Yale Police Benevolent Association
Summary of Arbitration Awards
1993 to the Present
This Yale Police Benevolent Association (YPBA) summary covers all arbitrations from the first in 1993 to the present. In that time YPBA and the University have met in the arbitration forum only 4 times.
Each summary is merely an overview of the critical issues in each case and is not intended to replace the Award itself. Therefore, no one should rely exclusively on only the summary but should utilize all resources (Contract, Supervisors, Labor Relations Representatives, etc.) when making operational decisions. Contact Labor Relations at 432-9822 if you wish to discuss a case or obtain a copy of a given award.
The summary is organized from the most recent Award to the oldest and each Award is identified by a reference number which corresponds to the date the Award was issued and an internal Labor Relations number.
Summaries
97/05/02 - case #P04
The Grievant was one of six applicants for promotion to three available Detective positions. He filed a grievance when he was not selected for promotion, claiming that he was the most qualified of all the candidates, and that he had been disadvantaged in his bid for advancement because the Department allegedly retaliated against him for his Union activity in that he had served as a Union steward.
The Arbitrator determined that the Chief of Police made correct decisions in selecting candidates for promotion, and he found no evidence of antiunion prejudice.
94/12/02 – case #P03
The Grievant was suspended following an episode where he drew his firearm and aimed it at the two occupants of a car operating on a New Haven street. He later explained that his intention was to protect himself from the oncoming car, but the Department’s investigation showed that he deliberately and without good reason placed himself in the path of the car, presumably to capture the occupants who he believed to be guilty of an earlier traffic violation.
The Arbitrator upheld the suspension, agreeing that the Officer's actions violated Department rules covering the proper use of firearms, and that the Department properly considered the officer's prior employment and disciplinary history in determining the appropriate level of discipline.
94/11/30 – case #P02
When negotiations for the 1992 Agreement with the YPBA concluded in
August, 1993, the settlement included a provision for a retroactive pay
settlement going back to the former contract's original expiration of June
30, 1992. The Union claimed that Police Officers who terminated between
June 30, 1992 and August, 1993 were eligible for the retroactive
settlement. The University's position was that the settlement only applied
to employees on the active payroll as of the settlement date. However,
since there was no specific reference in the settlement agreement or in
the Labor Agreement itself, the Arbitrator found that retroactive pay was
due the former employees.
93/12/03 – case #P01
A Yale Police Officer was given a 30 day suspension after he was discovered to be several miles away from his assigned beat during a night shift. He took deliberate steps to mislead his supervisors as to his whereabouts, including reporting a false location when asked via radio to report his location while the supervisor had the officer under surveillance.
The Arbitrator determined that while the grievant's behavior warranted discipline, it was not egregious enough to deserve a 30 day suspension. He also noted that the Department did not have a history of issuing that severe a penalty and the grievant's prior disciplinary action was for dissimilar infractions. The Arbitrator reduced the suspension to 5 days, noting that the Grievant should still consider his job in jeopardy.
File last updated
March 19.
1998
