By Anthony Rice
In the City of Chicago, the arbitrator denied the grievance alleging a CBA violation for the City’s decision not to staff a Patrol Officer on a holiday, despite having done so in the past.
At the time of the alleged CBA violation, the Grievant, who is currently a Sergeant in the Chicago P.D., was a Patrol Officer detailed to the Special Events Unit. The Special Events Unit is responsible for coordinating the P.D.’s response to special events, such as parades, motorcades, and movie shoots. Thus, on holidays like Lincoln’s Birthday, at issue here, the Grievant normally is assigned work. However, in this case the Grievant was not “required to work” his regular tour of duty on the contractual holiday because The Special Events Unit had been declared “non-essential” by the City. The Union grieved, asserting the City abused its Management rights.
To support denying the grievance, the arbitrator looked to the language of the CBA Section 23.7 provided that: “When operational considerations require that some officers of a unit work on a holiday, as defined in Section 11.1 of this Agreement, the most senior officers will be given the option to work, provided that the holiday is not an officer’s regular day off or a part of an officer’s approved furlough extension….” The arbitrator explained that this clause implied that the Department might elect something less than full staffing on a holiday:
Section 23.7 [of the CBA] language indicates clear recognition by both parties that working on a holiday is more exception than rule, because working on a holiday must first be required. In other words, working on a holiday is not assumed. My conclusion on this point is specifically supported by the instruction that immediately follows, i.e., that the most senior officer or officers within the unit be given the option to work provided it is not their day off.
In other words, the arbitrator found a clear indication, within Section 23.7 of the CBA, that working a holiday (even if it is a regularly assigned work day) should not be an expectation on the part of any bargaining unit member.
This is so because work on a holiday must first be required by the City, and then, it is awarded on the basis of seniority (provided skill requirements are met). Any finding to the contrary on my part would be tantamount to granting the Union something it did not gain through collective bargaining; a requirement on the part of the City to fully staff the Police Department on holidays
Editor’s Note (Jim Cline): The arbitration result in this case was predictable based on the CBA language, as well as general principles of management rights. Although the management rights clause itself was not specific about management’s right to set staffing levels, this is assumed to be a normal management decision in most contexts. Here, the language providing seniority preference for holidays; clearly implying that something less than full staffing might occur. Where a management right exists, a past practice argument rarely succeeds.
