Archived Labor

Definition Of Arbitration

Arbitration is a method of dispute resolution used as an alternative to litigation. It is commonly designated in collective agreements between employers and employees as the way to resolve disputes. The parties select a neutral third party (an arbiter) to hold a formal or informal hearing on the disagreement. The arbiter then issues a decision binding on the parties. Both federal and state law governs the practice of arbitration. While the Federal Arbitration Act, by its own terms, is not applicable to employment contracts, federal courts are increasingly applying the law in labor disputes. Thirty-five states have adopted the Uniform Arbitration Act as state law. Thus, the arbitration agreement and decision of the arbiter may be enforceable under state and federal law.

Quiet Long Enough

Your city’s police officers and firefighters have sat quietly while the mayor and council members launched a public attack against Ballot Question 2A. We had hoped their arguments would be fair and truthful to the public. Unfortunately that has not been the case. They have used their positions to misrepresent and distort the issues involved in the proposed charter amendment. We can no longer remain silent.

7,000 of your fellow voters put Ballot Question 2A on November’s ballot. A charter amendment that provides firefighters and police officers the right to meet as equals with city officials on working conditions. It provides a positive channel of communications to work together in the interest of our citizens. Collective bargaining will create a proven and stable platform for communication between the parties. This platform will not be blown about by the winds of political and administrative change and will create a strong partnership between the citizens of Longmont and their public safety employees. Our goal is a productive relationship with city administration.

This is not about police officers and firefighters forming a union. The associations representing our two groups have existed for over 20 years. Over 97% of all eligible police and fire employees are members. Refusal by the city to meet and discuss issues of concern has cost our citizens considerable tax dollars. This must end. Until now we have never asked our citizens for formal recognition. City administration will not work with us unless we are officially recognized. We propose a system of fairness to all.

2A is about official recognition and leveling the playing field in favor of the taxpayer. It prohibits strikes and work stoppages. Those are tools found in the private sector when the parties reach an impasse in negotiations. The amendment was written to strictly prohibit such behavior. As a result a fair system of conflict resolution was incorporated. That system is interest arbitration.

Arbitration is a last resort to impasse. 2A is written to make certain the elected representatives of our citizens are the sole voice in determining who will be deciding issues of impasse. The amendment is in accordance with Colorado constitutional law, decided by Colorado Supreme Court decision SC-9985 - Commerce City v FOP requiring the elected representatives of the citizens to select arbitrators. In adherence with that decision the amendment's Section 15.8 c states: "The City Council shall create a permanent panel of at least five (5) arbitrators from those qualified persons who apply." Across Colorado this system has proven to work efficiently and effectively.

2A mandates the arbitrator consider established past practices of the city, the interest and welfare of the public, the lawful authority of the City, and the finances of the City when making a decision. The arbitrator is prohibited from making an award that would be financially unreasonable to the citizens of Longmont. Arbitration forces the parties to sharpen a bargaining position to one that is more reasonable than they otherwise might adopt. Studies show that nationally cities prevail in arbitration 70% of the time. That is why issues of impasse rarely go to an arbitrator. They are normally negotiated out between the parties in good faith bargaining.

Section 15.9 of the amendment includes citizens in the arbitration process. Something that will be unique to Longmont. Nowhere else in Colorado do citizens have a voice on issues of impasse in police and fire contract negotiations. We want a partnership with the citizens of our community and believe they should be involved. We felt it absolutely necessary our citizens be included in this process.

The opposition claims that the amendment’s Section 15.17 creates “two floors” in which pay and benefits could never be reduced. This is completely unfounded and a gross misstatement of fact. Pay or benefits could go up or down. Section 15.17 only reaffirms a base for first and subsequent negotiations. The section also dictates that wages and conditions of employment cannot be unilaterally changed without discussions. In accordance with Section 15.13 (b)(21) the negotiated contract language itself can include re-openers for emergency provisions. The amendment simply mandates discussion between the parties before such reductions can take place. That is only fair and appropriate.

For every argument the opposition has given against this amendment our opponents offer no examples or any creditable evidence to support their claims. With as many cities as there are with collective bargaining in Colorado, there are certainly plenty to choose from if they were to exist. The fact is examples that would support such claims do not exist. They expect the voters to vote against this amendment just because they say so. That’s an unreasonable request of the voters.

For the last 30 years, time & time again, whenever police or fire collective bargaining has faced the voters across this country the local government has come out strongly against it. Always for the same reasons we see today. Always without examples to support their arguments. Every time you hear or read opposition arguments ask yourself where are the examples? If they do exist we haven’t seen them, and our challenge to our opponents is bring them forth if you have them. The question will be met with silence because there are none. We ask you to vote yes on 2A.

Firefighter's Guest Opinion

Your police officers and firefighters have watched with dismay and disappointment as our mayor and members of council have launched a public attack on Ballot Question 2A and your public safety servants. We had hoped that though disagreements may arise, these officials would not resort to half-truths and misrepresentation of the facts. Your firefighters and police officers serve daily with courage and honor and we deserve better from our elected & appointed officials. Local politicians have used their positions to distort the issues involved in the proposed charter amendment and we are saddened by their less than honorable actions. Your firefighters and police officers will remain silent no longer.

7,000 of your fellow citizens put Question 2A on November’s ballot. 2A is a city charter amendment that will establish a stable platform for communication between your firefighters & police officers and your elected & appointed officials. 2A provides an effective solution to mounting tensions brought about by our local official's refusal to discuss matters of concern with our public safety officers. Behind the scenes, an opposition group has formed under the guise Longmont Citizens for Good Public Policy. This group would have us all believe it's a grassroots citizen movement opposed to 2A, but with a little research we find it consists only of Councilman Block, Mayor Pirnack, and former Mayor Stoeker yet again putting forth calculated misinformation and half-truths. They rail against a tested and proven solution yet offer no other alternative, bar the status-quo.

Longmont's firefighters and police officers seek a partnership with the citizens we so proudly serve. We seek bilateral communication on issues important to all parties so as to resolve conflict and capitalize on opportunity. We seek positive change in our community. This amendment is not about your police officers and firefighters forming a union, as local "power-brokers" would have you to believe. Our associations have been in existence for over 20 years. Combined, our associations represent 97% of the rank & file members of the Longmont Fire and Police Departments. This amendment is about communication, participation, and respect. It is about giving your firefighters and police officers a voice in matters that affect their welfare and safety; the same way in which thousands of cities across our nation, many across the Front Range, have seen fit to do.

Elected and appointed officials would have you believe they are battling this amendment on your behalf; simply not true. They perceive the passage of this amendment as an attack on their power and authority, forgetting that power and authority in our democracy ultimately resides with the people, and not with a few privileged officials. Their attitude and rings clear in a comment recently made by our mayor during an August council session in which she suggested that Longmont is not even a democracy.

Your firefighters and police officers understand fully that the authority and power in our community rests with the good people of this city. This is why we have come to you with our request, a request to form a partnership; a partnership insulated from the often fickle and volatile winds of political and administrative change. We seek improved relations with local officials via honest and open communication. We are confident that sound reason and judgment will prevail over our opposition’s tactics of negativity, fear, and uncertainty. We ask you to read the proposed charter amendment and give it your full consideration. 2A is fair to our firefighters and police officers, and good for our community.

Jason Broken Leg
Longmont Professional Firefighters Association

Summary Of The Charter Amendment

This Amendment to the City Charter of Longmont establishes collective bargaining with binding arbitration by impasse panel to resolve issues between the City and its Police Employees and its Fire Employees. The Police Employees or Fire Employees and the City Administration will meet and agree on most issues. If there is an issue the parties cannot resolve on their own, then that issue can be presented to an Impasse Panel consisting of an Arbitrator and two Longmont citizens chosen from a panel appointed by the City Council. The Impasse Panel will resolve the issue in conflict. The Amendment will not raise taxes or increase City expenditures.

Since Colorado has no labor act governing public employees, each political subdivision must develop its own act under which it can collectively bargain with its employees. The Charter Amendment extends the right of collective bargaining to its police and fire employees. The Amendment enacts the rules under which that process would be managed in Longmont in the event the police and fire employees chose to exercise their right to collectively bargain with the City.

The protection of the public health, safety, and welfare demands that Police employees and Fire employees not be allowed to strike or engage in any work stoppage, slowdown, or mass absenteeism. This Amendment prohibits all such actions. This necessary prohibition does not, however, require the denial to such employees the right to organize, the right to be represented by an employee organization of their choice, and the right to bargain collectively. This Charter Amendment will allow police and fire employees and the city to openly discuss pay, benefits and working conditions. The goal of such discussions is to reach a mutually beneficial agreement and to ratify that agreement in the form of a written contract.

This Amendment allows police officers and firefighters to collectively secure terms and conditions of employment through the good faith negotiation of a legal contract. Negotiated agreements ensure more fiscal responsibility by managers, which ultimately benefits the taxpayer. This is necessary for the type of monetary accountability and responsibility the taxpayers feel they deserve. This Amendment will not increase the expenditures or the cost of doing business for the City. The City cannot commit money that is not there.

This Amendment to the City Charter promotes enhanced morale and basic levels of self-determination. It allows police and fire employees to participate in employment-related discussions and offer insightful feedback on issues that affect and protect both their future and their working conditions. National studies have shown with a collective bargaining agreement in place retention of experienced officers improves, and so does the ability to attract experienced officers from other agencies. Staffing will stabilize and the citizens will benefit.

Police and fire collective bargaining is not unique. Negotiated contracts are the normal way of doing business in the police and fire professions in many cities. There are literally thousands of police and fire labor contracts in place across this country. Most cities rely on these contracts to plan with certainty their annual budgets. Employees’ wages and benefits are secured and management rights are defined.

This amendment will ensure more fiscal responsibility by managers, which ultimately benefits the taxpayer. This amendment is necessary for the type of monetary accountability and responsibility the taxpayers deserve. A negotiated agreement will allow the City to plan ahead. For the duration of the contract all costs are fixed. This allows the City to properly balance its budgets.

Link To Collective Bargaining Charter Amendment

As a result of the public discussion which took place Wednesday 08/04/04 between the FOP/LPOA Vice-President Mike Violette and Longmont Mayor Julie Pirnack there were many requests for our web site address and a link to the Charter Amendment. Anyone wishing to download a copy of the charter amendment should simply click their mouse on the following link. The document is in word format and can be downloaded or printed directly from the web site. To our visitors accessing this link we encourage you to contact us (Executive_Board@Longmontpolice.com ) with any questions on this matter. We will be more than glad to answer them, or make a presentation to your group on this important ballot issue. Click here: Collective Bargaining Amendment For Police & Fire Employees. Anyone visiting here can access our site map page from the above link bar to review various articles posted on this web site concerning our history to this point.

A Failure To Communicate

A question was asked by a citizen at a recent public discussion involving the Mayor and our Vice-President about why our two sides have never been able to meet about issues and problems of mutual concern. This is not the first time this question has been posed. It will not be the last. We hear it in our contacts in the community frequently.

We have written or emailed the Mayor, City Council, and the City Manager several times going back to January of 2003 offering to meet formally or informally on matters of concern and dispute. We did so in an effort to resolve or address issues of disagreement. Those requests were rejected or met with silence. This lack of response and inability to meet as equals has in part placed us all where we are today. That is unfortunate.

On August 17^th we tried again to solicit a meeting. Recent actions and statements from council reflect a polarization of the issues concerning the collective bargaining amendment. We hoped this meeting would relax the growing tensions between the parties, and reduce what has unfortunately become an adversarial relationship. We felt it would benefit the community to meet as the elected representatives of the employees and the elected representatives of the citizens to discuss areas of disagreement and concern.

We did not expect, nor envision the meeting would result in any agreement. That was not the purpose. It was hoped the proposed meeting would be the first step in promoting a better understanding and relationship between both sides, and possibly lay groundwork for working together in the future. We hoped council would accept our latest offer.

This request was made in the interest of the growing number of voters who desire a positive and productive relationship between the City and its fire and police employees. Once again our request was rejected. As a result we are certain our citizens will again ask themselves our biggest question. Why?

Ballot Question 2A is about problem solving and compromise. It is good for our City. A large and growing number of voters agree and support this ballot question. They understand that at the end of the day the real winner will be the community.

Charter Amendment Facts For Citizens

The LPOA &The LPFFA

Refusal on the part of City Administration to meet or discuss with us issues of dispute or misunderstanding has created a serious employee relations issue in the most essential services a City provides to its citizens. Public safety services. This must change. We, your public servants seek a partnership with the citizens of Longmont. We believe we CAN work well with appointed and elected officials in the interest all of Longmont's citizens. We only need the opportunity. This amendment will create that opportunity.

Our two public safety organizations have been representing police employees and firefighters in Longmont for over twenty years. We are committed to improving the working conditions of police and fire employees, and the safety of those we serve through education, legislation, information, community involvement, and employee representation. We are professional police and fire labor organizations committed to the promotion of our profession and protecting the interests of our membership and the citizens of Longmont. LPOA and LPFFA work together in areas of common interest to promote public safety.

For years City Administration has refused to meet and speak with our associations on working conditions and other critical issues of employment. In the past, when issues of unfairness, or violations of employment practices by City Administration have occurred, we have been left with no choice but to involve ourselves in costly lawsuits. This is not the best way of dealing with these issues, but City Administration left us with no other choice. Collective bargaining promotes a better way to resolve issues and prevent this drain on taxpayer dollars. It will ensure that both sides work together in an atmosphere of mutual respect. Our intent and motivation is to improve Law Enforcement and Fire Services to our community.

We, your Police and Fire Employees, are seeking your help in amending the City Charter to allow us to negotiate with City Administration on working conditions, benefits and wages for Police and Fire Employees.

The amendment specifies the following:

No strikes, slow downs or sickouts.
Public Safety employees and City Administration must bargain in good faith.
Binding Interest Arbitration only on issues that are in conflict.
Local citizen involvement in the arbitration process.
Costly lawsuits of the past can be avoided.
Conflict can be resolved.
City Council appoints the arbitrators & citizens of the impasse panel.

This Amendment:

Will not create any new taxes.
Will not create layoffs of police employees, fire employees or other city employees.
Will not cut police department, fire department or other City services to the community.
Will improve communications between City Administration and its public safety employees.
Will help to resolve problems prior to them affecting the community.
Will allow public safety management to do their jobs.
Will help improve the morale of the police & fire departments.
Will attract quality police officer and firefighter candidates.
Will help make Longmont competitive in wages and benefits with other similar sized front-range communities.
Will promote retention of experienced police employees and firefighters.
Will allow for a proper and binding grievance procedure, that both sides must follow.

What You The Citizen Can Do?

The Longmont Police Officers’ Association & The Longmont Professional Firefighters’ Association appreciate your time and interest in this issue. It is important to us as public safety employees, and we need your help in making this happen. If you want to help in any way, please email us at Executive_Board@Longmontpolice.com

You Can Help:

I. Vote! It is the most important aspect of this process. We hope you vote yes to allow us to negotiate with the city and resolve these issues.

II. Become involved. We always appreciate it when citizens become involved in issues that will improve law enforcement and fire services.

III. Personal Endorsements. Contact us if you would like to show your support by posting a yard sign or displaying a bumper sticker.

IV. Volunteer. Contact us if you would like to assist us in this campaign to improve Public Safety in Longmont.

V. Donations. Any donations for this cause are greatly appreciated. You can mail them to LPOA, PO Box 1274, Longmont, Co 80501.

VI. Get the word Out. Talk with your friends and neighbors about this issue.

Click on this link to see the Collective Bargaining Charter Amendment For Police & Fire Employees. If you have questions, feel free to ask us. We wrote the Amendment!

Throw It At The Wall & See What Sticks!

Among many false and hollow arguments being made by those opposed to the charter amendment is that somehow it will increase city expenditures and put intolerable pressure on city finances. This has to be the biggest red herring of the arguments fabricated against this amendment. Another scare tactic trumpeted by those who offer NO examples of their outrageous claim. In fact there are many examples of just the opposite.

Two recent police labor contracts were just negotiated in front-range cities where they have been experiencing financial shortfalls. In both the City of Boulder and the City of Aurora contract negotiations resulted in police officers receiving a 0% pay increase for 2005. The officers preserved their step-pay and some benefit enhancements to their current contracts. These settlements are reflective of the financial status of those cities and the fairness of negotiations and arbitration.

Englewood is in arbitration with the city’s final best offer being a 0% pay increase for 2005. It is anticipated the arbitrator will favor the city’s position. Contract negotiations between the City of Denver and its police officers have a .085% final pay offer in front of an arbitrator. Pueblo just completed their contract with a 4% 2005 pay increase for its officers.

In Longmont the teachers union just settled for a .7% increase with preservation of step-pay. Earlier this year both the Denver Sheriff's FOP and the Denver Firefighter's Unions re-opened their current contracts with the city and negotiated their pay increases downward to assist that city in its financial problems. A re-opener clause would be part of any negotiated Longmont agreement with its police and fire employees.

These are examples of reality. Not the fabrication of someone who would have you believe collective bargaining does not work. Negotiations and arbitration do not favor any one side in collective bargaining. They favor reality and the best interests of both sides to any negotiated agreement. Collective bargaining is about problem solving and compromise.

We have said time and time again that although collective bargaining will allow us to negotiate wages and benefits it is not a panacea for a compensation package. It does not magically make more money appear into the City’s’ Budget, General Fund, Coffers, etc. No one should assume that wages and benefits would automatically go up with collective bargaining. Collective bargaining will not automatically increase the expenditures or the cost of doing business for the City. The City certainly cannot commit money that is not there. Collective bargaining will not raise taxes; that is a decision made by City Council or voter ballot, not binding arbitration or an impasse panel.

On those rare occasions when an issue of impasse is submitted to arbitration an arbitrator shall consider established past practices of the city, the interests and welfare of the public, the lawful authority of the City, and the finances of the City. The arbitrator cannot make an award that would be financially unreasonable. As a master of fairness and equity, a professional arbitrator is put off by extreme arguments and overbearing demands.

Arbitration forces parties to sharpen a bargaining position to one that is more reasonable than they otherwise might adopt. In all candor, City representatives who bring a fair and reasonable position to interest arbitration almost always prevail. That is why issues of impasse rarely go to an arbitrator. They are negotiated out between the parties in good faith bargaining.

Ask yourself when you hear or read the opposition arguments; where are the examples? Our challenge is bring them forth if you have them. Your question will be met with silence because they have no examples. NONE! ZERO! ZILCH!! Their tactics like those used in any other smear campaign are “throw it at the wall and see what sticks”. Tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.

These are the tactics of those who have no valid argument, and are simply afraid of losing power. These are the tactics of politicians who have run political campaigns and fine tuned distortion and smear. They are not the tactics we are comfortable with. They are the tactics that upset the average voter who seeks the truth. We are not politicians. We deal in truth and justice, and that's the only way we know how to conduct a campaign.

A Challenge To The Opposition!!

Whenever this issue of collective bargaining for firefighters and police officers has come up elsewhere, one argument heard from opponents is that it will increase city expenditures and put intolerable pressure on city finances. Another argument heard is that arbitration is somehow unfair to the citizens. These are false and hollow claims. They are scare tactics trumpeted by those who can offer NO examples to support their position. On the other hand there are many examples of just the opposite.

For example two recent police labor contracts were just negotiated in front-range cities where they have been experiencing financial shortfalls. In both the City of Boulder and the City of Aurora contract negotiations resulted in police officers receiving a 0% pay increase for 2005. In Aurora the arbitrator upheld the City’s need for employee furlough days without pay. The police union wasn’t happy, but that was the decision of the arbitrator. These settlements are reflective of the financial status of those cities and the fairness of negotiations and arbitration.

Englewood police are currently in arbitration with a ruling anticipated this week. The City of Englewood's final best offer being a 0% pay increase for 2005. It is anticipated the arbitrator will favor the city’s position. Contract negotiations between the City of Denver and its police officers have the city’s .085% final pay offer at impasse with arbitration coming in early October. The City of Denver has proposed a 4% pay REDUCTION in year one, a 2% pay increase in year 2 and a 3% pay increase in year three of the contract. Due to revenue shortfalls In Commerce City the FOP and the city negotiated a 0.3% increase for 2005.

On the other hand in cities where finances are better we find that Pueblo just completed their contract with a 4% 2005 pay increase for its officers. Greeley police are in the third year of a contract with a 3.5% increase for 2005. These were good faith negotiated raises that the City could afford to give because of improved financial conditions.

Even more revealing is that late last year both the Denver Sheriff's FOP and the Denver Firefighter's Unions re-opened their current contracts at their city’s request and negotiated their pay increases downward to assist that city in its financial problems. A re-opener clause would be part of any negotiated Longmont agreement with its police and fire employees.

In Northern Colorado the citizens of Greeley, Boulder and most recently Fort Collins have extended this right to their public safety employees. You have not and will not see this system putting pressure on the city finances in any of these or other cities. That simply does not happen. Whether these examples were good or bad for the police union is not the point. The point is the employees were involved in this process and it works.

Arbitration is a last resort to impasse. Arbitration forces parties to sharpen a bargaining position to one that is more reasonable than they otherwise might adopt. In all candor, City representatives who bring a fair and reasonable position to interest arbitration almost always prevail. Independent studies show that nationally cities prevail in arbitration 70% of the time. That is why issues of impasse rarely go to an arbitrator. They are negotiated out between the parties in good faith bargaining.

For every argument the opposition has given against this amendment they offer no examples. With as many cities as there are with collective bargaining in Colorado, there certainly are plenty to choose from if they were to exist. The fact is examples that would support such claims do not exist when it comes to firefighter and police officer collective bargaining.

Every time you hear or read opposition arguments ask yourself, where are the examples? If they do exist we haven’t seen them, and our challenge to our opponents is bring them forth if you have them. The question will be met with silence because they have no examples. And if they have no examples then where is the creditability to their arguments? There is no creditability because their arguments are formulated as scare tactics using misrepresentation of the issues and false claims. In an election the voters eventually find the truth. We believe that will happen in Longmont.

How Interest Arbitration Works

We have received several inquiries concerning the interest arbitration process contained in the charter amendment. In order to fully explain the process and how it is designed in the amendment we have written a tutorial on that subject. The arbitrator selection process is heavily weighted in the City's favor as dictated by a Colorado Supreme Court decision. Please click you mouse here to read the article: Interest Arbitration

Two Floor Spin ?? No Just Another Red Herring!!

The management labor attorney, Mr. Martin Semple, retained by the City in May at taxpayer expense to spin as many arguments as possible against the charter amendment for the City Manager and City attorney to place in front of our City Council. Mr. Simple had a very creative interpretation that the amendment has “two floors” for negotiations. He further spun the wording to argue terms and benefits could never be reduced and could only go up.

His hollow arguments are out of context from the entire amendment and do not reflect the legislative intent or actual wording of the amendment. For those who aren't aware Martin Simple cut his eye teeth fighting teachers during negotiations to improve their working conditions. That apparently gave him the necessary credentials to meet what the City Manager needed for this project to educate council. Click here for explanation of the legislative intent and actual meaning of that section: Section 15.17

Another Request For A Meeting Met With Silence

We have received several inquiries from citizens recently as to why LPOA/LPFFA and City Council doesn't meet and try to work out their differences. It was explained to these citizens that we have made several offers and request to meet with either the City Manager or council to discuss problems. Each of these requests have been met with silence or rejection. However, our response to these inquiries was that we would try one more time.

On August 17, 2004 the executive boards of LPOA and LPFFA wrote a letter to our Mayor and City Council requesting a meeting. In that letter we told City Council that we seek a partnership with the City not an adversarial situation. That we feel the rapid polarizing of the two sides ultimately is not healthy for the citizens we all serve, and in whose interest we act. We did not expect, nor envision the meeting to result in any agreement. That was not the purpose. We felt a meeting would promote a better understanding and relationship between both sides. We hoped it would possibly lay the groundwork for working together in future in an atmosphere of mutual respect.

Regardless of whether or not the two sides agree on this charter amendment, we believe the citizens of Longmont would like to see us talking. In this, our last request, we told council we believe an open channel of communications with them is a positive thing for the community.

We asked for an answer by Friday, August 27^th. Once again the Council apparently saw fit to ignore our request. They did not even have the courtesy to respond officially in writing. Again they have given the impression they could care less about any relationship with our associations. This is one more example of the need for a collective bargaining agreement with our city. Apparently they do not understand that regardless of whether the amendment passes or fails at the polls, the underlying problems will not go away. As a matter of fact those issues, if left unaddressed, will only get worse.

The refusal of City Administration to meet with, or respond to the elected representatives of the police and fire employees gives an unfortunate impression of arrogance on their part. An impression that will not sit well with the public, and does not serve the interests of our citizens. The following letter was sent to each council member on August 17,2004.

Dear Madam Mayor & City Council,

We the elected representatives of your police and fire employees are more than disappointed that you would entertain a resolution such as what has been proposed this evening, 08/17/04. It would appear you are primarily relying solely on study and consultation provided to you by Mr. Martin Semple. That is your choice. That is your business.

We can tell you the spin put on the issues you portend to be problems in this amendment are inaccurate and misleading. Some of you know that, but are so opposed to the concept of collective bargaining that it is your adopted platform. That also is your business and your choice.

We extend to you an offer to sit down as the elected representatives of the employees and the elected representatives of the citizens to discuss these areas of disagreement and misinterpretation. Clearly you need to hear the factual legislative intent and meaning of your misguided points of contention with this amendment.

We propose a meeting void of any other parties. No attorneys. No City Managers or outside labor officials. No Chiefs. A meeting of the elected representatives of the employees and the people, behind closed doors in a relaxed atmosphere void of the media or outside influences at a mutually agreeable location. Concern on how such a meeting would play in the press is certainly an issue. We propose the parties leave the meeting with an agreed to mutual press release and format.

The question came up at a recent public discussion involving the Mayor and FOP/LPOA Vice-President Mike Violette about why we have never been able to sit and talk about issues and problems of mutual concern. This is not the first time this question has been posed. It will not be the last. We hear it in our contacts in the community frequently. Our valid contention is that we have requested and suggested such meetings but have been rejected or met with silence.

We have written the Mayor, City Council, and the City Manager several times going back to January of 2003 offering to meet formally or informally on matters of concern and dispute. We did so in an effort to resolve or address issues of disagreement. The requests were rejected or met with silence. We have copies on file of those offers.

It is apparent the past lack of response and ability to sit down as equals has in part placed us all where we are today. That is unfortunate. We do not expect, nor do we envision this meeting to result in any agreement. That is not the purpose. We do expect a meeting such as this to promote a better understanding and relationship between both sides and possibly lay the groundwork for working together in an atmosphere of mutual respect.

We have, are, and always will seek a partnership with the Citizens of Longmont and their government on areas of mutual interest. That is what the amendment hopes to achieve and that is what is in the best interest of our City and the citizens we serve. To promote anything less does not serve the interests of the citizens or their employees.

We sincerely hope you accept this offer. It will be beneficial to all. If we have not received a response by next Tuesday, 08/24/04, then once again the disappointment of those who seek a positive and productive relationship between the City and its employees will be realized. We are certain our citizens will once again ask themselves our biggest question. Why?

Sincerely,

The Executive Boards

LPOA/LPFA

Letters To The Times Call Editor

We have been provided with two letters that were written to the editorial page of the Times Call by citizens. They were mailed to the paper last Monday (08/23/04). These are two of four letters that we are aware were sent concerning the City Council’s resolution. The paper has yet to publish either of these two letters. That being the case, and knowing we are experiencing a growth in citizen visitors we are publishing two letters here for reading. Both of these citizens are not police officers or firefighters; nor do they have any relatives who are. It remains to be seen if the Times Call publishes these and the other two letters

Dear Editor,

I was very disappointed by the actions of city council in its Tuesday meeting. It is unfortunate they believe they should become involved in an election issue that the voters of Longmont have put on the ballot. Even more disappointing is that the mayor would claim Longmont is not a democratic government, but a republic and the elected representatives should tell the voters how to vote on an issue that the voters put on the ballot. That is a sad statement coming from someone we elected to serve us.

Councilman Fred Wilson is to be commended for taking a courageous stand against the rest of council on this matter. He has not lost sight of the democratic principles of free elections without government intrusion, and the peoples’ right to decide an issue.

I support the firemen and police officers in their election to achieve collective bargaining. The principle of having a voice in your working conditions and benefits is good for both management and employees. That translates into a good situation for the citizens of this city. It has become obvious to me that employee relations have been mishandled by both the city manager and the council he advises. This has resulted in a work environment of low morale and dissatisfaction. When this involves public safety the citizens eventually suffer.

Fort Collins’ citizens just elected to give their police officers collective bargaining in this month’s election for many of the same reasons. Our city management, which created this mess, is offering no solution but status quo. The problem will not fix itself. The amendment on the November ballot is the proper and correct solution.

Steve Ericson

Longmont

*********************************

Dear Editor,

At Tuesday’s, August 17, 2004 city council meeting, Mayor Julia Pirnack told the citizens of Longmont that our city is not a democratic form of government. In her stated opinion Longmont is a republic. She went on to say city council understands the fire and police issue better than the voters, and they will tell the voters how to vote in this election.

Mayor Pirnack and her fellow council members ignore the fact that over 20% of Longmont’s voters, using the rights given to them in a democracy placed the police and fire ballot on the November’s election. City administration fought that effort of the citizens without success. I remind mayor Pirnack she was elected to her job in a democratic election free of government interference.

With this attitude displayed by the city administration and council it is not surprising our police officers and firemen have come to the voters for a system of fairness. The voters of Longmont agreed with them by putting this on November’s ballot.

The management style of the city manager and the decisions of our elected mayor and council have created serious morale problems in the workforce that provides the most critical services to our city.

Our city manager, mayor, and city council have assumed the role of a “special interest group” that would exercise a disproportionate level of influence over the election process. For a local government to do this goes against the democratic principles upon which this nation was built. For these and other reasons of fairness, I urge my fellow voters to vote yes and give the right of collective bargaining to the firemen and police officers of Longmont. By doing this we will remind the city administration that Longmont is a democracy and a fair employer.

Janet Nuss

Longmont

This Issue Crosses Political Lines!

We are gathering support from community members, labor organizations and other various resources. The numbers are growing. What is surprising to many who are unaware, is the fact that this issue crosses political lines and philosophies. We are in contact with both sides of the political spectrum.

While it may be a common opinion that the idea of collective bargaining is solely embraced by Democrats, that is not the case. As a matter of fact many members of various labor organizations are conservatives and registered Republicans. Many conservative voters work under collective bargaining agreements.

The AFL-CIO recognizes this and has a Republican Labor Caucus. Many Republicans believe that the party of Lincoln believes in an honest day’s wage for an honest day’s work, and the right of employees having input in their working conditions. Most police union members are conservatives in their politics and also strong supporters of the right of collective bargaining.

Surprising? No. Go to any labor organization in this country and you will find members of all political philosophies and ideals. You would be hard pressed to find any who would give up this hard fought for right. The idea of collective bargaining is one that promotes efficiency, morale, and improved labor management relationships in the workplace. That is good for both labor and management.

This is not an issue of tax increases or increased spending by government. It is not about money at all. It is simply about having the right of an equal voice in an atmosphere of mutual respect. Something most people agree with regardless of their political affiliations or philosophies. It is about respect and common dignity.

We are reaching out to both sides of the political spectrum looking for support and understanding. The contacts we have made. The support we have been pledged. The comments we have received, only reinforce our believe this is an issue all citizens can live with. Very few are opposed to this concept. Most distrust any politician who attacks employees' right to have an equal voice in their future.

One only need to examine the recent Fort Collins vote. The citizens of that community gave their police employees collective bargaining, and they passed essentially the same document we have in front of the voters in Longmont. In that election more conservative Republican votes were counted than Democrat, showing the issue covers the political spectrum.

FOP/LPOA & LPFFA Secure Statewide AFL-CIO Support and Endorsement For Charter Amendment !!!!!

On Friday, 08/13/04, Vice-President Mike Violette was invited to speak to the several hundred delegates gathered at the Colorado State AFL-CIO convention in Denver concerning our Collective Bargaining Charter Amendment. Jason Brokenleg of the LPFA joined Mike on the podium.

Just prior to Mike’s speech Mike and Steve Deal met briefly with Attorney General and U.S. Senate candidate Ken Salazar. Mr. Salazar addressed the convention delegates just ahead of Mike. Mr. Salazar strongly supports collective bargaining in the workplace. In his keynote address he mentioned his support of law enforcement officers across the state, and his appreciation of FOP.

The purpose of Mike’s speech was to gather support and statewide endorsement by AFL-CIO of the charter amendment. He was interrupted three times during the speech by enthusiastic applause, and received a standing ovation at the end. When he and Jason left the podium they were surrounded by delegates wanting to shake hands and offer support.

A local radio host from an area radio station invited us to speak on his station about the charter amendment. Invitations were extended for Mike to speak with other important groups wanting to give their assistance to the Longmont Police & Fire Employees in getting this ballot issue passed.

On Saturday, the Colorado AFL-CIO passed a resolution endorsing the charter amendment and pledging support from their organization on this ballot issue. The vote was unanimous with no dissenting votes. (Click here for information) This is only the beginning of endorsements and assistance for this election. This statewide endorsement from labor is a huge victory for our cause. We have promises of endorsement and support from other groups within and outside the city for this amendment. We are only awaiting their official process before releasing that information.

A Citizen's Statement To Council 08-17-04

The following speech was made to the Longmont City Council August 17, 2004 by Longmont citizen Chris Rodriguez concerning their resolution against the Charter Amendment.

There’s an item on the agenda tonight that apparently doesn’t warrant a public debate or discussion thereof. A resolution of the Council urging Longmont citizens to vote “No” on the ballot question regarding collective bargaining for police and fire employees. Seems either staff, council, or both, don’t want or need to hear what the voting and taxpaying public think. Since this is still a democracy and you are our representatives, I’m asking you NOT to vote in favor of this resolution.

This all stems from your city staff and its’ budget of 2003 with its supposed financial crisis. If there really was such a crisis, it was by staffs own waste and abuse. They continue it with the hundreds of thousands of dollars wasted on hired guns and resolutions from on high for you to adopt. This road they led you down with their questionable budgeting and unfair employee treatment has taken you right to it’s logical conclusion: employees needing a union as their trust and faith in their employers has hit rock bottom.

Tonight you’re probably going to hear from a city manager whose credibility has been questioned in public and in court, along with his underlings that’ll get right in line with the guy who holds their purse strings. You’ll hear perceived problems with this line or that line, or the wording of the ballot issue. They’ll give you this resolution as a way out. A way to say “I’m not against unions or our fine city employees, just the way this is worded.” A way to save your political skin as you stick it to your workers, yet again. These same staffers could care less about your political future, unless it’s to their benefit.

No one said democracy is easy, painless or that you could get your cake and eat it, too. Tonight you need to make a decision on behalf of your voting and taxpaying public.

If you personally are not going to vote for this ballot question, that’s fine and that’s your right. But that doesn’t mean you, as a council, have to vote for a resolution urging us, the voters, to get in line with you or your city staff. Most people don’t take too kindly to their elected officials telling their constituents what to do or how to think. This is exactly what your staffers are trying to force you into with this ridiculous resolution. What’s more troubling is the fashion they snuck this item in, not wanting the public’s opinion, yet wanting you to tell that same public they should vote a certain way. If you don’t see a problem with that, you should.

By voting for this resolution, it is condoning the monumental disaster and embarrassment this current city staff has been for the City of Longmont. Unfortunately, they can’t be voted out of office, but you can. You are getting in the middle of city employees telling you to wage war against other city employees, in public. You aren’t city staffs representatives, you are our representatives. Have any of us asked you to wage war on our policemen and firefighters?

Let this ballot issue pass or fail on its own merits. Don’t tamper with the election process like your staffers want you to. Don’t waste any more of council’s time, and definitely don’t waste any of our taxpayer dollars, on this campaign against this ballot issue.

Voters need to know in the next couple elections who you really represent, them, or your city staff. The choice is yours.

City Council To Pass Resolution Condemning Charter Amendment

On Tuesday evening, 08/17/04 City Council is expected to pass a resolution condemning the Collective Bargaining Amendment, and urging the City's voters to vote no. This is not a surprise nor is it unexpected. They have the right under Colorado Election law to do so.

Needless to say we are disappointed in this action. It is consistent with the attitude and closed-minded approach they have steadfastly displayed on this matter before the citizens. It appears there is serious concern the voters will support this reasonable and practical solution to long-standing employee relation problems.

They quickly condemn a fair solution without providing an alternative other than status quo. That fact indicates an apparent lack of interest in problem solving. They are also reinforcing the average city employees’ opinion about how employees are valued by both council and the highest levels of local government. A sad but revealing fact for many.

They will allow no public debate on this issue. They would never discuss issues with us, and they won't discuss them with the public. Ask yourselves why? Are they are cutting their own political throats? The person orchestrating this affair and the his plan to try to defeat this ballot issue is exposing our factual argument that they seek no alternative point of view. On this issue they never have, and never will. That person appears to care less about the future of any council person or any other city administrator who are urged to follow his lead.

Their resolution only goes to illustrate the apparent lack of study our elected officials have put into this measure, and reinforces the view of many citizens that council has apparently been led about by the City Manager and City Attorney. In keeping with their past track record they have never extended an offer to us, as the elected representatives of police and fire employees, to meet and discuss their concerns with the charter amendment or any other issue for that matter. This approach is what got us all here in the first place. They have, and will continue to, promote the "red herring" analysis provided to them by a “hired gun” placed in front of them by the City Manager and City Attorney.

The problem they have, and will continue to have, is that they underestimate citizen reaction to politicians telling voters how to vote in an election. Most City Councils that have any political savvy, would not risk potential public backlash. This group is following counsel from City Administration to do otherwise. It gives an impression to some of desperation and weakness. This is something that could be a serious political mistake for each of them that is party to this resolution in their future political endeavors. It is possible they will find themselves on the opposite end of this decision of the voters this November. Something that could be used by future political opponents.

They will take their vote and the newspaper will report accordingly. This has happened elsewhere. When it has it almost always has backfired on the politicians. We will take advantage of their predictability. With this move they have provided our supporters and us with more campaign material. As long as they follow their current advisor that will continue.

HUGE VICTORY IN FORT COLLINS !!!!!!!

Voters vote yes on Collective Bargaining !

To Our Members,

We are proud to announce that our brother and sister police officers of FOP Lodge Three’s Fort Collins Police Department have won their election for collective bargaining. The collective bargaining ordinance was approved by the voters of Fort Collins 51% in favor to 49% opposed.

This was done in the face of stiff opposition from their City Administration, City Council, Mayor, Chief of Police, and local newspaper. As a matter of fact the Fort Collins “Coloradoan” Sunday’s editorial was a scathing condemnation of the issue and urged Fort Collins voters to vote against this initiative. Much like our local paper's editorials, the voters ignored that foolishness.

The citizens responded when asked by their officers for support in having a voice in the workplace. This vote was another example of the natural level distrust of elected politicians and local newspaper editors banding together against their public safety employees. This vote was not about union or collective bargaining per se. It had everything to do with the ordinance itself and the giving the police officers an equal voice. The citizens of Fort Collins sent a strong message to their City Hall, and we believe so will the citizens of Longmont.

This ordinance, which was passed by the citizens of Fort Collins in Tuesday’s election, is identical to our charter amendment. In fact we copied Fort Collins ordinance and made it our charter amendment. This is the very same document that our City Administration is fighting with distortion of fact and misinterpretation. The citizens of Fort Collins saw through that smoke screen and so will ours.

This is a tremendous victory for FOP Lodge Three. As many of you are aware the Fort Collins area is compromised of very conservative voters. It is second only to Colorado Springs on the front-range in that respect. Who said Republicans don’t support issues like this? It is obvious this issue crossed political lines.

Because of the voter make-up and conservative nature of the Fort Collins electorate this ballot issue was expected to fail. The Fort Collins’ police issues and arguments were not as strong as our current issues. Yet they won. We firmly believe we will be able to achieve that same victory. This should send a strong message to our City Hall that the partnership that we seek with them, is far more productive than then adversarial environment they promote.

Fraternally,

FOP/LPOA Executive Board

FOP Northern Colorado, Lodge Three

Campaign Opening Discussion A Success!

The discussion between Mayor Julie Pirnack and FOP/LPOA Vice-President Mike Violette was held this evening 08/04/04. It was an informative and well-attended event with over 100 people in attendance. Both sides gave fifteen-minute opening statements. The history and reasons for this charter amendment were well covered in Mike’s opening address. He was certainly well prepared and stated the history and the facts surrounding this initiative quite well.

The Mayor's opening remarks restated the information given by the City’s Special Counsel Martin Semple, which has been reported on before. Unfortunately it reflected how much influenced our governing body has been by the red herrings Mr. Semple has laid out on the table. We certainly don’t blame the Mayor for her position. She is simply repeating the information provided to her by the City Manager’s "hired gun".

Mike did a very good job of bringing the truth to light on the key issues of opposition by the City. His closing statements presented an excellent explanation of the issues the City has hung its hat on, and masterfully defused that position. The session was video taped and in the near future it will be reproduced in video and DVD for anyone wanting to view the event. A copy of Mike’s 15-minute opening statement is available for your reading by clicking your mouse on the following link: (FOP opening statement). Anyone wanting the history and a full explanation of how we arrived at this point should take the time to read that speech carefully. You won't be disappointed. You can also watch a video of highlights of the discussion including the opening statement. There is a Windows Media Video link on the Collective Bargaining page of the web site. (Click play button and turn up volume!)

After the question and answer period the audience was afforded the opportunity to mingle and comment; or ask more questions of the participants including FOP/LPOA and LPFFA officers present. Several discussions took place. From conversations it was apparent to many in the room that the stated concerns and forecasts fabricated by Mr. Semple for City Council and repeated by the Mayor were questionable at best.

Several citizens commented to us afterward that this was the same old rhetoric that is always used when management fights employees seeking the right to collectively bargain. Others expressed concern with the City’s continued refusal and inability to find a solution to addressing issues in the workplace. Some stated they were very supportive of the right to collective bargaining, but wanted the opportunity to read the amendment. Many asked for our web site address to visit and gather more information on the initiative. Access to a copy of the Charter Amendment is located on our collective bargaining page.

All in all, the entire event went quite well. We deeply appreciated this opportunity which was extended to us by the Longmont Area Democrats. A special thanks goes to Councilman Doug Brown for arranging this event, and Wanda Sterner for her great job of coordinating and creating a format both sides were comfortable with.

This marks the beginning of our fall campaign to convince the voters this amendment is needed and beneficial for our city. We firmly believe the support is there. Our next major presentation will by Mike Violette and Tim Malen to the Boulder County Labor Coalition. This group represents various unionized workers in Boulder County. Many of whom live and vote in Longmont. We will work hard to get the true story out to the voters. Only time will tell.

If you are interested in reading the local newspaper article on this event click your mouse in this link (TC Debate Article)

True Facts On Collective Bargaining

Across this country thousands of cities have collective bargaining agreements in place with their police officers and firefighters. In many cities in the East, Midwest and West Coast this an accepted form of doing business. In the vast majorities of these cities the system works quite well.

Most cities rely on these binding contracts to plan with certainty their budgets annually. Contrary to frequently heard arguments by cities fighting collective bargaining, taxes DO NOT go up. City Managers are forced to be fiscally responsible. Employees wages and benefits are secured and management rights are clearly defined.

Police labor organizations are not the traditional Unions which you would find in the public sector. Strikes and job actions are strictly prohibited, illegal and would never be employed to settle a dispute. Instead each side is protected by 3rd party binding arbitration to settle the occasional issue which cannot be agreed to. This process actually fosters reasonable and responsible negotiations.

Police officers as a whole tend to be very conservative and do not follow the traditional composition of labor unions. Police labor organizations and their members tend to be more understanding of police management’s needs to direct its workforce in order to effectively carry out their daily mission to serve their citizens. On the other hand, when it comes to equipment, benefits and compensation police officers are solidly and justifiably convinced they are different than any other class of public employee and demand to be recognized and treated by their cities as such.

Police officers strongly believe in their duty to serve and protect, and are committed to the citizens they are sworn to serve. The nature of police work requires officers to regularly be placed in situations which could cost them their lives or well-being. They proudly accept that responsibility. In no other profession in this country, other than fire fighting and military duty, do governments expect their employees to lay down their lives, if necessary, to protect its citizens. This is not a melodramatic statement; it is a fact of life. That fact by itself places police officers and firefighters in a class separate from other public employees, and demands they be compensated differently.

Studies have shown that contrary to the belief that collective bargaining creates an adversarial environment, in most cases it normally results in a more stable employee management relationship. Where adversarial relationships do exist they would also exist without a collective bargaining agreement. Adversarial relationships are normally the result of poor leadership, immaturity and a lack of respect for each other's position within both police management and police officer ranks, and are not the end result of having the right to collectively bargain. In police departments where there existed a good relationship with police management before collective bargaining; that relationship prevailed after collective bargaining. The foundation for mutual respect was in place and provided a positive platform to work from.

Full Text Of Collective Bargaining Amendment 2A - Available On Line