Skip to content

Police Association negotiations with the City – the Positions

May 25, 2014

The first order of business was to get the ground rules out of the way. I’ll see if I can’t get a copy of these and post them. I was disappointed that they weren’t posted as part of the agenda for the meeting as the Police Association (PA) and their representatives had obviously been able to see them prior to the actual meeting. If it was digitally available, it should have been published on the meeting page with the notification. The purpose of a website is transparency. I shouldn’t have to work to find out what’s going on at the meeting.

I don’t know what rules 1-6 are because, as mentioned above, the rules weren’t made available. However, the Police Association (PA) had received them and said that they didn’t have any problems with 1-6, but would like to negotiate alternatives to 7, 8 and 9.

Number 7 must have had to do with the City forbidding the PA or their reps from talking to the media. JS (John Siriega of Texas Municipal Police Association) suggested something that would allow the PA and their reps to talk to the media in the event of an impasse if they gave notice to the City.

Number 8 had to do with the ability of the PA or their rep to address the City Council and not meet with Council members individually. JS suggested that they would like the ability to address Council if the negotiations reached an impasse and agreed not to meet with Council individually.

For number 9, JS suggested that there be allocated a pool of 10 hours for the representatives of the PA to represent the PA during the periods of negotiations so that they didn’t have to use their vacation time to cover it.

The City Manager (CM) asked if JS had any proposed language for replacing items 7, 8 and 9, but JS didn’t have any. JS said he’d get it to the CM and they could hammer out the rest of the details at the next meeting (May 28).

Both parties agreed to continue discussions with the intent to cover as much ground as possible assuming that some arrangement would be made on items 7, 8 and 9.

The CM asked if they had a list of their demands. I’m sure there’s a better word than “demands”, but it’s not coming to me at the moment.

The PA had a list of 6 items that they would like to have addressed. I’ll list all six and then go back and address them in more detail.

1. Salary adjustment of 12% to bring them up to market value.
2. Certification pay to be increased $300/year per certification.
3. Assignment pay for field training. Specifically, $100/month to 5 permanent Fulltime Training Officers (FTO) to be paid over the year whether they were training or not. Other trainers would get something, but I didn’t write it down.
4. Return to a 14 day pay cycle. They’re on a 28 day cycle now, but prior to 2000(?), it had been a 14 day cycle and the patrol officers would prefer the 14 day period.
5. Longevity pay timed around the holiday and in a lump sum. No change to the amount, just how it was to be paid.
6. Input on the selection of a Chief of Police.

That’s the short list. I’ll try to cover in detail some of their points for being willing to ask for these items.

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: