The editorial “Rewriting the police contract” that appeared in the Tribune on Feb. 7 got one fact right: “Chicago cops do a dangerous and demanding job.” Other than that, the editorial presented a one-sided view that seemed only to rely on the distorted and biased interpretation of the police accountability task force. Contrary to the editorial’s assertion that “both sides know those contracts need to be scrubbed of provisions that have been used to shield bad cops from the consequences of misconduct,” the Fraternal Order of Police has never wavered from our position that all employees deserve due process protections.
The protections are not there to “shield bad cops,” but rather to protect all Chicago police officers who put their lives on the line every day to protect the citizens of Chicago. Of course, officers proven to be involved in misconduct need to be held accountable and, if necessary, disciplined. Our contract allows for this — there just has to be due process.
The Tribune offers several examples of where it claims the contract protected a small group of officers guilty of misconduct. At times, the city and the Police Department may have failed to implement certain contract provisions properly, but that does not mean they “should be scrubbed.”
The Tribune writes that City Hall has been “handcuffed” by the police union. The editorial seems to forget that all 50 members of the City Council in 2014 unanimously approved our contract. At the time, even Mayor Rahm Emanuel praised our efforts in reaching a fair deal.
We agree that restoring public trust in the Police Department is essential — but not at the expense of eroding our contract. Instead, that will come from building stronger relationships with the communities we serve; improving training and equipment so we can do our jobs better; creating support programs for officers who are struggling with issues such as post-traumatic stress disorder; and ending nepotism and cronyism that often keeps the best officers from rising in the ranks. Getting rid of basic rights for police officers is not the answer; it just feeds the anti-police rhetoric.
— Dean Angelo Sr., president, Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 7
