News (Media Awareness Project) - US CA: Police Union Drops Drug Test Lawsuit |
Title: | US CA: Police Union Drops Drug Test Lawsuit |
Published On: | 2000-04-13 |
Source: | Los Angeles Times (CA) |
Fetched On: | 2008-09-04 21:56:47 |
POLICE UNION DROPS DRUG TEST LAWSUIT
*City and group to return to random drug testing negotiations.
HUNTINGTON BEACH -- After years of bitter disagreement, the city and the
police union hope for a fresh start when they renew negotiations on how to
randomly test officers for drug use.
"There's some bad feelings associated with this from both sides," said Bill
Osness, the city's personnel director. To help clear the air, the union
agreed last month to dismiss a lawsuit filed against the city, which in
return withdrew its threat to unilaterally impose testing, a March 14 city
document shows.While he said he in no way suggests there is a drug problem
within the police ranks, Councilman Tom Harman believes a screening process
is necessary to make sure officers stay clean.
"We need to keep a close eye on our officers," he said. "There can, on
occasion, be misconduct."
Having police under the influence poses too great a risk to public safety,
Harman said.
"Their life or somebody else's life may be hanging in the balance," he said.
The only officers randomly tested for drugs now are the department's new
hires, which make up about 20 out of a total force of 170, Osness said. The
officers are only tested in their first year, he said. Also, anyone in the
city under "reasonable suspicion" of working under the influence is tested,
he said.
Since 1994, the city has been pushing for the tests, and the officers
association has steadfastly resisted out of fear that the results would be
unreliable.
Frustrated by a lack of progress in talks, city officials threatened to
unilaterally impose a policy in 1996 -- a ploy the union has resented to
this day, Osness said.
The union's spokesman, president Russ Reinhart, declined to comment.
The association managed to stall the city's implementation of a testing
program until February 1999, when the city planned to initiate drug
screening. In the 11th hour, the union filed a lawsuit charging that the
program is illegal and lacks significant employee safeguards.
The judge ordered the parties in March 1999 to try to reach an out-of-court
settlement, but no breakthroughs resulted.
Councilwoman Shirley Dettloff said she hopes the union leaders will be more
reasonable in upcoming negotiations.
"I don't know what's in their minds," she said. "It should not have gone on
this long. I am absolutely adamant about that."
Neither side would discuss the major points that will be discussed. As a
guideline for negotiations, expected to restart by late May, both sides have
agreed to use the random drug testing policy of the Los Angeles County
Sheriff's Department as a guideline.
That procedure provides for confidential testing up to three times a year
for most officers, with additional tests for those who operate heavy
equipment, work in narcotic units or are recent recruits.
*City and group to return to random drug testing negotiations.
HUNTINGTON BEACH -- After years of bitter disagreement, the city and the
police union hope for a fresh start when they renew negotiations on how to
randomly test officers for drug use.
"There's some bad feelings associated with this from both sides," said Bill
Osness, the city's personnel director. To help clear the air, the union
agreed last month to dismiss a lawsuit filed against the city, which in
return withdrew its threat to unilaterally impose testing, a March 14 city
document shows.While he said he in no way suggests there is a drug problem
within the police ranks, Councilman Tom Harman believes a screening process
is necessary to make sure officers stay clean.
"We need to keep a close eye on our officers," he said. "There can, on
occasion, be misconduct."
Having police under the influence poses too great a risk to public safety,
Harman said.
"Their life or somebody else's life may be hanging in the balance," he said.
The only officers randomly tested for drugs now are the department's new
hires, which make up about 20 out of a total force of 170, Osness said. The
officers are only tested in their first year, he said. Also, anyone in the
city under "reasonable suspicion" of working under the influence is tested,
he said.
Since 1994, the city has been pushing for the tests, and the officers
association has steadfastly resisted out of fear that the results would be
unreliable.
Frustrated by a lack of progress in talks, city officials threatened to
unilaterally impose a policy in 1996 -- a ploy the union has resented to
this day, Osness said.
The union's spokesman, president Russ Reinhart, declined to comment.
The association managed to stall the city's implementation of a testing
program until February 1999, when the city planned to initiate drug
screening. In the 11th hour, the union filed a lawsuit charging that the
program is illegal and lacks significant employee safeguards.
The judge ordered the parties in March 1999 to try to reach an out-of-court
settlement, but no breakthroughs resulted.
Councilwoman Shirley Dettloff said she hopes the union leaders will be more
reasonable in upcoming negotiations.
"I don't know what's in their minds," she said. "It should not have gone on
this long. I am absolutely adamant about that."
Neither side would discuss the major points that will be discussed. As a
guideline for negotiations, expected to restart by late May, both sides have
agreed to use the random drug testing policy of the Los Angeles County
Sheriff's Department as a guideline.
That procedure provides for confidential testing up to three times a year
for most officers, with additional tests for those who operate heavy
equipment, work in narcotic units or are recent recruits.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...