PAX Centurion - Fall 2016

www.bppa.org PAX CENTURION • Fall 2016 • Page 7 Secretary’s Thoughts: Christopher J. Broderick, BPPA Secretary Body cameras won’t solve all problems See Secretary on page 11 I am writing this article on Saturday, August 6, 2016. Why is that significant? Because it is just days after a bold but absolutely necessary letter from the heads of the four Bargaining Units of the Boston Police Department was made public. It is a very real piece of the news cycle right now and has been since it first appeared lateWednesday, early Thursday morning. What isn’t accurate is that it is a new issue. It is not new. It is not the first communication about these matters. I know that there have been draft policies and plans on multiple occasions in the last few years about some of these concerns that never came to fruition. I know from Day 1 of Pat’s term as our President, he has voiced these issues over and over again. I know that the BPPA Bargaining Committee has raised these types of issues again and again with the Department’s Labor team. I know that the BPPA Health and Safety/Labor Management Committee have brought these concerns ad nauseum with the Department’s representatives to the Joint Committee. The documentation of the BPPA’s concerns fills a filing cabinet (at least). It has gotten to the point where there was a real fear, based on national tragedies and local threats that we would wake up one morning having to say to ourselves “we should have tried harder” or “we could have done more”. Based on that the letter was drafted, reviewed, discussed, agreed upon and then signed by the Bargaining Unit’s principals. I am sure it was not an easy letter to write and sign anticipating the reaction the City and Department would have but it was an absolute necessary one. The decision was made to give the recipients time to read, examine and discuss it. Two weeks passed with no legitimate action taken, to my knowledge, by the City or the Department. Our members had a right to see the letter and know what actions were being taken. After 2,000 plus copies were circulated among every rank and office it made its way to the press. I never thought I’d say this but thank God for the fourth estate. We should be encouraged and rejuvenated by the mostly positive coverage the media has given this issue. If you have dared to read the different comments sections in the various articles printed you will find people speaking up for us. There are even people defending us from those that take a different stand. To these people, our friends and defenders, I say thank you. I knew you were out there and have been waiting for you to speak up. In those comments you may have seen some dissention that could be construed as anti-police. As far as some of the opposition to the idea that officers should be better equipped… I’d like to note some of the concerns I read and how I’d respond if those questions were brought to me. I have heard that this equipment would militarize the police and damage the community approach to policing. The idea is not to walk around Uphams Corner in a Kevlar helmet and Level 4 vest with a rifle slung over the back. The women and men that serve this City are community police officers because that is who they are… not because of how they are dressed and trained. We believe in this City, we care about this City and no piece of equipment will ever change that. If they issue all or any of this equipment do you think the CSOs will stop organizing bike rodeos and RAD classes? Do you think they will turn in the BPD Ice Cream Truck for a tank?Will the BPPA stop volunteering for community events? No, No and No! Will the dialogues and activities like basketball and day trips with officers and the youth stop? No. Does anyone believe that the service car, rapid or walking beat will stop interacting with the public because of the equipment in their trunk? It simply will not happen that way. I know it, you know it and any reasonable person knows it. If the community cares about us like we care about them, which I believe is true, shouldn’t they want us to be safer if there is an event that calls for a greater level of protection for officers to protect themselves and the very same communities?When this equipment is issued there should be established protocols. A discussed and vetted policy in how and when this equipment is used would put all parties concerned, Community, Command Staff and Officers, at ease. Another concern I have seen voiced is why the need for this equipment? Body worn cameras will solve everything. That is quite possibly the silliest of comments I have seen to date. One has nothing to do with the other… at all. The equipment we are asking for will protect us from bottles and bricks, gunfire and worse. No matter where you stand on BWCs you cannot say they are protective equipment and want to be taken seriously. As anyone who has read anything I have written would know I could go on and on but quite honestly this argument is so ridiculous I will give it exactly what it deserves. Nothing. Another gripe of some is the idea that this is all about posturing for a new collective bargaining agreement. To that I say BULLSHIT!!! The idea that anyone would equate officer safety with pay raises is foolish. As a member of the BPPA, an elected officer and part of the BPPA Bargaining Committee, do I want to reap the best possible pay and benefits for the membership ? Of course I do! Do I want to give up the least amount possible to obtain those benefits? Of course I do! I expect the same but opposite goal from the other side of the table. Yes! Do I think it is fair to put basic officer safety concerns on the bargaining table? Absolutely not! I honestly hope the other of the side of the table feels the same way. They have an obligation, a responsibility to make sure we are safe. It is not subject to givebacks or COLA raises and it never should be. We as a Union, and they as the City, must be clear that these are two different discussions that must be dealt with independently. Finally I will address the issue of funds being more useful to train officers how to deescalate tense situations. We may complain and whine when there is mandatory training of any sort but I think the reality is the modern day police officer welcomes additional tools to deal with situations. De-escalation training would be received no differently. At the end of the day I am not sure how effective an E-learning or a 4 or 8 hour block of training will be. Police officers have been “on the job” training in the art of de-escalation since the first day on the job… no matter if that was 1980 or when Class 55-15 stepped out a few weeks ago. It is quite possibly the one constant in our profession. Since the inception of policing we have been called upon to be the calming influence over and over again. I am not sure where the notion began that we do not try to deescalate every situation we encounter but we know that it is out there. But similar to my concerns over body cameras, de-escalation training does not protect you from a brick or bottle thrown from 15 yards away. It will not protect you from a lunatic firing rifle rounds. It would prove useless when confronted with an aggressive, convinced