An independent arbitrator’s decision has given River Forest police officers a retroactive 4-percent raise, rather than the 3.5 percent proposed by the village.
Arbitrator James R. Fox ruled Dec. 10 that non-command level police officers should receive a 4 percent raise over each of the next three years. The raise is retroactive to the end of the previous contract, which expired on April 30, 2007. Sources estimate the difference amounts roughly to an additional $108,000 over the course of the three-year contract, which expires April 30, 2010.
“We’re very happy with the arbitrator’s decision,” FOP 46 Lodge President Jason Labriola said Tuesday. The department’s rank-and-file officers, he said, “deserve every bit of this contract.”
Village Administrator Steve Gutierrez said the village was “disappointed” with the decision on wages, but he emphasized that the village prevailed on seven of nine issues. That, he said, indicated several of the positions advocated by the FOP were “extraordinary reaches for benefits.”
Trustee Steve Hoke said it “wouldn’t be appropriate to characterize the arbitration as a victory or a loss because we are all on the same team.”
“The fact we went to arbitration for the first time in memory-and against the fine officers who protect our families-indicates just how difficult our financial condition is,” he said.
Cox noted the village’s tightening financial situation, writing, “There is no question but that the year-end general fund balance has been declining and is projected to further decrease going into the next few fiscal years.” However, he concluded, the 4-percent figure “more closely approaches recent salary settlement increases in the [comparable surrounding departments] than the employer’s 3.5-percent proposal.”
Gutierrez, while acknowledging the arbitrator gave detailed reasons for his ruling, said he didn’t believe he had taken into consideration the village’s total compensation package, which he called “at the top of the heap.”
Binding arbitration was sought after negotiators reached an impasse last summer. Nine issues related to the police labor contract were submitted, including:
Wages, vacation schedule, longevity pay, use of sick time, sick leave utilization, “donning and doffing” (i.e. getting into required police gear before a shift), specialist pay for detective sergeants, specialist pay for relief sergeants, and the retiree health savings plan.
Cox ruled officers may now use accrued sick leave as part of the allowed federal Family and Emergency Leave Act. Previously, officers who wanted to be on paid status during an unpaid FMLA absence could use only accrued vacation, personal or compensatory time.
Cox rejected “donning and doffing,” which would have required the village to pay 15 minutes at overtime rates to each officer prior to each shift. The village estimated that would cost an additional $265,000 annually, effectively increasing the raise to 4.7 percent.
Also rejected was the FOP’s proposed longevity pay. The lodge was seeing a yearly lump sum bonus of between a half percent of annual base salary for 10-14 years of service up to 1.5 percent for 25 or more years of service.
George Parry, a frequent critic of the village’s policies, and someone close to the negotiations, said the village could have had a contract last summer, but balked at the donning and doffing issue.
“The village could have had the same result without going to arbitration,” he said. That contract, he said, would have stipulated a 3.5 percent raise, and 10 minutes of overtime pay for donning. That proposed structure of the donning and doffing pay ran afoul of federal fair labor regulations, however.
Labriola said his members are now looking forward to other challenges.
“Hopefully with this over, we can work more towards the goal of a more efficient police department under Chief Limon,” he said.
Hoke agreed with that statement, saying, “While we did not prevail on the wage issue, we did limit the value of the overall package, and it is a reduction from the 4.5 percent raises in the previous contract. With this now concluded and the appointment of a new chief, I would like to think today we can finally move on.”
The arbitrator’s decision is final and legally binding, though the village can contact the arbitrator with 14 days of the Dec. 10 decision, seeking “reconsideration.” Should they so choose, the village would be required to pay all related costs, including the arbitrator’s and FOP’s attorney costs, regardless of the outcome.
Gutierrez said the village board has not chosen to seek reconsideration.
“As of [Friday] we’re moving ahead with this award, and will implement it as quickly as possible,” he said.
