Before we proceed, I would like to emphasize that the best way to resolve our contract disputes is at the bargaining table. But when the city’s negotiators refuse to negotiate in good faith, they give us no alternative but to go to PERB arbitration. And we have not hesitated to do so.

(article continues below chart)

The best way to evaluate the figures is from a historical perspective. Let’s compare the basic maximum salaries earned by New York City police officers from 1990 to the present and the results of non-PERB contracts (settled before this current PBA administration took office) to the basic maximum that our officers have gained in three PERB awards. (By basic maximum, we mean officers’ salaries earned after five years on the job for those hired before Jan. 1, 2006, and after 5 1/2 years for those hired on that date or later. And by basic maximum, we mean top pay exclusively, not counting other forms of monetary compensation such as service longevity, holiday pay, uniform allowance and night differential.)

First, it’s important to point out that one of this PBA administration’s strongest priorities when we took office in July 1999 was to fight for the right to have our contracts arbitrated by PERB. When the city challenged the constitutionality of the PBA-sponsored PERB law and took the case all the way to the state’s highest court, we fought that action vigorously and emerged victorious. The accompanying chart on this page shows in concrete dollars-signs just how valuable the PERB process has been: In the OCB-arbitrated award that settled the contract that ran from July 1, 1990, through Sept. 30, 1991, basic max ended up at $40,679. In the negotiated settlement that ran from Oct. 1, 1991 through March 31, 1995 (which included 18 months of zeros), basic max ended up at $43,593. And in the OCB award covering the contract that ran from April 1, 1995 through July 31, 2000 — the infamous “zeros-for-heroes” contract that began with a two-year wage freeze — basic max ended up at $49,023. Over a ten-year period, those contracts represent a 25.97% (compounded) or $10,109 increase in the basic max — which barely kept pace with the inflation rate.

The terrible contracts of that decade, in which there were a total of 3 1/2 years of zeroes, are what changed the police-salary landscape and caused New York City police officers’ earnings to stagnate while other police officers nationwide continued to improve their salary.

Now let’s contrast that 1990s contract performance with the results of the three PERB-arbitrated awards that have come since then. In the award for the contract that ran from Aug. 1, 2000, through July 31, 2002, basic max ended up at $54,048. In the award for Aug. 1, 2002, through July 31, 2004, basic max ended up at $59,588. And in the most recent award covering the contract that ran from Aug. 1, 2004, through July 31, 2006, basic max ended up at $65,382. Those contracts represent a 33.37% (compounded) or $16,359 increase in the basic max. That resulted in more real money in four years less time.

Each of our PERB awards broke the city’s pattern, and they take us only through July 31, 2006.

Another way to evaluate whether the PERB process has been worth the time, expense and effort is to make some assumptions — that is, to imagine what basic-max salaries would look like now if there had never been any zeroes in the 90s. If we had received percentage raises instead of zeros we would be close to market rate of pay now.

Yet another way to evaluate the effectiveness of the PERB approach is to make an assumption and imagine what our basic max would be today if we had received the pattern in the last three rounds.

In the first round, it would have been $54,048 over 30 months instead of the actual settlement, which was that amount in just 24 months.

In the second round, the city’s offered pattern was 0%, 3% and 1% over 36 months. Our salary would have been $56,226 instead of the actual settlement, which was $59,588 in just 24 months.

And in the third and latest round, if we had been held to the city’s offered pattern (3% and 3.5%), our basic max would have been only $59,737 over 24 months instead of the $65,382 that we’re getting by refusing the pattern and submitting to arbitration under PERB.

Another point is just as important: If we had received the city’s pattern offer for the last three rounds — remember, it was for a total of 90 months rather than the 72 months we got from PERB — the $59,737 would have been effective all the way up to Jan. 31, 2008, whereas the current top pay of $65,382 expires a full year and six months earlier on July 31, 2006. To sum it up, we have received more money in less time.

Furthermore, the PBA’s battle for higher wages has raised the bar for every other municipal union in the city despite the fact that none of those unions helped us in that battle except for the Sergeants Benevolent Association, which contributed to our legal fund for defending the constitutionality of the PERB law.

As I have said, the PERB process is not perfect and contracts reached at the bargaining table — when they are negotiated in good faith — are preferable. But was PERB worth it. When you’re staring at an average retroactive check that’s more than $20,000, not counting overtime — a full $7,000 larger than it would have been under the city’s pattern< — your only possible answer is yes.