Happy New Year!

As 2009 comes to a close I wanted to take a minute to wish everyone a Safe and Enjoyable New Year's Eve. It is my wish that you have a safe, healthy, and Happy 2010!

I also want to say thank you for those that have supported this endeavor, and also for your feedback. I am looking forward to continuing my writings, and to hear/ read your feedback.

Take care and be safe!

James

President Obama and the Noble Peace Prize (Originally Drafted 12/11/09)

President Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize. I watched his speech, and over all I have to say I thought it was a good speech (more about that in a minute). There was some criticism of the trip, not to mention about his receiving the award in the first place.

As far as the trip is concerned, there was some discussion in the media about the President not attending some events including a luncheon with the King and Queen. I think that if the President was going to receive his award in person he should have attended the other related events, such as the lunch with the King and Queen of Sweden. These events are a part of receiving the recognition of the award, it is also common courtesy.

Imagine if another world leader had come to the United States to receive an award and the President and First Lady were attending the ceremony. As a part of the events President and Mrs. Obama had invited that leader and their spouse to a luncheon in recognition of that leader receiving the award, the leader declined to attend. What an uproar there would be, in addition to talking about what an insult it was to this nation the media would be ridiculing the leader, probably even ask aloud if there might be racial overtones behind the skipping the lunch.

The White House was making a feeble attempt to cover by saying that he was the only president that received the award, and that he had to get back to Washington. There was no transatlantic air travel when the others (Roosevelt and Wilson) won the award, they would have had to travel by ship (and it would have taken more than a few hours). Additionally, the embassy(s) and the aircraft referred to as Air Force One are equipped with the latest communications equipment for just that reason, so the president can stay in touch and deal with the business of the country.

As far as the speech was concerned I thought overall it was a good one. I did have a concern when he spoke of the Geneva Convention; these provisions are for members of a country’s armed forces, not for terrorists. Are we now going to extend the protections of the Geneva Convention to persons that it was not created to protect?

One thing that I liked was in the beginning he addressed the sending of additional troops overseas, the President also addressed the need to use force sometimes to ensure peace. I hope that those foreign leaders, and their military advisors, that believed they could do anything without worry of the United States will rethink those positions. Will the President commit troops in the future, I don’t know, but neither does anyone else at this point. However, President Obama did articulate a justification for doing so, which indicates that the option is available.

Finally let me address President Obama’s being awarded the Noble Peace Prize. Did he deserve the honor? Considering that up until now the award has been for past accomplishments, considering that the president was nominated less than a month after taking the oath of office, I believe that there were others that were more deserving. Had the Noble Committee nominated him a year or more into his term of office I believe it would have been more appropriate.

Having said that, people need to take a deep breath and relax! Regardless if you agree or not, in a global view it is an honor for the United States to have a sitting president be nominated and receive the award. The only question I would ask those that are upset or disappointed at President Obama’s receipt of this honor; Were you just as upset or disappointed when Al Gore or Rush Limbaugh were nominated? That's right (no pun intended) Rush Limbaugh, he was nominated in 2007 along with the former Vice President.

I am hopeful that now the world can move on, George W. Bush is no longer the President, enough with trying to bash him or do things that some might perceive as insulting him. Enough with the Bush bashing already!

That’s My Opinion, What’s Yours.

Political Correctness, has it come too far?

It has been a while since I wrote an article. I could say that it is because I've been busy at work, or that I've had things happening in my personal life that have been keeping me busy. Both would be true, but not totally the reason I've taken a break from posting. There hasn't been a lot that I felt like writing about. There has been so much energy spent talking about Health care, but realistically it has been a waste of energy. Until the House of Representatives and the Senate both passed bills so that the Conference Committee could try to take both pieces of legislation and craft a separate bill that both chambers could act on any talk was an exercise in futility. Now that the House has passed a bill, I'm sure I'll be writing about Health care again soon.

What has prompted me to take some time and write? The shootings and murders at Fort Hood Military Base in Texas. First my thoughts and prayers are with the wounded, their families, those that died and there families. It is ironic, last week I spoke with a number of people and during some of the conversations the old stigma that women faced when they chose a career in law enforcement were mentioned. Last weeks shooting should finally put an end those sentiments that women don’t belong in law enforcement since it was a female officer, Sergeant Kim Munley that put an end to the carnage at Fort Hood. And she did so after being wounded herself. During my career I have been fighting with violent subjects and a male officer has turned and ran away. In one particular case he didn’t even get on the radio and call for help, just left me and another officer to fight with a mentally ill woman who was bigger than me. By the way the officer that stayed with me in the fight was a female. Based on my experience and the actions of Sergeant Munley last week, I’ll take a partner like that any day!

Another thought that came to mind over the weekend as I caught up on the news about the shooting was has this country gone too far with political correctness, too far worrying about someone being offended if information is reported? As I draft this there have been reports in the American media that the shooter was a Muslim, even interviews with family members overseas that he wasn’t a Muslim, didn’t speak Arabic nor was he able to read the Koran. Is that true, I don’t know, nor do I care.

There have been reports that the shooter has made posting on line, comments in training situations (and possibly elsewhere) that would have been acted upon a few years ago to determine if some threat existed. In recent years society has become sooooo politically correct that people are afraid of being labeled a bigot or racist if they react to something which causes alarm. I hope that the investigation determines that this was not one of those cases. If you act with sincerity you shouldn't worry about those types of problems. Also, if someone does become angry you might have to do something that has become very hard to do in today's society. Talk to a person, not text, just talk. When you talk with someone you can explain yourself, they can get to know you and then they will be able to sense that you had no ulterior motive.

Even if proverbial alarm bells had been acted upon there is no guarantee that what happened last week could have been prevented. However, how many times do you stop and think of how you do something might be misinterpreted?

Now British newspapers are reporting of the shooter’s ties to the 9/11 attackers. As I am drafting this I haven’t seen anything in the American media. I can understand wanting to verify information before you do a story, confirm your facts, confirm the sources, but why base that confirmation process on a person’s ethnicity or religion? I can understand not wanting to cause fear, and in the case of Muslims not wanting to create animosity towards them, however, there is a way of reporting the facts in a way to avoid that.

The bottom line is that the media needs to set one standard for all, without bias for anyone. Society should also practice what our parents taught us, which was to treat people as we would want to be treated.

That's My Opinion, What's Yours

President Obama Speaks to Congress

President Obama spoke to a joint session of Congress this evening (Sept. 9, 2009) regarding health care/ insurance reforms. I thought I’d take a minute to write about my initial thoughts, without watching the various recaps and analysis of the speech that TV and radio are going to do in filling several hours of programming.

First, I thought it had good points, as well as some bad. The good will need details in order to make a final determination on just how good they are, based on my experiences as a trustee of a health insurance trust that was funded by both employee and employer contributions I have concerns. Based on my experiences in advising campaigns and other involvement in politics I think the bad was unnecessary and befitting a position much lower than the prudency, and Congress.

Tonight’s remarks are what President Obama should have said a month and a half ago during his primetime press conference. He let us know what his objectives are for health care, objectives which I think are positive changes. Such as not being denied coverage because of a pre existing condition, a “pool” where individuals and small businesses could purchase coverage, and tax incentives for small businesses to provide coverage, preventative care treatment like annual physicals, mammograms, colonoscopies, etc. While there will be an initial cost for these preventative measures, as I mentioned previously, the long range cost savings will far outweigh those initial costs (not to mention help save more lives because of early detection).

This is something I would be willing to pay for. Now we need to see the specifics, like the saying goes “the devil is in the details.” I believe the president is mistaken when he talks about part of his plan being completely funded by the premiums people would pay for the coverage (talking about the pool individuals and small businesses could participate in). If the president’s figure of only 5% of the uninsured would participate is correct, there is no way that this option could be self sufficient on premiums alone as the president announced. The penalty that companies would pay if they did not provide health insurance to their employees, 8% of payroll, is an incentive not to provide coverage instead of a deterrent. For most companies and government entities health insurance premiums exceed 8%, even with an employee contribution. The penalty has to be increased, I would suggest averaging the annual cost a company or government’s costs have been for a certain period (3 or 5 years) and then add a percentage to that amount. Otherwise managers will make a decision that it would be a smart business decision to cancel the health insurance benefit and just pay the penalty, that’s what I would do. During the time I was involved with my local union’s trust the police department’s budget accounted for approximately 85% of the city’s entire budget. Health insurance costs were 12% percent (and more) of the police budget. I believe that if the first portion of tonight’s speech had been his speech in July, the town hall meetings may have had a different tone. He could have said that this was his preference to House Bill 3200, and then the discussions could have been on how to achieve these objectives.

Now for what I didn’t like about tonight’s joint session. Members of Congress need to remember that this is not the United Kingdom, and they are not Parliament. Regardless of what your opinion is of President Obama he is the President of the United States of America. I thought that there needed to be more decorum, the waiving of papers, sarcastic laughter, and the one outburst when he spoke about being deficit neutral and illegal immigrants not being covered were out of place. Out of place because the speaker was the President of the United States and it was taking place in the chambers of the United States Congress, not a social club membership meeting.

During the middle of the speech, when the president began to take a swipe at republicans for the previous eight years, for the town hall meetings this past month, and the criticism from talk radio and TV, I felt that he was wrong. I felt that he shouldn’t have done that because there was no real positive benefit. Sure supporters could brag about how he took his opponates on, how he was challenging them by responding to their frivolous attacks. True there was the immediate/ initial advantage; however, all it did was give his opponates more ammunition to keep the attacks going instead of quieting them down. Now they can take apart what he said and point out how it conflicted with HB3200, with what he and his supporters have said previously.

It gave some a reason to argue that he demonstrated that he isn’t sincere about working together in a bipartisan effort; otherwise he wouldn’t have made the attacks this evening. It also gave people the opportunity to say that since the president wants to talk about the past 8 (or 10 as he said) years let’s talk about the fact that when George W. Bush took office the country had been in a recession for the previous year (the last year of Bill Clinton’s second term). True it was mild by comparison to the current situation; however, we were in a recession none the less.

The only positive to his putting down republicans and other critics is that if they take the bait the talk will be about what he said tonight and take attention away from the resignation of Special Advisor Van Jones.

Maybe Congress can take the positives from tonight’s speech, remember what they heard in the town hall meetings, put the partisan bickering aside, and work out the specifics for a bill that will truly benefit us. And could they PLEASE draft that legislation in simple, specific language and make it less than the size of an encyclopedia?

That’s My Opinion, What’s Yours

Health Care Discussions

Over the past couple of weeks (since my last posting) I had to prepare for 137 Disciplinary Hearings with the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission (I represent Florida’s Attorney General on the Commission). After that I went and played Uncle Jim for a few days, visiting my brother and his family, so I haven’t been writing. A lot has happened during that time and I’m going to try catch up over the next couple of days.

Health care has been in the news. As I have written, America’s health care system is a very good system; it’s not perfect and can be improved. However, it is not so bad that it needs to be gutted/ scrapped and begun a new. Town Hall meetings have been all over the news. A good thing is that people are getting involved; they are asking questions and providing input to their representatives. They are reading the proposed legislation and becoming informed. This is great, something that hasn’t occurred in several years.

People are scared, and feeling frustrated because they feel that their representatives aren’t listening. Unfortunately, when they have had an opportunity to attend these meetings the frustration shows and others (including the media) have concentrated on that instead of what people are saying. Many have asked very pointed and thoughtful questions, made good suggestions to their representatives and the anger is being used as a justification for not addressing their comments.

I mentioned that I visited my brother Tom and his family. Sometimes Tom and I have similar views on issues, and there are times in which we are on opposite ends of a position. Health care is one of those issues that we differ on, yet we were able to have a conversation. We didn’t agree on some of the aspects, but we also didn’t yell, we respected each other’s point of view.

We both believe that changes are needed. Based on his experience last year when he had shoulder surgery, and the fact that he pays over $7,000.00 a year in premiums to insure his family (I hope he doesn’t mind my sharing that info), he and his wife feel that change needs to happen now. Then after reform is passed amendments can be passed to fix any problems with the reform. They also talked with me about the health care system in Japan (my sister in law was born and raised in Japan). According to them the Japanese system works extremely well.

I on the other hand believe that Congress should take a few months to study different options, like the Japanese system, see what will work in the U.S. and then pass a reform measure. Everyone seems to agree that approximately 91% of the U.S. population has some form of health care, but the true number that will be helped by reform varies from 4 to 46 million (the president originally said 58 million but in the past week as said that the number is between 37 and 46 million).

My position is based on two reasons, none of which is the fact that I am a republican. I served as a trustee on a health insurance trust for five and a half years. I’ve been involved in modifying the plan, including benefits and costs, so I know what is involved. We took months so we wouldn’t have to go back later and change. Some have argued that we should just put something in place and then later get rid of benefits that aren’t cost effective or that don’t work as well as projected. I don’t believe that will happen because of the experience on the health trust when we made changes to prescription coverage.

Originally the trust I am a part of would reimburse a member for prescription costs, you would submit an application for reimbursement along with your receipts and then receive a reimbursement. At one point the trust was doing well enough financially that the board decided to try a one year trial, we added prescription coverage instead of reimbursement. Our costs skyrocketed, prescription costs were incurred immediately instead of incrementally as with reimbursement. This is similar to what has happened to Medicare. It also became harder to do budget projections. At the end of the year the numbers showed that the coverage was a poor option, reimbursement was the more fiscally responsible policy. Despite that the membership refused to change and threatened the trustees if an attempt was made to return to the former policy. People didn’t care that it was a fiscal burden to the trust, or that there was a serious possibility that the coverage could bankrupt the trust (as happened with the firefighters trust ten years earlier); the members wanted the convenience of not having to submit paperwork for reimbursement.

The other reason I believe we should take a few months to study various options and put together a thoughtful program, is I doubt that you will be able to modify it after passage (at least not in time to prevent the program from going bankrupt). A case in point it Social Security reform. In the mid 80’s there were changes to Social Security enacted. After passage it was learned that for a lot of people their benefits would be reduced, significantly, if they participated in another retirement plan. Basically and overly simplified, if you contribute/ participate in certain retirement plans your Social Security benefits will be drastically reduced even if you’ve paid all your quarters. For example, I have paid all my quarters and because I also paid into a pension system at the City of Miami I will not receive all the Social Security benefits that I would otherwise be entitled to. According to the last letter I received from Social Security, despite the fact that I have all my quarters (and will continue to pay for several more years), I will receive less than $500.00 a month (instead of the $1,200.00 I would otherwise receive). There have been attempts to ammend this legislation to make it more equitable for more than 15 years and still nothing has happened.

Just like many of the laws that Congress has passed they will not participate in any public option that results from health care reform. Several members of Congress have demonstrated that instead of listening to their constituents they will call them names and degrade them if they disagree. That being the case can we rely on their correcting problems in the system once reform is enacted? I doubt it.

Like I said the one good thing that has happened during this health care reform issue is that many people that didn’t care about what happens in Congress, that didn’t feel that they could make a difference, are now becoming involved and active. Like a woman told Senator Spector during a town hall meeting, she hadn’t been involved before but now they (Congress) “have awakened a sleeping giant.” Even my 9 year old niece was asking questions. Let’s hope this involvement in the government process continues.

And finally, enough with the name calling (by all sides), let’s set an example to our next generation and be civil towards each other, children are watching what is happening and they do imitate the actions of adults. We’ll accomplish a lot more if we listen to one another and work together.

That’s My Opinion, What’s Yours?

Has Hatred Grown Since The Passage of Civil Rights Laws?

Recently I wrote an article entitled “What happened to the “civil” in civilization?” In it I spoke about the shooting at the Holocaust Museum, and my interaction as a young man with victims of the Holocaust. I also mentioned the shooter at the museum; he had a web site that he used to express his views of the world. With the recent shootings around the country I began to wonder if there was more hatred than when I grew up in the 1960’s, this prompted me to post the poll question.

One day after posting that article I was at my office reviewing cases for upcoming disciplinary hearings, one of the cases for revocation of his law enforcement certification is a part time officer that had lied on his application about being a member of the KKK. I also received an intelligence report talking about upcoming meetings various groups were planning; most were spreading the word via their web sites.

I remember talking with some other law enforcement officers when Senator Obama was elected President. We were talking about how far this country has come, but were also concerned about the different hate groups (and individuals) were really going to get “cranked up and come out of the woodwork.” This also got me thinking about if there were more “hate” groups then in the past.

Obviously the population has grown since the 1960’s. With the increased population the hate filled philosophy will grow, after all these people will teach their philosophy to their children and some of those children will adopt their parents’ philosophy. Some, but not all, there is no indication that the family of the museum shooter held the same views as he did. Except for this, I doubt that hatred has really had as profound an increase as some would believe. If I am correct; then why does it seem as if hate is more prevalent that in the past?

I believe that we hear more about hatred now, then before because of other changes. When “Bull” Connors had the police dogs turned loose on Civil Rights Protesters there were three (3) networks, no satellite trucks, no cable news, and no Internet to spread the news. We have gone from three stations to hundreds with twenty four (24) hour coverage (back then television stations and some radio stations went off the air during the overnight hours). There have been other changes as well, the internet is one. The Holocaust Museum shooter wrote a book in 1981 espousing his belief/ hatred.

When he wrote his book he had to find someone to publish the book, and then the marketing and selling was limited to word of mouth, gatherings and such. Now he can (and did) create a web site to write his views without publishing a book. If one chose to write a book about their philosophy it can be marketed around the world via the internet and it could be obtained with a lot more anonymity.

The internet has allowed people the opportunity to express their opinions freely with a sense of security that their identity will not be discovered, it allows them to come out of the proverbial racist closet. People feel free to voice hatred for their boss, their neighbor, family members, so why not race. Just look at some sites out there that were begun to allow professionals from other parts of the country, and world, to share information on trends in their profession. Take a look at the chat rooms of those sites that do not require a person’s identity to be posted with their comments; it’s amazing how venomous people can become when they don’t have to put their names to their comments. In addition to their identity being concealed, a person can go on the internet without disclosing their location. You can post on an American group's web site from any corner of the world.

Lastly, I believe that there is less censorship than in the 1960’s. With the expansion of the cable and satellite networks the type of content has vastly grown from four decades ago. Even on “regular” television the FCC is not as strict as they were, except of course for Janet Jackson’s “wardrobe malfunction” during the Super Bowl Halftime Show (in that case people discovered their moral compass real quick). Radio and music content is less restricted as it was back then. You never would have heard someone on the radio in the 1960’s singing a song entitled Cop Killer.

When you look at the changes in society over the last forty years hatred hasn’t increased as dramatically as it appears, the ability to share one’s view, philosophy, and intolerance has!

That’s My Opinion, What’s Yours

Poll Question

I hope you like the poll questions. Sorry about the first not coinciding with an article, I was drafting one on health care and on hate in America. I had planned on posting the latter, but it didn't work out that way (that's what I get for doing the question before I post the article).

It was the first, I'll try to do better.

Health Care Reform

First, I am getting tired of politicians saying how much the health care system sucks in this country. If it was that bad why would leaders from around the world come to the United States for medical treatment when they have a serious medical situation? I can remember Anastasio Somoza of Nicaragua coming to Miami Beach in the 70's for treatment (I was the orthopedic technician assigned to maintain some of the equipment that was going to be used for his surgery and care), and then there was the Prime Minister of Italy that came to the United States for his care (I believe it was in 2005).

OK, now that I've unwrapped myself from the flag let me say that our system is not perfect, and I believe this country needs to do something to enhance the health care, and to assist low income persons obtain health care. That is the key word, ASSIST. However, I have serious concerns about the pending legislation; its cost, negative impact on coverage a person already has, the reduced and rationed care that is likely to result. Finally, I have a BIG problem with the speed in which this is being pushed through. My concerns are based on my experiences, as a law enforcement officer I've worked in low income areas and seen the impact the problems with the health care system have had on people.

I have another prospective as well, for five and a half years I was a trustee on the Fraternal Order of Police Miami Lodge 20 Insurance Trust Fund, nearly three years of that time as Chairperson (in the City of Miami the police run their own health insurance). It is because of this experience that I have a problem with the speed in which this legislation is being pushed, and the delays in (and rationing of) care that will be caused. At the police department annual physicals were mandatory for the sworn personnel (those personnel with arrest powers). The trust meets monthly and a part of those business meetings is to review claims for the previous month as well as year to date, hear appeals if a member was denied coverage for an issue (During my time as Chairperson our operating budgets were over six million dollars). We began to notice an increase in cancer related illnesses in the dependants of officers and retired officers. As we looked into this trend more we discovered that in most of the cases early detection would have significantly reduced the aggressiveness of the course of treatment, as well as the cost. We decided to implement annual physical coverage for dependants and retired members. Although the initial cost would increase if a large number took advantage of this new benefit, early detection would reduce our costs over a long period of time. It worked, and as a result of being able to reduce annual costs the trust was able to consider additional benefits to our members.

Another lesson that was reinforced during that time, and one that Congress and President Obama should seriously consider is that you can’t give everyone what they want without there being consequences. When the FOP Insurance Trust Fund first began (1985) the trust would reimburse for prescriptions. You could either submit your receipts and paperwork requesting the reimbursement as the expense occurred or once a year (your choice). The trust was doing well and members began to ask if we could try a prescription card instead of the reimbursement process. Finally, the trust was doing well enough that we decided to try it for a year as a test program, study the cost impact. At the end of that year our costs went crazy, the program was a financial failure because the payments were immediate, versus the reimbursement program. The largest costs were from the retirees. The trustees felt that the trust should return to the reimbursement program, it was easier to predict annual costs when preparing budgets, and the costs were spread out over a period of time minimizing the impact. That was twelve years ago and despite the financial burden to the trust the prescription card is still in place.

The proposed legislation is going to increase the number of patients, yet it does not appear to do anything to increase the number of professionals, such as doctors, nurses, and other medical personnel to care for the patients. Hospitals are having trouble staffing to care for the current patient levels, how are they going to adequately handle the proposed increase. How about dealing with that first. The federal government has implemented programs in the past to increase the people that choose law enforcement as a career, why not do similar programs for the medical field. When there is a natural disaster the military will deploy medical personnel in the affected area, they also have had programs in the past when going into a community for “Fleet Week”, medical staff will go into an area and work in a clinic. Many medical personnel are members of the medical reserves; why not have them do their weekend or two week duty in the area county hospital. Could the government offer incentive programs for people to become doctors, nurses, etc, such as assistance with student loans, or paid education in return for a commitment to work in the county hospitals for a certain number of years. I know there are arguments against, but if the government is determined to spend trillions of dollars just so they can say that they did something, regardless if their proposal will accomplish the intended goals, why not look at these types of alternatives? I would rather the government take a few more months and come up with a workable program that won’t punish me for already having coverage, or stick my great grandchildren with the debt caused by a rushed failure. President Obama likes to talk about FDR, well if the U.S. has been waiting since FDR’s time for a health care program, will a few more months really be that devastating to the country.

As I have mentioned before, history is a favorite topic of mine. As is the ole saying about being doomed to repeat history if you don’t study it. Well, previous attempts to reform health care, going back to FDR, have failed because they have been rushed and the leadership has tried to ram it through without doing due diligence.

Finally, could I please get a straight answer with details? The argument that there are fifty million people without health care is misleading. It gives the perception that all fifty million want healthcare but can’t afford it. There are a portion that can’t afford it, a portion with income in excess of fifty thousand a year that choose not to have it, a portion that are in the process of changing jobs (and coverage), and the indestructible youth that believe that they do not need coverage. Another argument that gives a false perception is that currently no one’s insurance covers pre existing conditions. Legislation was enacted in the past that addresses this. I’ve changed coverage several times in the past and none of the coverage’s refused to ever cover pre existing conditions. There was a waiting period for pre existing conditions, my experience ranged between thirty to one hundred and eighty days. It is possible that there are programs that will never cover a pre existing condition, but to borrow one of the president’s favorite words, it is disingenuous to imply that all insurance carriers refuse pre existing conditions.

I would also like a straight answer about the impact on small businesses. Two days ago President Obama was on a conference call with some bloggers (I wasn’t one of them) and he was asked about a provision in H.R. 3200 that would prohibit you from changing coverage, if you dropped your current coverage you would be mandated to go into the government plan. The president’s response was that he wasn’t familiar with the provisions in H.R. 3200. Shouldn’t you become familiar with the entire bill, all the provisions, the pros and cons of the legislation if it is enacted before you tell me that it is great and will make my life so much better. I remember as a child reading about another time when this happened, people were telling the emperor how great his new clothes were.

I have been looking at H.R. 3200, and will read it a second time, but some provisions (if I’m reading them correctly) would prohibit changes in your current coverage once this legislation is enacted. If your life situation changes you would not be able to adjust your current coverage. Like I said, once I finish reading this I am going to go over it again to make sure I have an accurate understanding (apparently there is a federal regulation prohibiting the drafting of a bill in plain/ easy to understand language rather than “legalese”) (no offense meant to my Esq. friends).

I will be listening to President Obama’s news conference this evening in hopes that he is able to provide details, give a straight answer.

I am including a link to H.R. 3200, the legislation from the House of Representatives so that you could read, or look at, the legislation for yourself (of course reading this may disqualify you from being a member of Congress, or President). That’s My Opinion, What’s Yours?

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200:

Blog Updates

I have got a lot of positive feedback from people, including those that have read printed copies of the posts. I really appreciate the feedback, and ideas.

I decided to try some of the suggestions and felt that it was time to try and expand a bit. I have modified the blog to allow comments from anybody, including anonymous comments. Because of that I added a comment moderation as well, not to censor differing points of view (those will be published as well), just to keep profane comments out. As vast as the English language is if you can not express your thoughts without being profane or offensive without putting your name to what you say you shouldn't be posting comments. At least not on a Blog where it will also be a reflection of me.

I have also invited others to write posts if they choose. These are people who's opinions I respect, and people that I enjoy having conversations with because of their perspectives.

I may from time to time add a poll question, and would appreciate any suggestions.

What happened to the “civil” in civilization?

On June 6th I was watching the D-Day remembrance/ ceremony. I remembered my mother telling me about learning of the invasion on the radio, as well as stories about sitting around the radio for updates throughout the war (and the fear that the war might come to American shores). I also thought about how fortunate I’ve been throughout my life.

After graduating high school I went to work at Miami Heart Institute (at the time a major hospital located on Miami Beach) as an Orthopedic Technician, I was a part of the Physical Therapy Department. In addition to the orthopedic assignments I also assisted the aides with patients. During that time I had patients that had been a part of the armed forces in World War II; some had taken part in the D-Day invasion. I also had patients that had been victims of the Holocaust, suffered in and lost family in the Nazi concentration camps. With very, very few exceptions these were the most polite, patient, understanding people I have ever met either before or since. With only one exception, they all would apologize to the hospital staff caring for them, they would apologize for inconveniencing the staff, their health made it very difficult (if not impossible) to care for themselves and they were the ones that were apologizing.

Some were alone because their spouse had passed away, but rarely did I ever find one that felt lonely. I would talk with them as I set up or checked on their equipment, or were taking them to therapy. I would ask why they had kept the tattoo that the Nazi’s had branded them with? They kept it to remember what had happened to them, to remind them that no matter the trials they were suffering, they had already suffered the worst thing that could possibly happen to a person so their current situation was just an inconvenience. Most also kept the tattoos as a reminder to the rest of us of what happened, and of what man is capable of when evil goes unchallenged.

I mention this because just four days later a man went to the Holocaust Museum and opened fire with a rifle, killing a security guard before being wounded by other guards. Later that day it was reported that apparently Security Guard, Stephen T. Johns, saw an older man approaching the entrance and as an act of courtesy he opened the door for this elder “gentleman”, this act of decency rewarded with a bullet.

Within hours of the shooting some media and “Bloggers” began saying that the gunman was an “extreme right wing nut.” Looking at some of this individual’s writings (I won’t mention his name and give him the satisfaction of being remembered or put him on the same level as Stephen Johns) you would see that he wasn’t “right” or “left”, he was just full of hate. However, there were those that had to “label” him the same as others they dislike, and I have to ask WHY? Why is it OK to “paint” those that disagree with your philosophy with the same brush as the individual that would commit such a crime? It’s wrong when you’re labeled, so why perpetuate the wrong.

Is it possible to have civil discourse, how about working together establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, and promoting the general welfare of the country instead of trying to reshape the country in the image of only those that we agree with. Does that sound familiar; maybe you’ll remember it like this;
“WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide, for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

The founders of this country had a lot of faults, after all they were only human, but maybe we should stop hating one another because we have different beliefs and be thankful that this Republic allows us the freedom to have different thoughts and ideas. Maybe we should work together to ensure that future generations have the ability to disagree and speak our opinions, after all, thousands of people try to come to the United States each year so that they can enjoy such freedom.

Just maybe we can remember what is really important, and eleven year old boy lost his father, a woman her husband, and another family has to deal with the fact that they are the decedents of a hateful individual.

If that is too much to hope for, maybe we can follow the example of those that survived the Holocaust. That’s my opinion, what’s yours?

No I haven't disappeared or given up (not yet anyway)

No I haven't disappeared or given up. I haven't been able to post as often as I had originally planned. I got busy and to be honest, when I would get home the last thing I wanted to do was sit down at the PC and write (even though it would be for pleasure).

Things have slowed down a bit, and I'm feeling better (I've been contributing to my doctor's vacation fund). I am working on completing a couple of articles that were in the draft stage and will post them. I am also reading a couple of books and may have a thought or two when I'm finished.

LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS MEMORIAL SERVICE

During the past two weeks Law Enforcement/ Peace Officer Memorial Services have been taking place throughout Florida and the nation. These services pay tribute to, and honor those law enforcement officers that have paid the ultimate sacrifice; they’ve died in the line of duty. These services are also designed to assist the families of those that have given their lives.

In Florida the memorial service is actually a two day event, Sunday and Monday, and it honors municipal, county, state, and federal law enforcement officers serving in Florida that have died in the line of duty (we also recognize those that have been disabled and military personnel that have died serving our country).

On Sunday there is a lunch and meetings for the survivors where information is shared, including information about COPS (Concerns of Police Survivors). On Sunday evening there is a candlelight vigil at the capital courtyard, and on Monday there is the ceremony at the state capital. These days are also a time for the families to see that they are truly not alone. There are survivors there from previous years, they meet, get to know each other, and talk. The new survivors get to see that they are not alone and they get to be with others that have gone through what they are experiencing. They get to see that there truly is someone that knows what they are going through.

This is also a time for officers to come together, to honor coworkers and friends that have died. In law enforcement we are good at helping citizens deal with tragedy, but we are poor at it. This is an opportunity for those of us that have experienced the death of a friend in the line of duty to meet with and support those that are experiencing such a death for the first time. I first experienced such a loss four days after graduating from the police academy. Back then (1981) cops didn’t show emotion; cops weren’t impacted by the death or murder of a friend/ coworker. If you showed any emotions you were no good for law enforcement and some senior officers would do what they could to force, or convince you to quit. We know now that this is not the case, it is ok to be impacted, to be sad, it is how you deal with it that is important. By our coming together we show those officers that they are not alone, that there is someone that they can talk with.

Another thing that those of us can do for officers that are experiencing such a loss for the first time is help them also deal with the family. Often time’s officers are uncomfortable being with the family because they don’t know what to say, or how to ease the family’s suffering. I tell them that they don’t have to say a word, just being there shows the family know that they are not alone.
 
People ask why these memorials take place during the month of May. This is done to coincide around the National Peace Officers Memorial Service. On May 4, 1963 President John F. Kennedy signed Proclamation 3537 Peace Officers Memorial Day and Police Week. This proclamation designated May 15th as Peace Officers Memorial Day, and the week of May 15th as Police Week (you can find the proclomation on line, a source that I used was The American Presidency Project at http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=24099).

I attended the Florida Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Service in Tallahassee on May 4, 2009. I was there to pay tribute to Miami Police Officer James Walker and the other officers that have made the ultimate sacrifice. Officer Walker was murdered January 2008, shot and killed by a subject armed with an AK-47 assault weapon.

As I watched the families I took a moment to pray to God to look after them, to give them the strength to get through the next two weeks and to go on with their lives. I have dealt with families whose lives basically stopped; they chose to live in the past.

I also gave thanks that I made through my career with the Miami Police Department and my family never had to go through what these families were experiencing. There were times that my mother felt guilty, but whenever an officer died in the line of duty she prayed for the family, and also gave thanks that it wasn’t me. She was a social worker and always made herself available to the families (remembering what she felt like as a detective picked her up and transported her to the local trauma center, and the relief she felt when she found I was stable and would survive injuries I had sustained).

I know this is going to sound bad, but I do not mean it that way, I mean this in the positive. As the families passed me I thought of how simple some appeared. As I watched them I remembered what made this country great, and had more confidence that America will get through the current economic and political mess and be stronger. These families were proud that their loved one had chosen public service over another career that could have been more financially satisfying. Instead of being bitter, they stood tall and proud. Sure that choice was causing them pain now, but still they stood tall.

Each year when I attend these services I remember my friends that died in the line of duty. I also choose to rededicate myself to my chosen profession, and to serving my community.

As you go through your day today (May 15th) I hope you take a moment to remember those public servants that have lost their lives serving your/ our community. Also, take a moment to appreciate those in your personal life that you care about, maybe even let them know how you feel about them (believe me I know how hard that is, but try).

That's My Opinion, What's Yours




Proclamation 3537 - Peace Officers Memorial Day and Police Week
May 4, 1963


By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation
WHEREAS, from the beginning of this Nation, law enforcement officers have played an important role in safeguarding the rights and freedoms which are guaranteed by the Constitution and in protecting the lives and property of our citizens; and

WHEREAS, through constant application of new procedures and techniques, such officers are becoming more efficient in their enforcement of our laws; and

WHEREAS it is important that our people know and understand the problems, duties, and responsibilities of their police departments and the necessity for cooperating with them in maintaining law and order; and

WHEREAS it is fitting and proper that we express our gratitude for the dedicated service and courageous deeds of law enforcement officers and for the contributions they have made to the security and well-being of all our people; and

WHEREAS, by a joint resolution approved October 1, 1962 (76 Stat. 676), the Congress has requested the President to designate May 15 of each year as Peace Officers Memorial Day and the calendar week during which such May 15 occurs as Police Week:

NOW, THEREFORE, I, JOHN F. KENNEDY, President of the United States of America, do hereby designate May 15, 1963, and May 15 of each succeeding year, as Peace Officers Memorial Day, in honor of those peace officers who, through their courageous deeds, have lost their lives or have become disabled in the performance of duty.

I also designate the week of May 12 through May 18, 1963, and the calendar week during which May 15 occurs of each succeeding year, as Police Week, in recognition of the service given by the men and women who, night and day, protect us through enforcement of our laws.

I invite State and local governments, patriotic, civic, and educational organizations, and the people of the United States generally, to observe Peace Officers Memorial Day and Police Week in this year and each succeeding year with appropriate ceremonies in which all our people may join in commemorating law enforcement officers, past and present, who by their faithful and loyal devotion to their responsibilities have rendered a dedicated service to their communities, and, in so doing, have established for themselves an enviable and enduring reputation for preserving the rights and security of all citizens.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the United States of America to be affixed.

DONE at the City of Washington this fourth day of May in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and sixty-three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and eighty-seventh.

JOHN F. KENNEDY
By the President:
GEORGE W. BALL,
Acting Secretary of State

I'll be Back

It has been a while since I've written, no I didn't change my mind about writing articles. As some know I've been dealing with a situation the past month, and to be honest at the end of the night (when I usually do my writing), or when I would take a lunch break at work, I didn't want to see a keyboard or the journal that I use to write ideas for the blog (to paraphrase a famous quote, Yes Virginia there are really people that write longhand).

I am currently drafting two posts, one regarding peace officers memorial and another on comments that President Obama has made regarding college education.

Thanks for your patience, and if you have any ideas or comments let me know.

It’s Impossible to Fire a Government Employee

My posts so far have been written based on my 28 years of public service/ law enforcement, and my 22 years activity in my organization/ union (as an employee representative, Chief Steward, and executive board member of both the local and state lodge). Initially I came up with a few ideas for posts, addressing topics from my law enforcement/ union perspective. Then I began to think that I should find something to write about other than topics based on my background, however, something last week made me decide to go forward and write on this topic.

Last week (I began drafting this on March 21st) there were news articles that the Florida Legislature was considering a 5% pay reduction for state employees as one of the measures of dealing with the proposed budget deficits. Although it wasn’t a strong or popular sentiment, there were some that thought this would be a way of getting rid of some state employees. After all, you can’t fire a government (municipal, county, state, or federal) employee, even when they’ve committed an act that warrants termination. Unfortunately this perception is perpetuated by some in a supervisory role in government that have had disciplinary action overturned, or reduced by an appeal board (civil service, arbitration, or PERC, etc).

However, it is not impossible to discipline or terminate bad employees; I say that after being on both sides of the argument (union rep. and supervisor initiating discipline). In my experience there are a couple of main reasons that employers loose discipline cases. First the supervisor or agency doesn’t take the appeal process seriously and as a result they do not prepare for it as they should. Also, their attitude comes across during their appearance and/ or testimony.

In law enforcement the supervisor needs to prepare for this appeal process as if they are preparing to appear in criminal court. Another problem is that supervisors don’t want to put in the time and effort; often time’s short cuts are taken, such as not documenting when an employee is counseled (or other corrective action is taken), such as date and time it occurred. Another problem is the agency or supervisor’s reputation, if they have been excessive in the past, not followed progressive discipline, this can have an impact on the action the appeal board (or arbitrator) takes. In the event of a serious violation that warrants termination over a lesser penalty the supervisor needs to articulate why.

If a supervisor has not worked an investigative assignment they should consider taking a case preparation class, although these courses are designed for preparing a court presentation the principles are the same. Finally, a supervisor needs to have a positive attitude, even if they have appeared before the appeal board in the past and “lost”.

There are people that do not belong in the law enforcement profession, and if the supervisor properly documents their actions and is consistent in the recommended actions this individual will be removed. More importantly, if there is a civil lawsuit filed because of this person’s actions the supervisor will be protected.

In closing, unions don’t like defending someone that doesn’t deserve the “people’s” trust, however, they can’t allow violations of policies or contract to occur as a way to get them out of the profession. If you allow a person’s rights to be ignored or violated, how can you protect others?

If you are fair, consistent, professional, and take the time to document your attempts to correct a violation or poor performance a government employee can be terminated. That’s my opinion, what’s yours.

Updated Blog Address

Originally I wanted to make the Internet name match the Blog name, "That's My OPED, What's Yours" was the working title as I was setting up the Blog. Unfortunately as I was saving a draft copy, I changed the title but hadn't realized that this working title had been saved into the web address.

I have been able to change it, and made it the link that I originally wanted
http://thatsmyopinionwhatsyours.blogspot.com

I also set it up to send you an email when I make a new post, so the purpose of this post is to let you know of the change in the address and to test the email notification.

As I make other changes I will let you know. Finally, and most important, I want to thank everyone for their input and suggestions to help me improve this Blog and be successful at this endeavour.

ENOUGH Already!

ENOUGH Already!
Saturday afternoon I was watching different news and business programs. From time to time the past couple of days (including today during a break) I was listening to some talk radio. The majority were talking about the Stimulus Package, how the Republicans have been in charge for the past eight (8) years, Rush Limbaugh, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi traveling in a government jet, and how much “pork” or “earmarks” are in the Omnibus Spending Package.

I believe that everything in life happens for a reason. Case in point, Saturday afternoon at approximately 5:30 PM the power went out at my house. Turns out that it was a transformer on a pole adjacent to my back yard, the power was out for me and three other neighbors. I won’t bore you with all the details, I’ll just say that it took eleven (11) and half hours to restore the power and while pulling the truck out of my yard FPL knocked my satellite dish out of alignment. Like I said everything happens for a reason, and the reason for this was that prior to the power failure I found myself yelling in frustration at my TV (as I watched one of the news programs) ENOUGH ALREADY!!!

I am so sick and tired of hearing about Stimulus Package, how the republicans have been in charge for the past eight (8) years, Rush Limbaugh, and how much “pork” or “earmarks” are in the Omnibus Spending Package. Democratic members of Congress and advisors keep saying that the Republicans have been in charge for the past eight (8) years, counting on the majority of people that have been moved to become involved in the political process aren’t familiar with how Congress and the line of succession works. No the Republicans haven’t been in charge for the past eight years, the president for those years was a Republican. If the Republicans were in charge for all of those years Nancy Pelosi would not have been the Speaker of the House for the past two, Harry Reid would not have been the Majority Leader of the Senate for the past two years.

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have been in their leadership roles because the Democrats have had the majority in both houses, they’ve been in charge. The Republicans need to quit criticizing Speaker Pelosi for flying in a government jet instead of the much cheaper commercial airlines. Regardless if you like her or not the Speaker of the House is second in line of succession. After the 9/11 attacks security was increased for the Speaker of the House, realizing that the line of succession needed to be protected in order to ensure that our government could continue to function should the President and Vice President both be incapacitated. If it really bothers you, then change the line of succession back to the Secretary of State being second and the Speaker of the House being fourth like it used to be (I think it was during the 60’s or early 70’s that the succession was changed). If you’re not sure if I’m correct about the Speaker’s position all you have to do is Google Secretary of State Alexander Haig or the attempted assassination of President Regan and see the big “flap” that was raised when Secretary Haig said at a press conference while the president was in surgery that he was in charge (because of the line of succession) until the Vice President returned to the White House.

In case members of Congress hadn’t noticed, the Stimulus Package passed and was signed into law. In other words, it’s over. There were valid arguments, many points raised by the Congressional Budget Office, but it’s over for now. If the Congressional Budget Office is correct and the Stimulus only generates 1.5 or 2 million jobs instead of the 3 to 3.5 that the President says, if it takes 2 to 3 years to actually stimulate the economy instead of the immediate to 1 year, then raise those issues. How about a novel idea; fix the problem. Stop making statements that causes doubt in the stability of our financial system, I am tired of having to grab the bottle of Zantac before reading my latest statement. At this rate I would have done better to take all my severance pay and DROP monies and placed one BIG bet at the tables in Vegas instead of investing the money.

Let me preface this by saying that I regularly listen to Rush Limbaugh’s program. I don’t always agree with him, but he does raise valid points and criticisms, on both the Democrats and Republicans. Rush does generate discussion. Having said that I believe in the grand scheme it was a mistake for the President and his Chief of Staff to continually go after Rush. You are the President, why lower the prestige of the office to attack a private citizen. Unless of course you are also going to attack program hosts on Air America, like Al Franken.

Your continuous comments about Rush are causing people that don’t mind thinking for themselves to research what you claim, and if they continue to find that what you claim doesn’t quite match up with the facts you can lose their support. I went to CSPAN’s web site and watched Rush Limbaugh’s entire speech to CPAC. I thought it was a very good speech; he raised some valid points, and actually praised President Obama’s skills as a speaker. Another negative if you’re not a fan of Rush Limbaugh is that you keep his name in the headlines, which is something that Rush really doesn’t need any help at. The only good thing that has come out of the Rush attacks is that it distracted people from the issue of the “earmarks” in the proposed budget, or the fact that “earmarks” that President Obama either submitted or cosponsored last year as a Senator were being revised to remove his name from them.

If you have problems with the proposed budget/ Omnibus Spending Package, don’t vote for it as is. Try to amend it, or if you are not allowed to amend vote against. And finally, don’t you dare tell me later that you voted for it but didn’t read it. I couldn’t swallow that with the Stimulus Package. How can a congressperson say that they voted for something because it is good for the country and then admit that you didn’t have time to read it.

If Congress wants to save money; how about abolishing the Congressional Budget Office? The CBO reviewed the Stimulus Package, cited some problems, and instead of addressing the issues their report was ignored.

Anyway, like I said, ENOUGH Already!!!! THAT’S MY OPINION, WHAT’S YOURS?

Blog Updates

I want to thank those that have looked at this Blog and emailed me with their feedback and suggestions. They are appreciated, and I know they were given by friends that want to help me produce a product that others will want to read and be a part of.

One suggestion for another way that people can follow this was to sign up with Twitter. I looked at it and thought it was an idea worth exploring (http://twitter.com/JamesMannFLFOP).

The picture I originally had appeared "washed out". A friend of mine offered to touch it up for me, he did a great job and also gave me a black and white version.

My friend is JC Mendez, JC is a photographer and artist. I really like JC's work, especially is black and white photos. JC is on Facebook and Twitter, his web site is is http://www.digital-vfx.com and I would encourage you to check out his work.

Thanks again for the suggestions to help me make this something that you would want to follow.


ORIGINAL






COPIES FROM JC

Public Employee Unions and Benefits (Part 2)

I won’t go into the history of unions, their membership and the purpose they serve (at least not now). Rather than that I want to talk about the benefits.

Over the past several years many public sector employees have been able to obtain defined benefits (pensions) so that they are nearly competitive with the private sector. However, just as the private sector, the public sector is moving to a defined contribution for new employees.

Whenever a government entity has budget problems, or is just looking at making changes, they like to talk about how extravagant the government employee benefits are. The same politicians that people don’t trust on other issues, who’s credibility is such that if they said it was a bright sunny day tax payers would go find a window to look out and double check, are all of a sudden believed without question. When they want to attack government employees benefits their word is taken as gospel and no verification is needed, or sought (nor is the pensions that they set up for themselves included in that conversation or put on the “chopping block”).

I could make the arguments about how law enforcement officers (LEO) and firefighters (FF) deserve the pensions that they have because they risk their lives; that they deal with circumstances that others run away from. I could also argue about how in some school districts the teachers also risk their lives, in addition to preparing our children to be the future leaders. These would be valid arguments, however, as soon as you raise those points you turn off a lot of people. They say, that’s true but they chose that job.

Rather than that, let me make another point, but first I’d like to ask you a couple of questions.

1. Would you take a job in which you were not entitled to overtime pay if you work more than 40 hours a week?

2. Would you take a job in which you were subject to work a double shift if others don’t come to work (and again were not guaranteed to receive overtime pay when that happens)?

3. Would you take a job that when you retired would cause your Social Security Benefits to be reduced by up to 60%, even if you had all you quarters and/ or worked at another occupation after you retired?

I’ll leave it at 3 questions for now.

As I said, I am not going to mention risking you very own life, being exposed to disease(s) and illnesses that could threaten your life and your family. If you answered no to these questions you wouldn’t be a firefighter or law enforcement officer. If you answered no to number 3 you wouldn’t be a public school teacher either.

When most people choose to go into public service they aren’t aware of, or even consider the above questions.

Questions 1 & 2

Law enforcement and firefighters are exempt from the Fair Labor Standard Act (FLSA) regulations requiring that an employee be paid overtime when they work more than 40 hours a week. It is commonly referred to as a “207K exemption” or” Section 207 (K) exemption.”

Section 207 (K) has a schedule of the Maximum Non-Overtime hours Law enforcement and firefighters have to work before they are entitled to overtime pay. It ranges from 43 hours (LEO) or 53 (FF) in a seven day period, to a maximum 171 hours (LEO) and 212 hours (FF) in a twenty-eight day period. Some agencies require that you actually work those hours, if you take a personal or sick day you aren’t paid overtime. Others only require that you be on payroll for those hours, if you take a sick day or personal time and are carried on payroll you will be paid overtime. Government entities can declare their LEO and FF exempt and there is a process for that.

During the past few years’ law enforcement and fire departments have been having trouble hiring new personnel, they are not able to keep up with the attrition. This is resulting in LEO’s being held over for a second shift in order to have enough manpower to cover the streets and not have public safety jeopardized. The good side is it is easier for LEO’s to reach the working hour requirements; the negative is the increased worker comp. and other liability. Officers are working on the streets when they are exhausted, this endangers their safety and could reduce their ability to respond to situations.

Some public sector employees actually contribute to their pensions, in addition to Social Security. If those that serve your community do, you’re never told that by politicians as they reticule those pensions (nor do they tell you about the pension they will receive for only serving a few years as an elected official). For decades public sector employees either had no pensions, or they were poor, no where close to private sector pensions.

Many were enhanced and got much better in the late 80’s and 90’s. What happened in the 1980’s? The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO). Because many LEO’s retire earlier then other public employees and start other careers, this tends to have a greater impact on them. Their Social Security benefits may be reduced up to 60% because of these pieces of legislation. More information is available from the Grand Lodge, Fraternal Order of Police.

Public sector unions represent their membership to ensure a decent wage so that they can care for their family. They also help ensure that employees are treated fairly and are not subjected to hostile working conditions. Management has complained in the past about the need of a professional work force, one that is free of corruption and favoritism to the wealthy in society. Paying a decent wage, comparative with the private sector helps reach and maintain that objective. BUT politicians can’t continuously go back and forth on this issue; either you want a professional work force or not. Public sector unions and benefits help achieve those objectives.

Now let me climb down off my soap box and say that I realize that there are union leaders that do not espouse to the philosophy of working with management, some have the attitude of give me, give me, give me. In those cases the individual locals should be addressed instead of the preverbal shot gun approach. Just as all politicians aren’t corrupt; neither are all unions. To quote another generation “you don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.”

As I mentioned before the priority of management and labor should be fixing any problems, then if you feel the need place blame go for it. THAT’S MY OPINION, WHAT’S YOURS

Public Employee Unions & Benefits (Part 1)

It appears that for the past few months it has been fashionable to “lump” all unions into the same category, then criticize and verbally attack. They are all “painted with the same brush.” Not all unions are alike, just like democrats, republicans, liberals, and conservatives aren’t the same. With President Obama’s election unions became an easy target because they endorsed and supported President Obama.

However, not all unions or employee organizations endorsed or supported then Senator Obama’s candidacy. Some actually had a Political Screening process that included questionnaires and/ or interviews. At the conclusion, despite then Senator Obama’s charisma and public speaking abilities, some disagreed with his stated policies and legislative goals. They did not believe that these would be in the best interests of their membership and community.

Then the U.S. automakers went to Congress asking for billions in order to remain solvent and avoid bankruptcy. They came back and then the latest Stimulus Package was passed. At this point the attacks started again on unions, citing the United Auto Workers (UAW) refusal to make concessions. They were blamed for the imminent demise of the U.S. auto industry. I’m sure that if the Stimulus Plan fails, or is not as successful as President Obama has presented, the UAW will receive some blame/ credit. Did the UAW refuse to make concessions, or did they refuse to make anymore? I was not in the meetings trying to negotiate modifications to the contracts so I can’t say for certain what happened.

What I can tell you is that public employee unions have stepped up in the past to help government in times of fiscal crisis, case in point that I am intimately familiar with is the City of Miami, Florida. Politicians that weren’t even in an elected office at the time have taken credit, however, the police, fire, general employees and sanitation workers unions played a major part in the city’s survival and its bond ratings being raised from junk status. The majority of people that choose public service as a career do so because they want to make a difference in the community, and truly believe in public service. They carry that over into their union/ organization leadership.

For those that aren’t familiar with what happened (in Miami), there was a federal corruption investigation. The Budget Manager was caught by the fed’s and turned informant in order to get a reduced sentence. Long story made short, a commissioner and the City Manager were arrested. Another part of the problem was that the department that was supposed to be an independent reviewer of the Finance Department was moved under the control of the Budget Director during consolidation of city functions. They reported to the very person that they were supposed to be a “watch dog” over. Additionally, the city would under estimate their liabilities and over estimate their assets, including counting one time funding sources as recurring revenue. Then at the end of the budget year, in order to comply with the law requiring a balanced budget, monies would be transferred from projects or grants to the general revenue fund so that it would appear that the budget was balanced (and there was no deficit). Then on the first day of the new budget the monies would be transferred from the general fund back to the trust or grant fund, thereby causing an immediate deficit to the new fiscal year’s budget.

After the arrests the new City Manager scheduled a weekend of budget meetings in order to try and figure out exactly what the city’s status was. Initially the manager refused to allow the unions to attend the meetings, apparently forgetting about Florida’s Government in the Sunshine laws. After we went to court and were granted an emergency injunction the city agreed to let us attend, but we were not allowed to contribute. This lasted half a day, until the manager realized that we had been looking and were able to uncover information that he was not provided (the unions had been questioning the budget figures for some time).

After that first day the city administration sought to work with us (the unions) to try and save the City of Miami. We worked with the administration to reduce costs, ease the burden on the tax payers, and generate revenues. We, the unions, made concessions and postponed benefits until the financial stability of the city was attained. We were also instrumental in the governor appointing an oversight committee to approve any expenditure the city wanted to make in the mean time. Obviously if a major municipality were to fail the state would be severely impacted.

We worked at finding a resolution for more than two months and this was an abbreviated account of what occurred. The point is that once the city decided not to take an adversarial position with the unions, and chose to work together as partners to try and find solutions, solutions were found. The unions recommended concessions that the city’s management hadn’t “put on the table”. It was hard, but we all came through it.

The point is that everyone, government officials, union leadership, need to stop pointing the finger and try to assess blame for the financial mess. Instead of being advisories they need to work together as partners to fix the problem. Once the problem is fixed, then you can worry about placing blame if you feel the need, I think it would be more constructive to make sure this didn’t happen again. After all if you’re not careful history will repeat itself. THAT’S MY OPINION, WHAT’S YOURS

In the second part I will talk about employee benefits

Upcoming Posts

As issues arise I will post addressing them, and any other topics that you suggest.

Ideas for upcoming posts will talk about how impossible it is to terminate a government employee?

I've got a couple of emails asking about FLSA and the Section 207 (K) exemption, so I may post a little more info and list a couple of references.

Introduction

This is my first Blog, and this first post may be a little long. However, I thought I’d start out by telling a little about myself and why I decided to start a Blog.

I have been involved in law enforcement for 28 years, retiring from the City of Miami after nearly 27 years of service. It has always been my belief that when working in the capacity of a law enforcement officer I should remain neutral and not take sides on issues. It’s not that I don’t have an opinion, or that I am afraid to share my opinion, I feel that I owe it to the citizens that give me a paycheck not to take sides while working in that capacity.

Having said that; my mother was always very active in politics, and she passed the love of politics on to my brother and me. I believe (thanks to her influence) that through an exchange of ideas and contrary points of view we grow and make our society a better place for all. I enjoy listening and watching various commentary programs, not just those that I agree with.

As a student I used to enjoy Current Affairs, History, and debates. After becoming a law enforcement officer I became active in the Fraternal Order of Police, and eventually I was elected to the Executive Board of my local lodge and later the Florida State Lodge. As an Executive Board member I was, and am, an advocate for the membership’s positions on many issues. These issues are not only law enforcement; they are a variety of issues because I am a strong believer that we (FOP) should be active in our communities.

Over the past two or three years I have become disgusted with the change that has occurred with some in our communities. We are no longer tolerant of different ideas or positions on issues. If you disagree with some they either become hostile, or resort to disparaging references towards those that disagree. I am also sick of the “labels” that are put on people because of the political party they choose to belong, or not belong to. This attitude had crept into our elementary, middle and senior high schools.

Shortly after the 2000 presidential election my girlfriend and her daughter (Jessica, 8 years old at the time) went out to dinner. While we were discussing the aftermath of the election I noticed Jessica looking at me with a puzzled look. Finally she asked me if she could ask a question. She asked if I was a republican, and then if I was a police officer? Then she asked how I could be a police officer if I was a republican? Jessica went on to explain that her third grade teacher had announced to the class that republicans were crooks, and since teachers were instructing facts she was confused about how I could be a police officer.

During this past election discussions in some classrooms have been that if you were African American and disagreed with anything that then Senator Obama said, or questioned any of his proposals, you were not being true to your race. If anyone else, who didn’t vote for Senator Obama, questioned or disagreed with President Obama and his policies are racists. Teachers have stated these views publicly.

It appears as if freedom to think for yourself, to question authority, the freedom to make your own decision is an extinct ideology. This really angers me; I try to instill in young people the same ideals that my mother did in me. I wasn’t sure how to address it, appealing to the school system is a waste since they are the ones teaching intolerance for independent thinking.

I had almost given up the fight until the Stimulus Package was passed by Congress. As part of a class assignment Jessica, now 16, had to write an essay about the Stimulus Package’s passage. I was out of town on business and she called me and asked if she could read her essay to me. I was impressed with the thought that she put into this, so much so that I asked her to please email me a copy. Later when I was checking my email for her essay I learned of a Blog that a coworker from the police department had started. It was then that I thought of starting this Blog.

From time to time I will share my thoughts and opinions on issues and events based on my background and life experience. More importantly I wanted to have somewhere in which different points of view can be shared, including those of the youth. I hope that this Blog will help serve that purpose, the youth are our future, and they do have their own opinions (it is an option separate from the social sites they use). These opinions are important, even though we may not always want to hear them (probably because we’re afraid that we will have to face the fact that we are not always the more mature).

In the Movie Network the main character, a news anchor, tells his audience to go to their windows, open the window and shout “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore.” This Blog is my proverbial window and I hope that you will join me in a civil exchange of ideas.

Thank you for your time.