have completed our third arbitration since I was elected to office in 1999 and our fifth in the last six rounds. And while it’s ideal to reach agreement at the bargaining table, we believe there’s no justification for the city to offer below-inflationary wage increases in negotiations at a time when we rank at the bottom in police salaries. We continue to believe we must be paid like professional police officers, and because we have the most difficult policing job in America, we must be paid at the top of our profession.

We began preparing for this arbitration as soon as we received our last award. Our efforts intensified last summer in the months leading up to the first hearing, right through the 12 days of arbitration testimony, and concluding with the submission of our final briefs in mid-March. This effort represented a tremendous undertaking for the union, requiring a substantial investment of our human and financial resources. No effort was left unexpended to assure that the arbitrator was presented with all facts necessary to resolve all issues in our favor.

On every single one of the Taylor Law criteria, we presented overwhelming evidence to support our case. The evidence that, in terms of monetary compensation, we rank dead last among the jurisdictions considered was largely undisputed. With respect to other benefits, which the city claims are overly generous, we showed that we fared no better than average, even considering the SF, and that in certain areas we lacked certain benefits given in other jurisdictions. As far as the city’s ability to pay is concerned, we showed that, despite recent economic news, the city had had unprecedented surpluses in the period at issue before the arbitrator. We also showed that, even in the current fiscal year, the city will realize significantly greater revenues than budgeted.

As for the other statutory factors, including the interest and welfare of the public, we submitted overwhelming evidence. We demonstrated through testimony of elected officials and others that the interest and welfare of the public depends in significant measure on a healthy and effective NYPD, and the NYPD’s success depends on its workforce — the police officers — who must be fairly compensated.

The continuing recruitment and retention crisis at the NYPD, coupled with rising crime trends, starkly illustrate the dangers of trying to get effective law enforcement on the cheap.

In summary, we spared no effort or resource in presenting a compelling case for significant wage increases and by all accounts, we had infinitely better arguments than the city on every statutory criterion under the Taylor Law. The time has come for the panel to stand up to the city and render an award that makes clear to the mayor and his minions that the one-size-fits-all labor strategy known as pattern bargaining must be abandoned in favor of paying New York City police officers a market wage.

In my testimony to the arbitration panel, I made clear what we expected from the process:

“My members believe and my belief is we’re in arbitration, [and] it needs to be done on the criteria of PERB, based on the Taylor Law, compare police officer to police officer… all we ask for is fairness and [to] rule on the evidence. That’s why we fought so hard to get the PERB arbitration. That is [what] is necessary for my members. They understand the criteria, and [market increases need] to be done to solve the problem for the city and for the New York City PBA, my members.”

The PERB panel should now follow its statutory mandate and award police officers wage increases that restore us to our one-time position as being among the highest-paid police officers in the nation — the standard that the former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Arthur Goldberg established for New York City police officers in 1968 and the standard that even the city has agreed in sworn testimony is the appropriate one by which to compensate us.

Now the arbitrator must do her job.