Time for a mini-thread on police unions, because it is both tricky and very high stakes.

[octoberlib]

Link to tweet

Collective bargaining is a powerful way to prevent against profiteering and to protect workers. Its a long-standing cornerstone of progressive politics.

In '09 membership of public sector unions surpassed membership of private sector unions, as manufacturing and farming shrunk.

But police unions have some unique characteristics. I've been learning from the very good folks at Campaign Zero (https://joincampaignzero.org) and want to amplify some findings here.



Jurisdictions where there are police unions result in 40% more violent misconduct. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55ad38b1e4b0185f0285195f/t/5d92b749ad13ae3d9b293125/1569896278868/Sheriffs+Unions+Misconduct.pdf

Cities with police union contracts are 50% less likely to sustain excessive force complaints. https://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ccpuf.pdf

This is data on cops who were *re-hired after being fired*, by region, typically after arbitration and appeal, supported by the union.


There is some cognitive dissonance for me, because I believe in collective bargaining.

But when it comes to public safety, and when the employer is *the people*, direct, transparent accountability must take precedence. And it currently isn't. By design.

Collective bargaining in police unions has become very sophisticated. And it isn't just about wages, but about insulating officers from accountability -- across the board.

These data confirm that at very granular detail. I encourage you to read all of these papers.

Finally, there is a bill on the House floor that I want to call attention to: well-intended, but will serve to strengthen the influences above, and is counterproductive to its intended end. Call your congressperson, ask them to reconsider:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1154