Q: How would you evaluate the state of the PBA today?

PJL: We have come a long way, but we still have further to go. The PBA is stronger, more stable and more responsive to the needs of our members than it’s ever been. But it took years to dig out of the hole left by our predecessors. The organization was broken in so many ways. Police officers couldn’t get into the PBA office without being approved and buzzed in. The organization was laden with questionable contracts. The finances were in ruins. We’ve professionalized the PBA with strong staff people who spend their time working for the members and we are proud of the service that the PBA is delivering today. Again, that wasn’t always the case. We have unraveled many of the questionable financial arrangements and managed the finances so that more resources are dedicated to member services.

Q: What challenges does the organization face in the future?

PJL: Although we have made significant progress over the last two rounds of bargaining, achieving a competitive pay scale and protecting our benefits and pension remain our priorities. It’s pretty clear that the trend is for the politicians to target health benefits and pensions. The recent arbitration in the Transport Workers Union case resulted in their members paying 1.5 % towards their health benefits. Another police union made a bad decision to introduce a 401K investment plan to its members. That is a precursor to the City administration’s strategy to end pensions as we know them. It is a chess game and we all need to be thinking many moves in advance. We cannot make it easy for management to undermine our salary and benefits. We need to be prepared to fight to protect the 20-year pension and all uniformed unions with that benefit need to be on the same page.

Q: What is the state of collective bargaining between the city and the PBA?

PJL: Regrettably, there continues to be no acknowledgement by the city, of the wide gap between the pay of NYC police officers and virtually every other police officer in the country. While the tone has lightened in this administration, the message is the same — they have no interest in addressing the serious problem with police pay. As a result, we see continuing massive defections to other police departments locally and nationally. New York City police officers are in a unique situation in comparison to other City job titles. No other City title, to our knowledge, lags as far behind their market pay as NYC police officers. If we were earning a salary that was on par with Nassau, Suffolk, Port Authority, etc., the negotiation of a contract would certainly be less taxing. But the disastrous 1990’s, where we received 3 1/2 years of zeros, has us behind the eight ball in every round. We are making progress, but we continue to have ground to close. Having an unwilling partner in City Hall makes every round a challenge.

Q: Bloomberg keeps saying things like the cops could have earned more if they gave productivity savings. Why didn’t we do that?

PJL: When this administration calls for increased productivity, it means givebacks of other contract benefits and that is merely moving the same chips around the table without addressing the problem. We have been one of the most productive agencies in City government, working with thousands of fewer officers. We deserve compensation for that productivity. The city wasn’t really offering a raise, they were looking for our new recruits to work 10 extra days.

Productivity to the city is not working harder, smarter or more efficiently. It’s working more shifts or longer shifts without additional pay or getting fewer days off. The city has been trying to get 10 more appearances out of us for the last two rounds. In this round, they want the rookies to give up 10 vacation days. We already work more and longer shifts than most police officers in the nation. And we do it in the toughest patrol environment in America.

Q: So what’s our strategy for getting a fair contract?

PJL: It boils down to this: The city won’t move off the pattern raise, so we have to get a third party to decide our contract and that means another PERB binding arbitration. We continue to believe that in an environment where we are paid 30% or more less than other police officers, the application of pattern bargaining is inappropriate. Arbitration takes time and money and is a difficult process, but we’ve gotten clear results in the last two contracts. In the two PERB arbitrations during my presidency, we broke the existing patterns and were awarded a total of 22% in raises over four years which is just slightly less than our members got over the ten years starting in 1990.

Q: Some cops think, just have PERB give us our 5 and 5 and cut the nonsense.

PJL: I wish two fives were automatic but the truth is, we have to fight for every percent we get. PERB is a conservative institution. We have had lecturers who were 20-year employees at PERB tell us that the 5% raises we received in successive arbitrations is on the high side of PERB awards. Therefore, we must pay close attention to every detail of our presentation before PERB. We put on very strong cases at the last two PERB arbitrations and are getting in a position to do so again. In the last arbitration, the panel chairman said we had put on the strongest case he had seen in all his many years as an impartial arbitrator.

We have taken that solid case and have continued to build on and refine it. Of course, the City’s bright budget picture and the Department’s inability to recruit and retain police officers should only help our presentation. We believe it is in everyone’s interest to get a deal negotiated at the table, but we will not settle for sub-standard raises just to reach a settlement. Below inflationary raises in an environment where we are already paid 30 % below other departments does not make sense for our group.

Q: In 2006, the PBA was able to pass nine bills in Albany, including a presumptive disability bill for 9/11 illnesses, and expanding the “heart bill” to include stroke. How will PBA initiatives do with the Spitzer administration?

PJL: The PBA was the first major union to endorse Eliot Spitzer for governor and in politics, it is better to be with the winner. Perhaps unlike other unions, there is always tension for this union in the decision whether to endorse Republican or Democratic candidates. The prevailing wisdom is that Republicans more closely represent our interest in the area of police operations and social issues, while Democrats are more supportive in the area of wages, benefits and other employment-related issues. The Governor has shown support for our positions on compensation and is a proponent of good government, a concept that has been absent from Albany for many years.

Q: How are the Health & Welfare Funds doing?

PJL: If you recall, when we inherited the union, the retiree fund was effectively bankrupt and the Active Fund was fast heading in the same direction. We turned the funds around, enhanced benefits, streamlined operations and put them on better financial footing. The funds are again showing signs of strain, with retirees placing tremendous demands for benefits on the Retiree Fund. Adding to that strain are increased prescription drug costs resulting from increased prices, changes in the medical field where prescription drugs play prominently in all kinds of treatments. Finally, illnesses from the WTC have strained both the active and retiree funds. We have pressed the administration to pick up their responsibility for the WTC drugs and are awaiting final word on the implementation of a program to address these costs. Nevertheless, we must continue to do our part to use our benefits judiciously. We ask members not to stockpile drugs and to use benefits when they are absolutely necessary. In that way, our welfare benefits will be there when we need them.

Q: As the face and voice of New York City’s police officers, what is your philosophy of press relations, especially in highly-charged, high-profile cases involving police shootings and allegations involving other police conduct?

PJL: The heart and soul of my media philosophy is to be out there — quickly, strongly and smartly. We’ve been doing this ever since we took over the reins of this organization, in contrast to previous administrations, which were silent on most issues. We, on the other hand, have always been highly visible, doing more media than ever before. In fact in our first weeks in office, we were confronted with one of the highest-profile cases of all — the Diallo case. And with that one and many others, we were vocal and persistent, defending our members, putting a human face on the New York City police officer. Of course, sometimes you have to be measured in your response, and you always have to be smart, being careful never to join the media circus that usually accompanies these incidents. We defend our members, never stridently, always with dignity. As I said earlier in another context, it’s a chess game that has to be planned many moves in advance.