Star Ledger Editorial on Arbitration Misleads the Public and Maligns Police Keith Dunn, Executive Vice President New Jersey State PBA The Star Ledger’s editorial on binding arbitration was among the most misinformed expressions of opinion we have encountered in recent years. Without referencing a single fact regarding the arbitration process, the Ledger managed to both mislead the public and insult police officers at the same time. If the Ledger had actually done any homework on this they would learn that arbitration exists because police officers are not permitted to strike. In order to ensure fairness in the negotiation process arbitration is offered as a final solution when contract talks break down. What the Ledger doesn’t say is that very few contracts are decided by an arbitrator and that most are negotiated without acrimony. From what the Ledger and municipal leaders say you would think that hundreds of contracts are rammed down taxpayer throats by arbitration every year. In fact, arbitration awards are rare. When well more than 90% of contracts are settled without arbitration for many years, something in fact must be right with the process. Yes, contracts negotiated since 2010, with and without arbitration, have average increases of less than 2% a year but it is phony logic to equate the arbitration law with that result. The reality of the 2% tax levy cap, the economy and cuts in State aid to municipalities have led unions and local governments to find clever ways to avoid more layoffs that have decimated our police departments across the State. Our locals are prepared and responsible when it comes to the impact of negotiations on preserving public safety and staffing levels. Plus what an arbitrator can award under this law is not a 2% per person per year raise. The formula in the law that will expire establishes a formula that essentially provides increases that means, when pension and benefits payments are included, an officer will actually be taking home less pay than before they got their “raise.” Of course the Ledger didn’t explain that or do any real math on the real overall impact of the law to develop their opinion. Establishing a permanent cap on arbitration awards when coupled with recent State administrative rulings give a local government zero reasons to negotiate a contract. The process is now rigged, to use a word from the editorial, in favor of the employer who can simply refuse to negotiate for as long as they like and then run to an arbitrator who has no ability to make sure the process is fair. That is not what arbitration is for and not what the sponsors of the arbitration cap intended in 2010. Finally, the Ledger’s remark about law enforcement being a job that “does not require a college education” is downright insulting and irrelevant to the arbitration law. A victim who needs an officer to protect them isn’t asking for the officer’s Ivy League credentials. A bullet shot at a cop can’t be deflected with a Master’s Degree. The Ledger, who once compared driving a truck to being as dangerous as being a police officer, seems to have no problem demeaning the men and women of law enforcement. It’s a shame they can’t put that energy into actually researching a complicated process for which they appear to have such a strong opinion.
Posted on: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 18:18:35 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015