FOPALC's Claim for Overtime Pay for DOC Correctional Officers
October 18, 2007
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Terry Goddard Arizona Attorney General 1275 W. Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Dora B. Schriro, Director Arizona Department of Corrections 1601 W. Jefferson Phoenix, Arizona 85007
RE: Claim for Overtime Pay for DOC Correctional Officers III
Dear Attorney General Goddard and Director Schriro:
This claim is made pursuant to A.R.S. § 12.821.01 on behalf of the following Correctional Officer IIIs with the Arizona Department of Corrections (hereinafter “Officers”): Domingo D. Moreno, Robert W. Stevwing, Jr., Martin Huizar, Alberto Almanza, Sr., Laura Pyle, Regina M. Hudson, Andrew G. Engleman, Gloria M. MacArthur, Michele L. Sundwall, Keith L. Connell, Felipe M. Solis, Geraldine Wilcox Cook, Ramon Silva, Deborah L. Wilbur, and Esiquiel Aguilar, Jr..
This claim is for overtime pay calculated at the rate of time and one-half for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in any one work week during the period beginning March 22, 2006, and into the future. As judicially authorized in Andrew S. Arena v. Superior Court, 163 Ariz. 423 (1990), this claim is also brought on behalf of all similarly-situated Officers employed by the State of Arizona, Department of Corrections (hereinafter “DOC”).
The basis of this claim is A.R.S. § 23-392 which provides in relevant part:
A. Any person engaged in law enforcement activities shall be compensated for each hour worked in excess of forty hours in one work week at the option of such employer at the following rates:
One and one-half times the regular rate at which such person is employed or one and one-half hours of compensatory time off for each hour worked if by the person’s job classification, overtime compensation is mandated by federal law.
If by the person’s job classification federal law does not mandate overtime compensation, the person shall receive the regular rate of pay or compensatory leave on an hour for hour basis.
B. For the purposes of this section, a “person engaged in law enforcement activities” means a law enforcement officer as defined by section 38-1001, a peace officer is defined by section 41-1701, or any security personnel responsible for controlling or maintaining custody of inmates in correctional institutions maintained by the State or a County, City or Town. The term “person engaged in law enforcement activities” shall not include any such person employed in a bonafide executive or administrative capacity as defined by the employer.
The Department of Corrections has not paid overtime as required by § 23‑392. Specifically, although the DOC has required the Officers to work 8.5 hour shifts or 42.5 hours per workweek, it has not paid these officers overtime pay for all hours in excess of 40 hours. Although thirty minutes of each 8.5 hour workday was ostensibly for an uninterrupted meal break, these officers, because of their work duties and work loads, did not have uninterrupted meal breaks. The full 8.5 hours per work day was therefore primarily and predominantly spent for the benefit of the Department of Corrections. These officers should have received overtime compensation for 2.5 hours per work week paid at the rate of one and one-half times their regular rates of pay. Prendergast v. City of Tempe, 143 Ariz. 14, 691 P.2d 726 (App. 1984).
This claim also seeks damages pursuant to A.R.S. § 23-351(C)(3) which requires that “overtime or exception pay shall be paid no later than 16 days after the end of the most recent pay period.” A.R.S. § 23-355 further provides: “If an employer in violation of the provisions of this chapter, shall fail to pay wages due any employee, such employee may recover in a civil action against an employer or former employer an amount which is treble the amount of the unpaid wages.”
In any such action to recover wages and treble damages, the Officers are entitled to recover all of their costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees. Velarde v. PACE Membership Warehouse, Inc., 105 F.3d 1313 (9 th Cir. 1997).
Finally, these Officers also seek pre-judgment interest at the rate of 10 percent per annum pursuant to A.R.S. § 44-1201, on all wages determined to be due and owing.
Because the information necessary to calculate the exact amount of wages and damages owed to each of the Officers is in possession of the Department of Corrections, it is impossible to state the exact amount due all of the Officers. Nevertheless, for purposes of this claim letter and in order to satisfy A.R.S. § 12-821.01, the specific amount for which these claims can be settled is $6,425,000.00. This figure was arrived at by estimating the Officers’ base pay rate at $20.00 per hour and therefore using an overtime rate of $30.00 per hour.
A class grievance was filed by these officers on March 22, 2007. Since March 22, 2006 (one year prior to the date of the grievance) to the present date, there have been approximately 75 workweeks. When the 75 workweeks of this claim period is multiplied by the estimated approximately 250 similarly situated Officers statewide, and that figure is multiplied times 2.5 hours of overtime for each employee per week and that figure is multiplied by the overtime rate, we arrive at a base overtime arrearage of $1,406.250.00. When trebled, that figure becomes $4,218,750.00. Interest at the rate of 10 percent per annum as provided by the statute was calculated at approximately $600,000.00. Attorneys’ fees of 33-1/3 percent ($1,606,250.00) were added to this figure. The total approximate value of the claim is therefore $ 6,425,000.00.
If you would like to discuss a proper resolution of this case, we would certainly be happy to do so. Otherwise, if we have not received your response or otherwise resolved this matter within 60 days from the date of this claim, we intend to file suit on behalf of the Officers and all other similarly-situated Officers seeking the full measure of damages as they exist at the time of judgment.
This letter also cautions that any reprisals against the named plaintiffs or other Officers for asserting their rights to wages is unlawful and will not be tolerated.
Sincerely,
Robert E. Yen REY:ib
Collective Bargaining Bill Introduced in the US Senate
Chuck Canterbury, National President of the Fraternal Order of Police, hailed the introduction of S. 2123, the "Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act," describing it as one of the top priorities for the organization.
"Public safety employees—police officers and firefighters—are virtually the only class of workers left in the nation today who are denied the fundamental right to bargain collectively with their employers over wages, hours, and working conditions," said Canterbury.
The bill was introduced yesterday by Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) and Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA), the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP). In addition to Senator Kennedy, there were nineteen other cosponsors—eight (8) Democrats, nine (9) Republicans, and two (2) independents. The legislation, which is the companion measure to H.R. 980 that passed the House of Representatives by an overwhelming 314-97 vote, recognizes the right of public safety employees to form and join unions, and bargain collectively with their employers. States with collective bargaining statutes will be exempt, and strikes and lockouts will be prohibited under the provisions of the bill.
"Law enforcement officers take their sworn oaths and their commitment to the protection of the public very seriously," Canterbury said. "We do not engage in work stoppages or slowdowns. Threats to public safety are not used as bargaining chips by police or firefighters. But without collective bargaining rights, these critical employees—these dedicated men and women—have no avenue to influence important decisions affecting their jobs and livelihoods. That's just not right."
Canterbury pledged the strong support of the FOP for the legislation, saying, "The 'Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act' will put police officers and firefighters on an equal footing with other employees—they'll finally be able to bargain collectively for wages, hours, and conditions of employment."
The Fraternal Order of Police is the largest law enforcement labor organization in the United States, with more than 325,000 members.
FOP's 2007 Legislative Success
With one exception. all of our 2007 Legislative Agenda items were passed by the legislature and signed into law.
2007 Arizona F.O.P. Legislative Agenda
Labor and Employment
As a result of our success in making changes to the Due Process statutes in 2005, we will continue to comply with our 2005 agreement with employers to delay FOP Due Process legislation for one more year.
The two year delay was intended to allow employers time to make voluntary adjustments and prove that they can treat law enforcement employees fairly in due process situations without additional legislation.
Success - SB1006 public records; confidentiality (FOP BILL previously SB1223) - passed the House and Senate and has been signed into law by the Governor. The provisions of SB1006 will be enacted September 19, 2007 .
Previously, the statues only allowed peace officers, justices, judges, commissioners, public defenders, code enforcement officers and prosecutors to remove residential addresses and telephone numbers from certain public records.
SB1006 expanded the list of persons eligible to redact information to include; law enforcement civilians, corrections and detention employees, national guard members acting in support of a law enforcement agency, probation officers, members of the Board of Executive Clemency, a person who is protected under an order of protection or injunction against harassment and firefighters assigned to the Arizona Counter-Terrorism Center in the Department of Public Safety.
Previously, peace officers were required to file a new affidavit and obtain a new court order when new public records were created. SB1006 allows an eligible person to use the previously approved court order filing number to redact new records rather than have to go through the entire affidavit and court order process (by which time the new records had been released and often ended up on the Internet).
Currently, all full time employees covered by PSPRS, EORP and ASRS have an ordinary disability benefit. Within CORP, dispatchers have an ordinary disability benefit, however, corrections officers do not. The cost to provide an ordinary disability benefit to corrections officers has been calculated at 2.4 million dollars.
The F.O.P.’s proposed ordinary disability was approved as part of the budget negotiations, however, the provision was approved with a delayed enactment. Implementation will become effective 1 year after the retirement system is 100% funded, but no earlier than June 30, 2010.
Withdrawn - HB2585 private retiree health insurance; subsidy(PROPOSED FOP BILL)Provide an additional Health Insurance Subsidy benefit for retirees who chose NOT to participate in health insurance options offered by their employer or the ASRS Retiree Health Insurance Program.
Compensation issues (Budget Process)
Success - Support budget legislation to address CORP salary compression issues (ADC Budget Issue).
$3 million for ADOC Supervisor Pay Increase
Success - Support substantial salary improvements for all State employees and work toward achieving market level compensation (State Employee Compensation Budget Issue).
$88.3 million to provide an across the board state employee salary increase of 3 percent, effective July 1, 2007. An additional 0.25 percent of the increase is added for performance pay.
$27.2 million for the employer to absorb the state health insurance increase.
$19.2 million for the employer to absorb the ASRS retirement rate increase.
Specifies that $2 million appropriated from the DPS sworn officer salary adjustments is to be used for Officer I, II and III classifications. Allows $672,900 appropriated from the Parity Compensation Fund for sworn officer salary adjustments to be distributed as determined by the department.
Legislation Update
To: F.O.P. Discussion Group From: Jim Mann, Arizona Labor Council Subject: Legislation Update - SB1006 (County Records; Confidentiality)
Update: F.O.P. Records Redaction Bill Signed by Governor
Over the past decade, the Arizona Fraternal Order of Police has sought and received changes to statutes governing the public’s access to records containing law enforcement personal information.
This session, the Fraternal Order of Police sought a further change in SB1006 (County Records; Confidentiality) to expand the list of persons who may request that their personal identifying information, including home address and telephone numbers, be redacted from county recorder, county assessor and county treasurer records. Under SB1006, law enforcement support staff, adult or juvenile corrections officers, corrections support staff, probation officers, parole board members, National Guard members acting in support of a law enforcement agency, and firefighters assigned to the Arizona Counterterrorism Center in the Arizona Dept. of Public Safety, may request that their personal information be redacted. This protection is currently available to peace officers, judges, commissioners, prosecutors, public defenders, domestic violence victims and code enforcement officers.
SB1006 was signed by the Governor on April 27, 2007 and will become law 90 days after the legislative session ends.
2006 Arizona F.O.P. Legislative Success
2006 Legislative session - All of our F.O.P. initiated legislation was passed through the Legislature and signed into law.
2006 Arizona F.O.P. Legislative Agenda
Labor and Employment
Success - Due Process - During the 2006 Arizona Legislative session, the Sheriffs introduced a bill which would have weakened the law enforcement merit system appeals process. The Fraternal Order of Police and other employee groups opposed the bill. The effort to weaken merit system appeals process failed.
As a result of our success in making changes to the Due Process statutes, we complied with our 2005 agreement with employers to delay further Due Process legislation for 2 years. The two year delay is intended to allow employers time to make voluntary adjustments and prove that they can treat law enforcement employees fairly in due process situations without additional legislation.
FOP Success - The FOP's DPS; officer organizations bill,sponsored by Senator Blendu, passed both the Senate and House and was signed into law by the Governor on 4/11/06. During the this Legislative session, the Fraternal Order of Police crafted a bill to clarify the voting requirements for the DPS Meet and Confer statute. This FOP bill provides that if more than 50% of DPS employees vote, DPS will recognize the employee organization that gets the majority of the votes cast. This bill further clarifies our original DPS Meet and Confer bill, which was passed into law last session.
Retirement and Pension
FOP Success - DROP for CORP - HB2482 was transmitted to the Governor on 4/26/2006. DROP is intended to provide Corrections Officers with a pension option similar to that already available to firefighters and police officers as an incentive to stay working longer. A corrections officer with more than 24 years of service, at retirement, can elect to receive an immediate Deferred Retirement Option Plan (DROP) lump sum in exchange for a reduced lifetime monthly pension. F.O.P. Bill
Initially introduced as SB1228, sponsored by Senator Huppenthal, CORP DROP passed the Senate 30-0 and was added to HB2482, which passed both the House and Senate unanimously. The legislature recognized the CORP DROP as a retirement plan option needed to encourage experienced employees in critical functions to work as long as possible. Very few corrections officers stay long enough to qualify for a pension and even fewer stay long enough to qualify for a maximum pension.
Under the provisions of HB2482 a corrections officer with more than 24 years of service can elect to receive a reduced pension AND a lump-sum payment equal to his or her monthly pension benefit, with interest, accumulated from the date they select after 24 years of service until the actual retirement date. The benefit is capped at 60 months (5 years).
The bill has a sunset date of July 1, 2011. A sunset provision is routine for retirement benefits.
FOP Success - CORP Re-employment - HB2482 was transmitted to the Governor on 4/26/2006. Originally introduced by Senator Huppenthal in SB1172 CORP reemployment was passed unanimously by the Senate. Later SB1172 was consolidated into HB2482. This bill is intended to provide increased employment opportunities for retired members of the Corrections Officer Retirement Plan. HB2482, as passed unanimously by both the Senate and the House, allows a retired member of CORP, who retired prior to January 1, 2006, to be re employed by a CORP participating employer and receive pension benefits at the same time if the reemployment occurs at least 90 days after retirement and involves substantial direct inmate contact, except that the return to work provision does not apply to retired members who are re employed before 90 days after retirement or the reemployment does not involve substantial direct inmate supervision. Joint F.O.P. and ADC Bill
The bill has a sunset date of June 30, 2008. A sunset provision is routine for retirement benefits. After an evaluation of reemployment trends, the legislature may be willing to extend or change the eligibility.
FOP Success - Retired ID Cards - SB1258 requires law enforcement agencies to issue photo identification to officers who retire honorably. F.O.P. Bill
The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (Act) was passed by Congress in 2004 to allow qualified retired law enforcement officers who have specific identification (ID) to carry concealed handguns, notwithstanding any state or local law.
The Act defines a qualified retired law enforcement officer as an officer who has retired in good standing from a public agency service and who has met the state's standards for training and qualification for active law enforcement officers to carry firearms during the most recent 12-month period. Before his or her retirement, the officer must have been authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, prosecution of or incarceration of any person for any violation of the law and had statutory powers of arrest. In addition to this, the officer must have been regularly employed as a law enforcement officer for at least 15 years or been forced to retire due to a service-connected disability.
Qualified law enforcement officers are allowed to carry a concealed weapon under the Act when they are carrying: a) a photo ID issued by the agency for which they work or from which they retired, indicating the individual has, within the past year, been tested and meets state qualifications to carry a firearm; or b) a photo ID issued by the agency for which they work or from which they retired, AND a certification issued by the state in which they reside indicating the individual has, within the past year, been tested and meets state qualifications to carry a firearm.
In 2005, the Legislature allowed the Department of Public Safety to issue firearm proficiency certificates to facilitate implementation of the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act.
This bill mandates that law enforcement agencies to issue photographic identification to law enforcement officers who have retired honorably from the agency. Requires the chief law enforcement officer to determine if an officer has retired honorably. Exempts law enforcement agencies from the obligation to revoke, alter or modify honorable discharge identification once it has been issued.
Compensation Issues
F.O.P. Success - Support substantial catch-up salary improvements for State Corrections Officers - The top priority for the Arizona Fraternal Order of Police is salary and benefit improvements for State Corrections Officers. The F.O.P. legislative committee has been meeting with legislators for several months on this issue. The legislative action must be taken by the legislature during budget negotiations. Generally, the legislature has been very receptive to our calls to make substantial and effective salary improvements. The appropriations process is still in the works.
F.O.P. Success - Support substantial salary improvements for all State employees - SB1202 and HB 2661 as amended. Initially the FOP OPPOSED the original bill which would have made all new hires "at will" employees. The FOP was allowed to work an amendment, which was adopted and approved. The FOP initiated amendment removed the "at will" provision for law enforcement and Corrections employees. The "at will" provision for all other employees started at grade 24 and above. The pay raise portion was enhanced to 6.3%.
The bill was approved by the Senate and House and was transmitted to the Governor. It was signed into law on 1/30/2006 and the Governor used a line item veto to remove the "at will" portion of the bill. See Chapter 1. The legislative leadership has initiated a lawsuit over the line item veto.
In addition to our call for salary improvements for Corrections Officers, the F.O.P. will continue to ask the legislature to make significant improvements to all State worker pay and benefits in accordance with the Joint Legislative Study Committee on State Employee Compensation, which voted on Nov. 8, 2005 to forward to the governor and legislative leadership a five-year plan that would put state government on par with public and private markets by 2011. Also, additional health insurance benefits are needed.
FOP's 2004 Legislative Agenda
Final Summary of Significant Laws Passed During the 46th Legislature June 2004
The 46th Legislature, 2nd Regular Session, adjourned on Wednesday, May 26, 2004. The laws enacted by the legislature will become law 90 days after the Legislative Session ended, or upon the effective date listed in the bill. The general effective date is 8/25/04.
As we close this very active and successful legislative session, it is important to thank everybody who made telephone calls, wrote letters and sent e-mail in support of the FOP legislation. This year, the FOP's legislative website included the capability to fill out and send pre-formatted e-mail to the appropriate legislators while important bills were winding their way through the legislative process. Although we started the e-mail campaign in mid-session, 5,146 individual e-mail messages, supporting FOP priority issues, were sent to legislators via the FOP website.
In addition, our lobbying firm, Don Isaacson and Steve Duffy, should be recognized for brilliantly performing miracles throughout the session. Among many other services, Don Isaacson drafted proposals, arranged sponsorship and skillfully guided FOP priority legislation through the process. On several important issues the FOP teamed up with other employee groups and individuals to make proposals work.
The FOP began lobbying for our 2004 Legislative Agenda in November of 2003. We approached the session with our legislative agenda priorities separated into three categories; Labor and Employment issues; Retirement/Pension proposals and Miscellaneous Support. As we began the session, we identified nine priority issues. At the end of the session, five of our nine priorities were enacted and one, the DPS Pay Parity priority, was funded through a budget mechanism. The remaining three made great progress, however, did not get approved.
The FOP Legislative Committee met with individual legislators and the governor many times during the session to promote the interests of the FOP membership. The FOP Legislative Committee lobbied effectively, gave testimony to legislative committees and spent a significant amount of their free time working to get these bills passed.
The DPS Pay Parity priority was a “partial win” in that the FOP membership rallied to send a significant number of e-mails asking legislators to pass the bill. At the end, the legislature converted the issue to a budget item. As a result of effective lobbying and grass roots FOP member involvement, DPS officers received a greater salary increase than initially proposed by the legislature.
Late in the session, the FOP and other employee groups were invited by Representative Huppenthal to work on a proposal to create a "Catastrophic Disability" benefit. The discussions resulted not only in the creation of the new disability classification, but will work as a vehicle to present the results of our in-progress PSPRS/CORP Mercer Consulting retiree health insurance study to the legislature next December. It looks like we correctly anticipated this issue last February when we encouraged the PSPRS Fund Mangers to approve and initiate the retiree health insurance cost study.
The bills listed below are the significant bills passed during the 2004 legislative session. The first five are the FOP Priority issues and the remaining are some of the many bills the FOP tracked during the session. The bills the FOP supported are identified in the text. Other bills are listed because they may have an impact to our profession or retirement benefits. Links to the new laws and the legislative summaries are included.
Rights of a law enforcement officer who has appealed a disciplinary action by an employer are revised to state that a copy of the investigative file (including names and addresses of all persons interviewed during the investigation) must be provided to the officer within 3 business days after the employer receives notice of appeal and that each side must exchange documents and witness lists within 5 days of the hearing. The appeals board or judge may be asked to rule on the advisability of disclosing certain information that might result in harm. The officer may request a change in the administrative law judge hearing the action, and on the first request, it shall be granted. Subsequent requests must show that a fair and impartial hearing cannot be obtained because of the prejudice of the assigned hearing officer or judge.
First sponsor: Sen. Weiers. Others: Rep. Huppenthal, Sen. L Aguirre, Binder, Brotherton, Cheuvront, Jarrett, Miranda, Rios, Verschoor.
Prohibits the disclosure of a peace officer’s photograph from his or her personnel file with the following exceptions:
A law enforcement agency may release a peace officer’s photograph from the officer’s personnel file if that officer is charged by complaint, information or indictment of a misdemeanor or felony.
A police agency may use the officer’s personnel photograph to assist a person with a complaint against an officer for the purpose of identifying an officer.
A photograph may be used if it was obtained from any source other than a law enforcement agency.
A representative of a newspaper requests the photograph for a specific newsworthy event, unless the peace officer is undercover or is scheduled to be undercover within 60 days; the release of the photograph is not in the best interest of this state, or; a peace officer or prosecutor files an affidavit with the presiding judge of the superior court in the county in which the affiant resides, requesting to prohibit the release of the photograph, pursuant to A.R.S. § 28-454.
PSPRS provides retirement benefits to firefighters, police officers, and a variety of certified peace officers in the State of Arizona. It is comprised of 195 employer groups with over 15,500 active members. As of July 1, 2003, there were over 6,100 retirees and beneficiaries receiving benefits.
Current law (A.R.S. § 38-849) states that if a PSPRS member is discharged because of theft, embezzlement, fraud or misappropriation of an employer’s property, the member would not be entitled to receive a pension, and would instead receive a lump sum payment equal to the member’s contributions as of the date the member was discharged. HB 2542 would expand § 38-849’s limitations on pension entitlement to include those members convicted of theft, embezzlement, fraud, or misappropriation of an employer’s property, or property under the control of the member’s employer.
Creates a new catastrophic disability pensionclassification to mean a physical condition that results in a catastrophic injury incurred in the performance of the employee’s duty and that the local board determines prevents the employee from totally and permanently engaging in any gainful employment.Allows for 10 catastrophic disability pensions in calendar year 2004 and allows for four additional catastrophic disability pensions every year thereafter.
States that if more than the allowable amount of catastrophic disability pensions are approved by the Local Boards, then no new catastrophic disability pensions may be awarded from and after December 31 of the following calendar year. Requires the Local Boards to reevaluate members receiving catastrophic disability pensions 60 months after the initial award and every year thereafter to determine if the member is able to engage in any gainful employment.
States that catastrophic disability pensions shall be calculated as follows:
For the first 60 months, 90% of the member’s average monthly salary.
After the first 60 months, 60% of the member’s average salary or the amount the member would have received under a normal pension, whichever is greater.
Mandates that catastrophic disability pensions be based on medical evidence provided by a physician or clinic appointed by the Local Board.
States that if a PSPRS member is convicted of theft, embezzlement, fraud or misappropriation of an employer’s property or property under the control of the employer, the member shall be subject to restitution and fines imposed by a court of competent jurisdiction.
States that the court may order the restitution or fines be paid from any payments otherwise payable to the member from the retirement system.
Stipulates that beginning on July 1, 2008, PSPRS employers whose retired employees elect to purchase individual health insurance coverage shall be required to provide the administrative functions associated with the payment of health insurance subsidy.
Outlines guidelines for the payment and limits the payment to $25 per month.
Modifies the definition of nonservice area in relation to the PSPRS temporary rural retiree health insurance subsidy to include qualifying areas outside of Arizona.
Requires Legislative Council to contract with a private entity to conduct a study on retiree health insurance within the four state retirement systems, including the feasibility and cost impact of establishing a single health insurance for all retirees.
First sponsor: Rep. Huppenthal. Others: Rep. Boone.
Beginning in fiscal 2005-06, the minimum employer contribution rate for the Corrections Officer Retirement Plan is increased to 4% from 2%. Additionally, if the aggregate employer contribution falls below 4% of salary, the employee rate (currently 8.5%) shall be permanently reduced by an amount equal to the difference between 4% and the aggregate employer rate, but never less than 7.65%. Sponsor: Rep. Huppenthal.
A member of the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System who is receiving a pension for "accidental disability" (defined as a work-related injury that has resulted in permanently preventing the person from the normal range of work in his/her job classification but that does not prevent the person from engaging in other gainful activity) will not have the amount of the pension reduced if he/she finds work. The statutory reduction for those whose disability is classified as "ordinary" (unable to engage in "any substantial gainful activity") remains unchanged. First sponsor: Rep. Huppenthal. Others: Sen. Weiers.
THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE IS THE BEST KNOWN AND MOST RESPECTED NAME IN LAW ENFORCEMENT
The Grand Lodge Fraternal Order of Police represents more than 318,000 law enforcement officers in every region of the country. We are not only the oldest and largest law enforcement labor organization, but also the most widely recognized and respected.
The FOP’s Labor Services Office keeps the FOP at the fore front in labor issues and keeps labor at the top of the list when it comes to what the FOP is involved in nationally. Out of the 75 largest cities in the US the FOP represents 27 and that number continues to grow. The FOP has a Labor Services Department staffed with some of the top labor professionals in the country. This staff has over 100 years of experience used to assist our members everyday with labor questions, helping all the lodges with their labor needs.
A recent review of the twelve major law enforcement groups in the news during 2004 showed that the Fraternal Order of Police remains the most frequently mentioned organization for the fourth straight year. The review was conducted using Lexis-Nexis ™, and examined twelve different organizations representing rank-and-file officers and law enforcement executives at the Federal, State and local levels from 1 January to 31 December 2004. During this period, the Fraternal Order of Police was cited in over 4,200 different articles. The next closest organization, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, was mentioned in just over 800 articles.
In addition to being the most well-known and widely cited law enforcement organization in the U.S. media, the Fraternal Order of Police is also the number one voice of law enforcement on Capitol Hill and the most influential and visible voice for law enforcement in Washington, D.C.
At the core of the National Legislative Program is the Steve Young Memorial Law Enforcement Legislative Advocacy Center, the F.O.P.’s permanent headquarters located on Capitol Hill. The F.O.P. maintains a very high profile as the premier voice of police officers nationwide with a full-time professional staff engaged in the day-to-day activities of Congress and the Administration.
F.O.P. leaders frequently testify before Congress on legislation of critical importance to law enforcement officers. Decision-makers in the Administration often consult the collective experience of the F.O.P. in crafting national law enforcement policy. No other law enforcement organization is as widely consulted by the Federal government or the media for our views on law enforcement issues.
Chuck Canterbury, National President of the Fraternal Order of Police, hailed the introduction of S. 2123, the "Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act," describing it as one of the top priorities for the organization.
