News

Menlo Park council explores binding arbitration in police-discipline cases

What options besides binding arbitration exist for handling appeals filed by police officers facing discipline? The Menlo Park City Council held a study session to explore alternatives.

Binding arbitration earned public scrutiny after the Almanac broke the story last year of veteran officer Jeffrey Vasquez, who was reinstated by an arbitrator despite being caught naked with a prostitute in a motel room and reportedly admitting it wasn't the first time he had hired a hooker for sex. The arbitrator also awarded him $188,000 in back pay.

Labor attorneys Jeff Sloan and Michael Rains, representing the management and union perspectives on binding arbitration respectively, carried on a back-and-forth during their Jan. 27 presentation.

Mr. Sloan said a "very strong" public safety lobby led to California's "Public Safety Officers Bill of Rights," which sets out protections for police officers that are broader than those for any other public employee, with the possible exception of firefighters.

Mr. Rains, a former police officer with three decades of experience as a labor attorney, noted that the purpose of the bill of rights is to prevent abusive or arbitrary discipline.

Describing police as "the most visible representative of this city," he told the council that officers want a fair, thorough and objective process, which in turn brings benefits for the city.

"As long as the disciplinary process and the appellate mechanisms are there, you can buy a lot of goodwill from your police officers and their associations," Mr. Rains said.

Two alternatives to binding arbitration: A civilian personnel review board, or implementing non-binding arbitration, which would allow either side to appeal a decision through the court system.

Mr. Rains said those choices can bog down the process, leading to lengthy, expensive hearings.

Voicing disagreement, Mr. Sloan said arbitration isn't fast either, in some cases taking more than a year to render a decision. "I had one case where the union lawyer took 23 days to put on his case in front of an arbitrator, and I dare say a judge would not have allowed that."

He said a big aspect of his concerns relates to the issue of who the arbitrators are. "How qualified are these people? To what extent are they researchable, and can I see what they've written, check their references? And typically the answer to that is no." Arbitrators have to be able to satisfy both sides of an appeal to stay in business, he noted.

Mr. Rains countered with saying that word gets around within the legal community about an arbitrator's reputation, in addition to copies of sample decisions.

"We aren't just out there picking and hiring blindly," he said.

Little data

Other labor attorneys shared Mr. Sloan's concerns during the Almanac's investigation last year. At least 16 jurisdictions in California rely on binding arbitration in police disciplinary cases.

The lack of a centralized database of arbitration decisions, or even statistics on how many cases are upheld, turns evaluating the effectiveness of the system -- or individual arbitrators -- into a monumental challenge.

The Almanac obtained 17 redacted decisions in police misconduct cases involving San Jose, Stockton, Richmond, Alameda, Sierra Madre, Oroville, Merced County and Oakland. Out of 17 cases, arbitrators reinstated the officers nine times, and reduced a suspension once -- a reversal rate of about 59 percent.

They upheld terminations in the remaining seven cases. Academic studies of similar binding arbitration cases in Chicago and Houston show approximately the same reversal rate.

The state doesn't require arbitrators to publish their decisions, and due to confidentiality laws, both parties must give permission should an arbitrator choose to release a case ruling. Labor attorneys said sample decisions provided by arbitrators are typically selected according to politics – a city manager, for example, is likely to get a copy of a ruling that supported management.

One question went unaddressed during the Jan. 27 study session – where is the public transparency? Under California law, the identities of police officers appealing through binding arbitration are confidential.

A public agency may disclose the number of such cases and the outcomes, as the City of San Jose does quarterly, but Menlo Park refuses to release even that redacted information. And no state agency has oversight of the arbitration process, meaning no one knows how well the process works.

Councilman Peter Ohtaki said during the study session that the outcome in the Vasquez case outraged the council as well as the community. "What we're trying to do is look at alternatives to avoid the outcome, but still respect and preserve a fair and thorough and objective due process."

In August, the Menlo Park council voted 4-1 to approve a contract with the Police Sergeants Association that made some minor changes to the binding arbitration process, namely, adding a clause that allows the city and union to select an arbitrator from a pool of retired San Mateo County judges if they can't agree on an arbitrator from a list provided by an outside agency such as the state mediation service. But the arbitrator's decision would still be final.

Voting against the contract, Councilwoman Kirsten Keith called the binding arbitration process "broken" and said the changes didn't go far enough.

At the Jan. 27 study session she said she agreed that fairness is necessary. "But it doesn't mean binding arbitration furthers that goal."

The council asked for opinions about using retired judges to arbitrate. On that topic, Mr. Sloan and Mr. Rains sounded united. Both expressed that retired judges may not have the experience or background to deal with the nuances of labor law.

Comments

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Here's the deal
a resident of another community
on Jan 31, 2014 at 9:29 am

The real reason cops want binding arbitration wasn't covered in this article. Let me explain.

Arbitrators are highly paid for their time. And, the arbitrator must be agreed to by both parties, cop/union, and city.

This results in arbitrators who want to have a full plate of expensive work in front of them going the cops way most of the time, so they continue to get picked by the police union for future cases.

The securities industry has a similar racket going, called FINRA. Any account holder with a brokerage firm has agreed to disputes settled by FINRA arbitration. The FINRA arbitrators side with the securities people almost all the time, for the same rationale.

Stop this nonsense, and start serving the residents of your community. If courts of law are good enough for the people cops arrest, they're good enough for the cops themselves to appeal disciplinary actions.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by values
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Feb 1, 2014 at 11:41 am

Based on the number of comments, residents are much more upset about the new mascot and logo guidelines than this issue.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Lessons
a resident of another community
on Feb 1, 2014 at 11:52 am

They cared when the result of this arbitration policy resulted in the cop who admitted to seeing a prostitute during his shift retaining his job.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by ToBeFair
a resident of Menlo Park: Belle Haven
on Feb 2, 2014 at 12:18 pm

Cops should get the same justice as the rest of us do. Their trials should be public, they should be publicly named, they should have the nastiest allegations smeared all over the news next to their mugshot.
What goes around should come around.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Menlo Voter
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Feb 2, 2014 at 6:34 pm

Menlo Voter is a registered user.

Tobefair:

Their trials are public. the only thing not public is what the departmental discipline is.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Grab a Bowl of Heaven soon in Mountain View
By Elena Kadvany | 0 comments | 2,523 views

Quick Check List for UC Applications
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 0 comments | 1,770 views

Don't fund the rape culture at my alma mater
By Jessica T | 17 comments | 1,304 views

Palo Alto and Bay Area Election Facts and Thoughts on the Implications
By Steve Levy | 14 comments | 1,266 views

“I live near Sunset”
By Stuart Soffer | 5 comments | 607 views