PAX Centurion - Fall 2017

www.bppa.org PAX CENTURION • Fall 2017 • Page 7 Vice President’s Message: Michael F. Leary, BPPA Vice President Arbitrator’s decision on parental leave goes against us, but we will fight on regarding other issues W e finally received the decision in the parental leave case. Unfortunately, it is not the one we had hoped for. The arbitrator ruled against us. This case was about whether our members were contractually entitled to paid parental leave equivalent to that granted to other Boston Police Department employees by the City’s Paid Parental Leave Ordinance. We have a provision in our Contract that states that “[i]n the event any statute(s) relating to members of the Police Department provides or sets forth benefits or terms in excess of or more advantageous than the benefits or terms of this Agreement, the provisions of such statute(s), to the extent not forbidden by law, shall prevail.” Since the City’s Paid Parental Leave Ordinance gives other Boston Police Department employees (that are not unionized) paid parental leave, the Union brought this grievance arguing that our bargaining unit members should be receiving it too. Why did she rule against us? Good question. Her opinion (which is short – a little over three pages) states that an “ordinance” is not a “statute.” This is despite the fact we submitted a Supreme Court Case that states “a city ordinance is a law of the state” and the definition by West’s Dictionary that defines an “ordinance” as “[a] law, statute, or regulation enacted by a Municipal Corporation”, the Law Dictionary that defines an “ordinance” as “a statute enacted by a city or town”, and Burton’s Legal Thesaurus that lists “statute” as a synonym for “ordinance.” I will not list the myriad of Massachusetts court cases we also submitted that regard ordinances as statutes – we submitted them all. Then how did she explain not following the Supreme Court and the dictionary??! She. Does. Not. She basically just says they are two different words, and says that parties intended to differentiate between the two words – even though neither side introduced any evidence of that. So why don’t we appeal it? Because as frustrating as this decision is, we have been told by our legal counsel that an appeal in court would likely not be successful. Courts cannot turn over an arbitrator’s decision even if the arbitrator gets the facts wrong or the lawwrong – both of which happened in this case. Arbitration awards are one of the most difficult decisions to overturn – it is the reason why the courts could not overturn the decision we received in the DaveWilliams case, for which we are grateful. But we are not giving up. Because of this decision, which was unfortunate and unexpected – I promise you that the BPPA will make this a priority in negotiations. Also, now that Phase II of the pilot program for body worn cameras is over, for the officers that wore the camera, make sure you received the $500 stipend and the C-days that you are owed. Any officers that wore the camera for four or more months should receive one C-day, eight or more months should receive two C-days, and if you wore the before or on November 12, 2016 until the end of the program, you should get three C-days total (but you don’t get the third one until January 21, 2018). As always, thank you, and stay safe. Courts cannot turn over an arbitrator’s decision even if the arbitrator gets the facts wrong or the law wrong – both of which happened in this case. Arbitration awards are one of the most difficult decisions to overturn – it is the reason why the courts could not overturn the decision we received in the Dave Williams case, for which we are grateful.