Police union battles to keep binding arbitration

May 11, 2011

The San Luis Obispo Police Officers’ Association is seeking a temporary restraining order against the city in an attempt to delay its goal to have the public vote on binding arbitration and a charter that requires voter approval to make changes in retirement benefits. [Tribune]

Binding arbitration, voted in by the public in 2000, entitles safety worker’s unions to bring in a third party negotiator if labor talks are at an impasse. The city and the unions are then required to abide by the negotiator’s decision.

The council is expected to approve a special mail in ballot election for Aug. 30 at next Tuesdays council meeting.

The police union filed a request on Monday seeking an injunction that would prohibit the San Luis Obispo City Council from taking any action regarding the two measures.

On Tuesday, Judge Charles Crandall continued the case to next Monday so that he could have time to read through documents filed by both the union and the city.

On May 3,  the union filed a civil suit alleging the city is ignoring its obligations to the city and that the council’s decision to put the cost saving measures on the ballot violates rules.

City attorney Christine Dietrick argues the ballot measures do not go against collective bargaining requirements that the city must abide by.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

It’s to the point in SLO that whenever I see a cop or police car (or SUV!) I get a strong urge to give them a 1 fingered salute…

Ah to be 15 again.

Lets see…. our elected officials are asking us to vote on controlling a major expenditure of our tax dollars. Hmmmm sounds like democracy in action.

Well, like Andy Stern said, they’ll use the power of persuasion, then the persuasion of power…

When a public union goes to court to keep the public from running public business, it is time for the union – and all its members – to go. When our policemen tell all of us they are the ones who run things, that’s called martial law.

What is the world coming too ? Now we give welfare receipients guns and badges and uniforms and medical and retirement and excuses to go out on medical leave at 35 years of age. We can afford this How ???????? Cut their pay and benefits by 50% what are they going to do quit….I don’t think so….develop a bad attitude and shoot people….well they already do that. Deb Linden had the right solution ….24 hour curfew on everyone…then no one needs cops anymore

With a bachelors’ degree and more than a dozen years’ experience in each of my two careers, I make less that an entry level cop does (including all compensation).

I am all for doing whatever is needed to bring their pay/benefits in line with ours.

They serve the public. It’s ridiculous that the servant makes more than the “master.” Something must change.

I used to think it was a fair differential due to the fact that someone might shoot at them, whereas I seldom get shot at. I no longer believe that because our boys in Iraq and Afghanistan don’t make that kind of coin.

Excellent analogy…

I read this am, that in Orange County some Lifeguards are pulling down $200,000 a year.


Sheesh, this has gotten completely out of control and a change is coming…


LE and soldiers get to carry guns and shoot back, we do not!

They also have on-going training, batons, mace, and backup!

(We are not allowed to!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

If your not harrass by the criminals, then your cited by the LE.

Both against the middle (Neither are better than us yet they have leverages against us.

Screw them both

LE has more legal ammunition against its own people than any military in arms against any county or nation

Protect that gravy train.

I cant wait to see how they try to use their scare tactics next. I can hear i know….increased response times, public safety, …blah blah blah……


Maybe they’ll trot out the proverbial sacrificial lamb: children and elderly. Soon, it will start to sound like the thuggery that public unions have become.

I’m curious what the rank and file think of all this. Most union vs. taxpayer issues are from the top, with dues-paying members just “there” and not actively involved.

It appears that they are using a different knee jerk issue at the moment, based on some comments on the Trib- implying that the Council is out of control and a threat to democracy.

Argument 1: We are constantly in harms way to keep you safe. You can’t pay us enough to do what we do.

Not buying that?


Argument 2: We have no argument 2. We’ll just politik and sue to keep our slop troughs full…

I gotta say, ANY law enforcement officer who publicly even hints at “increased response times” if binding arbitration ends should be given an official reprimand. That sort of extortion has no place in law enforcement…