patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Montgomery County Sues Board of Elections Over Police Bargaining Rights

The County Council authorized its attorney to pursue a legal challenge of the Board of Elections' November decision to put the question of police bargaining rights on the 2012 general election ballot.

 

 

Montgomery County Council will sue the county's Board of Elections after the board put the questions of police bargaining rights on the 2012 general election ballot.

The issue revolves around "effects bargaining" and prior to the passage of a law in July, police could bargain certain management decisions, such as how officers are given new assignments and how to implement a new computer system used by employees.

The law does not affect the rights of police officers to negotiate items such as salary and benefits. According to a statement released Tuesday by County Council President Roger Berliner, county police officers were the sole county employees to possess this “unique” managerial bargaining right.

In November, the Fraternal Order of Police gathered enough signatures to take the legislation to a referendum in the 2012 general election. Shortly after the Board of Elections approved the petition to referendum, the Montgomery County Council filed a lawsuit challenging the board’s decision. 

Attorney Jonathan Shurberg, of Silver Spring, is assisting the county's legal challenge, looking into the validity and procedure of the police petition efforts and whether the Montgomery County Board of Elections was correct in passing the petition to referendum.

County Council members have expressed concern that signature seekers gave inaccurate or incomplete information about the issues surrounding the repeal of effects bargaining.

Have you been approached by petitioners? Do you think petitioners misrepresented the issue to county residents? Should effects bargaining be restored to Montgomery County Police?

  • Were you approached by police petitioners about "effects bargaining?" Do you think the issues were misrepresented?

    (Voting has been closed for this question)
    • Yes, I was approached by police petitioners about "effects bargaining," and I think the issues were misrepresented.
        12 (24%)
    • Yes, I was approached by police petitioners about "effects bargaining," and I think the issues were correctly represented.
        19 (38%)
    • I was not approached by police petitioners about "effects bargaining."
        19 (38%)
    Total votes: 50
  • Your vote will only count once. This is not a scientific poll. View Results Vote!
Related Topics: Effects Bargaining, Montgomery County Council, Montgomery County police, and Public Safety

MD

10:47 am on Wednesday, February 15, 2012

As much as I think the people have more and final say to things, I think having unions for local,state or federal employees is wrong. Government employees including fire and police should NOT have bargaining rights.

Reply

Public

8:54 am on Thursday, February 16, 2012

MD you sound as if you have an axe to grind. Let begin by saying of saying that of all collective bargining units public safety collective barganing is a must. These individuals are in a very unique position.The jobs they do put them in harms way on a daily basis. When the average joe goes to work how many times does he or she have to worry about exposure to cancer causing agents, people who want to do them harm, fire and the proper maitience of the vehicles they ride in. There are so many other dangers of the job they are to numerous to mention. I suggest MD that maybe you try a ride along with a public safety person and see what these unions do to protect them. Its not only about pay and compensation. Get educated and then make an informed oppinion.

Reply

Leave a comment