Police Union Newsletter Sept2015 Fin

DC Police Union Newsletter
Volume 1, Number 5
1
CONTENTS
1. What Rights do Members
have When It Comes to
Scheduling
2. Quality, Effective, and
Dedicated Policing Does
Make A Difference
3. AHOD Update
4. No Confidence Vote:
After Action Report
5. Notice of General
Membership Meeting
SEPTEMBER 16, 2015 VOLUME 1, NUMBER 5
1
What Rights do Members have
When It Comes to Scheduling?
By: Marinos Marinos, Secretary
Scheduling is one of the most consistent
complaints that the Union received from its
members. While MPD has the right to
schedule Union members as needed they
must do so in accordance with Article 24
(Scheduling) of the Collective Bargaining
Agreement (Agreement) and D.C. Code § 1–
612.01. (Hours of work). One of the ways
MPD consistently violates Article 24 is they
will change a member’s schedule because of
an anticipated event like the papal visit,
summertime, Halloween, and recognized
government holidays.
The MPD believes that if they give at least
fourteen (14) day notice to the members that
they can change their work schedules for
anticipated events, however the Union argues
and cites that Article 24 reads in part; “Each
member of the Bargaining Unit will be
assigned days off and tours of duty that are
2
either fixed or rotated on a known regular
schedule.” In response to these violations
the Union has filed class and group
grievances that are already prepared for
an arbitration hearing.
Also MPD does NOT have the right to
schedule a member to work more than
one tour of duty during their work week.
D.C. Code § 1–612.01 Part b Section 2
reads in part; “The working hours in each
day in the basic workweek are the same”
This can happen ATLEAST twice a year
when a Union member who is not
assigned to day work has to attend
biannual pistol requalification.
If you believe that MPD is violating your
contractual and statutory rights what
should you do?
You should immediately contact your Chief
Steward to explore your options. If the
violation cannot be informally remedied a
formal grievance may be filed. While the
grievance may not stop the immediate
violation from happening, when it is finally
heard by the Chief of Police of even a
hearing examiner MPD would have to pay
the member a financial penalty if the MPD
is found to have violated the member’s
contractual and statutory rights. While
this process takes time and you may not
receive immediate gratification
Quality, Effective, and Dedicated
Policing Does Make A Difference
By: Hiram Rosario, 7D Chief Steward
The DC Police Union does not interfere
with Metropolitan Police Department’s
(MPD) rights to manage. However,
District of Columbia (DC), residents,
visitors, and business owners deserve
better Also, the information that MPD
provides to the citizens shall be factual.
… CONTINUED ON PAGE 2 …
Page
1
1-3
3
3-6
6

Volume 1, Number 5
2
… CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1 … As professional
police officers, we are held to higher standards.
But, too bad that we cannot say the same for most
of the MPD’s command staff, some of DC elected
officials, and the mayor.
Quality, aggressive, and dedicated policing does
make a difference. I joined MPD in 1988 at the
heart of the crack-cocaine epidemic. I have to say
that I agree with Chief of Police (COP) Cathy Lanier,
in that the drug problems in DC today are
somewhat different from 20 plus years ago.
However, I strongly disagree with COP Lanier’s
tactics of disbanding the seven police districts vice
units. I strongly believed that today, more than ever
the MPD needs the presence, quality, and
aggressive-successful tactics that these vice units
brought to the streets of the District of Columbia.
While not everyone is involved in criminal activity,
when COP Lanier disbanded the seven vice units,
and then constantly advertising it, then those
involved in criminal activity are basically being told
that they would not be dealt with as seriously, as
when the vice units were out working the these
communities which may have different drug
problems, as wells as other serious criminal
activities.
I have to say that policing across the United States
is changing, but in many instances not for the
better. When a low level drug dealer get the sense
that he / she can operate with very little police
intervention, it just a matter of time before that
person is no longer a low level drug dealer. As
human beings, the vast majority of our citizens are
law adding citizens. However, those citizens that
are criminal-minded, are only looking for
opportunities on how to grow and make money,
which is why more than ever the MPD needs to
have the vice units within each police district. These
district-vice units were out in the community make
a big difference, just the mere fact of having these
vice units sends a loud message to those engaged
in criminal activity that is a matter of time before
the police catches up with them. I strongly believe
that sworn police officials should not sound, or act
like politicians.
Police work and Public Safety is not a joke. Here is
an observation that as a police officer regarding
politics in DC. A few years ago Theft One was a big
problem within DC, so I guess easier way to
combat the Theft One problem was for the DC City
Council to change the law, where now Theft One
has to be $1000.00 or more for it to be a felony
and a Part One offense. The change in the law
basically immediately reduced crime, even though
citizens are still victims of thefts, just not felony
theft. Therefore, at the time of MPD reporting
crimes to the FBI, the number of Theft One was
automatically, and quickly reduced which would
show less Part One offenses for DC.
Here is the District of Columbia Whistle Protection
Act, and General Order GO-RAR 201.36,
(Metropolitan Police Department Sworn Law
Enforcement Officer Code of Ethics), which would
clearly show that we are held to higher standards.
Apparently, it seems that within the DC
government and within MPD the higher standards
only applies to rank and file members
The District of Columbia Whistle Protection Act,
D.C. Code § 1-615.52(a), (6), (A, B, C, D, and E)
defines protected disclosure as follows:
“Protected disclosure” means any
disclosure of information, not specifically
prohibited by statute, without restriction
to time, place, form, motive, context,
forum, or prior disclosure made to any
person by an employee or applicant,
including a disclosure made in the
ordinary course of an employee's duties
by an employee to a supervisor or a
public body that the employee
reasonably believes evidences:
(A) Gross mismanagement;
(B) Gross misuse or waste of public
resources or funds;
(C) Abuse of authority in connection with
the administration of a public program
or the execution of a public contract;
(D) A violation of a federal, state, or local
law, rule, or regulation, or of a term of a
contract between the District
government and a District government
contractor which is not of a merely
technical or minimal nature; or
(E) A substantial and specific danger to
the public health and safety.
General Order GO-RAR 201.36, (Metropolitan
Police Department Sworn Law Enforcement Officer
Code of Ethics), Part II (Policy), provides in part,
that: “The policy of the Metropolitan Police
Department is that sworn law enforcement
officers shall maintain the highest standard of
conduct and perform their duties in a
nondiscriminatory, efficient, courteous, respectful,
and ethical manner at all times. Further, these
official powers shall not be used for personal

Volume 1, Number 5
3
… CONTINUED FROM PAGE 2 … profit or gain, or
violate the Constitution or laws in performance of
their work.”
Hiram Rosario, 7D Chief Steward, can be reached
at (202) 276-7115.
AHOD Update
2007: The first of a series of group grievance was
advanced to arbitration in July after efforts to
resolve the matters with the MPD failed. One of the
group grievances was briefed and we are awaiting
an award from the arbitrator.
2008: An arbitrator was recently assigned after
efforts to resolve the matter with the MPD
failed. The arbitration hearing is being scheduled in
the Fall 2015.
2009: The DC Police Union filed a Class Grievance
and prevailed in arbitration. The MPD did not
appeal the Arbitrator's decision. The MPD and the
Union are scheduled to return to the Public
Employees Review Board (PERB), so the PERB can
determine what type of payments should be
ordered for the Enforcement Order in DC Superior
Court.
and prevailed in Arbitration and was upheld by the
PERB Board. The MPD did not appeal the decision,
but refuses to pay the award and the matter is
currently before the PERB in an enforcement
proceeding.
and prevailed in Arbitration and was upheld by the
PERB Board. However, MPD appealed PERB's
decision, which is currently pending on appeal in
DC Superior Court.
and is scheduled for arbitration on January 8,
2016.
and is scheduled for arbitration on November 24,
2015.
and is scheduled for arbitration on November 18,
2015.
and is awaiting a date for arbitration.
No Confidence Vote:
After Action Report
By: Gregg Pemberton, Treasurer
As you are aware, The DC Police Union conducted
a referendum of its members last weekend to
determine whether or not our membership had
confidence in Chief Lanier’s leadership of this
agency and public safety in the District of Columbia.
After a long week of media coverage on the Union’s
position and the city’s response, we have compiled
some information about our endeavor.
Allegations of Low Turnout
Many of the Chief’s loyal sycophants in the media
immediately tried to come to her rescue when the
results were published. The most common
deflection was “only a third even bothered to vote”
or even the Mayor’s own Chief of Staff who
tweeted, “the results are as believable as a Castro
election.” Are they right to say the results are
invalid?
Statistically, we can’t say that the 1,128 members
who voted are representative of the whole, but we
can say that one-third of the members of the DC
Police Union are gravely concerned and frustrated
with the current direction of the department. That
is a more than significant number of police officers,
detectives, and sergeants that we believe have
legitimate grievances with the leadership. While we
heard the Chief dismiss the referendum and
attempt to invalidate it, we never once heard
anyone in the leadership ask how to fix it, what the
main issues are, what can be done to repair the
rift, or even how to prevent other officers from
falling into this group of disheartened and
disenchanted police officers. It seems like more of
the same stubborn, deaf-eared attitude from
leadership.
The Union can go even a step further to say that
members of the Executive Committee visited every
district and almost all the specialized units to
inform members the vote was being held. We were
met with one overwhelming response everywhere
we went: “I support everything you guys are doing
but I’m not using my ID number to vote, there will
be retribution.” The question about turnout should
be this: What is more likely, that two-thirds of the
department are happy with the Chief but were too
lazy to click the link and say “Yes, I have
confidence”? Or two-thirds were deathly afraid of
the discipline from management that would no
doubt be meted out if their votes were discovered?

Volume 1, Number 5
4
… CONTINUED FROM PAGE 3 …
Leadership Remains Dismissive
The Chief said in a 5D community meeting last
week, the Chief stated, "I think the 70 percent that
did not vote, I've heard from them in the last couple
of days, they approve of the job I’m doing". This
seems like an unusual response from the leader of
a large organization who just discovered that one-
third of their agency disapproves of their
performance. What’s even more alarming is that
when the vote began last Friday, the Chief said on
WAMU on the Kojo Nnamdi show that she “was
taking the vote seriously.” But on Monday when the
results were published, she stated, “I am not
interested in responding to or commenting on the
anonymous online survey conducted by the [FOP]”.
Of course, though, she went on to comment on
how she couldn’t care less and that we were just
mad we had to work on a Saturday.
Last time I checked, the police department is open
24/7, and because the Chief changed the vast
majority of member’s days off for the whole
summer, almost everyone already works on
Saturdays. The only thing that she did state
regarding those who voted against her was this, "I
could sit down and figure out more what they want
to do. But if they want me to say I'm not going to
change schedules, I'm not going to say that.”
Well the Chief should be saying exactly that. It is a
contractual violation for the department to do
anything BUT that. Union members have always
been willing to work inconvenient times and
schedules. We are only asking that she adhere to
the contract that gives department the authority to
change a member’s tour without notice ONLY for a
declared emergency or for an unanticipated event.
It’s these constant violations of the labor contract
with which we take issue. Perhaps Chief Lanier
forgot that an arbitrator ruled in 2009 that All
Hands on Deck (AHOD) violated several terms of
the police union’s contract1,2
(which was affirmed in
2013 by DC Superior Court3
).
How could the leader of the 6th
largest police
department learn that 1,100 of her employees
have no confidence in her leadership and NOT
1. http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/
citydesk/2009/09/10/no-more-all-hands-on-
deck-for-cops-ruling-says/
2. http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/
assets/citydesk/2009/09/0910ahod.pdf
3. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201
3/jul/22/court-deals-blow-to-dc-polices-all-
hands-on-deck-i/

immediately take action on how to resolve that
catastrophic issue? Her dismissive stance on the
vote is another example of Chief Lanier’s lack of
concern for the morale of the police department.
The Reason for the Vote
The Union is not going to delve deep into this
because we have made this point thoroughly. But
we must refute those in the media and in the
department who say we were just upset because
we had to work Saturday, or that we’re still mad
over not getting a cost of living increase for seven
years, or that ‘our schedules were changed’. These
things may have contributed to our frustrations,
but it’s much deeper than that. Our real reasons
for the action were highlighted in our press
release:
“Failure to negotiate contracts in good
faith, no cost of living increases,
unreasonable scheduling disruptions,
cancelled and banned vacation time,
bad faith bargaining, heavy handed and
capricious discipline, disingenuous
reporting of statistics and data,
impotent and ineffective policing
strategies, disbanding of the most
effective units, gimmicky deployment,
toxic management, a skyrocketing
attrition rate, and an inability to
fundamentally keep our neighborhoods,
our citizens and our officers safe have
all contributed to the fact that our
members have lost confidence in the
leadership of the Chief. This ‘No
Confidence’ vote is a symbolic gesture
of our member’s long-building desire for
a new direction in policing in the
District.”
Ultimately, we knew we had to draw attention to
our disapproval when we became concerned for
the safety of our city, our citizens, and our officers.
The no confidence vote was just that, a culmination
of years of failed leadership topped off with
disastrous strategies that are endangering the
city.
This is not about angling for competitive pay or
reasonable scheduling. We are trying desperately
to improve police services as per our by-laws,
which state in part, … CONTINUED ON PAGE 5 …

Volume 1, Number 5
5
…CONTINUED FROM PAGE 4 …
“To promote efficiency in the MPD and
better service to the public, and to
advance plans of improvement
beneficial to its members to be secured
by legislative enactment through
cooperation with governmental officials
and by other lawful means.”
Many have suggested we were using crime as an
opportunity to smear the Chief. Nothing could be
further from the truth. For several months we have
highlighted problems and shortcomings while
making common sense plans and suggestions on
how to improve service. When our pleas went
ignored, we became concerned for the safety of
our city, our citizens, and our officers. Our no
confidence vote was a reflection of our frustrations
and a signal to citizens and leaders alike that we
were voicing our opposition to the status quo.
Nonetheless, this department is hemorrhaging its
veterans and young bloods at an alarming rate due
to the internal grind of mismanagement and
constant undervaluing of its employees. If the city
doesn’t move to solve some of our longstanding
problems, we will not be able to fill the vacancies
fast enough, causing the department to rapidly
shrink at a time when the city is vulnerable to
returning to a time when daily homicides were the
norm.
Media Bias
A lot of members seemed disappointed that some
in the media immediately disparaged the Union.
We have to keep in mind that this was expected. It
was no surprise the DC Government damage
control machine was running on all cylinders. We
pulled back the curtain on what many had thought
was a smooth running operation led by an
organizational wizard. The powers that be weren’t
happy that one small public sector union was able
to show how little credibility and integrity existed in
our public safety leaders. Keep in mind that every
media outlet reported the same story, “DC Police
Vote No Confidence in Chief Lanier.” Sure there
were digs in the story line and efforts to undermine
our position, but we were interviewed and reported
on by local, national, and several international
outlets nearly all of whom shared our concern and
felt our position and data was more than credible.
It’s also important to note that we discovered
something we had suspected for a while. The
Chief’s approval rating with the public has declined.
Many media elites love to tout that “She has a
soaring approval rating of 84%”. That was data
from a 2011 Clarus Poll. In 2014, WaPo/NBC
had her at 74%. The Union contracted an
independent polling company and discovered Chief
Lanier’s approval rating is now at 60%, and that
polling was done before the no confidence vote.
While of course 60% is still a positive number, we
believe the real take-away is the severe decline in
her approval among the public.
Integrity Matters
Some of the information coming out of our
government in defense of our call for change has
been nothing short of despicable. The Mayor’s
office put out an infographic4
suggesting that crime
is down 50% under Lanier. According to the MPDC
Annual Reports 2007-2014,5
citywide crime is up
13%, even when the equation is controlled for the
increase in population. Inquiries to the Mayor’s
office about this number seem to have gone
unanswered.6
We can just skip over the fact that
there was a picture of Cinderella on the graphic
with text suggesting the Chief is a “princess”.
It’s also concerning that the Chief has repeatedly
disparaged our recently disbanded vice units. On
August 26, 2015, Chief Lanier published a
document titled “Addressing Violent Crime in
Washington, DC” it was also linked on Mayor
Bowser’s web page. In the section
titled Centralization of Drug Units, Chief Lanier
writes the following about district vice units:
“The productivity of vice units had
dropped precipitously. In the first four
months of 2015, non-marijuana
arrests had decreased 31
percent. Search warrants and gun
recoveries by these units were also
declining. Those were telling signs that
we had to modernize our approach and
change tactics.”
What Chief Lanier neglected to tell the public is
that on October 24, 2014, she issued Teletype No.
TT 10-111-14 ordering the following: “All District
Vice lieutenants shall ensure that all current and
on-going vice operations are closed out, or
transferred to the Investigative Services Bureau,
Narcotics … CONTINUED ON PAGE 6 …
4. https://twitter.com/TeamMuriel/status/637
021811616694272/photo/1?ref_src=twsr
c%5Etfw
5. http://mpdc.dc.gov/page/mpdc-annual-
reports
6. http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/04/dc-
police-union-says-mayor-is-lying-about-crime-
stats/

Volume 1, Number 5
6
… CONTINUED FROM PAGE 5 … and Special
Investigations Division, by January 4, 2015. On that
date, all district drug enforcement operations will
be centralized and conducted out of NSID.” Chief
Lanier is being dishonest when she writes that vice
unit’s productivity dropped precipitously in the first
four months of 2015, when in fact, she ordered
the cessation of their operations during the time
period she is referencing. That statement is
patently false and intentionally misleading.
Unfortunately, this is not the first time the Chief
has been dishonest about the Metropolitan Police
Department (MPD) and its activities.
Unconstitutional roadblocks, obfuscating our
contract negotiations, botched ERT barricade
operations, celebrity escorts, whistleblower
retaliations, phony case closure rates, fabricated
crime statistics, and even reprehensibly blaming
our officers for lack of productivity are just a few of
the issues that have been sustained and thereby
affected her integrity.
Moving Forward
Last week’s vote was a line in the sand and a
message to the city leaders and the citizens: Our
department is in shambles and we are on the
precipice of catastrophe for effective public safety
in our neighborhoods.
The vote may have seemed like an attack to some,
but it was nothing of the sort. It was a call for
change; a change in direction toward effective,
evidence based policing and a call to treat our
officers fairly and respectfully. We will continue to
work with the DC Council, the Office of the Mayor,
and the departmental leadership, including the
Chief, provided they are willing to hear our
concerns and work together on finding solutions.
The message to our members is that we’re
working hard to improve ALL of our conditions. We
believe that this city has the capability and the
resources to be the pinnacle of policing, with
cutting edge equipment, highly trained officers, and
policy at the forefront of the industry. We should be
the top agency in the nation, not a training ground
for the neighboring counties.
We once again encourage you to contact us with
any questions or concerns. Our contact
information is located on the website,
DCPoliceUnion.com.
Notice of General
Membership Meeting
A General Membership Meeting will be held
Tuesday, September 29th
at 1600 hours. It will take
place in the Community Room of the First District
Police Station (101 M Street SW).

Police Union Newsletter Sept2015 Fin

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (19)

Similar to Police Union Newsletter Sept2015 Fin

Similar to Police Union Newsletter Sept2015 Fin (20)

More from DC_Police_Union

More from DC_Police_Union (9)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (17)

Police Union Newsletter Sept2015 Fin