San Antonio Collective Bargaining Agreement

Yazının yazıldığı tarih Tarih: 12 Nisan 2021  Yazının ait olduğu kategori Bölüm: Genel  Yazının okunma sayısı Okunma: 94 views  Yazıya yapılan toplam yorum Yok.

The intensity of the public debate about police work encourages me. During my seven years in office, public safety has always been the primary concern of residents and voters. It`s changing. In recent weeks, the discussion has postponed concerns, and issues such as police demilitarization and the search for different ways of addressing security issues have reached the summit. I don`t think it`s enough to train the police, there must be profound political changes in policing – the way the police interact with the community, the way they perceive black people – and the changing public mood will go a long way towards reorienting political will. Deep changes to the collective agreement will be easier to achieve, but it will still be a difficult elevator. San Antonio Police Chief William McManus also sees problems with the collective agreement and some of the state`s laws that are in effect. In both cases, he says, “they do protect the wrong officers.” (Watch the full clip at the bottom of the article.) I will advocate for substantial changes in the next collective agreement that will allow the Chief of Police and municipal staff to permanently eliminate all the bad actors who undermine the integrity of our police service and endanger the safety of our citizens. The current collective agreement with SAPOA hinders SAPD`s ability to remove bad actors from power, including through the binding arbitration clause. This tends that officers, rightly suspended, engage in arbitration and be returned to force by an overwhelming majority. The best thing SAPD can do to keep them off the road when they are reinstated is to assign them to an administrative office job. I think we need to revisit this issue in the next police contract, but perhaps also extend conciliation to three member bodies, as is the case with firefighters. The current trial with an arbitrator has caused a crisis of confidence.

With regard to the police in particular, I believe that the collective agreement must change and allow for more transparency and accountability. I think the waterproofing of past archives needs to be changed. In my view, arbitration does not promote justice for individuals and I strongly object to officers paying again when they are reinstated. Past discipline is generally applied only if the officer is accused of violating the same rule within two years of sentencing, but there are a few exceptions. History may be used as evidence if the allegations include “violence, substance abuse and incompetence” under the collective agreement. Chapter 143 – which governs police attitudes, promotions, discipline and archives – was adopted by San Antonio voters in 1947. In addition, Chapter 174, the Status of Collective Agreements, adopted in 1974, allows the local treaty to oust or oust the public service laws described in Chapter 143. Not all cities have adopted these rules, but both can be repealed by a local vote. Nirenberg: The current collective agreement — with arbitration created in state statute and approved by voters in 1947 — protects “bad officers.” Chief McManus` decisions to fire officers must be the last word if he is to impose true discipline. Under current rules, it is too often rejected because the system has shifted to protect officers from discipline. I think past and recent events have shed more light on the intricacies of the collective agreement and the impact it in turn has on police work in our communities. When we learned of the legal framework in which CBAs are authorized by Texas law and how our people voted in 1974 to support this approach through a petition, I think it is time for us to discuss the objectives of this type of negotiation.

Facebook'ta paylaş   Twitter'da paylaş   Besleme | RSS


Yorumlara Kapalı