http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100111_11_0_reaetr875983
Tulsa police union blasts mayor's hardline approach
[/i]By BRIAN BARBER World Staff Writer
Published: 1/11/2010
Tulsa's police union and the Black Officers Coalition compared Mayor Dewey Bartlett to an extortionist Monday for his ultimatum that officers give up concessions or sustain mass layoffs. "The mayor will push scores of our officers to the brink of financial and career destruction, then demand that their comrades pay for their salvation or bear the responsibility for their fate," the groups said in a news release distributed at a press conference. "Though this is not extortion, an extortionist could not do it any better."
But Bartlett in a phone interview said the officers should appreciate having a choice, rather than have the funding solution forced upon them. "I have a contract to follow with the union, and it says layoffs is the route I have to follow," he said. "They have to change that course."
The Police Department is faced with cutting $3.4 million for the rest of the fiscal year and could lose as many as 135 of its 808-member force. Officers often refer to themselves as a brotherhood and treat each other as family, Bartlett said. "Here's a good opportunity for that to be expressed," he said. "Concessions have to be agreed upon. If they are not, a lot of their brothers and sisters will lose their jobs. They will be faced with not having paychecks or medical benefits.
"I'm pleading with the union to think about their fellow employees. I would hate to be someone who turned to his or her co-workers and said, 'Hey I'm sorry, but I'm looking out for myself.'" Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 93 Trustee Ryan Perkins said at the press conference at the Greenwood Cultural Center said this tactic is like "holding a gun to the head" of officers' careers and then asking for ransom. He encouraged citizens to make contact with their municipal elected officials to weigh in.
Bartlett said he will present lists of concessions to both the police and fire unions by mid-week. The Fire Department is facing $2.5 million in cuts and could have 130 firefighter layoffs. On the lists will be potential salary cuts along with other financial benefits contain in the contracts, including payments for advanced degrees, length of service, bilingual skills and uniforms, among others.
The police union wants formal negotiations to be opened, Perkins said, allowing some back and forth with the mayor. But Bartlett said that could be a weeks- or even months-long process that the city doesn't have time for in this budget crisis. Action must be taken soon so that the $8 million to $10 million budget hole doesn't grow.
"We could be negotiating until the cows come home," he said. "That would make it so much worse for everyone else. We have to address this problem now." Perkins said this is "an artificial timeline" and that it will take time for the union to seriously consider any concessions. "(The mayor) has created a situation where he can layoff officers and then blame it on the union," Perkins said.
Many officers whose jobs are not at risk "are looking for an exit strategy because they don't trust this administration," he said. Bartlett asked Chief Ron Palmer to revise the department's budget plan to thin out the upper ranks of the force, calling it "top heavy." The mayor also said he doesn't want to see the officers on the street bearing the brunt of the cuts. Palmer found that forcing demotions—or bump downs to lower levels of rank and pay— doesn't produce much in immediate savings and could trigger the filing of employee grievances.
The chief did, however, present a multiyear plan to reduce the supervisor ranks from 201 to 97 positions. Bartlett said this approach would take a decade and be "too little too late." "His plan is a non-starter. I think we have to take a much more aggressive stance," he said. "It should have happened many years ago."
Black Officers Coalition President Tyrone Lynn at the press conference said that layoffs would have a devastating impact on minorities groups on the force. "This would roll back diversity at least 30 years, for sure," he said. "And we're not where we need to be right now."
Of the layoffs that are on the table, it would effect 11 of the 89 white female officers, 14 of the 86 black officers, 13 of the 78 American Indian officers, three of the Asian officers and four of the 15 Hispanic officers. Bartlett said that layoffs must happen through specific processes laid out by the Civil Service Commission, the City Charter and the police contract. The race of an employee is not a factor. [/i]
This seems so over the top to me.
How does a 4.4% budget cut become financial and career destruction?
And I still don't get the math. The story says a 4.4% budget cut could mean layoffs to 135 officers. $25,000 per officer? The starting pay and benefits are three times that per officer.
808 officers and a $86 million budget works out to $106,000 per officer. That would be more like 35 officers.
More than just officer pay is includes in the budget. There's alot of overhead
11 of 89 White Females = 12.4%
14 of 86 Blacks = 16.3%
13 of 78 American Indians = 16.7%
3 of ? Asians = ?%
4 of 15 Hispanics = 26.7%
Total minorities listed = 45 (including Asians) of 268 (not including Asians) = 16.7 %
135 - 45 = 90 White males to be let go
808 - 268 = 540 White males
90 of 540 = 16.7% White males
Adding the number of Asians to the 268 other minorities would decrease the percentage of minorities to be let go. Subtracting the same number from the 540 White males (obtained by including the unknown number of Asians in the White male count), increases the percentage of White males to be let go.
Depending on the total number of Asian officers, it looks like the group with the biggest legitimate gripe is the Hispanics.
I'm sure a lot of you don't agree with the Union's position, but I don't agree with the Mayor's either. He has not met with the Union to discuss their options, he has not attempted to negotiate (which he is required to do, unless he just wants to layoff, which he knows is a bad move) I know MH has said it on here, and I have heard many officers say it, they would take some kind of across the board pay cut, or some concessions, but there has to be something coming from the mayor's side, some kind of dialogue. There has been nothing. I was at the council meeting, he told the councilors he would have his proposal to the union on Friday, monday morning at the latest, but now today, he says maybe mid-week. And he plans on laying people off on Friday. There is no way the union can meet, address the issues, make recommendations and vote on anything. Instead the mayor just wants to put all the blame on the unions. It's getting old.
Where are his ideas, the only thing coming from him is cut, cut, cut. Cutting can be good and if he shows an ounce of good faith, I think people will follow, but what about finding alternative revenue sources? What about immediately requiring the BOK center to pay for its own security? The city has money, it just has messed up priorities. At least I get the impression Christianson and Bynum are looking at options, researching ideas, trying to find a way to bridge the gap with the city until things turn around.
I've never been more disappointed in Tulsa's leadership, and this isn't just limited to Police and Fire, it's all city employees. The money is there, use it wisely, and I think we can make it until things improve.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on January 11, 2010, 08:02:36 PM
This seems so over the top to me.
How does a 4.4% budget cut become financial and career destruction?
And I still don't get the math. The story says a 3.4% budget cut could mean layoffs to 135 officers. $25,000 per officer? The starting pay and benefits are three times that per officer.
808 officers and a $86 million budget works out to $106,000 per officer. That would be more like 35 officers.
Where did you get your math? The starting pay of a police officer is $43,000. Are you saying they receive $32,000 in benfits? Where did you get that number?
I heard the FOP flack on KRMG this morning, and his statements were every bit as hyperbolic and stupid as in the paper.
If he thinks the mayor is engaging in "extortion," then he'd better arrest him, or the FOP had better read Oklahoma statutes book more closely. If you keep yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, pretty soon people aren't going to take you seriously.
Quote from: pmcalk on January 12, 2010, 08:57:18 AM
Where did you get your math? The starting pay of a police officer is $43,000. Are you saying they receive $32,000 in benfits? Where did you get that number?
The starting pay is $43,744.26.
The general city benefits package is 50% for another $21,300 (on average).
That makes $65,000. Tulsa officers also make $100 per month if they have a bachelor's degree (now required). Officers also get an annual $625 uniform allowance and $100 a month bilingual pay. There is an allowance of $50 per year to replace a wristwatch and $150 a year to replace eyeglasses.
This TulsaWorld story says the cost to the city for each police officer is $85,816 per year.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20091221_11_A1_ATulsa864741&archive=yes
3.2 million dollars in budget cuts divided $85,816 per officer equals 37 officers.
Why does the police union keep claiming Mayor Bartlett wants to cut 135 jobs?
Quote from: tulsa_fan on January 11, 2010, 10:54:18 PM
The city has money, it just has messed up priorities.
<snip>
The money is there, use it wisely, and I think we can make it until things improve.
I don't buy it. All you are advocating is robbing from Peter (hello, TARP fund) and paying Paul. This is not a good or sustainable solution to a budget shortfall.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on January 12, 2010, 09:50:42 AM
This TulsaWorld story says the cost to the city for each police officer is $85,816 per year.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20091221_11_A1_ATulsa864741&archive=yes
3.2 million dollars in budget cuts divided $85,816 per officer equals 37 officers.
Why does the police union keep claiming Mayor Bartlett wants to cut 135 jobs?
It's a 4.4% cut in the annual budget, but half the fiscal year is gone and spent. So, it's a 4.4% cut that has to come out of the remaining 50% of the original budget.
Instead of biznitching this thing to death, sounds like the FOP needs to get with the Chief and work out a pay cut for everyone if they don't want layoffs. I fail to see how stating the facts of this budget crisis works out to extortion. This is doing nothing to further a good image of the TPD with average citizens.
Quote from: Conan71 on January 12, 2010, 10:24:19 AM
... sounds like the FOP needs to get with the Chief and work out a pay cut for everyone if they don't want layoffs.
I agree 100%.
Quote from: rwarn17588 on January 12, 2010, 09:09:29 AM
I heard the FOP flack on KRMG this morning, and his statements were every bit as hyperbolic and stupid as in the paper.
If he thinks the mayor is engaging in "extortion," then he'd better arrest him, or the FOP had better read Oklahoma statutes book more closely. If you keep yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, pretty soon people aren't going to take you seriously.
And it would be the same way regardless of who ended up being elected mayor, as they would have to deal with the exact same problem. What happened is the FOP just got too big and fat.
"The police union wants formal negotiations to be opened, Perkins said, allowing some back and forth with the mayor."
Of course the Union wants that, but guess what...today's financial picture for the City leaves no room for back and forths, its put up or shut up time. $3.4 million must come out of TPD...no haggle. You dont like it, quit.
It's about time someone put the TPDs feet to the fire and show what their true mettle is. They will either stand by their less tenured brothers and sisters or quickly turn their backs on them to save their own skins.
This strategy by Bartlett has one mission in mind..show the public that TPD is either willing to do what is in the best interest of Tulsa or that they are not and solely out for themselves. Can't wait to see which it is. Congratulations Bartlett.
"Though this is not extortion, an extortionist could not do it any better."
The FOP would know exactly what extortion is given they have been doing that to the City of Tulsa for years. Constantly pushing for more and more of the budget pie to the detriment of other City services and departments while using fear propoganda to push their agenda. If Dewey learned, it was from them.
"The mayor will push scores of our officers to the brink of financial and career destruction..."
Much like the FOP has done to other City personnel as a result of their greed and without regard.
"Perkins said this is 'an artificial timeline'"
Wrong! This timeline is determined by the Sales Tax Revenue decline, numbers came out last week demanding a $10 million budget reduction that must be complied with prior to the end of the fiscal year. This may not be the only reduction if sales tax revenues continue to decline either.
"Many officers whose jobs are not at risk 'are looking for an exit strategy because they don't trust this administration,' he (Ryan Perkins) said."
Great, quit..then we dont have to hear your incessant whining that you are better than any other city worker, are a special class, are more highly educated (hard to imagine), etc. On top of that, if those not at risk leave due to a misguided and ill-perceived lack of trust regarding the adminstration that is only responding to the economic crisis it faces, then that frees up considerable more money per officer to retain lower ranked officers and place more boots on the street. If one $67,000 officer walks, that frees up to retain about 1.5 more newly hired officers.
"The race of an employee is not a factor."
Nor should it be but the Black Officer Coalition certainly seems to want to make it one, shame on them. Every race will feel the effects of a layoff...not just african americans.
Any other desperate gambles the FOP wants to role out without manning up and addressing the real situation?
Latest on the radio this afternoon was that some TPD officers are starting to look for work elsewhere since their job security is now in question. Sounds like the problem could take care of itself. If the total cut needed is 4.4% from the department, certainly that would mean that a percentage of that cut is going to come out of overhead costs in adddition to salaries. I'd take a 3 to 4% pay cut gladly if it meant the long-term survival and viability of my employer. I sure as hell wouldn't be jumping ship to go somewhere else in an uncertain economic environment. Actually I have taken a much larger pay cut than that this year, 18% to be exact, since a fair amount of my income is comission/bonus based. I'd give up part of my base salary if needed/requested at any point by my employer.
What happens when Dallas starts to cut back on their PD or any other city as tax revenues flag? Yes I understand some cities fund public safety via property taxes, personal property tax, and other methods. When property values drop, so do tax collections.
No I don't put my life on the line every day in my job and I do appreciate the job these guys do, but in tough economic times everyone has to tighten up and give a little. People who work for the government need to get used to this concept instead of thinking they are entitled to job protection and income protection that the private sector doesn't have either. If a company does not exist within its means, it will have to cease to exist at some point (Arrow Trucking, anyone?). The same should be expected of government. Live within its means or start identifying where cuts have to be made and positions eliminated until it can sustain itself again without incurring massive long-term debt.
No offense to the cops who participate on this forum, but the thinly veiled threats and outright hyperbole of your union representatives is really not setting well with the citizens of Tulsa, especially at a time when we are hearing more and more complaints about apathetic treatment regarding property and other non-violent crimes and a stodgy attitude about taking city property outside the city at night.
I sure as hell don't care for all the histrionic's......
Originally posted by DowntownNow.
"If one $67,000 officer walks, that frees up to retain about 1.5 more newly hired officers."
I like the sound of this... However seems I just read.....
Originally posted by Recyclemichael.
"The starting pay is $43,744.26.
The general city benefits package is 50% for another $21,300 (on average).
That makes $65,000. Tulsa officers also make $100 per month if they have a bachelor's degree (now required). Officers also get an annual $625 uniform allowance and $100 a month bilingual pay. There is an allowance of $50 per year to replace a wristwatch and $150 a year to replace eyeglasses."
Somehow they don't add up..
How much does a "newbie" cop cost to put on the street anyway?
Seems as though some citizens elected themselves them union busters to run our city.
It's never about running a more efficient government nor lowering our expectations about what services government should provide.
Our Police deserve better than ultimatums and threats. You may be in favor of denouncing the union but you'll get a lower quality police force without their organizing and administrative skill. Law and order come first.
Quote from: FOTD on January 12, 2010, 03:41:27 PM
Seems as though some citizens elected themselves them union busters to run our city.
It's never about running a more efficient government nor lowering our expectations about what services government should provide.
Our Police deserve better than ultimatums and threats. You may be in favor of denouncing the union but you'll get a lower quality police force without their organizing and administrative skill. Law and order come first.
I don't see this as a matter of union-busting. Mayor Bartlet (sic) has pointed to the union contract which he intends for the city to honor. The contract provides for layoffs. He's stated he would like to avoid layoffs. Bartlet (sic) walked into a total budget sh1t-storm. No wonder why Mayor Taylor decided not to go for a renewal, you think she didn't see this coming?
There is only so much money the city can LEGALLY encumber at this point without further research or a possible vote of the people.
What would your suggestion be as to how to best deal with this?
Downtownpasttense caused that comment....he doesn't realize the great sucking sound coming from downtown itself.
Across the board cuts. The demon wasn't elected on law and order rhetoric....
States and municipalities are really starting to go broke. Good thing
we saved Wall Street, though.
Maybe we could legalize bribery. Would that bridge the pay gap?
Quote from: RecycleMichael on January 12, 2010, 09:50:42 AM
This TulsaWorld story says the cost to the city for each police officer is $85,816 per year.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20091221_11_A1_ATulsa864741&archive=yes
3.2 million dollars in budget cuts divided $85,816 per officer equals 37 officers.
Why does the police union keep claiming Mayor Bartlett wants to cut 135 jobs?
Obviously, the city isn't going to suddenly realize $85,816 for every police officer they lay off. First of all, this is for the remainder of the fiscal year--half the salaries have already been paid. At best, they will have to lay off two officers to get to that amount. Second, some of that "cost" is in training provided to the officers, training that very likely has already been paid for. Finally, you don't get a dollar-for-dollar reduction in insurance benefits simply by eliminating some of the covered employees. I'm sure you understand that insurance rates are based on total number covered--the less people covered, the higher the rate.
Calling the mayor an extortionist is uncalled for. But he is setting up a false choice. You couldn't reach the 3.4 million without some very severe pay cuts. There are 808 officers; to reach the needed amount, you would have to cut every officers salary by over $4000. That would amount to $700 per month for the remaining fiscal year. How many people do you know that could absorb a $700 a month pay cut?
I know there are not a lot of choices here. We have no money. What bothers me is that the mayor seems to think that the only solutions are to cut the city to the point of non functioning. He has not looked at the possibility of finding other sources of revenue. Any time other money is considered, the mayor says that is just a "temporary" fix. Well, when your entire budget is based upon sales tax, everything is temporary. You never know what the next month might bring.
The only "long term" solution would involve a long term, consistent funding source. Why hasn't anyone suggested adding a fee onto our water bill, similar to the one for EMSA?
I'm getting awfully tired of the TPD's whining.
How many other City departments have been understaffed for years? All of them? They take cut after cut, and they don't mobilize big demonstrations, call the media, or use scare tactics. (Although I'm starting to think it's time we line the streets with people holding signs that say: "Want to Increase Municipal Revenues? Fully Staff the Planning Department!")
Imagine if the cops had to work in the private sector! When companies need to make cuts, they make cuts. You're there one day and gone the next...sometimes with little or no warning. The executives don't spend their time fighting to keep every job, they tell management to cut expenses and figure out how to be more productive and efficient.
Sometimes the Whirled gets it, and when they do they deserve credit.
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2010/Thumbs/20100113_plante20100113_opinion.jpg)
If the Mayor is an extortionist, then is the FOP terrorist?
Quote from: RecycleMichael on January 12, 2010, 09:44:53 AM
The starting pay is $43,744.26.
The general city benefits package is 50% for another $21,300 (on average).
That makes $65,000. Tulsa officers also make $100 per month if they have a bachelor's degree (now required). Officers also get an annual $625 uniform allowance and $100 a month bilingual pay. There is an allowance of $50 per year to replace a wristwatch and $150 a year to replace eyeglasses.
I would like to petition my boss for $100 a month bilingual pay. Does is specify which "lingual" they are required to speak?
Quote from: Gaspar on January 15, 2010, 03:24:31 PM
I would like to petition my boss for $100 a month bilingual pay. Does is specify which "lingual" they are required to speak?
Spanish, Vietnamese, or sign.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on January 15, 2010, 04:09:56 PM
Spanish, Vietnamese, or sign.
Vietnamese?
"Stewardess, I speak jive."
Quote from: Townsend on January 15, 2010, 04:28:41 PM
Vietnamese?
"Stewardess, I speak jive."
Seriously, in that part of Tulsa...yes. When I was just out of high school (mid 80's) I knew several Vietnamese nationals and families in that area. Quite a few still live there.
O that we could impeach this loser. He's no better than his predecessor. Unreal.
Quote from: gooberak on January 23, 2010, 01:44:18 AM
O that we could impeach this loser. He's no better than his predecessor. Unreal.
So sez another newbie who'll likely disappear from this forum in less than a week.
So what would you do in this situation?
Quote from: rwarn17588 on January 23, 2010, 08:41:40 AM
So sez another newbie who'll likely disappear from this forum in less than a week.
So what would you do in this situation?
Clean up the Public Works department.....
http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=14851.msg152362#msg152362
Here's something unique, a police union putting up billboards telling the taxpayers they cant guarantee their safety if the city lays off police:
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100530/A_NEWS/5300315
http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=82513&catid=2
FOTD. Guest ?
Didn't think this deserved its own thread, but this pi$$es me off.
QuoteAn Oklahoma City police lieutenant accused of cheating the city by failing to work his entire shifts has collected more than $75,000 in the past 11 months while on administrative leave during the investigation.
Police said Friday that Lt. Christopher Gayhart still is collecting a city paycheck even after he was charged Thursday with three felony counts and 10 misdemeanor counts of obtaining money under false pretenses.
Gayhart was booked into the Oklahoma County jail Friday after turning himself in.
His attorney, Irven Box, said Thursday he and his client still were looking into the allegations.
City officials said they have no choice but to keep paying the salaries of employees accused of wrongdoing, sometimes for a year or more, because of complicated disciplinary procedures established as part of negotiations with employee unions.
"It is frustrating," Mayor Mick Cornett said. "I wish we had other options. It's in some ways reflective of the culture of organized labor agreements."
http://newsok.com/an-accused-oklahoma-city-police-officer-lt.-christopher-gayhart-has-collected-75000-during-investigation/article/3584128#ixzz1RdtpTdUo
Isn't he presumed innocent? He's just been charged not convicted.
I have no problem with paying a guy while his case is working through the system. Then if he's found guilty he has to pay it back. Or, hold it in trust till the case is decided. I'm pretty sure if you did it the other way around (put him on suspension and withhold his pay) and he is found not guilty he'd likely sue for back pay and damages.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 09, 2011, 04:59:39 PM
Isn't he presumed innocent? He's just been charged not convicted.
I have no problem with paying a guy while his case is working through the system. Then if he's found guilty he has to pay it back. Or, hold it in trust till the case is decided. I'm pretty sure if you did it the other way around (put him on suspension and withhold his pay) and he is found not guilty he'd likely sue for back pay and damages.
All people are innocent until proven guilty. Except, if I get charged (assuming I worked at a business), I get fired. I don't get an 11 month paid vacation. And pay it back? How's he gonna do that if he's in jail?
Quote from: guido911 on July 09, 2011, 05:03:58 PM
All people are innocent until proven guilty. Except, if I get charged (assuming I worked at a business), I get fired. I don't get an 11 month paid vacation. And pay it back? How's he gonna do that if he's in jail?
This isn't just any business, its a guy with a contract that protects him from political or vindictive harassment, but if it was and I was found not guilty I would feel obligated to punish them for their actions. I think you would too and you wouldn't sign an employment contract that didn't protect yourself against such arbitrary action. Why does it make you mad he is doing the same thing?
Vacation? Do you defend yourself in lawsuits on your vacation while your neighbors and friends start to shun you? Some vacation.
The solution would be to put a portion of the salary in trust while leaving the defendant enough money to pay his lawyers and not have to apply for welfare or unemployment. In exchange his contract could prevent him from countersuing in case the city lost.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 09, 2011, 05:22:06 PM
This isn't just any business, its a guy with a contract that protects him from political or vindictive harassment, but if it was and I was found not guilty I would feel obligated to punish them for their actions. I think you would too and you wouldn't sign an employment contract that didn't protect yourself against such arbitrary action. Why does it make you mad he is doing the same thing?
Vacation? Do you defend yourself in lawsuits on your vacation while your neighbors and friends start to shun you? Some vacation.
The solution would be to put a portion of the salary in trust while leaving the defendant enough money to pay his lawyers and not have to apply for welfare or unemployment. In exchange his contract could prevent him from countersuing in case the city lost.
Where in the story is it mentioned that this POS was a victim of anything other than failing to do his damned job. Don't fill in facts that are not remotely there with your own. And "employment contracts"? The only one I ever signed is when I enlisted. Not everyone is in a damned union. And strange as this may be, a lot of us are employed at will and get fired if we do what are employer is paying us to do. Do those folks get 11 months off with pay while they protest? Nope. They get into an unemployment line. This cop? He gets to live it up on our tax dollars.
This criminal case by the way is irrelevant in my opinion. If he did what is believed, it should be internally investigated and then he should be fired. Period. Whether or not he gets convicted or acquitted is something altogether different.
And please do not play the "poor victim" or "he's being ostracized" card. Unless you know for certain he's innocent or being railroaded, or know anything more than what is stated in my article, you are doing nothing more that carrying union water. Funny, I think I know where your forum name(s) come from.
You are impossible to converse with.
I'm sorry you don't have access to a union that will protect you.
But I'm really sorry I responded to your bait. I'll have to work on that.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 09, 2011, 06:32:32 PM
You are impossible to converse with.
I'm sorry you don't have access to a union that will protect you.
But I'm really sorry I responded to your bait. I'll have to work on that.
I didn't think letting people know that we have a law enforcement officer accused of not working, being charged criminally, and getting paid to loaf around was bait. As for unions, got no use for them after what went on in Wisconsin. And I was raised in a pro-union family.
Quote from: guido911 on July 09, 2011, 10:07:41 PM
I didn't think letting people know that we have a law enforcement officer accused of not working, being charged criminally, and getting paid to loaf around was bait. As for unions, got no use for them after what went on in Wisconsin. And I was raised in a pro-union family.
Family lessons are important. You missed some of those lessons I guess. My family in Wisconsin is appalled and are determined to change the legislative landscape there.
The man is innocent. Bringing charges against your enemies ain't so hard. Good weapon if you know the system and its players.
But you know that, you're simply letting your politics overwhelm you.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 10, 2011, 10:06:56 AM
Family lessons are important. You missed some of those lessons I guess. My family in Wisconsin is appalled and are determined to change the legislative landscape there.
The man is innocent. Bringing charges against your enemies ain't so hard. Good weapon if you know the system and its players.
But you know that, you're simply letting your politics overwhelm you.
Is he innocent at present criminally? Yes. I am not disputing that. This whole thing about his innocence until proven guilty thing is apples and oranges as to his job, If he did what he did, and there are facts to support it, he should be terminated. How many other sectors of employment tie your continued employment to whether your misconduct is beyond a reasonable doubt? Change the offense for a second. Instead of not doing his job, let's say a male officer was accused by two women of sexual harassment--a reprehensible act that is unfortunately not criminal--with voice records of the acts? What if an officer is coming to work consistently late or intoxicated? Do they get 11 months of paid time off while an investigation takes place too?
It's not about my politics, which I am sure has nothing to do with your position. It's about my disdain for this sort of crap that is happening at the expense of the Oklahoma taxpayer.
I am happy to know your family is determined to fix what happened earlier this year.
The fake doctor notes?
(http://www.politifake.org/image/political/1102/hippocratic-oath-wi-union-teachers-political-poster-1298841874.jpg)
The trashing of public property?
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Z2k3PROGP0E/TXUwTc2CsrI/AAAAAAAAFqw/lvT-jLGqzHI/s1600/wisconsin-capitol-mess.jpg)
Dragging school children with you to protest?
How is your family going about getting these legislatively fixed because I agree with them it was appalling?
Quote from: guido911 on July 10, 2011, 03:23:37 PM
Is he innocent at present criminally? Yes. I am not disputing that. This whole thing about his innocence until proven guilty thing is apples and oranges as to his job, If he did what he did, and there are facts to support it, he should be terminated. How many other sectors of employment tie your continued employment to whether your misconduct is beyond a reasonable doubt? Change the offense for a second. Instead of not doing his job, let's say a male officer was accused by two women of sexual harassment--a reprehensible act that is unfortunately not criminal--with voice records of the acts? What if an officer is coming to work consistently late or intoxicated? Do they get 11 months of paid time off while an investigation takes place too?
It's not about my politics, which I am sure has nothing to do with your position. It's about my disdain for this sort of crap that is happening at the expense of the Oklahoma taxpayer.
I am happy to know your family is determined to fix what happened earlier this year.
The fake doctor notes?
(http://www.politifake.org/image/political/1102/hippocratic-oath-wi-union-teachers-political-poster-1298841874.jpg)
The trashing of public property?
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Z2k3PROGP0E/TXUwTc2CsrI/AAAAAAAAFqw/lvT-jLGqzHI/s1600/wisconsin-capitol-mess.jpg)
Dragging school children with you to protest?
How is your family going about getting these legislatively fixed because I agree with them it was appalling?
Apples and oranges? "If" he did what he did? And the facts support it? What if? What if?
Are you listening to yourself? You sound like a local version of Nancy (totmom) Grace!
The story doesn't say whether he was terminated. It says charges were filed. Charges are often used to bully, harass or quiet an employee you want gone or silenced. Unfortunately many in power use the law as a sword rather than a shield. Sometimes its used like a hammer. That is why vulnerable positions in police, academia and government have contracts that give them protections against that crap. If this is an abuse of that protection then it seems like to me this is a contract discussion. Nick Cornett should address these issues in his next contract negotiation. Meanwhile he's innocent until charges are proved and should continue his employment.
Or I presume you think we should just pull the plug on any collective bargaining rights like your politics and hatred of unions demands? I understand that view. Quite popular in these parts and growing elsewhere too. Doesn't mean its a good thing.
Nonetheless, I don't see how bringing in unrelated employment examples or my family's views on legislators who don't (by polls) represent their interests is germane. Its doubtful they'll be re-elected.
But really, what do you expect those who disagree with you to do? Suddenly see the light of your more powerful arguments and move drastically rightward leaving behind decades of personal experience and education? Junk generations of labor relations progress because those people must have been weak who caved into the dastardly union evildoers? Its like you think you just realized that other people aren't like you and you just can't have that! Is it the will to win....at everything? Maybe that is the genes of all lawyers and if so you have no responsibility. Not guilty by reason of defect? :)
Same union, different city --
QuoteA police union is coming to the defense of the Philadelphia cop who has been targeted for dismissal after he was caught on video punching a woman in the face.
It was originally announced that Lt. Jonathan Josey would be suspended for a month pending an Internal Affairs investigation. But less than two days later, Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey said he was taking "Commissioner's Direct Action" against Josey and that the officer would be dismissed.
A video posted on YouTube shows Josey punching a woman in the face and knocking her to the ground before she is led off bloodied and handcuffed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSwcIOVlZ2I
The Fraternal Order of Police in Philadelphia is angered with the decision. "I think it stinks," John McNesby, president of the Fraternal Order of Police in Philadelphia, told ABC News' Philadelphia station WPVI. "It sends a bad message to the police out there on the streets."
The Fraternal Order of Police is a U.S. labor union made up of law enforcement officers.
McNesby said the union plans to fight the decision and he expects Josey to be reinstated, according to WPVI.
The woman who was punched, Aida Gusman, is pleased with the decision to fire Josey.
"We never asked for the officer to be let go, but we do agree with the decision," Gusman's attorney Enrique Latoison told ABCNews.com. "This one officer's actions have made the whole police department look bad. We do recognize the fact, from seeing the video, that he was the only officer that did what he did. He acted alone."
Latoison said that Gusman is cooperating with police and will be meeting with the department of Internal Affairs today as the investigation into the incident proceeds.
The Philadelphia District Attorney's Office said on Wednesday that it would be dropping the disorderly conduct charge against Gusman.
Gusman denied throwing anything at police and said she did not know why she was punched.
"I'm 40 years old. I don't have time to play games like that," Gusman told WPVI earlier in the week. In addition to her facial injury, she has cuts and bruises on her arm and hand.
The video, taken at Sunday's Puerto Rican Day Parade, shows a crowd of blue-shirted police officers standing in the middle of a street, around a car. Someone on the left appears to throw something resembling silly string on the cops. An officer in a white shirt rushes out of the crowd and punches Gusman in the face and then hit her in the back of the head.
She fell to the ground where two officers apprehended her and led her off. As she passed the camera, blood can be seen streaming down her face.
Lieutenant Josey, 39, has had 13 complaints made against him over his career.
Quote
Police union plans party for cop fired after punching woman
WHEN PHILADELPHIA police Lt. Jonathan D. Josey II punched a woman last month and a video of the incident went viral, Commissioner Charles Ramsey called it "troubling" and fired him.
Mayor Nutter was "horrified" and apologized to victim Aida Guzman, and protesters rallied with "We are all Aida" signs.
But Fraternal Order of Police members, apparently, are "all Josey."
The police union will fete the 19-year veteran with a $30-per-person benefit Oct. 28. "Come On Out and Support ONE OF OUR OWN" reads a flier inviting officers to the five-hour, Sunday-afternoon event at the FOP Hall on Spring Garden near Broad. Proceeds will help Josey with living expenses, because he no longer gets a paycheck, FOP President John McNesby said.
"You're kidding me, right?" City Councilwoman Maria Quinones-Sanchez said of the benefit.
"While I understand that the FOP has to defend one of its own, I am extremely disappointed because this will appear that they are condoning the very visible actions of Josey, which hurts the image of their good officers," added Sanchez, who represents the district where the incident occurred.
Retired Philadelphia police Capt. Ray Lewis, who has been caught up in a dispute with the FOP sparked by his involvement with the Occupy Wall Street movement, called the benefit "unbelievable, but it's no surprise."
Lewis, a 24-year veteran with no blemishes on his record, enraged the FOP last year by wearing his uniform to Occupy protests in Philly and New York. McNesby called for his arrest and filed a grievance that could have resulted in his ouster from the union.
"It's a shame. Here you have this guy caught on video sucker- punching this woman and the FOP is going to stand by him," Lewis said.
But McNesby blasted any suggestion that the benefit is inappropriate.
"It was inappropriate for the city to apologize to this woman and drop the charges until the investigation was complete," McNesby said. "And we still don't believe it's a fireable offense."
He emphasized the event isn't an official FOP benefit, even though it's being advertised on FOP letterhead and the union's website. Rather, "it's a benefit that is going to be held at the FOP hall, by officers and co-workers. They're using our building."
Still, he added, "we are in support of it."
The union often rallies behind cops whom police commissioners fire through direct action, because union officials say such dismissals deny cops due process. Such firings also often get overturned in arbitration hearings.
In March 2010 the FOP hosted a free happy-hour celebration when four officers - fired for beating three suspects in an incident caught by a news helicopter - won their jobs back in arbitration.
In the more recent videotaped incident, Josey, 40, a supervisor in the Highway Patrol unit, was among a group of officers doing crowd-control Sept. 30 after the Puerto Rican Day Parade when someone sprayed something that appeared to be liquid or Silly String on them at 5th Street and Lehigh Avenue in North Philly.
A 36-second YouTube video caught what came next: Josey spotted Guzman walking away and punched her in the head twice from behind. From the video, it's unclear if Guzman threw anything. The punch sent Guzman, 39, to the ground with a bloody lip. She was handcuffed and charged with disorderly conduct. The District Attorney's Office later dropped the charge, and Josey was suspended with intent to dismiss.
Guzman's attorney, Enrique Latoison, said he had no strong objection to the benefit.
"It would have been nice for him to reach out and apologize for his actions. And we don't think he should be reinstated, that's for sure," Latoison said. "But as a defense attorney, I understand that his people are going to defend him and look out for him."
(http://media.philly.com/images/300*258/101212_joseyletter_1024.jpg)