INTEREST ARBITRATIONS

Decision Information

Decision Content

City of Seattle

And

Seattle Police Officer’s Guild

Interest Arbitration

Arbitrator:      William L. Corbett

Date Issued:   01/03/1995

 

 

Arbitrator:         Corbett; William L.

Case #:              10630-I-93-00228

Employer:          City of Seattle

Union:                Seattle Police Officers' Guild

Date Issued:      01/03/1995

 

 

BEFORE WILLIAM L. CORBETT, NEUTRAL ARBITRATOR

SGT. E. STRIEDINGER, PARTISAN ARBITRATOR

FRED C. TREADWELL, PARTISAN ARBITRATOR

 

IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION        ]

BETWEEN:                                                      ]        CASE NO. 10630-I-93-228

                                                                           ]        AAA CASE NO. 75 390 00015 94

SEATTLE POLICE OFFICERS' GUILD ]

      AND                                                            ]        INTEREST ARBITRATION

CITY OF SEATTLE                                         ]

 

Appearances:

      For the Guild:

            Will Aitchison, Esq.

            Labor Representative

            P.O. Box 83068

            Portland, OR 97023

      For the City:

            Mark H. Sidran

            Seattle City Attorney

            Leigh Ann Tift

            Assistant City Attorney

            10th Floor, Municipal Building

            600 Fourth Avenue

            Seattle, WA 98104

 

      The interest arbitration was held on July 25, 26 and

27, 1994, in Seattle, Washington, before he panel arbitrators:

Neutral Arbitrator William L. Corbett; Partisan Arbitrator Sgt. E.

Striedinger; and Partisan Arbitrator Fred C. Treadwell.  The

parties stipulated to the jurisdiction of the arbitrators,

presented evidence, argument, and agreed to file post-hearing

briefs.  Timely briefs were received from both parties.  Further,

the parties agreed to extend the time period for completion of the

Decision beyond 60 days to facilitate the arbitration panel's need

to circulate and finalize its decision.

 

THE DECISION

 

I.    BACKGROUND

      During the negotiations for 1992-1995 collective bargaining

agreement, the City of Seattle (City) and the Seattle Police

Officer's Guild (Guild) were able to reach agreement on all issues

except one -- the City's proposal to civilianize certain positions

currently filled by sworn officers.  Rather than delay implemen-

tation of the entire contract, the parties agreed that the City

would have the right to refer its civilianization proposal to

interest arbitration while the remainder of the contract was to

take effect.

      The City has proposed a civilianization of fourteen

positions, which are:

__________

Position                                                           Number of Positions

Chief Dispatchers                                          6

Telephone Reporting Unit                             4

School Crossing Guard Supervisor               1

Equipment Maintenance Officer                   1

Facilities Sergeant                                         1

Media Relations                                            1

__________

      City Drive Candidates Proposal Following a Study Conducted

by the Office Of Management and Budget ("OMB") at the direction of

the Seattle City Council.  See, Exhs. 3 & 4.  The OMB study

considered "whether additional positions could be converted to

civilian positions" by matching the duties performed by the

identified sworn police officers against a set of criteria.  If the

position did not require the "training, experience, powers and

reporting relationship of the uniformed officer," the position was

included in the civilianization proposal.  See, Exhibit 4.

Seventeen positions were initially identified by the OMB study.

See, Exhibit 4.  However, one of these positions was abrogated in

the police budget, and two of the positions were not within the

Guild's jurisdiction.  This arbitration concerns the remaining

fourteen Guild positions, which the OMB study concluded did not

require training, experience and arrest powers of a sworn

police officer.  See, Exhibit 4.

 

II.  ISSUE

      The issue is whether the City has sustained the necessary

burden of proof to change fourteen sworn officers positions to

civilian positions.

 

III. POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES

      A. Position of the City

      The City argued that sworn police officers are not necessary

to fill the fourteen positions at issue.  It claims that dedicating

sworn police officers to these positions will not assure that its

personnel, and limited resources, are put to the highest and best

use.  The City justified its civilianization proposal based on (1)

cost savings; (2) comparability with similar jobs in similar west

coast cities; and (3) creating a wider pool of applicants and

qualifications from which to select candidates for the specific

positions. 1/  The Guild challenged the City's projected cost

savings; presented conflicting evidence on comparability; and

asserted benefits of having sworn officers perform the jobs the

City sought to civilianize.

_____

1     The first two sentences of the City's "Civilianization Study"

      state:  This report deals with the possible civilianization of

      certain sworn positions in the Seattle Police Department.

      Civilianization, in general, offers the prospect of several

      benefits ranging from a reduction in salary and training costs to

      creation of a wider pool from which to select new applicants.

_____

      1.   Cost

      The City argued that its civilianization proposal would

save approximately $200,000 in its first year, with continued,

lesser savings thereafter.  The City's $200,000 figure was based on

totaling the current cost of having sworn officers perform the jobs

at issue, and comparing the figure with the projected salaries for

civilian employees performing the same functions.  The City's

figures are:

__________

                                                                        Proposed Civilian

Function                            Sworn Title        Cost             Title                               Cost          Savings

Facilities/ISD                   Sergeant            $62,710        Mgmt. Sys. Analyst      $50,033     $12,677

1st Watch Dispatcher      Officer               $49,955        Dispatcher III               $45,190     $4,765

1st Watch Dispatcher      Officer               $57,954        Dispatcher III               $45,190     $12,764

2nd Watch Dispatcher     Officer               $57,899        Dispatcher III               $45,190     $12,709

2nd Watch Dispatcher     Officer               $57,899        Dispatcher III               $45,190     $12,709

3rd Watch Dispatcher      Officer               $57,899        Dispatcher III               $45,190     $12,709

3rd Watch Dispatcher      Officer               $57,954        Dispatcher III               $45,190     $12,764

Comm OPS                       Dispatcher         $57,003        Radio Com.                   $46,724     $10,279

                                                                                                                                                   Specialist

TRU                                  Dispatcher         $57,003        Dispatcher I         $35,966              $21,037

TRU                                  Officer               $55,570        Dispatcher I         $35,966              $19,604

TRU                                  Officer               $47,585        Dispatcher I         $35,966              $11,619

TRU                                  Officer               $55,328        Dispatcher I         $35,966              $19,362

Media Relations              Officer               $55,328        Publ.  Rel. Spec.   $43,754              $11,574

Crossing Guard Supr.      Officer               $55,569        Crossing Guard    $29,234              $26,335

                                                                                          Supr.

TOTAL                                                        $785,656                                    $584,749            200,907 2

_____

2     At the hearing the City revised its estimated savings figure

      to $210,732.

__________

      2.   Comparability

      The parties have long used seven West Coast cities for

the purpose of determining comparability with respect to wages,

terms and conditions of employment.  The cities are: Long

Beach, Oakland, Portland, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco

and San Jose.  The City surveyed police departments in these

cities to determine whether each city had a job comparable to

each of the specific positions the City sought to civilianize,

and if so, whether the position was held by a sworn officer or

civilian.  The City's survey indicated the following:

__________

CITY                  POSITION

                           Chief               Telephone       School                Equipment        Facilities           Media

                           Dispatcher      Reporting       Crossing            Maintenance    Sergeant           Relations

                                                   Unit                 Guard                 Officer

                                                                           Supervisor

Long Beach       civilian            civilian            civilian               civilian              sworn                1 civ.

                                                   &

                                                   1 sworn

Oakland             civilian            sworn              civilian               civilian              sworn                no mat

Portland             (no match)       civilian 3          (no match)          civilian 4            (no match) 5      sworn

Sacramento       civilian 6          civilian            (no match)          civilian              (no match) 7      civ.

San Diego          civilian            civilian            (no match)          civilian              sworn                civ.

                                                   &

                                                   sworn

San Francisco    civilian 8          (no match)       (no match) 9        civilian              sworn                sworn

San Jose            civilian            sworn              sworn                 1 civilian           sworn                sworn

                                                                                                      & 1 sworn

Seattle               sworn              sworn              sworn                 sworn                sworn                sworn

_____

3     These new positions were changed from sworn to civilian in 1991

      when a new unit was created.

4     Duties are covered as components of several civilian jobs.

5     These function are spread out over a number of sworn and

      civilian jobs.

6     This job was changed from sworn to civilian in 1989 for

      financial reasons.

7     These functions are performed by a variety of sworn and

      civilian jobs.

8     This job was changed from sworn to civilian in June 1989 for

      financial, stability, and expertise reasons.

9     All positions were eliminated due to lack of funding;

      however, they were civilian when they existed.

__________

      B.  Position of the Guild.

      The Guild Argued that the City failed to establish the

necessary proof to civilianize the fourteen position.  It argued

the City did not adequately present and support its proposal

at the bargaining table; that its proposal would not result in

cost-saving; that the proposal was not consistent with

civilianization efforts when compared to other police departments

in Washington State or comparably sized cities; and finally, that

the City's proposal will have a detrimental impact on performance

of the respective positions.

      1.   Cost

      The Guild disputed the City's figures.  It argued that

civilianization would increase the City's annual costs by

approximately $48,000.  The Guild's figures indicate:

__________

Function                               Sworn Title           Cost             Civilian Title                     Cost

Facilities/ISD 10                   Sergeant               62,710          Man.  Sys.Analyst           114,815

1st Watch Dispatcher         Officer                  49,955          Dispatcher IV 11               58,055

1st Watch ---                        Officer                  57,954          Dispatcher IV                   58,055

Dispatcher

2nd Watch Dispatcher        Officer                  57,899          Dispatcher IV                   58,005

2nd Watch Dispatcher        Officer                  57,899          Dispatcher IV                   58,005

3rd Watch Dispatcher         Officer                  57,899          Dispatcher IV                   58,005

3rd Watch Dispatcher         Officer                  57,954          Dispatcher IV                   58,005

Comm Ops                           Dispatcher            57,003          Comm. Spec. 12                 61,314

TRU                                     Dispatcher            57,003          Dispatcher III                  51,834

TRU                                     Officer                  55,570          Dispatcher III                  51,834

TRU                                     Officer                  47,585          Dispatcher III                  51,834

TRU                                     Officer                  55,328          Dispatcher III                  51,834

Media Relations                 Officer                  55,328          Sr.Pub.Re. Spec 13            58,039

Crossing Guard Super.       Officer                  55,569          School C.G. Sup. 14           44,178

TOTAL                                                                                                                             834,001

TOTAL SAVINGS                                                                                                          (48,355)

_____

10    As the testimony at the hearing established, the incumbent

      in this position is currently performing the equivalent of 2

      separate jobs; the City's Exhibit 10 presumed that the replacement

      for the officer will only perform 1 of those jobs.  Table 2 reflects

      the replacement of the sworn position with two non-sworn positions.

11    The figures in Table 2 reflected 12% increase over the wages

      paid Dispatcher III's -- the same differential as between the

      positions of Dispatcher II and III.  The costs for Dispatcher IV are

      understated, for shift differential is not included in the

      calculation of the Dispatcher wages.

12    Table 2 reflects a $5,000 greater salary than that reflected

      on Exhibit 10.  The figures in Table 2 are understated, before they

      ignore the fact that the City will likely need to hire two civilians to

      perform the job.

13    Table 2 presumes that the police department is likely to be

      a "controversial" city agency.

14    Table 2 reflects the fact that 20% of crossing guard duties

      will have to be performed by a sworn officer.

__________

      2.   Comparability

      The Guild conducted its own survey and its results, in

part, conflicted with those of the City.  The Guild's survey was

conducted by a Guild member who contacted Guild counterparts, in

writing, at each of the comparable cities, then followed up with

telephone calls to presidents and vice presidents of each

organization and with individual officers in the departments.

The results of the Guild's survey were:

__________

CITY                  POSITION

                                                                           School

                                                   Telephone       Crossing           Equipment

                           Chief               Reporting       Guard               Maintenance  Facilities              Media

                           Dispatcher      Unit                 Supervisor        Officer            Sergeant              Relations

Long Beach       civilian            civilian            sworn 15             civilian            sworn                   1 civ.

                                                   &                                                                                                   &

                                                   1 sworn                                                                                         1 swn.

Oakland             civilian 16         civilian            sworn 17             civilian            sworn                   swn. 18

Portland             (no match)       civilian            sworn                civilian            (no match) 19        swn.

                                                   &

                                                   sworn 20

Sacramento       civilian            civilian            (no match)        civilian            civ.

                                                   &

                                                   sworn 21

San Diego          civilian            civilian            (no match)        civilian            sworn                   civ.

                                                   &

                                                   sworn

San Francisco    civilian            civilian            sworn 22             civilian            sworn                   sworn

                                                   &

                                                   sworn 23

San Jose            civilian            civilian            sworn                civilian            sworn                   sworn

                                                   &

                                                   sworn 24

Seattle               sworn              sworn              sworn                sworn              sworn                   sworn

_____

15    A Lieutenant in the traffic detail, along with other

      responsibilities, handles supervision of school crossing guards.

16    Civilians' work is limited to misdemeanors.

17    Sworn officers were assigned a number of duties at schools

      and one of those duties involved the supervision of crossing

      guards.

18    By contract the position will be sworn beginning January

      1995.

19    These function are spread out over number of sworn and

      civilian jobs.

20    There are six permanent sworn positions.  They use light-duty

      personnel to fill those positions; however, they are permanent and

      budgeted positions.

21    Because of staffing problems the department backfilled the

      positions with sworn light-duty officers.  The sworn officers are

      "quasi-permanent" positions; however, there is always one sworn

      officer in the TRU Unit.  The permanent sworn officer is a

      Facilitator, and is used whenever a citizen wants to speak within

      sworn officer.

22    There are two officers in the traffic detail that have been

      assigned to oversee the crossing guards as part of their regular

      assignment.

23    The positions are civilian but the department fills these

      positions with officers who are on light-duty, and because there is

      a current shortage of civilian personnel they are backfilling with

      sworn officers.

24    Sworn officers when on light-duty.

__________

      The Guild also argued that the City's civilianization effort

have been extensive and that there was no need for any further

efforts.  The Guild cited its study to the effect that the City's

civilianization of the Police Department was the sixth highest in

the State of Washington.

      3.   Benefit Obtained By Using Sworn Officers

      The Guild argued that for each of the fourteen

positions the city sought to civilianize, there were substantial

benefits in retaining a sworn officer to perform those functions.

 

IV. CRITERIA TO BE USED IN RESOLVING THE ISSUE AND

      ALLOCATING BURDEN OF PROOF

      A.  Statutory Criteria

      The Revised Codes of Washington (RCW) § 41.56.460 provides

the criteria that must be considered by the panel in making an

award.  For purposes of this arbitration, the pertinent criteria

listed in RCW § 41.56.460 are: the constitutional and statutory

authority of the employer; the stipulations of the parties; the

wages, hours and working conditions of comparable employer; and

"such other factors ... which are normally and traditionally

taken into consideration in the determination of wages, hours and

conditions of employment."

 

      B.  Interest Arbitration and the Burden of Proof

      In an interest arbitration the decisionmaker(s) must not

depart from the status quo unless the proponent of change

establishes that its proposal: (1) was initially presented at the

bargaining table; and (2) considering all the evidence, is

preferable to the status quo.

      Because interest arbitration is nothing more than an

extension of the bargaining process, the proponent of change must

establish that its proposal was presented at the bargaining table

and that it was rejected.  Thus, the party making a case in

interest arbitration initially must make its case during the

bargaining process.  Without such a threshold showing,

negotiations would lose a considerable amount of their purpose.

      Additionally, in interest arbitration, the party requesting

a change in the status quo has the burden of establishing: (1)

the need or desirability for change; and (2) that the proposed

changes are practical and reasonable in the absolute and in

relation to the interests of the parties.  Thus, the party

proposing a change must "provide evidence of a demonstrable need"

for the change, City of Pullman and the Pullman Police Officers

Guild, PERC Case No. 9223-I-93-201 (Axon, 1991); and that its

"proposal is not only desirable but practical and necessary."

City of Kennewick and the Kennewick Police Officers Benefit

Assoc., PCRC Case No. 5380-I-84-123 (LaCugna, 1984).  See also

Elkouri and Elkouri, How Arbitration Works, p. 817, 4th Ed., 1985.

The concept of "necessity," must be tempered to reflect the

reality that no one set of "terms and conditions of employment"

may generally be described as "necessary," beyond that they are

desirable, practical and reasonable in the absolute and given the

interests and needs of the parties.  At a minimum, "[i]f the

arguments offered in support of the change do not clearly out

weigh arguments in favor of the status quo then the status quo

should be maintained."  City of Bellevue and Bellevue

Firefighters Local 1604, PERC Case No. 6811-I-87-162, AAA case

No. 75 390 0125 87 (Gaunt, 1988).

      Here the City has the burden to demonstrate that it offered

its civilianization proposal to the Guild at the bargaining table

and provided a justification for its proposal that is not unlike

the justification was offered that interest arbitration.

Second, the City must establish that its proposal is desirable,

practical and reasonable in the absolute and when considering the

interests of the parties.  With regard to this latter burden, the

City must demonstrate that its proposal will result in

significant cost savings; that is civilianization efforts are

supported by other comparable jurisdictions; and that having

civilians perform the specific jobs in question is desirable,

practical and reasonable.

 

V.  DISCUSSION

 

      A.  Whether the City Adequately Presented Its Proposal

            at the Bargaining Table

      The City must establish that it adequately presented its

proposal to the Guild at the bargaining table.  The Guild

asserted that the City failed to prove that it provided adequate

justification for its civilianization proposal during the

negotiations, and should not be allowed to do so in interest

arbitration.

      Specifically, the Guild argued:

                  At the hearing, the City acknowledged that, contrasted

            with the 3.5 days of the arbitration hearing, the

            complete discussion of the civilianization issue in

            bargaining consumed only half a day.  The City's lead

            negotiator, Lizanne Lyons, testified that the entirety

            City's presentation on civilianization was made

            by Claire McKechnie, a representative from the City's

            Office of Management and Budget.  Ms. McKechnie had

            prepared a civilianization study for the City which was

            given to the Guild during Ms. McKechnie's presentation,

            and which later became Exhibit 4 in these proceedings.

                  As Ms. Lyons acknowledged, and as Verner O'Quin, the

            Guild's Treasurer, stated even more forcefully, the

            Guild believes that Ms. McKechnie's civilianization

            presentation not only was woefully inadequate to

            justify the City's proposal, but contained significant

            data errors. ...

                  Not only was Ms. McKechnie's presentation during

            bargaining unconvincing to the Guild, it appears to

            have been unconvincing to even the City's negotiators.

            As Ms. Lyons fairly dramatically testified, while the

            City did not have "serious" reservations about "all" of

            Ms. McKechnie's numbers, Ms. McKechnie's presentation

            left the city "looking at how to reconcile some

            differences in the numbers."

      The position of the Guild, in part, is supported by the

evidence.  Indeed, when Ms. Lyons was asked by the Guild's

counsel: " Is it fair to say that those reservations were shared,

at least in part, by members of the City's negotiating team at

the conclusion of the presentation?"  She responded:

            Well, I would say there were some questions regarding

            Claire McKechnie's numbers and some numbers generated

            by Suzanne Crane from the City Council's staff and

            reconciling the two.  I might not say it quite as

            broadly as you did in terms of serious reservations

            about all of Claire's numbers.  We were looking at how

            to reconcile some differences in the numbers.

Tr. 267-68.

      While there may have been some question regarding

McKechnie's numbers -- and a clear difference between Ms.

McKechnie's numbers and those of Suzanne Crane, the numbers

supplied by the City to the Guild indicated that civilianization

of the positions in question would result in the cost savings.

Moreover, while the cost savings figures the City attributed to

civilianization may not have been free from error, the figures

represented a reasonable effort project personnel costs under

it's proposal.  As discussed below, the City's figures do

represent a savings.

      In total, the evidence supports conclusion that the City

offerred its civilianization proposal to the Guild at the

bargaining table and provided a justification for its proposal

that is not unlike the justification was offerred at the

arbitration hearing.

 

      B.  The Chief Dispatchers

      The evidence supports the conclusion that civilians can

adequately perform the job function of Chief Dispatcher; that

employing civilians would cost less than sworn officers; and that

the use of civilian to perform this job is consistent with the

situation in comparable jurisdictions.

      1.   Civilians Adequately Performed the

            Position of Chief Dispatcher

      The Chief Dispatcher is the lead dispatcher for the

police radio dispatch function in the Communications Center.

Chief Dispatchers that job title of six sworn police officers

and it is also used to refer to the function of lead dispatcher-a

function that can be performed by civilian or sworn employees.

Applying OMB criteria, the position of Chief Dispatcher does

not require arrest powers, does not require paramilitary chain of

command, does not require patrol experience, and is not reserved,

as a matter of law, for sworn officers.

      At the present time, civilian employees do the work of Chief

Dispatcher.  The Director of the Communications Center, Lt.

Tibbs, testified that there was no instance where the performance

of a civilian Chief Dispatcher was qualitatively or

quantitatively less than the performance of a sworn Chief

Dispatcher.

      Both Mr. Lawson and Director Tibbs explained that the skills

require of a police officer and those required to perform the

position of Chief Dispatcher are different.  Mr. Lawson testified

that a specific set of computer skills is required for the

computer aided dispatch system, and that dispatching is a much

different experience than a police officer's response to a call

for assistance.  Director Tibbs explained that civilian

dispatchers are given a modified Perfex test to assess aptitude

for the dispatching job.  Director Tibbs testified that a patrol

officer would not know how to operate as a dispatcher without

training, and the not all patrol officers have an aptitude for

dispatching.  This testimony was echoed by the Guild President,

Mr. Jakobsen, who said, the true to sworn Chief Dispatchers

far "far better dispatchers than I believe that they were

policeman, if I wanted to weigh it, out on the street."

      2.   Civilian Chief Dispatchers Would Cost the

            City Less Than Sworn Officers

      The City estimated that employing civilians, rather than

sworn officers, to perform the work of the Chief Dispatcher would

result in annual savings in salaries of approximately $68,000.

The projected savings were determined by comparing the current

salaries of the six sworn officers who currently hold the

positions of Chief Dispatcher and comparing them with the salary

of the Civilian Dispatcher III, Step 1.  The City determined that

the appropriate classification was a Dispatcher III after

reviewing the position description for the Chief Dispatcher

position and determining a civilian classification that

corresponds to these duties.  This process was performed by a

City classification specialists.  The City determined that the

classification should be at Step 1.  It is undisputed that

Seattle Municipal Code requires that a newly hired person for a

civilian civil service position must start at the first step of

the salary range.

      The Guild disputes the City's determination that

Dispatcher III, Step 1, is the correct civilian classification.

Alternatively, it argues that if the Dispatcher III classifica-

tion is used the appropriate step is Step 4, or that the City

should establish a new classification, Dispatcher IV.  If either

these assumptions are made, there would be little or no salary

savings in changing the position from sworn to civilian.

      The Guild's position with regard to using a Dispatcher, Step

4, is based on the assumption that the City will promote current

civilian employees from the position of Dispatcher III.  If the

City promotes a Dispatcher II to a new Dispatcher III position,

the employer will not begin is a Dispatcher III, Step 1.  The

City's own witness testified that:

            ... if you're already an existing City employee and

            you transfer from one job title to another job title,

            you would remain in the same step you were

            currently at.  If you were promoted into a position

            from a lower level into a higher-level position, then

            you would be placed at a salary step that would be

            equal to at least [four percent] 4% salary increase.

Tr. 117, 298.

      The President of the Seattle Police Dispatchers' Guild, the

organization that represents the civilian Dispatchers, testified

that when a Dispatcher II, Step 5, is promoted to a Dispatcher

III, the employee would be placed at Step IV as a Dispatcher III.

Tr. 77-78.  He also testified that the last time the Dispatcher

III test was administered to Dispatcher IIs for promotion, all or

most all of them were Dispatcher II, Step 5.  Accordingly, the

Guild argues that if the sworn Chief Dispatcher position was

civilianize, the new positions would probably be staffed by

former Dispatcher IIs at Step 5.  Consequently, in their new

positions as Dispatchers IIIs they would not be a Step 1 on the

pay scale.  If it is assumed the civilian Dispatcher IIs will

fill the new Dispatcher III positions, the City's figures

overstate the savings he can expect by converting from sworn to

civilian Chief Dispatchers.  The actual savings will be

substantially less.  25

_____

25    A $26,000 savings may be a more realistic figure, assuming

      Dispatcher III, Step 4 will earn approximately 16% more than

      a Dispatcher III, Step 1.

_____

      In support of its alternative position, the Guild asserts

that the City will use a new civilian Dispatcher IV

classification.  The position of the Dispatcher IV is based on the

assumption that the City will develop a new higher classification

for this newly suggested civilian position.  However, the

evidence does not support the Guild's position that the City will

adopted classification for the civilian Chief Dispatchers.

While the Dispatcher's Guild would like the City to create a new

Dispatcher IV position for Civilian Chief Dispatchers, and likely

will carry such a proposal to the bargaining table, there is no

evidence that the City will agree to such a proposal.

Additionally, if the City agreed to such a proposal the increase

in salary may not be the twelve percent (12%) increase that the

Guild projects.  26

_____

26    This conclusion is based on the fact that those employees

      moving into the Dispatcher IV positions were probably Dispatcher

      IIIs with a number of steps.  When the advanced to the Dispatcher IVs

      they will receive an approximate four percent (4%) raise.  Tr. 117,

      298.

_____

      Apart from salary savings, if any, the City will experience

cost reductions, thus savings, by civilianizing the Chief

Dispatcher positions.  The City cited the substantial expense,

approximately $36,000, in training a sworn officer compared to

the training necessary for a civilian to perform the function.

The City also cited the equipment cost of a sworn officer,

approximately $1,560.  Additionally, because of the differences

in scheduling work for sworn officers and civilians, there have

been shifts in the Communication Division, such that it is "top

heavy" with Chief Dispatchers.  The different scheduling,

necessitated because of the two different classifications,

occasionally has resulted in two sworn Chief Dispatchers and a

civilian Dispatcher III on the same shift.  This is an

unnecessary and costly consequence of the dual system.  While none

Guild cited that fact that civilians earn "shift differential"

which is not paid sworn officers, the evidence is clear that the

City will experience a cost savings by using civilians as Chief

Dispatchers.

      3.   Comparability

      It is undisputed that one considering the six west

coast cities comparable to Seattle no city uses sworn officers as

Dispatchers.

      4.   Other Factors that Impact Whether the

            Position Should be Civilian or Sworn

      The Guild argues that apart from the fact that the

civilians can perform the functions of Chief Dispatcher at the

savings to the City, and that no other comparable cities use

sworn officers, there is very real value in having sworn officers

perform these positions.  The Guild argues that there is a

significant value in having a police officer with "street

experience" in the position; that in extremely critical

situations, sworn officers perform exceptionally under the

highest stress of the moment; there is a value in having a mix of

sworn and non-sworn personnel in the dispatch center; and other

benefits ranging from security concerns to the intimate knowledge

of the physical environs of Seattle possessed by sworn officers.

      There's no question of sworn offerers bring an "added

value" to the position of Chief Dispatcher.  Police Chief Stamper

testified that a sworn officer's experience is valuable in

Dispatch, but not essential.  In conclusion, the evidence

supports the City's position to civilianize the position of Chief

Dispatcher because of the added costs of using sworn officers; the

fact other comparable jurisdictions use sworn officers; and that

sworn officer training and experience is not essential for that

position.  However, given the fact that six sworn officers are

effected by changing the position from sworn to civilian, the

City must effectuate this change pursuant to a transition plan.

 

      C.  Telephone Reporting Unit

      The Telephone Reporting Unit (TRU) has four sworn officers

that the City seeks to civilianize.  The sworn officers in TRU

the police reports over the telephone in lieu of dispatching a

patrol unit.  This same function is performed by civilian

Dispatcher Is; the only distinction being the amount of reported

damage.  As Director Tibbs explained, one call that reports

property damage of $299 dollars would be taken by a civilian,

another, reporting identical damage, except estimating that

damage at $301, would be taken by a police officer and TRU.

However, all follow-up reports, whether they involve more than

$300 damage or suspect identification, are taken by civilians.

      The duties of the civilian Dispatcher I and the TRU officer

are similar.  This information is recorded by both employees

when taking a telephone report.  If a call is answered by either

a civilian dispatcher sworn officer in TRU, and there is the

possibility of apprehension of the suspect, the call is immediately

routed to a patrol unit.

      1.   Cost

      The City estimated that replacing the sworn officers

with civilians would save approximately $71,500 annually.  The

City's estimate was based on replacing sworn officers with

civilian Dispatcher Is.  Alternatively, the Guild estimated that

the average savings would be approximately $8,000.  The Guild's

estimate was based on the assumption that the City would actually

use Dispatcher IIIs to replace the sworn officers.  As with the

Guild's assumption that the City would create a new position of

Dispatcher IV to replace the sworn Chief Dispatchers, the City

indicated that have no plans to use Dispatcher IIIs to replace

the current Dispatchers who currently perform telephone

reporting.  Accordingly, the evidence supports the conclusion

that shifting from sworn officers to an all civilian force will

result in substantial cost savings.

      2.   Comparability

      The City's survey revealed that of the seven comparable

cities two cities used civilians; two cities used both civilian

and sworn; two cities used sworn; and in one City there was no

match.  Alternatively, the Guild's survey revealed only one City

that used civilians, and that the remaining cities used a

combination of civilians and sworn officers.  The parties agree

that Long Beach uses a civilian with one sworn officer.  While

the City listed Oakland with a sworn force, the Guild found both

civilians and sworn officers.  The City lists Portland and

Sacramento with a wholly civilian force, whereas the Guild found

that the cities use sworn officers on "like duty," and that

Sacramento has one sworn officer at TRU to serve as a

"Facilitator" for citizens who want to speak with an officer.

The parties agree that San Diego uses both sworn and civilians.

The City found "no match" in San Francisco, whereas the Guild

determined that it used both sworn and civilians.  The sworn

officers were only schedule and on "light duty," or when there

was a shortage of civilians.  The City listed San Jose as using

sworn officers; whereas, the Guild determined that civilians do

the work and sworn officers only work when on "light duty."  The

differences between the parties are not a great.  It is clear

the most of the comparable cities use a mix of civilians and

sworn officers in TRU.  Often the sworn officers are used only

when on "light-duty."  However, in Oakland, most of the work is

performed by sworn officers, and in Long Beach and Sacramento,

one sworn officer is permanently in the unit.

      Thus, the evidence is clear that most comparable cities use

a combination of civilians and sworn officers in TRU, and out of

the cities that use sworn officers, they are used primarily foreign

"light duty," 27 or as in Long Beach and Sacramento, a small

complement of sworn officers are used to take calls from citizens

who want to speak with a sworn officer.  The City also provides

"light duty" work for sworn officers elsewhere in the department.

_____

27    It is clear that the City is not legally bound to provide

      such "light duty" positions for sworn officers in TRU.

_____

      There is no absolute need for sworn officers in TRU because

when a citizen wants to speak with a sworn officer, an officer is

dispatched.  While it might be cheaper to have a complement of

sworn officers in TRU to speak with citizens who want to talk to

an officer, the dispatch of sworn officers appears to satisfy

citizen needs and assures effective police work.  Unless the City

discontinue such practice of dispatching a sworn officer when a

citizen requests to speak with an Officer, the practice in

comparable jurisdictions does not justify the permanent

assignment four sworn officers to TRU.  However, the

elimination of sworn officers in the TRU will increase the work

load of other sworn officers.  This consideration is discussed

below.

      3.   Other Considerations

      Because TRU officers deal directly with citizens who

want to speak with a police officer, this activity saves the City

money that would otherwise be spent dispatching sworn officers to

the citizens' residence or place of business.  The City has

recognized that this savings, in large part, justifies the unit.

In its 1991 Position Description Questionnaire for the TRU

position the Department stated:

            If the TRU Unit were eliminated, the current average

            workload of 11,760 calls/investigations now handled

            would be dispatched to Patrol Units, which would likely

            result in increased call waiting backlogs, longer

            response times, and increased citizen frustrations.  The

            types of calls being handled by TRU Officers are

            processed in 10 to 20 minutes with complete citizen

            satisfaction.  The dispatch of a Patrol Unit, including

            travel time, investigations and reporting would

            probably average 30 minutes to one hour.  Since TRU-

            handled calls are police investigations, they cannot be

            transferred to civilian staff, even if such staff were

            available.  The 1989 Police Management Study applauds

            the TRU Unit by saying "This is a very efficient

            utilization of sworn personnel."

Exhibit 7D at 7.12.

      Eliminating sworn officers from performing this communi-

cation function would impose an appreciable economic cost on the

Department.  Apparently the City did not consider this increased

cost in its calculation of the financial implication of

eliminating TRU.  Thus, while the evidence demonstrates a

salary cost savings by replacing the sworn officers with

civilians, the City did not consider the resulting cost increase

of having street officers dispatched to interview civilians.

Therefore, the actual cost savings and clearly defined.

      Additionally, apart from cost, the evidence supports the

conclusion that there will be a reduced effectiveness of the

Department's telephone reporting function.  There was

considerable evidence that TRU officers' street law experience

was a considerable asset to their functioning as TRU officers.

The TRU officers' investigatory training and street experience

was frequently called upon to flesh out telephone reports.

They also brought their formidable knowledge of the City's

geography to bear in handling calls.  While retaining sworn

officers as Chief Dispatchers had particular value, it was less

clear whether eliminating sworn officers in TRU would result in

substantial cost savings to counterbalance the loss of their

services.  Accordingly, it is concluded that the evidence does

not support the City's position regarding elimination of the

four TRU positions.

 

      D.  School Crossing Guard Supervisor

      The school Crossing guard supervisor oversees part-time

civilian school crossing guards.  Approximately, twenty percent

(20%) of the supervisor's time is spent writing traffic tickets.

The City seeks to civilianize this position.

      Applying the OMB criteria, except for the time writing

tickets, position does not require arrest powers, does not

need to maintain the paramilitary chain of command, and does not

require patrol experience.  The twenty percent (20%) of the

employee's time that is spent writing traffic tickets will be

retained as Guild work and absorbed by other traffic or patrol

officers.

      1.   Cost Savings

      The City plans on replacing the sworn officer with a

Crossing Guard Supervisor at a cost savings of $26,335.  The

Guild argued that the City's estimate accounted for only eighty

percent (80%) of the position, the crossing guard duties, but did

not account for the twenty percent (20%) spent writing tickets.

The Guild factored in the additional twenty percent (20%) and

concluded that the actual savings would be approximately $11,000.

      Clearly the bulk of the position involves duties that do

not require a sworn officer.  The City should not have to pay in

excess of $26,000 for twenty percent (20%) of the sworn officer's

time for ticket writing.  It is reasonable for the City to

spread that small amount of time throughout the Department,

possibly with the impact that some small percentage of tickets

won't be written.

      2.   Comparability

      The City's survey indicated that school crossing guard

supervisors in Long Beach and Oakland were civilian, that the

position was staffed by a sworn officer in San Jose, and that the

remaining jurisdictions did not staff the position as a full-time

position.

      The Guild's survey indicated that a job similar to the

school crossing guard job was performed in Oakland, Long Beach,

Portland and San Francisco.  The Guild's witness admitted,

however, that in Oakland position was performed by 8

lieutenant who is in the traffic detail who handles supervision

of crossing guards as part of this is duties.  The Guild's

witness agreed that it was difficult to analogize the school

crossing guard job in Oakland and the other jurisdictions with

the position in Seattle, which was created in funded with its

primary purpose of school crossing guard supervision.  He

admitted that had he asked these jurisdictions whether they have a

position created and funded to perform only school crossing guard

supervision, he would "possibly" have received very different

answers.

      The better evidence is that few jurisdictions have sworn

officers primarily devoted to supervising civilian school

crossing guards.

      3.   Other Factors

      Guild emphasized that traffic enforcement (ticket

writing) was imperative for the position.  Additionally, the

Guild argued that having an experienced sworn police officer who

trained adult school crossing guards in recognizing traffic

hazards was critical.

      The evidence does not support the conclusion that ticket

writing authority is necessary for the position.  Most all

traffic violations that occur school crossings will not begin

the presence of the sworn officer.  Nor, is it clear that the few

tickets that are written, approximately two a month, are

significant in assuring safety.  Nor, does the evidence support

the conclusion that only a sworn officer may properly train adult

school crossing guards about traffic hazards or proper avoidance

techniques.

      In total, the evidence supports the conclusion that the City

will occur significant cost savings with no appreciable law City

efficiency or safety if it replaces sworn officers with civilians

disposition.

 

      E.   Equipment Maintenance Officer

      There is no serious dispute as to whether the job of

Equipment Maintenance Officer ("EMO") can be performed by A.

civilians.  Even the incumbent, Officer Waltier, admits that he is

mainly a software systems manager.  These duties are regularly

performed by civilians.  Mr. Waltier admitted that it was not

necessary to have a law enforcement background in order to do his

job.  His only concern was his belief that the City would have to

pay a civilian considerably more than he was paid to perform that

job.  The position was staff previously by a civilian, and the

classification was changed to sworn because the City have

difficulty retaining civilians in the position because of its low

pay.

      1.   Cost Savings

      The City estimated position could be filled with a

civilian Radio Communication Specialist at the savings of $10,279

per year.  The Guild estimates that there will be no cost

savings, and that the City will actually have to pay a civilian

considerably more than it is currently paying the sworn officer.

The Guild notes that previously when the position was staffed by

a civilian the City could not retain qualified persons because

there are always lured away for higher salaries.

      It is difficult to conclude that the City can reap a salary

savings in this position.  It may have to pay a civilian

approximately what it is currently paying the sworn officer.

However, conversion from sworn officer to a civilian would allow

the City to save the cost associated with training a sworn

officer for a position that does not require law enforcement

training.  That training costs the City between $35,000 and

$37,000.  Additionally, the City will not be spending the funds

required to equip a sworn officer, approximate $1,560.  Thus,

even if there is no salary savings, the City will not be

expending a considerable amount of money to train and equip a

sworn officer for a task that day-to-day he or she is not called

upon to perform.

      2.   Comparability

      The City's summary demonstrated that the equipment

maintenance job is staffed by civilians in every comparable

jurisdiction of San Jose, where there is one civilian and one

sworn officer who perform these duties. The Guild's survey

indicated that San Jose employs only civilians in the position.

      3.   Other factors

      The City argued that its personnel should be put to

their highest and best use.  It is undisputed that the sworn

officer performing equipment maintenance is not specifically

called upon to use his police officer training, equipment, and

expertise in the performance of the equipment maintenance job.

While his police training and experience is "value added" for the

position, it is not necessary for performance of the position.

It is not sound policy, both economically and practically to

require training that is not necessary for successful performance

of that position.

      In total the evidence supports position of the City for

the civilianization of disposition.

 

      F.   Facilities Sergeant

      The Facilities Sergeant position is currently filled by one

sworn officer who actually performs two separate jobs.  The

individual performs all of the duties of the Facility Sergeant

job and serves as the Aid to the Chief.  When serving as the

Facility Sergeant, the incumbent acts as the Department's

facilities coordinator by coordinating and identifying general

maintenance needs; prioritizing requests for services; performing

supervisory and administrative duties; acts as the Department's

telephone coordinator; and monitors any new construction or

alteration to existing facilities.  The position does not require

police training or patrol experience.

      The City's plan to civilianize the Facilities Sergeant

position assumes that a portion of incumbent's time devoted to

serving as Aid to Chief Brasfield would continue with the

incumbent, or be reassigned to another sworn officer.

      1.   Cost Savings

      The City civilianization plan calls for replacing the

Facilities Sergeant with a civilian Management Systems Analyst.

The City estimates an annual salary savings of $12,677.  This

estimated savings does not account for the portion of the

position designated as "Aid to the Chief" that must be assigned

to sworn officer.

      The Guild's estimated cost of civilianizing the position

attempts to account for the "Aid" portion of the position.  In

doing so, estimates that it will actually cost the City more

money (an increase from approximately $62,000 to approximately

$115,000).  While the Guild correctly notes that the City's cost

estimates do not account for the entire cost of civilianizing that

Facilities Sergeant position, the Guild's estimate appears to

overstate the cost.  The City should have accounted for the "Aid"

portion of the position, but the evidence does not support the

conclusion that the cost attributed to the position will increase

by approximately $50,000.  There was no evidence regarding the

percentage of the incumbent's time spent on the portion of the

position that the City seeks to civilianize, and that portion of

position that is "Aid" to the Chief.

      2.   Comparability

      The City study indicated that of the seven comparable

cities, five have a sworn officer in the position of Facilities

Sergeant; and in the remaining two cities, there was "no match."

The evidence was that in the two cities where there was no direct

match the functions were spread over a number of sworn and

civilian jobs.  The Guild did not offer any evidence that their

study was inconsistent with that of the City.

      3.   Other factors

      The evidence supports the conclusion that currently the

Department anticipates a substantial multi-year building plan.

Chief Stamper testified that there are two Facilities jobs; one

would intend to the "day-to-day" activities, whereas the other

will require someone with "project management" experience to

handle needs assessment, site selection, financing and

construction of the buildings.  This latter position me require

expertise from outside the Department.  However, the Chief stated

the plans are currently "in a state of flux."

      Given the fact that a sworn officer will apparently continued

to serve as Aid to Chief Brasfield (thus clouding the accurate

projection of cost savings -- if any); that the needs and direction

the Department potentially require two "facilities" persons;

and that comparable jurisdictions continue to rely on sworn

officers in handling "facilities," the evidence does not support

the City's position regarding civilianization of the Facilities

Sergeant position.

 

      G.  Media Relations

      Currently, the Department's media relations are handled by a

sworn officer.  The officer relays information from crime scene

investigators to the news media and responds to questions from

the media related to police reports. As such, the sworn officer

has no role in performing criminal investigations.  The City

proposes having a civilian perform these functions.

      The OMB report noted: "It is possible that some crime scene

training would have to be provided to a civilian Public

Information Officer ... to accomplish the duties ... in media

relations."  The report concluded that the job did not required

sworn personnel.  In addition to media relations, the incumbent

has been assigned to investigate civil claims that were filed

against the City.

      1.   Cost Savings

      The City estimates that they would be an annual

savings of approximately $11,500 by having a civilian "Public

Relations Specialist" perform media relations for the Department.

The Guild argued that civilianizing media relations would not

result in savings, but actually cost more for the City.  The

Guild determined that the position would call for a "Senior

Public Relations Specialist," which could cost the Department

approximately $3,000 more than the current sworn officer.  The

City's classification specialists acknowledged that a "Public

Relations Specialist" is designated for City agencies which are

not deemed "controversial."  Whereas, the "Senior Public

Relations Specialist" is designated for agencies that are

"controversial."  Chief Stamper testified that he could think of

no City agency likely to be as "controversial" as the Police

Department.  Thus, there is a legitimate question as to whether

the City properly determined the appropriate classification for

the Department's media relations person, assuming that the

position were civilianized.

      Additionally, the evidence indicated that the current media

relations officer was responsible for preparing the initial

investigatory defense to approximately 350 to 400 claims a year

that were filed against the Police Department.  There was no

evidence that a civilian could properly perform this aspect of

the current job.  This work would have to be assumed by other

sworn officers, at a cost to the City.

      In total, the evidence does not support the conclusion that

you'll be cost savings by switching to a civilian.

      2.   Comparability

      The City's study revealed that of the seven comparable

cities: three cities use sworn officers; two cities used

civilians; one City used one sworn and one civilian; and the

remaining City had "no match."  The Guild's survey agreed with

that of the City, except for the City's conclusion that one of

the comparable jurisdictions had "no match."  The Guild's

evidence was that the jurisdiction was about to fill the position

with the sworn officer.  Thus, the evidence was the most of the

comparable jurisdiction used sworn officers.

      3.   Other Factors

      Guild presented testimony from one of the leading

"consumers" of the services of the Department's Media Relations

officer, a long time Seattle police beat reporter. He testified

that a sworn officer serving as media relations officer would

have a higher degree of credibility over a civilian serving in

that capacity.  That reporter compared the quality of information

the media receives from the Police Department without coming

from the Fire Department, where a civilian media relations person

is employed.  The reporter testified that while the Fire

Department's media relations person was competent, the quality of

information would be better if it were coming from someone who

was more familiar with fire fighting procedures and techniques.

He then analogized that experience to the Police Department and

concluded that is civilian media relations person would suffer

from the same difficulty.

      It is clear that the media frequently seeks information

about crime scene, arrest procedures, the application of

criminal laws, and other technical information that a civilian

would have difficulty providing for would be unable to provide.

If the position were civilianized, the City would select rate

civilian with prior law enforcement experience or provide a non-

experienced civilian with a high degree of police training.

However, it is clear that a successful media relations person for

the Department must be very technically knowledgeable.  Given the

high degree of training required of a media relations person; the

fact that there appears to be no annual salary cost saving in

switching to a civilian; and that the experience of comparable

jurisdictions is mixed; the City has failed to make its burden of

proof regarding civilianizing the Media Relations Officer.

 

      H.  Conclusion

      The evidence supports the position of the City regarding the

civilianization of the Chief Dispatcher positions, the School

Crossing Guard position, and the Equipment Maintenance position.

However, the evidence does not support the City's position

regarding the TRU positions, the Facilities Sergeant position for

the Media Relations position.

 

AWARD

      Of the fourteen positions under consideration, the City may

civilianized only the Chief Dispatcher positions, the School

Crossing Guard Supervisor position, and the Equipment Maintenance

position.28

_____

28    A transition plan shall be established to effectuate the

      orderly change from sworn to civilian Chief Dispatchers.

 

 

/s/

WILLIAM L. CORBETT, NEUTRAL

DATED: 1/3/95

 

SGT. E. STRIEDINGER, PARTISAN

DATED: 12-19-94

 

FRED C. TREADWELL, PARTISAN

DATED: 12/22/94

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.