The D.C. police department and the police union have been at war for many months; it now appears the Metropolitan Police Department is losing — badly.
On Thursday an independent arbitrator ruled that Police Chief Cathy Lanier’s “All Hands on Deck” initiative violated the department’s contract with the union. According to the arbitrator, cops were not given enough time to rearrange their schedules; Lanier and Mayor Adrian Fenty failed to declare there was a “crime emergency,” as the law requires; and the department refused to honor the contract by simply discussing redeployment with the union.
Not only does the decision slap down the chief and one of her main crime-fighting tools, it could also cost the city millions in overtime pay, which the arbitrator ordered the city to fork over.
Can you say slam-dunk?
“The All Hands on Deck was a publicity stunt, period,” Fraternal Order of Police Chairman Kristopher Baumann told me. “Instead of having solid plans to fight crime, the chief forced thousands of officers to wander around aimlessly on their days off. There is no way to prove that AHOD drove crime down.”
Lanier claims just the opposite. She and the mayor credit the occasional flooding of the city with cops for making the city more safe.
Did All Hands on Deck kept the lid on crime? It’s impossible to prove, but I tend to agree with Baumann. Hardworking street cops keep the streets safe. Dedicated detectives solve crimes. Crime goes down when residents cooperate with cops patrolling their neighborhoods. The occasional show of force is window dressing.
What’s not impossible to prove is the growing enmity between Lanier and Baumann. In past decades, the police chief and the head of the Fraternal Order of Police have cooperated, for the better of the city and the safety of its residents. These two despise one another.
Witness the department’s continued investigation of Baumann. On Aug. 25 Lt. Linda Nischan informed Baumann she was conducting an investigation of his “alleged failure” to attend training in 2008. The investigation could lead to hours of testimony and reams of documents — all for nothing.
As Baumann wrote in response, for the last 30 years the union chairman has not been required to complete training. Nevertheless, Baumann actually trained for use of firearms and other police work. What’s more perplexing — dare I say downright dumb — is that the department already investigated Baumann’s training.
In a nine-page memo from the department’s general counsel’s office from July 2008, Nischan herself concluded “no action be taken against Officer Baumann” for allegedly failing to train in 2007. She recommended the union and the department work out the details. They didn’t; she’s investigating — again.
“It’s harassment and retaliation, pure and simple,” Baumann says.
Lanier declined to comment — but judging from Thursday’s ruling, the legal system is sounding off — in favor of Baumann.
E-mail Harry Jaffe at [email protected].
