| Legislative Alerts |
|
|
|
|
Collective Bargaining Bill (H.R. 413) Public Employee-Employer Cooperation Act introduced in Congress by Rep. Dale Kildee (D-MI) and Rep. John J. Duncan Jr. (R-TN).
When this legislation becomes law, it will impact every state and local law enforcement officer in the country along with other public safety personnel. The legislation requires that each State substantially provide for certain right and responsibilities for law enforcement officers/public safety personnel. The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) will determine if a state or local entity complies with the requirement either by State Law or local ordinance. Each will have 2 years from the date the federal law is enacted to provide for collective bargaining. The legislation provides for: 1) The employees will have the right to form and join a labor organization that serves as or seeks to serve as the exclusive bargaining representative for non-management and non-supervisory public safety employees; 2) The public employer will recognize the employees’ labor organization and agree to bargaining; 3) The bargaining shall be over hours, wages and the terms and conditions of employment; 4) There will be an interest impasse resolution mechanism such as fact-finding, mediation, arbitration or comparable procedures; and 5) There is a requirement of enforcement through state courts of all rights, responsibilities and protections provided by state law, including any written contracts or memorandum of understanding. What is: COLLECTIVE BARGAINING? Collective Bargaining is the process of negotiations between an employer and the representatives of organized employees (the recognized bargaining agent) for the purpose of determining the conditions of the employment, such as wages, hours, benefits, and conditions of employment. These negotiations lead up to the creation of a collective bargaining agreement that will be an enforceable document outlining the conditions of employment for all members of the bargaining unit. At-will Employment vs. Employment Contracts The difference between being an at-will employee and an employee working under a collective bargaining agreement is extreme. The at-will employee can be terminated for any reason at the sole discretion of the employer. This creates a non-productive work environment where management can use the fear of dismissal to force employees to conform to their wishes, leading to favoritism and discrepancies in administrating the agency. The employee that is protected and governed by the employment contract or collective bargaining agreement is in a much different circumstance. This employee can only be terminated for just cause as defined in the collective bargaining agreement. There must be a good and documented reason to dismiss any employee, and there is an avenue to follow to determine the validity of the dismissal. This increases the accountability of both management and employee in regard to any fob action taken and leads to a more secure and productive work environment. The Benefits of Collective Bargaining The collective bargaining process can be a long and difficult one; however the resulting collective bargaining agreement is vital to the welfare of the unit members. Having a written document that defines the terms and conditions of employment offers an immense level of protection for employees. This collective bargaining agreement is an enforceable contract with a prescribed grievance procedure. It establishes rules which define and restrict the traditional authority exercised by management. It restricts management’s ability to take arbitrary action against the employees, and any other unilateral actions by the employer are discouraged. The collective bargaining process can lead to a more productive workplace by establishing a method of resolving employee/employer conflicts, and collective bargaining helps to foster a sense of self respect and responsibility among the employees. Collective bargaining opens up the channel of communication between the workers and the management and increases employee participation in decision making.
********************************************************** H.R. 1972, the "Law Enforcement Officers' Procedural Bill of Rights Act ." Introduced Week of 30 March, 2009
FOP NEWS: FOP Top Priority Introduced in the House, H.R. 1972: Due Process Protection for Law Enforcement Officers The legislation, introduced by Representatives Bart Stupak (D-MI), the Chairman of the Congressional Law Enforcement Caucus, and Erik Paulsen (R-MN), would codify key holdings of the U.S. Supreme Court by creating a minimum level of procedural due process for law enforcement officers. The bill provides a balanced approach between the legitimate exercise of constitutional rights by law enforcement officers and the ability of a law nforcement agency to maintain internal discipline.
Chuck Canterbury (President of the National Fraternal Order of Police) stated; **********************************************************
|