pending investigation.
On Nov, 14, once again, without bargaining with the Lodge, the City notified the Lodge that it intended unilaterally to mod- ify (effective Jan. 10, 2019) the Sept. 3, 2014 and Sept. 2, 2011 letters of understanding incorporated into the parties’ collec- tive bargaining agreement regarding the Chicago Police Oper- ational Calendar and Police Period start date. The Lodge im- mediately filed a charge over the change and/or its impact or effect on bargaining unit employees’ terms and conditions of employment, which remains pending at the Labor Board.
Most recently, the Lodge filed its latest charge against the City on Nov. 28. In order to address recent changes in the investiga- tion of officer-involved shootings that may result in discipline through collective bargaining and/or grievances, the Lodge re- quested that the Corporation Counsel provide the Lodge with the CR number; the name of the corresponding officer; and the name of the Civilian Office of Police Accountability (“COPA”)’s lead investigator for any and all investigations into officer- involved shootings, for the period of Jan. 1, 2017 forward. With
no response, the Lodge filed a charge alleging that the City’s re- fusal to provide the requested information, which is necessary to collective bargaining and to evaluate potential grievances, constitutes a refusal to bargain collectively in good faith with the exclusive representative of all sworn police officers.
On the arbitration docket, as many of you know, the Lodge schedules three to four arbitration hearings each month. In 2018, the Lodge successfully settled and/or received favorable decisions in more than 90 percent of those cases.
On occasion, even after obtaining a favorable ruling from the arbitrator, the City is reluctant to comply. Such is the case when Arbitrator Nielsen issued an initial award sustaining a griev- ance finding that the City violated the parties’ agreement when it denied evidence technicians out-of-grade pay for performing forensic investigator work for at least two hours in any eight- hour tour of duty. Arbitrator Nielsen found that the appropri- ate remedy “is to make officers whole for their losses.” After a lengthy period of discussions between the parties, the parties sought clarification of work constituting forensic investigator work from Arbitrator Nielsen.
After yet another hearing, the arbitrator issued a supplemen- tal award, finding that the forensic investigator duties were properly defined in a Department document. Despite clarifi- cation, the City has not complied. Accordingly, on Nov. 30, the Lodge filed a petition to enforce arbitration awards in the Cir- cuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, seeking a judgment against the City pursuant to the terms of the arbitration awards. Faced with a potential judgment, the City recently reached out to the Lodge. Hopefully, this means it will finally comply.
Last year was a very active year. Here’s wishing all the men and women of the Police Department a safe, happy and pros- perous New Year!
CHICAGO LODGE 7 ■ JANUARY 2019 19