writing need help please

Mar 19th, 2015
FratBro23
Category:
Writing
Price: $10 USD

Question description

Boston Police Strike of  1912

Diane Lewicki

Lea439: Politics & Law Enforcement

Instructor: Patrick Norris

March 19, 2015

Boston police strike of 1919

  Faced by an oversupply of manpower from soldiers returning home from the First World War and high costs of living, which had significantly surpassed the police wages the Boston police force, was operating under working conditions, worse than the most unskilled factory workers. They worked seven days a week translating to between 72 and 98 hours a week and taking a day off every other week. The police officers were paid modest salaries and they were made to sleep in their stations, just in case they were summoned back for duty (Farmer, 2011). Other grievances included the deplorable state of the police stations and the fact that they were not paid for making court appearances. Due to the structural challenges in dealing with their grievances the officers decided to consider unionisation and sought guidance from the American Federation of Labor (AFL). The police were conferred a union charter in August 1919 which was followed by state legislation barring public officials in Boston from joining or forming a union. This was a wrong move as despite the officers having legitimate grievances, all efforts were directed towards suffocating their calls for fair wage and better working conditions.

  On August 20 the commissioner of police suspended 19 police officers for engaging in the push for unionization asserting that police officer as public officers should put the safety of the public ahead of their collective bargaining interests. On the evening of September 9, 1919 the Boston police strike began with their main grievance being barring their unionization and their affiliation with AFL. 1,117 officers out of the total 1,544 personnel of the Boston Police Department took part in the strike and declined to report for work. Since the supply of labour was in plenty, the police commissioner was able to hire an entirely new police force. However the actions of the brave 1,117 police officers paid off as the new hires were engaged on better terms including better working conditions and higher pay.

Boston police strike of 1919

There are a number of issues that come out from the Boston police strike case of 1919. Issues to do with the legality of strikes of public servants, whether unionised or non-unionised, the status of unionization of public servants especially for critical services such as the police officers, and firemen and the handling public officers grievances by their managers. First and foremost, it is agreeable that at the time there existed actual grievances that were not only limiting the performance of the police officers responsibilities but had the potential of adversely affecting the residents of Boston. The next concern regarding the case would be was the Boston police unionization necessary? From the way the police commissioner handled the issue it is clear that there was disconnect of understanding especially on his part with regards to the affairs of his officers. This might be attributed to the fact that at the time, there was a lack of proper channel or structure of communication that would ensure that actual information is effectively passed to the management. That is what collective bargaining is all about.

  Having mouthpiece that does not fear retribution and therefore very effective in passing information across to the management without any reservations. However, even with the existence of an effective mouth piece of the employees in the form of union leaders the management should also be willing to openly and constructively take part in the negotiations. It is a give and take situation. If the police commissioner would have sat down with the leaders of the pseudo labour union and considered their grievances, then probably the strike would never have happened. Given the existing economic and working conditions one would say that the unionization of the Boston police department was necessary at the time. Since all the efforts made by the police in attempting to air their grievances were not taken seriously then the only available option at the time was to seek guidance on unionization from the American Federation

Boston police strike of 1919

of Labor. However it should be noted that the labour union was only to be formed for the purpose of delivering effective services to the police officers in Boston. This agenda to be successful is to be mutual across board, which is, by the management and by the labour union leaders.  Though not given much attention at it deserves, the 1919 Boston police department strike was successful as the police commissioner became aware of the existing conditions and was able to offer better working conditions and wages to the new police officers.

Collective Bargaining

The post 1960s era saw a lot of changes regarding collective bargaining for public sector workers in the United States (Edwards, 2010).  Here, Edwards (2010), points out that before the 1960s, the courts was of the opinion that public sector workers were not entitled to union privileges as the private sector workers do such as collective bargaining. The author states that this position swiftly changed beginning 1960s and that by 2010, 26 states had collective bargaining for all public officers, while 12 states had collective bargaining for a fraction of their public officers. This must have been an achievement for the public officers and their labour unions but not for the United States government. According to Freeman and Han (2012), the post 2010 campaign against public sector collective bargaining was triggered by the 2008-2011 United States budget crises in states and localities. The authors reveal that the 2008-2011 budget crises was partly brought about by public sector collective bargaining which also weakened the efforts of the government in dealing with the crisis. A simple explanation of this would be that public sector unions collectively bargain for better salaries and benefits and with this comes an increase in the public sector services expenditure resulting to a budget deficit.

Boston police strike of 1919

Edwards (2010) highlights the plight of a number states whose high expenditure on health plan and pension resulted to state debt rising significantly. This is just one of the negative effects of public sector collective bargaining on the on state budgets. Upon realising the detrimental effects of public sector collective bargaining, states such as Indiana, Missouri, Wisconsin and Ohio decided to wage a war against the practise (Freeman and Han, 2012). The period of 2011 to 2012 witnessed a total 1707bills regarding labour relations of public sector employees in 50 states majority of which were intended to lessen the influence of public sector labour unions and their collective bargaining rights. However, Freeman and Han (2012) points out that the only exception were the bills concerning public safety employees, that is, firefighters, police officers, and other law-enforcement groups.

Collective bargaining for public officers as compared to the private sector usually presents a challenge given that the private sector derives its income from revenues or profits while the public sector derives its income mainly from taxes. And that is why states are becoming more uncomfortable engaging labour officials in negotiations with regards to collective bargaining for public workers. Furthermore, unlike in the private sector where the management/ executives usually negotiate with the union leaders, the public sector comes with its own complications (Lewin et al., 2012). In the public sector, the management which is the appointing authority is in most cases does not make decisions with regards to pay increase or benefits of employees. Actually in certain cases, the public sector management can only make recommendations with the function of reviewing salaries and benefits being handled by a different autonomous body and through a laid down process. Moreover, the private sector

Boston police strike of 1919

usually has greater control over the inadequacies brought about by the labour unions. Here, private enterprises have an array of options on how to respond to issues brought about by

collective bargaining agreements such as redoubling the quality of their personnel where the is a increase in union wages. These are some of the incentives that public sector managers don’t have at their disposal.

For law enforcement officers, collective agreements have been observed to introduce inclusivity in the departmental policy and procedure making process by involving the union leaders in negotiating the details unlike before where the process was solely left to the law enforcement managers (Veatch, 2008). Here the negotiation between the law enforcement officers’ management and he labour union officials usually focuses on two main elements affecting the employees, that is, the economic benefits and the employee working conditions. However the benefits of having a collective bargaining might be eclipsed as a studies have been able to shown that non-unionized police employees earn higher wages than unionized. Unionization of police officers do not lack any benefits though as Methé and Perry (1980), observes a general positive influence of unionization on wages.

Labour Relations

Labour relations play a crucial role in ensuring a harmonious relationship between an organizations management and its employees or employees' representatives (Hatch, 1987). Trade unions and collective bargaining form the basic features of labour relations. The unionisation of law enforcement is still a debatable issue with both sides to the debate likely to front viable arguments. Nevertheless, what proponents and opposers of unionization of law enforcement need

Boston police strike of 1919

to be in agreement is that, the law enforcement officers are a special category of public officers owing to the nature of their responsibilities and what the general society expects from them. By virtue of that engaging in labour relations related activities in the same wave as persons

engaged in the private sector might be unwise. There are two main reasons for this. First, law enforcement officers are professionals with the responsibility of preserving the law, order and security (Loader, 1997). This means that granting the law enforcement officers the opportunity to belong to a trade union might not only be grave repercussions to the well being of the society but also to the country. This can be attributed to the fact that law enforcement departments are highly disciplined organization making trade union related activities such as go slows synonymous to mutiny.  As public officers having the obligation of maintaining peace, law enforcement officers are usually bound to selflessly preform their duties by the Oath of Service.

In order to fully comprehend the relationship between labour relations and the law enforcement institutions, it is significant to discuss the origin of the trade union movement. Poor pay levels and extreme working conditions resulted to the emergence of the trade union movement in 19 Century (Hall et al., 2002).  Trade unions were created as institutions to promote the welfare of  workers at the workplace by providing a platform for the workers to express their views and opinions. This is based on the premise that employer-employee relationship based on the contract of employment is never between equals. Here employers are always in a stronger position to influence the terms of the contract with the employee (Armstrong, 2006). Currently trade unions perform a wide array of services for their trade members mainly focussing on the main issues affecting employees. Some of the key issues that are currently handled by trade unions include negotiating rules that safeguards the members against any arbitrary decisions of business enterprises. It is here that the justification of trade unions in law enforcement organizations complicates the whole organizational structure. That is why despite the International Labour Organisation (ILO) recognizing the right to organize and bargain collectively as well as the freedom of association as fundamental human rights, the rights do not necessarily belong to the Police and the Armed Services.

Despite the existence of valid reasons for the police not having unions, a number of countries boast of the presence of vibrant trade unions of law enforcement officers. For example studies have highlighted that union officials and heads of police departments are working together to improve the welfare of police officers in the United States (DeLord and Sanders, 2006; Polzin and DeLord, 2006). A survey by DeLord and Sanders (2006), highlighted that police chiefs and that union officials officially meet approximately once a month where they discuss issues that are similar to the interest of both sides. The survey brought out the fact that unlike the general perception that the relationship between labor and management is full of tension, the actual position is that both sides perceive each other as cooperative and friendly. Additionally, the outcome of the survey indicated that it was a mutual feeling that the cooperation between the law enforcement officers’ union officials and the management of the law enforcement institutions will not adversely affect the relationship between the unions and their members. The existence of such a relationship can be accredited to the initial relationship between police managers and police union leaders where they regularly work side by side as law enforcement officers. Even with the existence of such an accommodating relationship, it’s imperative that we take cognisance of the underlying issues present in the relationship. To start with, the existence of separate interests between the police union leaders and police managers can sometimes put a strain to their relationship. Conflicting interests might stem from the lack of understanding of the responsibilities of the other party especially in law enforcement officers disciplinary cases. It is always the labour unions’ goal to employ all reasonable measures to aid its members when in trouble especially if such is stemming from the trade unions members employer.

Police labour unions have been the source of serious conflicts of interests pitting their interests against the interests of the public. For instance when a police officer has committed a crime, possibly murder, manslaughter or assault and the police union together with the suspects colleagues organize fundraisers to raise funds for the officers defence a number of serious violations arise. This act merely pits the interests of the police against those of the general public whom they are meant to serve. Edwards (2010), underlines that public sector labour unions, such as that of the law enforcement officers have been known to undermine the governments endeavour to manage expenditure and increase efficiency, the unions are also known for protect poorly performing employees while advocating for minimum staffing levels and at the same time opposing the introduction of new technologies that threaten the jobs of their members. Police officers are supposed to enforce the law and ensure that justice is served. Protecting suspected police officers from being investigated or brought to justice by labour unions certainly fronts the argument against law enforcement labour unions. Even so, the labour unions of law enforcement officers do play a crucial role in safeguarding the interests of law enforcement officers against abuse by the police management. The best approach is to come up with structures that would ensure that law enforcement labour unions do not abuse their powers in the name of protecting the interests of their members.

References

Armstrong, M. (2006). A handbook of Human Resource Management Practice, (10th Ed.). London: Kogan Page Limited.

DeLord, R., & Sanders, J. (2006, August). Police labor-management relations (vol. I): Perspective and practical solution for implementing change, making reforms, and handling crisis for managers and union leaders. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Retrieved from http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/files/ric/Publications/e07063417.pdf

Edwards, C. (2010). Public sector unions and the rising costs of employee compensation.Cato Journal, 30(1), 87-115.

Farmer, B. (2011). The Boston Police Strike of 1919. New American, 27(14), 36-40.

Freeman, R. B. & Han, E. (2012). The war against public sector collective bargaining in the US. Journal of Industrial Relations, 54(3), 386 – 408.

Hall, L., Taylor, S., & Torrington, D.  (2002). Human Resource Management, (5th Ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Hatch, O. (1987). U.S. Labor Law and the Future of Labor-Management Cooperation. Labor Law Journal, 38(1), 3-10.

Lewin, D., Keefe, J. H., & Kochan, T. A. (2012). The New Great Debate about Unionism And Collective Bargaining In U.S. State And Local Governments. Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 65(4), 749-778.

Loader, I. (1997).  Policing and the Social: Questions of Symbolic Power. British Journal of Sociology. 48(1), 1-18.

Methé, D. T. & Perry, J. L. (1980). The impacts of collective bargaining on local government services: a review of research. Public Administration Review, 40(4), 359-371.

Polzin, M., & DeLord, R. (2006, August). Police labor-management relations (vol. II): Perspective and practical solution for implementing change, making reforms, and handling crisis for managers and union leaders. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Retrieved from http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/files/RIC/Publications/e06064103.pdfArticles

Veatch, K. C. (2008). The effect of collective bargaining on the use of innovative police policy. All Volumes, (2001-2008). Paper 14.

Analyzes the Impact of Topic # 1 on Law Enforcement Administration.

Total: 6.25

Distinguished - Thoroughly analyzes the impact of the chosen topic on Law Enforcement Administration. The analysis depicts new learning by relating specific and relevant experiences that demonstrate applicable understanding.

Proficient - Analyzes the impact of the chosen topic on Law Enforcement Administration. The analysis depicts new learning by relating specific and relevant experiences that demonstrate applicable understanding. The analysis is slightly underdeveloped.

Basic - Minimally analyzes the impact of the chosen topic on Law Enforcement Administration. The analysis somewhat depicts new learning by relating relevant experiences that demonstrate applicable understanding. The analysis is underdeveloped.

Below Expectations - Attempts to analyzes the impact of the chosen topic on Law Enforcement Administration; however, the analysis does not effectively address the impact of the chosen topic and/or does not effectively demonstrate new learning by relating experiences that demonstrate applicable understanding. The analysis is significantly underdeveloped.

Non-Performance - The analysis of the impact of topic # 1 on law enforcement administration is non-existent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Analyzes the Impact of Topic # 2 on Law Enforcement Administration.

Total: 6.25

Distinguished - Thoroughly analyzes the impact of the chosen topic on Law Enforcement Administration. The analysis depicts new learning by relating specific and relevant experiences that demonstrate applicable understanding.

Proficient - Analyzes the impact of the chosen topic on Law Enforcement Administration. The analysis depicts new learning by relating specific and relevant experiences that demonstrate applicable understanding. The analysis is slightly underdeveloped.

Basic - Minimally analyzes the impact of the chosen topic on Law Enforcement Administration. The analysis somewhat depicts new learning by relating relevant experiences that demonstrate applicable understanding. The analysis is underdeveloped.

Below Expectations - Attempts to analyzes the impact of the chosen topic on Law Enforcement Administration; however, the analysis does not effectively address the impact of the chosen topic and/or does not effectively demonstrate new learning by relating experiences that demonstrate applicable understanding. The analysis is significantly underdeveloped.

Non-Performance - The analysis of the impact of topic # 2 on law enforcement administration is non-existent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Analyzes the Impact of Topic # 3 on Law Enforcement Administration.

Total: 6.25

Distinguished - Thoroughly analyzes the impact of the chosen topic on Law Enforcement Administration. The analysis depicts new learning by relating specific and relevant experiences that demonstrate applicable understanding.

Proficient - Analyzes the impact of the chosen topic on Law Enforcement Administration. The analysis depicts new learning by relating specific and relevant experiences that demonstrate applicable understanding. The analysis is slightly underdeveloped.

Basic - Minimally analyzes the impact of the chosen topic on Law Enforcement Administration. The analysis somewhat depicts new learning by relating relevant experiences that demonstrate applicable understanding. The analysis is underdeveloped.

Below Expectations - Attempts to analyzes the impact of the chosen topic on Law Enforcement Administration; however, the analysis does not effectively address the impact of the chosen topic and/or does not effectively demonstrate new learning by relating experiences that demonstrate applicable understanding. The analysis is significantly underdeveloped.

Non-Performance - The analysis of the impact of topic # 3 on law enforcement administration is non-existent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Critical Thinking: Evidence

Total: 1.50

Distinguished - Employs persuasive information from credible sources to develop an ample analysis or synthesis of the topic. Viewpoints of experts are scrutinized thoroughly.

Proficient - Employs applicable information from credible sources to develop an analysis of the topic.

Basic - Identifies applicable information from credible sources, but may neglect the application of such information toward the analysis of the topic.

Below Expectations - Displays information from external sources, but such information may lack credibility and/or relevance. Neglects the application of such information toward the analysis of the topic.

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

Critical Thinking: Explanation of Issues

Total: 1.50

Distinguished - Clearly and comprehensively explains in detail the issue to be considered, delivering all relevant information necessary for a full understanding.

Proficient - Clearly explains in detail the issue to be considered, delivering enough relevant information for an adequate understanding.

Basic - Briefly recognizes the issue to be considered, delivering minimal information for a basic understanding.

Below Expectations - Briefly recognizes the issue to be considered, but may not deliver additional information necessary for a basic understanding.

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

Written Communication: Control of Syntax and Mechanics

Total: 1.25

Distinguished - Displays meticulous comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains no errors, and is very easy to understand.

Proficient - Displays comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains only a few minor errors, and is mostly easy to understand.

Basic - Displays basic comprehension of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains a few errors, which may slightly distract the reader.

Below Expectations - Fails to display basic comprehension of syntax or mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains major errors, which distract the reader.

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

Written Communication: APA Formatting

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - Accurately uses APA formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page.

Proficient - Exhibits APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors.

Basic - Exhibits basic knowledge of APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all APA requirements.

Below Expectations - Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of APA formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as APA.

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

Written Communication: Page Requirement

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - The paper meets the specific page requirement stipulated in the assignment description.

Proficient - The paper closely meets the page requirement stipulated in the assignment description.

Basic - The paper meets over half of the page requirement stipulated in the assignment description.

Below Expectations - A fraction of the page requirement is completed.

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

Written Commuication: Resource Requirement

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - Uses more than the required number of scholarly sources, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.

Proficient - Uses required number of scholarly sources to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.

Basic - Uses less than the required number of sources to support ideas. Some sources may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are used within the body of the assignment. Citations may not be formatted correctly.

Below Expectations - Uses inadequate number of sources that provide little or no support for ideas. Sources used may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are not used within the body of the assignment. Citations are not formatted correctly.

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

please look over make any changes the grading rubic is at the end

Tutor Answer

(Top Tutor) Daniel C.
(997)
School: Boston College
PREMIUM TUTOR

Studypool has helped 1,244,100 students

8 Reviews


Summary
Quality
Communication
On Time
Value
ddg82
Dec 6th, 2016
" Thanks, good work "
kenmwao2
Nov 23rd, 2016
" Solid work, thanks. "
tinytim47
Nov 22nd, 2016
" Wow this is really good.... didn't expect it. Sweet!!!! "
jestin7
Nov 13th, 2016
" This tutor is great! "
lilmoe415
Oct 31st, 2016
" Thank you, Thank you, for top quality work, this is your guy!! "
dontuwannaknow
Oct 8th, 2016
" Excellent work as always thanks so much "
thargrow
Sep 29th, 2016
" Very Satisfied. "
SjSurvivor143
Sep 25th, 2016
" Thanks for the help. "
Ask your homework questions. Receive quality answers!

Type your question here (or upload an image)

1829 tutors are online

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors