Advoken's Blog

Some people believe the clout of the police unions is too powerful and that they should be abolished, or at least weakened. Is that a way to begin reforming policing? No way!

There’s a belief that politicians of both parties are scared stiff of retaliation by the police union if they support reforms. Others complain that errant officers too often are protected from disciplinary action due to the existence of unions that use the union contract to protect unnecessarily violent officers.

The police unions have indeed shown great political strength, and the Republican Party has largely been the beneficiary, just as that party has become the darling of the National Rifle Association. Yet, the laws that are passed are done by politicians – not by union lobbyists – and politicians need to recognize their obligation to develop legislation that benefits all of the citizenry.

Let’s first remember one thing: police officers are workers and all workers deserve the right to self-organization and the right to unionize!

Secondly, the union’s obligation is to protect its members. That’s a principle purpose of unionizing: “one for all, all for one!” Thus, if a police officer (i.e. worker) is disciplined or discharged, a union leader’s obligation is to protect that worker and to insure that his or her rights are protected. The union must assure that the charges against an officer are adequate to permit the discipline he/she may be facing; they must assure that the Department following proper procedures.

I spent 35 years as either an active local union member, a union representative or as a national union official and was called upon to represent many workers who were disciplined. There were some members who I truly didn’t like and might have done questionable actions, but I represented them as best I could. They deserved to see their rights protected, even if they were eventually fired or disciplined; but the more important reason was because in representing that worker I was protecting the right of future workers against being unfairly disciplined.

It’s also important to realize that the union does NOT hire the individual worker; rather, It’s the employer, or in the case of the police, it’s the municipal employer. Thus, if the department hires a rogue officer, we in the union are obligated to represent that officer. The problem begins in the recruiting, hiring and training of the officer – and that’s a management responsibility.

Let’s then get past this idea to abolish the right of police officers to have a union and let’s see what can be done in the future.

A lot of change needs to begin with the management of the police force, the municipal government, the chief and the top supporting officers. The passage of laws that provide for more community-oriented policing with sufficient funding is a must. Further legislation such as banning chokeholds and unnecessary use of tear gas and other near-lethal crowd control measures is needed. Those chosen to be lieutenants and captains and deputy chiefs must be men and women with an understanding of community needs and must be people who reject the old, punitive ways of policing. The Department itself must foster a more collaborative spirit with the community within which it serves – rather than viewing citizens as the enemy.

Strong management, then, is a must.

As a union representative, I found it was much easier dealing with a management that may be tough, as long as such toughness is accompanied by consistency, honest and straight-forward practices. The toughest manager to deal with is one who is nice to you one day and an unreasonable SOB the next.

Now is not the time to so restrict police unions that they will be unable to fully represent their members; if the unions are gone, you can bet the quality of police work will drop. Look what happened in Wisconsin when Gov. Scott Walker and the Republican legislature took away collective bargaining rights for public employees, including teachers. Scores of teachers fled the ranks, drawing early pensions or moving to other jobs; teachers’ colleges reported drop in students who wanted careers in teaching and the quality of public education suffered.

Bill Fletcher, Jr., author, talk show host and longtime unionist and civil rights activist writes: “If one were to eliminate all police or law enforcement unions tomorrow, the problems that are being faced with law enforcement today would barely change. Why?  Because the law enforcement unions are not the problem; the history, culture and practices of the U.S. law enforcement system are the problem.” See In These Times article, June 12, 2020)

It is my hope that the current public demonstrations against police brutality will prompt the leadership of the police unions to recognize the need to broaden their goals, to realize that continued hardline resistance to change may result in the public demanding the curbing of police union rights. That means accepting the responsibility of supporting reasonable restraints to the use of undue physical force to subdue recalcitrant offenders; that means dropping the “blue line” mentality that makes it impossible to rout out the bad cops.

Most of this change will have to come from within the union itself, from members who join together to vote out the old line leaders who foster such an “us vs. them” attitude with citizens.

Police unions have in their power to do much to lessen today’s current episodes of violence. It’s my hope they will do just that. – Ken Germanson, June 16, 2020