"Secret Contract!"

DNA Info continues to swim in the media sewer - this is from an actual article by alleged "journalists:"

• Let’s be honest, not many people had read the Chicago Police union contract before video of the fatal shooting of Laquan McDonald was released and the U.S. Justice Department launched an investigation into dirty dealings at the Police Department.
  
  As things turned out, the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 7 contract is filled with fascinating tidbits that shed light on what it’s like to be a big-city cop — especially when an officer faces misconduct allegations or has fired a gun on duty.

We can hardly wait to see the give-and-take between the reporters and the FOP! And then...uh...what? There isn't a single quote from the FOP explaining things? You mean this is just another smear job by the "impartial hacks" in the media? Well, grab the popcorn! Maybe we can explain things:

• For instance, according to the police contract, officers who face misconduct allegations or fire a gun:
  
  Must make a first statement to their supervisor in secret.

In secret? Really? You mean when an Officer is ordered to make a statement? Where that whole "Right to remain silent" thing falls by the wayside because the Officer is in a position where his testimony may be used against him solely because he cannot refuse to answer questions? We must have forgotten the part where Officers have no Rights under the Constitution.

• Cannot be publicly identified

Um, duh? The Department doesn't identify arrestees until such time as they are charged, arraigned or have appeared in Court. Officers are entitled to the same protections as a lowly dope dealer, aren't they? Oh wait, Officers aren't citizens according to the media narrative.

• Can postpone making statements in shooting cases with people other than their supervisor for two hours unless he or she claims to be “physically or emotionally unable to provide a statement within the two-hour time period … accepting at face value all good faith claims of an Officer’s inability to provide a statement.” 

Sure, because the Officer hasn't been involved in what is arguably and demonstrably the most stressful incident in their careers. The investigation better just rush around and ask everyone questions before they have any time to properly digest the events. Chest pains? Not today Officer - you aren't a citizen, let alone a human being!

• Receive provided written copies of all their statements.

Again, duh? Why wouldn't you be provided with it? Dope dealers and their lawyers get everything. Why should Officers be deprived of the same Rights?

• Get interviewed by the Independent Police Review Authority “preferably while … on duty, or if feasible, during daylight hours.”

This is a Daley bean-counter provision - god forbid we have to pay anyone overtime when they can just order them to appear during their shift. And conducting interrogations in the dead of night doesn't mess with anyone's recollections, right?

• Allowed to interrupt interrogation sessions, which must be a "reasonable" amount of time, for "personal necessities, meals, telephone calls and rest."

Are these asshole reporters serious? Do they have any idea how many convictions have been returned or reversed because the Police didn't allow for bathroom breaks? Because the Police denied someone food? That they couldn't contact a lawyer? Or sleep deprivation allegations? Who the fuck are these jagoffs to complain that Gestapo/KGB techniques are completely acceptable to be used on Officers when they're the same asshats who'd do a three-part series on a child rapist who was denied a burger when he got hungry?

• May be allowed to review, when permitted by the city, any video or audio evidence before being interviewed by IPRA investigators.

God lord, this is reporting? Again, C-I-T-I-Z-E-N-S. Officers have Rights, same as scumbags.

• Can revise statements without punishment after seeing video or other evidence from the shooting.

Sure, because again, the most stressful incident of an Officer's career can't result in different interpretations of the facts at hand. Video can't refine or sharpen the memories of what you experienced. You might think you only fired five or six shots, but the ET collected a dozen pieces of brass - it's completely fine that they withhold this evidence to trap you in a "lie." Are you fucking kidding us?

• Will not be charged with violating Rule 14 (making false statements, written or oral) if they are not allowed to review video or other evidence before being interviewed by IPRA.

Okay, we're getting into full dumbassery here. If you aren't allowed any of the three previous Contractual guarantees, how can you be charged with a Rule 14? Remember, these are "journalists" who went to "school" to write this horseshit.

• Can decline to take a lie-detector test.

Given the unreliability of lie detector tests and their inadmissibility in most Courts, why is this a surprise? Oh yeah, because Officers can be ordered to do certain things, so the FOP made sure that this pseudo-science wasn't one of them.

• Shall not be made available to be interviewed by reporters unless the officer is criminally convicted or discipline is finalized by the Chicago Police Board or police superintendent.

Given the "quality" of this article, we'd agree completely with this provision.

• Shall be informed of the identity of the two officers (and just two) assigned to conduct the misconduct interrogation.

Thank goodness for this one, otherwise IPRA and IAD would still be wearing the hoods and zipper masks while interrogating Officers. Seriously, Officers are expected to identify themselves for every interaction with a citizen. Detectives are required to introduce themselves prior to any interrogations. But these goofs want a Star Chamber of Inquisitors to be able to question Officers. You can tell these people long for the days of Stalin and Mao.

• Can agree to “mediate” the resolution of misconduct allegations with IPRA or Internal Affairs in private (without case investigators present) to negotiate disciplinary action.

Another Shortshanks clause - it's used as a threat. "You can accept the five/ten/fifteen days suspension we are offering, or we'll go to the Board for 30-Pending-Separation. You might win in Court, but that will be two years down the road and you'll be unemployed during that time." It takes the political damage out of the process. The mayor can claim "swift discipline" and minimize fallout.

Then the article gets to the heart of the matter - money. Damn you Contract!

• ...the contract also allows officers who face up to three days' suspension to forfeit accumulated vacation, personal days, and even “baby furlough days” rather than being removed from actually serving a suspension.

Um, so what? The jails aren't filled with people who run red lights or park on hydrants. They get a ticket, can plead guilty and pay a fine, and move on with their lives. They are a little poorer in the wallet, but wiser in the ways of driving and parking and life goes on. Officers get tagged for all sorts of violations - missing court, uniform deficiencies, grooming standards, etc. They get a SPAR, plead guilty and pay a fine in the form of forfeited benefits - it's still a financial hit. Then they move on, a little poorer in the wallet, but wiser in the ways of the Department. What do these morons want? Officers fired for a red-light violation?

• Also, officers disciplined for misconduct who appeal their punishment to an arbitrator are not required to serve suspensions — and remain on paid status — until an arbitrator (or the Police Board in officer termination cases) makes a ruling on the merits of punishment.

Once again, the Right to an appeal - fine for criminals, but not for Officers - welcome to Leftist la-la land.

• ....the contract guarantees an officer:
  
  At least two hours of overtime “call back” pay for officers required to return to beat meetings when not on duty
  
  At least two hours of overtime pay to attend required court sessions when not on duty.

Imagine that - Officers wanting to be paid for being ordered to show up, off duty, in uniform, representing the Department, and subject to Department rules and regulations. Have you ever heard of such a thing? We know for a fact that when we see construction workers on the road every two or three miles, they're not doing it for money - they're there for free, wanting only to build roads. And automobile assembly line workers in that great city of Detroit? They aren't there earning filthy money - they're there simply to build a fine American made automobile. And reporters? They don't want money. They just want to report actual facts and make sure that the electorate has the information needed to make a good decision so we have leaders who are beyond reproach and not helping spread an agenda that damages society as a whole. So damn you greedy Officers!

• A $1,800-a-year uniform allowance
  
  A $3,480-a-year “duty availability” allowance that is “not dependent on an officer being present for duty for an entire pay period.”

To cover cleaning, replacement, updates along with bulletproof vests and maintenance of equipment, and of course, ammunition, which for some reason, has gone up in price in Cook County so that we can practice and be proficient.

But again, this is another Daley bean counter "savings." You see, back in the day, the Police had the audacity to ask for...get this....raises. Prices kept going up, but salaries were stagnant, which made it difficult to actually, you know, live. But a higher salary would mean that Daley had to make a large pension contribution - salary is pensionable after all, and Daley was in the middle of the biggest theft-in-progress by not paying adequately into the pension, but rather spending the money on pet projects and giveaways to assorted voting blocs. So Daley's people came up with a way to give the cops more money while not raising their salaries, thus "saving" money. Funny how DNAInfo missed that - almost like there might be an agenda somewhere.

• Time-and-a-half pay for serving as a language translator outside their assigned unit, plus a two-hour overtime pay bonus if work is done not during regularly assigned duties.

So what? Paramedics and firefighters get specialty pay for different qualifications. Construction workers get differential pay for working overnight. They're saying that Officers with a particular skill set shouldn't be compensated for their knowledge? And again, damn you Officers for not being available around the clock at the beck-and-call of the Department for free when you're home, in bed, reading to your children.

• No limit on the amount of compensation time due an officer can accumulate.

Honest to god, who are these assholes? They want to limit the amount of money you can make? These aren't just lib-tarded leftists, they're full blown commies.

Remember, this is from a Contract that was negotiated with the City, presented to the Council, debated and voted upon by the aldercreatures...all in public. We don't see the media taking them to task. We don't even see DNAInfo doing an investigation into those "perks" like paying themselves rent from their slush-funds, voting themselves massive raises, directing business to their law officers, representing corporations that might do business with the city, making twice what an Officer does for a supposed part-time job and a pension that is fully funded to overflowing.

Nope, Police are the problem.