Recent PERB Settlements

I hope this message finds you all well. I have been receiving inquiries after the NBC 4 interview of the new union leadership last Friday, regarding the PERB settlements that were reached, and wanted to share that information with everyone.

As most are well aware, during our campaign we spoke a lot about the backlog of PERB and arbitration cases that are clogging up the system. These cases at times take upwards of six years to be heard. Although things are starting to move a little faster, I find the long time it takes to advance these cases do our membership a disservice. I promised to act on these issues, and made a vow to try and clear the systems up, in turn making it a more streamlined process. I would love nothing more than to have a case that needs to go before the PERB or an arbitrator to be heard within twelve months.

Last week we were able to settle six pending PERB cases.

  • PERB 16-U-08 deals with an email that was sent out by the Chief of Police to the entire membership asking about training suggestions for In Service Training. This case was filed by the Union as an Unfair Labor Practice. This case was jointly dismissed.
  • PERB 08-U-60 deals with an email that was sent out by then-Inspector Sund to the Command Staff requesting that District Commanders identify officers who would normally have had Friday and Saturday off, but because of AHOD now had a different set of days off to voluntarily switch their days off back to Friday and Saturday. The Union filed an Unfair Labor Practice. This case was jointly dismissed, with the stipulation that MPD shall follow the CBA, including but not limited to Article 22 and 24 regarding members voluntarily agreeing to scheduling changes.
  • PERB 10-U-38 deals with two officers (both now retired) who were on limited duty status for a non-POD medical condition. Both members’ private physicians cleared them to come back to work, but the PFC would not accept a letter from the private physicians, and requested the members sign medical release forms for their records. Both members refused to sign the medical release forms, due to the broad scope of records that could have been released, and were then placed on sick leave. The Union filed an Unfair Labor Practice. After a review of the facts of the case, the case was jointly dismissed, with the stipulation that the Union or Union members are not precluded from pursuing any related matter dealing with limited duty. (The Union and Department are negotiating and bargaining over the Limited Duty Order, and will continue to work on issues that relate to the PFC and medical release authorization for non-POD medical concerns.)
  • PERB 13-U-17 deals with a disciplinary matter of a now retired member. The matter deals with two investigations, one against a member of the Union who was accused of insubordination and ultimately that complaint was sustained. The other investigation was against a member of Management where the investigation was found to have insufficient facts. I mention both investigations, because they were tied together stemming from similar issues. The Union filed an Unfair Labor Practice. The case was resolved by immediately rescinding the discipline issued to the member, purging all records of the discipline and investigation, attaching a copy of this resolution to any document that cannot be purged or destroyed, and reimbursing our member for any fine or suspension the member incurred.
  • PERB 12-U-20 deals with a Management Official of the DC Protective Services Police hampering the election campaign of a Union Official, by making posters and posting them around MPD Facilities. This case was jointly dismissed with the stipulation that MPD will not interfere in union elections, and any claim of interference will be brought to the attention of the Chief of Police or their designee.
  • PERB 08-U-61 deals with Operation High Impact where members’ days off were taken away and shifts were extended to twelve hours. This case was resolved in the following manner: the Department agreed to engage in bargaining when a demand is made, a list of members who were affected would be identified and pay studies would be done, those members who may have been compensated incorrectly would be researched and the union and department would conciliate any unresolved pay issues.

By coming to agreements in these cases, we have shown the Department that the Union is serious about working together to come to compromise in cases where the end result has a minimal impact on the membership as a whole. We have also saved the membership tens of thousands of dollars in Union money by eliminating lawyer fees.

I have said this before during the campaign and continue to say it to the Department and to our members: I know there will be issues that are too important to settle, so trust me when I say those cases will be pushed forward into the PERB or set for arbitration. We will continue to update the membership as cases are settled or heard in the respective proceedings.

M.N. Mahl
Chairman

Posted April 11 2016 at 3:10 PM by Matthew N. Mahl | Permanent Link

Get Updates