|
|
|
Is FOP Going To The Dogs ? IPS March, 1991 Dineen's Arbitration Game Proving Useless To Police. Police in Chicago are learning the hard way that the whole concept of resolving labor disputes through arbitration is nothing but an expensive hustle. The City is doing the hustling and the long-suffering men and women who work the streets are the people being hustled. But even though many rank-and-file Chicago cops have come to recognize arbitration for the costly scam it is, Fraternal Order of Police President "One Percent John" Dineen continues to play the game as if it's on the square. For instance, just before the January calendar ran out of month, Dineen filed a suit in Cook County Circuit Court saying the City of Chicago has failed to live up to the terms of a decision rendered by an arbitrator last September. In that instance, the arbitrator ruled that the City was in violation of its contract with Dineen's FOP Lodge 7. Specifically, the contract calls for the City to provide kennels for the 24 German Shepard dogs that are on duty with the Police Department's Mass Transit Unit. Without the kennels, the dogs must be housed in the homes of the officers who handle them, which creates problems for the two dozen police involved. The doghouse deal is not a new problem. In fact, it's been around, in one form or another, for the several decades that the Chicago Police Department has had dogs on duty. Finally, it looked like the canine kennel problem would be resolved when Dineen and the City administration put their pens to "One Percent John's" long-awaited collective bargaining agreement. However, the ink was barely dry on that questionable document when it became obvious that the police dogs were not even being thrown the bones (or the kennels) that they deserved. Then, when Dineen could no longer stand the angry barking that he was getting from his dues-paying members, he leaped into action, which is to say, he submitted the matter to arbitration. Given his past experience with the FOP's earlier arbitrated contract—and its piddling one- percent raise—one might think that Dineen and his advisers would have chosen a course of action with more teeth in it. However, they chose to line up their lawyers at considerable expense to the FOP membership and whimpered and whined their case before an obscure arbitrator. In terms of real dollars, it would cost the City only about $40,000 to build suitable dog house with fenced-in runs in each of the back yards of the 24 police handlers who work the Mass Transit Unit, or about $1,600 per dog. However, because the Daley administration negotiators realize they are dealing with an award-winning weakling in the person of "One Percent John," they not only refused to build the kennels for the Mass Transit Unit dogs, they threatened to build one centralized, dog-pound style kennel for all the dogs in the Department's canine corps. Dineen, of course, lacking any of the visible backbone and creative confrontation strategies that serious union officials must show from time to time, relied entirely on the expensive arbitration process for the answer to his $40,000 kennel problem. The arbitrator, apparently a dog lover, found for the FOP. In theory, the dogs were at last to have the kennels they could call home. But in fact, the City stiffed the FOP. Surprise and bow-wow, no kennels for "One Percent John." The reason? Arbitration as a means of resolving labor disputes, particularly public employee problems, is about as useful as a toothless old hound. Astute political operators like Mayor Richard Daley, his right-hand man Tim Degnan and their budgetary decision makers know upfront that arbitration is to be valued only for the work it provides the pinstripe patronage people. Beyond that—beyond giving favored lawyers a chance to charge major fees—arbitration serves no real, rational or even justifiably useful purpose. The proof? If arbitration worked, "One Percent John" would not have to be filing a lawsuit in addition to having the arbitrator's ruling that the City of Chicago should provide kennels for its police dogs. CCPA President John J. Flood charges that neither Dineen nor the FOP "have the necessary power or the necessary labor relations skills to make the City live up to the terms of any arbitration award that it chooses to ignore. In the case of the dog kennel problem, it's obvious that the City chose to ignore the arbitrator's decision, thereby forcing Dineen to squander his membership's dues money on legal fees," Flood declared. "This dog kennel deal," Flood said, "is just one issue out of dozens that continue to pop up. And if each relatively minor problem that goes to arbitration cost the FOP only $10,000 or $20,000 in legal fees, pretty soon the membership is going to be coming up with a million a year to pay for problems that could otherwise be solved face-to-face at no cost," Flood declared. "That is, if Chicago police officers had strong and capable union leaders. Now, they definitely do not," Flood said. "Dineen spends his time trying to organize suburban police departments," Flood continued, "and the rank-and-file Chicago police officers, the infantry of police work, suffer. They should be looking for new leaders and a new union. Dineen and his FOP have been a failure for them," Flood charged. According to CCPA General Counsel Noel Wroblewski, "a case like this could easily cost FOP members major money before it's finally settled. The arbitration process is incredibly heavy on procedural costs, including transcripts and the costs of discovery and the fees paid to the arbitrator himself. And then, because the City is not actually obligated to live up to the arbitrator's decision, the whole costly process can be repeated at each level of court proceeding that it gets dragged through," Wroblewski observes. "In fact, it would not be hard to imagine a dispute like the dog kennel case dragging on for two or three years, and going to the state Appellate Court level, and even the state Supreme Court level, before the original arbitrator's decision is finally ordered to be carried out," the CCPA attorney says. "In that kind of scenario, FOP members could easily be looking at many thousands of dollars in legal fees and related costs." To the dogs and their handlers, the kennel problem is no doubt a matter of major import. But to FOP dues-payers who are footing the legal bills, the question has to be raised - is it worth it? Considering that either the FOP or the City could probably build all the kennels that will ever be needed for a lot less than either side will pay in attorneys' fees, one has to wonder what "One Percent John" had in mind when the original decision was made to submit the case to arbitration. One thought that has been making the rounds of FOP insiders is that Dineen chooses arbitration whenever he can because he—just like the Mayor—has debts that can only be paid off through the process of pinstripe patronage. Another point that FOP insiders have raised is that because Dineen and the FOP were instrumental in getting the original state collective bargaining law passed—including the arbitration proceedings scam—then Dineen's motives for routinely submitting to arbitration can be seen as acting out of his own vested interests. But Dineen's useless collective bargaining law has set police back 20 years, and they're just beginning to find that out, as usual, the hard way. But for whatever reason Dineen originally chose arbitration in the dog kennel case, the fact remains that the whole concept is weighted toward the side of management - not the unions. In fact, after years of giving the process every opportunity to work, unions in the private sector have pretty much given up on arbitration as a method of resolving disputes. Arbitration, as practiced in Chicago, has at least three built-in major flaws. First, arbitrators have more latitude than judges do in making decisions, but unlike judges, they are not bound by precedent. In other words, arbitrators can render their decisions based on any criteria they feel like following - including their reading of the prevailing political winds. The second flaw in Chicago-style arbitration is that arbitrators generally get their appointments on the basis of their connections, rather than any clear-cut showing of impartiality. A third problem with the concept is that even when an arbitrator's decision is in favor of the union involved, the actual award is usually less than the cost of getting it. There are other problems that guys like "One Percent John" should be aware of - considering his experience with the process. And, of course, there are other solutions. Dineen might try a tougher negotiating stance, but he obviously doesn't have the guts for that. He might show a willingness to go public with disputes like the dog kennel story. He might organize picket lines and demonstrations. He might employ any of the dozens of strategies that American unions have been using for generations to get their points across. However, Dineen does not have the intestinal fortitude or "gray matter" to do that. As usual, he takes the easy way out and goes to arbitration. Thinking, apparently, "it's only money," and police officers will still believe something is being done. Or will they? After all, they can't always be conned by "One Percent John" Dineen. Return to the Labor Relations/News Page |
|
IPSN © 1997-2006 All Rights reserved. Not for republication on the
internet without permission. |