There are approximately 300 sergeants that are fraternal members of FOP. At the last FOP General Meeting the membership voted to allow Sergeants to remain on the FOP Board. This vote did not change qualifications of candidates for the board. The vote defeated a proposal that stated that once a board member is promoted to the rank of sergeant and above he would be required to vacate his post. This still does not allow a sergeant to run for a board position. Will we see attempts by FOP to bring on the sergeants in the future as full members? Maybe not as Lodge 7 but as a separate lodge?
Food for thought.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
31 comments:
Rules and Regulations of the Chicago Police Department:
Rule 54 B
prevents a supervisor from being a member of a union (fop lodge 7) that represents the rank and file (pos) on issues of wages, hours and working conditions.
the rule further defines "supervisor" as a rank of sgt and above.
the rule is clear and really makes sense as a supervisor does have a conflict of interest in any numerous areas, dicipline, advice on cr numbers, spar etc.
Sgts and above are not prevented from being members of the Fraternal Order of Police only Lodge 7 as they are the exclusive bargaining agent for the rank below Sgt.
The Lodge supervisors in Chicago can be a part of is The State FOP Lodge where they can legally be a full member.
When was the last time a supervisor member of Lodge 7 that was not already on the Lodge 7 Board been a delegate to the state or national conventions
the answer is NEVER
Lodge 7 is the ONLY FOP Lodge that is not a member of the Illinois FOP Labor Counsel which negotiates contacts and represents member lodges against the employer that is why the Rules and Regulations prevent supervisors from being members of FOP Lodge 7
If the leadership of FOP 7 values supervisors as members then let the FOP Illinois Labor Counsel represent Lodge 7 in contract negotiations instead of lightweight Donahue and the boys but that will never happen for how could he justify his $180,000. dollar salary!!! Then Lodge 7 would soley be a "fraternal organization" and Rule 54B would not apply...
wharej603
anyone know how long the pre-sgt's are going to be in the "D" units....rumored to shorted to 1 month..instead of the 3 months?????
they both SUCK!!!!
Anonymous said...
the rule is clear and really makes sense as a supervisor does have a conflict of interest in any numerous areas, dicipline, advice on cr numbers, spar etc.
Why doesnt this apply to firemen?
They dont seem to have a problem.
Look at the website for our union and that tells it all. Cosgrove is still president and Barnhill vice president. How long has it been?
When PBPA was offered as an alternative to FOP, the powers in charge of BOTH lied to everyone. It was just two hardheaded irishmen who couldn't get along.
Instead of being on the 2nd floor of FOP headquarters, with full access to records and staff, we're in our own bldg on Pershing. It's too late to go back, but I for one wish we had never heard of PBPA.
the fire union is part of the AFL-CIO and supervisors were part of the bargaining unit from the beginning not so with FOP the point is Sgt and LT and Capt have their own union the rule is clear let see what Cline does about the letter sent there is an altenative for sgts and above to continue fraternal association which is not barred by rule 54 b
take a look at the sgt's contract
sell back 200 hrs
3/4 hrs per day and duty avaiablity
plus a quarterly diferential
if a sgt is to detailed out it is by senority
same raises
what's so bad about their contract.....
I may be mistaken but doesn't the Fire Fighters Union Local 1 have as members from Firefighter to Battalion Chief.
This rule 54b can be changed. It seems the city only wants changes that benifit management.
To 2;41
I don't mean to bust yer' stones but....
Cosgrove is NOT the President and Barnhill is no longer affiliated with the Board, although he will probably run for president in the next election.
As far as FOP/PBPA goes......the board polled the troops and given the choices, FOP was unanimous, however the then president of [Local 7] FOP wanted our $$$ BUT we would not have the power to vote [the numbers alone knock us out] They [local FOP] stalled, lied and when it came down to the wire of either picking a Union or LOSE IT ALL by the deadline [don't forget we had to go to Springfield to even be allowed to consider a union for sgts., lt's & capt's, ] and if/when the deadline expired [a FOP sneak tactic, we would either have FOP with NO representation or quickly pick a union b-4 the deadline]
A vote by the members picked PBPA a respected organization. Don't forget the Teamsters were also a choice. So IF you want to blame someone, blame that former FOP President that screwed us and thank the Union for working for "YEARS" to allow us to organize and get the benefits we have today.
Been dere' done dat...I'm citing the facts man.
20+ as a sergeant
[It aint heaven but it aint kansas Toto]
Its all about one thing...Corruption.
SCS-in addition to times, you need to have dates on the postings so we know if we're responding to something recent or a week old, in which case no one is reading that thread anymore. Maybe the department's super -qualified techs can help you (haha)
When are they going to update the PBPA website?? Geez, Barnhill gets voted out and no one knows how to update the site? Did he get mad and take the password with him? Come on......
I thought the FOP was bad (and they are) but this union is next to useless. We should just all chip in and pay an on call attorney and someone to negotiate the contract every couple of years. I'm sick of paying $50 a month so a couple of guys can have a club house. We don't even have a website.....even though the one with the stupid cartoons was an embarrassment.
I personally will never return to the FOP the way we were treated when we finally gained bargaining rights by the then FOP board left a very bitter taste, and since our application to be a seperate lodge was turned down by both the state and national committees it wasn't just Nolan screwing us he had he support of the national hierarchy.Screw them they thought they would force our hand and take what crumbs they offered.look at how much the FOP is hated by the rank and file maybe they should join us at the PBPA.
Anonymous said...
take a look at the sgt's contract
sell back 200 hrs
3/4 hrs per day and duty avaiablity
plus a quarterly diferential
if a sgt is to detailed out it is by senority
same raises
what's so bad about their contract.....
Sat Sep 30, 04:22:21 PM
I'll tell you what's so bad. The lack of a legal defense fund prevents us from being able to protect ourselves should the need ever arise. One lengthy court proceeding could bankrupt the PBPA. As far as employing lobbists to push our agenda in Springfield, forget about it. The City knows we are in over our heads and constantly bullies us, knowing that we do not have the means to challenge them the way that FOP can.
Just a comment about the separation of bargaining units from what I "think" I understand. It is the Law that we can not negotiate outside our respective classes. That applies to the FOP and the PBPA. Sgt.'s can't negotiate for P.O.s/Detectives or LT's. Lt's can't for Captains/Sgts/Detectives/P.O.s. It is the way it is written in the labor laws. The CFD was grandfathered in. They couldn't break up their collective bargaining Unit to make it fit the law because that would have been an unfair labor practice. But with us, Sgt's,Lts, Capt.s never had a bargaining unit because we were considered management. So once the laws were on the books, they allowed us representation that it is restricted by the laws. This is the reason we never win anything in respect to promotons/exams, meritorious, etc. We are not allowed to bargain outside of our class. The FOP can bargain for D2A positions because a Detective is not a rank, it is an out of grade assignment. Even if we all became members of the FOP, the FOP could not bargain with the City based on both Sgts and Po's or any other class. Still no bargaining for testing etc. Unless the labor laws change, we're stuck holding our collective peckers, trying to block our poopshute before we get screwed again by the City.
SO .. what do we have to do bring in the FOP?
Is there a time frame that this has to be done in?
Article 4 of the current FOP contract was the result of bargaining and it that one article FOP gave away the store Please read the entire article and we are lucky we can do what we do. Read Article 4
wharej603
I was at that FOP meeting. The FOP has historically allowed all ranks as members. If the Sgt's were to come into Lodge 7 the separation of bargaining units would be accomplished easily. PO's could not vote on issues affecting Sgt's and Sgt's could not vote on issues affecting PO's. Common issues could be bargained together. It is not that difficuly and could be easily worked out. The most important thing would be the strength in numbers. More of a united front in contract negotiations.
Obviously there are some issues that affect supervisors and should be separate. Not too hard to handle.
If every Sgt were happy with PBA this would not even come up.
United we would stand stronger.
Does anybody know, who is the sergeant detailed to our union?
This is the person who is responsible for keeping things running smooth.
sgt voight 005 showed up to the fop board of directors meeting in his white shirt uniform riding in 510 al the way from five got a free lunch city time huh!
In all fairness to Sgt. Voight he is an elected trustee and as such his attendance to an FOP Board meeting falls under Article 17.3 of the contract. There was nothing improper in his attendance.
article 17.3 of which contract PBPA or Lodge 7 he is not covered under the Lodge 7 contract article 17.3 and he is not a board member of the PBPA Sgt Voight is in violation check your facts "in all fairness to the real membership" of Lodge 7
In the agreement between FOP Lodge 7 and The City Of Chicago,
17.3 -------Attendance at Lodge Meetings, States that all elected officials and board members shall be premitted reasonable time off, without loss of pay, to attend general, special and board meetings as long as the employer is notified at least 48 hours prior and the member is certified in writing by the lodge. Sgt. Voight is an elected official of FOP Lodge 7 and at this time there is no mechanism to relieve him of that position. FOP recognizes him as an elected official and has certified him as such.. The contract between the Lodge and the City does not have language under 17.3 that excludes any elected official that has since become a Sgt. However, this is all a moot point if Sgt. Voigt attended the meeting time due.
Maybe it is you who should have your facts straight. You lost in your bid to have language amended into the constitution and bylaws of the Lodge requiring a board member to step down if he were promoted to Sgt. So its about time you became fair to the “real membership” the membership who voted down your divisive proposal.
The contract covers FOP members. Sgt. "Merit" Mike Voight is a member of the PB&PA. He is NOT covered by the FOP contract. If he were covered by the FOP contract he would be given code 49 to attend FOP Board and General meetings. He is not covered, because he is a Fraternal member of FOP - not a bargaining unit member.
Sgt. Voight is both a fraternal member and a board member of FOP. Our defense of this position may be wrong and our arguments may not be valid. We are only relying on 17.3 of the contract and the FOP Constitution and Bylaws. WE fully understand that Sgt. Voight is covered under PB&PA contract and not FOP. WE do believe that the language is vague enough so that it would afford him the right to attend. That being said we are not legal experts so we accept the fact that we might be wrong.
Stop the personal attacks. Its childish and petty.
Well Sgt. Voight should file a griv. with the FOP to allow him to have code 49 to attend Board and General meetings on company time.
If Donahue advocates Sgts. should remain on the Board, does he think Sgts./Lts./Capts. maybe even the Supt. should be able to run for FOP office?
personal attacks?
Please re read your posts and then re consider childish and petty
ie "so its about time you became fair to the 'real membership' the membership who voted down your divisive proposal"
The reference to "merit" sgt voight is the truth not personal or childish.
isn't being named a "merit" anything a sign of great accomplishment and honor
yea right!!!
I do enjoy your posts and your frank admission that you "might" be wrong but you could always draft the two sgts on our board and do the right thing and take them on your board after all they have great experience and from the posts by sgts about the PB PA some experience is really needed or
maybe the PB PA could reimburse the $20,000.00 the membership of Lodge 7 will be paying the good sgts on our board after all according to the spin by Donahue and company they are the missing link between the FOP and PB PA
thanks again I really think your blog is great and I hope you allow the difference of viewpoints to be addressed.
wharej603
Dear Wayne,
Can we please move on?
Post a Comment