FOP Letter

We have now received "the letter" from about 40 or 50 different people. We have been aware of its existence for about a week now.

It was sent to us and Shaved before it was ever presented to the FOP Board, and we deleted more than a few references to it for a number of reasons.

First up, we couldn't verify it was an actual letter.

Second, we had no intention of being used by one of the parties involved to bolster their side of the argument that will, almost without a doubt, end up in the courts.

Third, we are in the midst of what will probably be the most brutal contract negotiations in FOP history and we judged that at the moment, the letter didn't serve any purpose except to distract from the ongoing events - a sideshow so to speak.

We expect "the letter" will continue making the rounds throughout districts and units in short order. It's particularly merciless in its criticisms of some guy who heads the organization. We've heard much of it before (immature, self-centered, disrespectful, disorganized, etc.). We've seen next to nothing that dissuades us that any of it is untrue as evidenced by other lawsuits, columns written, complaints at the meetings and confidences shared.

As you read "the letter" (and we're pretty sure you all will within two weeks), you can make your judgements. "Where there's smoke, there's fire." And from where we're sitting and what we've seen, there's a giant fucking blaze burning over on West Washington.

Finally, a Retiree List

Got the FOP Newsletter in the mail today and guess what appears, finally, after an extensive hiatus? A retiree list. And guess the totals on the page-and-a-half spread?

• September 2011 -1 forgotten retiree
• November 2011 - 53 retirees
• December 2011 - 18 retirees
• January 2012 - 66 retirees
• February 2012 - 38 retirees

If our math isn't off, that's 176 retirees and doesn't even cover the March, April and May numbers.

We aren't going to criticize the FOP for not having a retiree list for over 9 months - they've been busy with contract prep stuff, NATO grievances and the like. But we're going to gently suggest that these numbers would have, and still might, make a brilliant accompaniment to the billboard campaign to "Hire More Police."

Billboards?

These people don't live here. They don't vote here. They certainly don't pay any taxes here. So Why are we trying to impress these people? Are we thinking they'll call Rahm and ask him to give us a raise? If so, then hopefully this works:

• World leaders arriving in Chicago for the NATO Summit will be treated to a local controversy during their motorcade rides downtown, thanks to an advertising campaign bankrolled by the police union and timed to embarrass Mayor Rahm Emanuel.

  On Thursday, the Fraternal Order of Police paid to put up giant red billboards on the Kennedy, Dan Ryan and Stevenson expressways that state, “Keep Chicago Safe. Hire More Police Officers.”

  Similar ads are also going up on 54 CTA buses, fifteen rapid transit stations and on six digital screens across the city.

Maybe the money would be better spent trying to directly short circuit these supposed "reforms" in Springfield.

FOP Responds

The FOP responded to the Sun Times story:

• No matter what you read in the Sun Times quoting “off the record” sources, there is no dispute between the FOP and the City regarding upcoming contract negotiations. Our agreement was timely re-opened on March 20, 2012, well within the time limits that apply for modifications that would improve your labor agreement, address the critical issue of manpower, the safety of the public and of police officers, increase your wages and improve officers’ welfare. Under the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act, 5 ILCS 315/7, a party to a collective bargaining agreement must terminate or modify the agreement by giving the other side notice of the intent to terminate or modify the agreement 60 days before the expiration date. Our contract expires June 30. Therefore, any notice before May 1 would have been timely notice. The IPLRA does not require us to give the City notice by March 1.

  However, the labor agreement, Section 28.1, is anything but clear and unambiguous. The agreement provides that “notice of termination” must be given by March 1, 2012. FOP never intended to send a notice of termination. Our labor agreement needs modifications, not termination.

On one hand, they seem to be seeking to alleviate fears. On the other, they seem to admit it's "anything but clear and unambiguous." And we all know how Rahm is going to have his lawyers interpret that.

FOP Meeting? Time for a Motion

There is an FOP Meeting today at noon.

Seeing as how 50 people were shot this weekend despite brand new "crime strategies," contract violations seem to happen on a near daily basis, and the manpower shortages have reached critical levels (levels that can arguably have contributed directly to the critical wounding of one of our brethren,) wouldn't it seem that a "no confidence" vote might be in order for the mayor, the city council and McButchMcGuire's?

It might bring a little more light to an already bad situation.

Confidential To Rich Aguilar

Hi Rich!

Just so you know, people often type in our e-mail address to your forms so they don't have to give a real e-mail address to the FOP log-in screen. That isn't really us writing to you, so when you write back to us critiquing us for being anonymous, you look like an ignoramus.

We have an alternate address we use to send you e-mails and questions, most of which go unanswered for some reason.

Please remember, we gave you guys pretty much free rein in our comment sections last campaign season to tout a whole bunch of promises that seem to have fallen by the wayside. That mistake won't be repeated during your re-election run.

Now please be quiet before we have to reveal to the readers how you guys had an entire website designed for tens of thousands of dollars and then dumped it in favor of another pay site run by a connected cousin of the board who builds websites for a bunch of democratic candidates endorsed by the FOP. What did that cost the membership? $30,000? $45,000? Or more?

Who do you think you are, Mike Madigan? And you guys want to complain about Greg Bella?

FOP Newsletter

Got it in the mail today and two things stand out:

• The retiree listing reappeared! But it only lists the retirees from September and October of last year. Now we realize that there is plenty of stuff to write about, especially coming up on a contract year, but seeing as how November and December are the BIG retirement months and this January was another one, might it be helpful to have this a useful comparison to compare against hiring numbers? Especially when the Department has only hired 50 cops in three years;

And the endorsement list is out:

• Edward Acevedo - State Rep 2nd District
• Mike Madigan - State Rep 22nd District
• Anita Alvarez - Cook County State's Attorney

Seriously? Acevedo has the "*" next to his name noting that he is a cop. He's also an embarrassment to the badge with his off duty shenanigans.

Madigan? Are you fucking kidding us?

And Anita, who ran last time on a platform of locking up police officers.

Those are just the three that stand out in our minds. You know, just because the candidates are running unopposed or are the only ones to show up at the PAC committee meeting doesn't mean we have to give them the seal of approval by default. Unless they've actually done something for Chicago Police Officers and their families, then withholding an endorsement sends a clear message that we aren't happy.

Of course, it'd help if more of us were actually registered to vote, too.

FOP Endorsements.

Has the FOP released a list of 2012 political endorsements yet?

We looked at the site and we're confused by all the bells-and-whistles.

Maybe we're missing it.

McCarthy v FOP President

While it was no "Thrilla in Manila," we'll call it "The Hubbub at the City Club:"

• Chicago Police Supt. Garry McCarthy and the head of the police union got into a verbal shootout Monday over whether there’s a shortage of officers.
  
  McCarthy spoke to the City Club of Chicago before taking questions from the audience and got a tough one from [the] president of the Fraternal Order of Police.
  
  [He] asked how McCarthy could expect to fight crime proactively when there is a shortage of 2,300 officers. Then he asked: “Can you admit the Chicago Police Department has a manpower problem?”
  
  “The answer is no, I can’t do that because I don’t believe it,” McCarthy responded. “Sorry, [dude]. I didn’t want to have these conversations in public.”

And the body shot:

• McCarthy said he is not looking to expand the department’s payroll any time soon.
  
  “Quite frankly, I don’t think it’s a fair thing to do to the taxpayers at this point,” he said to rousing applause. Then he fired a shot at [...] the FOP president: “[Dude], why aren’t you clapping?”

Someone is rallying support for a contentious contract negotiation, and for whatever reason, the FOP president is attacking the political appointee, a guy who can't remove half-assed commanders from their spots, a guy with as many self-control issues as a tweaking meth addict.

The focus should be on the guy pulling McCarthy's strings, not McCarthy. He got in a good shot and it's going to leave a mark. Rahm is controlling the debate already and that's not a good thing.

FOP Sues ACLU

Well, not really, but we liked the way the headline looked. We'd pay to see that actually happen. In the meantime:

• The Fraternal Order of Police filed a legal motion Thursday with the ultimate goal of dismissing an ACLU lawsuit that accused the city of Chicago of depriving some inner-city neighborhoods of adequate police protection.
  
  If a judge grants the union’s motion to intervene, the FOP plans to initially ask that the law firm of Sidley Austin LLP be disqualified from assisting the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois and, ultimately, that the case be dismissed.
  
  “It’s horrible public policy if a single chancery judge is allowed to determine how the police department operates in the field and how they’re made up,” FOP lawyer Paul Geiger said. “That’s madness. It would be unlike any other big city in the United States.”

If Shortshanks or his predecessors had actually redrawn the beats and districts semi-regularly according to crime trends and population shifts, we wouldn't be having the discussion today.

But the truly amazing part of this lawsuit is that the ACLU has it all wrong. Where was SOS deployed? Mobile Strike Force operated where? Targeted Response? The "Jump Out" boys? Housing? Every large citywide unit, regardless of crime patterns, spent the majority of its time in the communities the ACLU insists are under-served.

FOP Sues Sun Times

Late yesterday:

• The Fraternal Order of Police is suing both the city and the Sun-Times over the publishing of photo lineups that included the names and faces of police officers with former Mayor Richard Daley’s nephew and his friends.

  The Sun-Times published the photos in Monday’s newspaper with an article about how the lineups were conducted. The lineups included several police officers, then-Mayor Daley’s nephew, Richard J. Vanecko, and two of Vanecko’s friends.

  [...] The paper also published the names of the officers in the lineup, along with their height, weight, hair color, eye color and dates of birth.

  The lawsuit, filed Monday, alleges the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) had reason to expect the city would not release the photos and the Sun-Times would not publish them. It also claims the city was in breach of contract because of a shared collective-bargaining agreement, and that the city should have prevented the Sun-Times from publishing the photos.

Once again, idiots in charge of the Department who never read or lived by a contract, making decisions in violation of that agreement and as a result, may end up costing the city hundreds of thousands of dollars.

FOP Reads the Blog

Trustee Rich King left a lengthy response in the "Buses to Springfield" posting. We're giving it its own thread since it contains a lot of valuable information:

• The bill authored by Rep. Cross from Oswego is nothing more than an attempt to circumvent the law that was passed by the legislature in Springfield forcing the city to live up to its obligations and bring the Chicago Police Pension Fund up to 90% in 30 years. Since its passage the city has introduced several bills attempting to water the bill down by extending the 90% target date to 50 years and failing in that attempt 40 years. Some of the city's legal minds have found a loophole that renders the law ineffective if the pension board does not request that the city's sales tax revenue be withheld if the city does not provide the funding that an appointed pension actuary says is necessary to reach that 90% funding level.
  
  Rep. Cross who's district is in Kendall and Will County has no Fire and Police agencies in his district that will be effected by this bill (HB 3827), yet he had chosen to champion this cause. He claims that it would be in the best interest of the Police Pension to have the Mayor of Chicago be in control of how our funds are invested.... Has he never heard of the former Mayor's Nephew by the Name of Vaneko. All the Mayor's appointed Trustee's voted to give the Mayor's Nephew over 15 million which is now lost.
  Over all the city pension fund I believe the mayor's Nephew got over 62 million which again was soon lost. Is Rep. too young to remember former Mayor Harold Washington's attempt to use the Police and Fire Pension funds to fund low income housing. Does anyone doubt what a financial disaster that would have been ?
  
  If the Mayor had a permanent 4-3 majority that would have been passed and our fund would be in even more trouble. Rep. Cross wants you to give control he says to the Mayor who will better invest our funds, this being the same Mayor who has such a short memory that he can't even remember his involvement, as President O'Bama's Chief of Staff, in the disastrous Cylindra scandal that cost the American Taxpayers over 500 million ! yes Rep. Cross this is the man that needs to be in charge of our Pension Funds.
  
  Who are you kidding Rep. Cross from Oswego. I am sure down the road we will find out what kind of deal has been struck between you the republican House Leader and our new Mayor, O'Bama's former Chief of staff. How does the republican National committee feel about your cozy deal with Rahm ?
  
  FOP members politicians only fear our votes. We must show them that we are a force (voting Block) to be reckoned with. I can not stress the importance of defeating this bill. This bill will influence many things including future cost of living increases. If there is any way that you can get on these buses down to Springfield to show our strength I urge you to do so, even if you have to miss a day of work on your side job or a Dr. appointment etc. If not instead of showing these politicians our strength we show them our weakness.
  
  To make it as convenient as we can to get you to come out and stand with us, we have arranged to have a bus leave from the 22nd District at 8:00 am. Please call FOP at 312 733-7776 and say you will stand with us down in Springfield, We need to put on a show of strength. Your Pension hangs in the balance.
  Rick King
  FOP Trustee

Sign up ladies and gents.

Documentation

A couple of comments drawing interest:

• We're being denied comp time due to "manpower shortages". Bosses are claiming some districts may go down to 2 officers allowed CU a night. Anyone else care to weigh in?

And this:

• what is wrong with the 20th District?
  
  
  
  The District Commander got caught lying to her troops about taking days off. She told them that HQ demanded BFD or P days to get a day off on a weekend. The affected POs called the FOP and confronted her to see the order. She backed down and let the Time due work. There was no order.

Unfortunately, we're seeing and hearing a lot more of this stuff going on. Each and every instance of it occurring MUST be brought to the attention of the FOP. The City and specifically, ignorant gold stars (but we repeat ourselves) are going to try to circumvent the contract more and more as manpower gets tighter and McCarthy attempts more "reorganization." The only way to address the majority of problems is by redistributing manpower in some way, as seen with the MSF/TRU people. It's permissible by the contract since people voluntarily gave up their rights, but the rest of the Department didn't.



Don't get run over.

EEOC Lawsuit

Thomas J. Pleines v FOP Lodge 7.

An interesting read.

It certainly doesn't paint a flattering picture of anyone involved.

FOP Changes?

Who's got the scoop? We heard a few of the old regime's field reps might be headed out of the office. According to the by-laws, the inside spots aren't tied to elected positions. It's at the direction of the president if we recall correctly.

FOP Calls Out Captain

Over on the "Current Updates" section:

• On 16 March 2011, our Bill # SB1874 was scheduled to be heard before the Senate Pension Committee in Springfield. This bill, if passed, would allow for at large elections for the Chicago Police Pension Board.The bill would pool the three representatives of active rank Lt’s and Above, Sgt’s, and those below the rank of Sgt. Retirees would retain their one representative. It would also require that all three of these elected members would be assigned full time to the Pension Board.
  
  Opponents of this legislation were all Sergeants and above including: Sgt’s Association; Lt’s Association; Captain’s Association; Latin American Police Association representative; PBPA; and a host of others. As this issue has been introduced before and was opposed then by some of the same individuals, their opposition was expected. What was not expected was the level of indignation towards those of us below the rank of Sergeant by their “chosen spokesperson” Capt. Mark Buslick. He began with a several minute long oration about himself and his educational background which caused many in the room to wonder where he was going with that. They didn’t have to wonder long as Buslick then went into a tirade about the lack of necessary intellect of those whom the FOP represents. Buslick felt that those who attain rank in the Police Department are the ones who are qualified to serve on the Pension Board. Buslick extolled on the vast number of reasons for opposing this bill and when asked by a Senate Member of the Committee to give him two examples he said that if a captain were to appear before the Pension Board seeking a disability pension and there was a patrolman on the Board who had a grudge against him, the Patrolman would vote against the Captains disability. When asked for a second reason by the same Senator, Buslick could not think of another at that time.
  
  So the affect of his testimony was that even though the ranks of Lieutenant and above who number about 260 have one vote on the Board, and the Sergeants who number about 1200 and have one vote on the Board, and all those below the rank of Sergeant who number about 11,200 and have one vote on the Board is fair because they are smart enough to run the Board as it needs to be and the FOP shouldn’t be asking for the change because it may impact on those of superior intellect.
  
  We would like to thank Buslick for his testimony because although we did not feel as though we had the votes to get this out of Committee, the Committee Members recognized the virus that was his testimony.
  
  One can be sure that his testimony as to the lack of intellect in non-white shirts is not adopted by the vast majority, but the fact that these organizations used this person as the channel for their opposition is inexcusable and they should be embarrassed. As much of our morale problem in this Department is often attributed to differences between management and non-management personnel, the vile testimony of this one person is proof that we have a long way to go in addressing that problem.

Very interesting. The City's method of "divide and conquer" continues to pay dividends. And the captain, who received quite a bit of support from readers here when he got railroaded for protecting his facility and doing the right thing concerning overly aggressive media trolls, seems to have some explaining to do.

Shields' First Move

A good first move. A safe move, but a good move nonetheless:

• New Fraternal Order of Police President Michael Shields hopes to press Mayor-elect Rahm Emanuel to protect police officers’ pensions and “hold his feet to the fire” on a campaign pledge to hire more cops.
  
  Shields, 33, said he collected 54 percent of the vote in balloting among current and retired officers to take over as head of the police union. He beat four other candidates in voting announced Friday.
  
  Shields also said he hopes to meet with Emanuel soon to discuss qualifications for the next police superintendent.

It can't hurt to keep Rahm's promises on the front burner. It also sounds sensible to want a voice in who the next superintendent is. After all, we've got to work with that person for the next four or more years. There's going to be plenty of opportunities shortly to lob bombs and brickbats at the political order seeing as how Rahm is (hopefully) going to upset the apple cart.

Shields Wins FOP Presidency

Word coming in the Mike Shields has won the FOP Presidency.

No word on the other offices yet.

Anyone have totals?

UPDATE: Winners as follows -

• President - Michael K. Shields
• 1st Vice President - Bill Dougherty
• 2nd Vice President - Frank J. DiMaria
• 3rd Vice President - Danny Gorman
• Recording Secretary - Sidney Davis
• Financial Secretary - Rich Aguilar
• Treasurer - John Capparelli
• Sergeant at Arms - William Burns
• Sergeant at Arms - James Moriarty, Jr.
• Sergeant at Arms - Daniel J. Shields
• Trustee - Dean Angelo, Jr.
• Trustee - Harold Brown
• Trustee - Michael Burke
• Trustee - Terry Collins
• Trustee - Denis E. Doherty
• Trustee - Patrick Duckhorn
• Trustee - Fernando Flores
• Trustee - Anna Hanley
• Trustee - Allen J. Jaglowski
• Trustee - Rick King
• Trustee - John J. Lipka
• Trustee - Tim Moriarty
• Trustee - Timothy Murphy
• Trustee - Ron Shogren
• Trustee - Tom Skelly
• Trustee - Daniel G. Trevino
• Trustee - Michael Underwood

Totals here at this link. Congratulations to all the winners.