Will Police Body Cameras be a Mandatory Subject of Bargaining in Florida?

Will police body cameras improve policing in Florida? Yes. The purpose of affixing cameras onto the bodies of police officers is to record their citizen contacts, especially their uses of force, including deadly force. This can provide insight into policing for training purposes and document incidents for suspects’ criminal prosecutions. It also serves to assess officers’ job performance and provide evidence for their discipline and criminal prosecutions. The use of body cameras by police officers has become more affordable and widespread, with federal funds available to help agencies purchase them. However, there is some resistance from the officers who will be wearing the cameras, which could affect their effectiveness. A report was published by the federal government and a police think tank about using body cameras for police officers. The report was based on a conference where police agencies from all over the US and other organizations gathered to talk about using body cameras. The report showed that only one police union sent a representative to the conference, even though it was important for them to be there. Because of this, the report didn’t address the concerns of police officers very much. It seems like the union guy wasn’t included in discussions about putting cameras on police officers. The report talked about consulting with unions, but it doesn’t seem like they were really involved. The author of the report didn’t mention negotiating with unions at all. The unions only found out about the cameras from the news or seeing it in their budget. Law enforcement in Florida is refusing to talk about body cameras. I have had some meetings with management about it, but only after I asked in writing. The meetings were only scheduled because the management got advice from their lawyers. The lawyers said they would have the meetings, but they still don’t think body cameras should be up for negotiation. Police departments and their officers’ unions need to negotiate together about using body cameras. Avoiding negotiation can create problems and cause distrust between officers and management. It’s important for everyone to work together to make sure the cameras are used in a way that helps improve police work and maintains public trust. When it comes to whether law enforcement agencies in Florida have to negotiate with their officers’ unions about body cameras, it’s likely that the state labor board will follow the same rules as the federal labor board for private sector employees. The federal board has said that employers have to talk to unions before installing hidden surveillance cameras in the workplace. This means that it’s likely that Florida’s labor board will also say that law enforcement agencies have to talk to unions before using body cameras on their officers. In simple terms, the use of hidden surveillance cameras in the workplace is a big decision that should be discussed with employees. It can affect job security and should be part of negotiations between the company and the employees’ union. PERC, the organization that handles labor disputes for public employees in Florida, will likely decide that police body cameras are a “mandatory” subject of bargaining. This is based on how similar issues have been treated in private sector workplaces by the NLRB and federal courts. In Florida, public employees have limited bargaining power, so PERC has the authority to balance the scales in labor disputes. For example, in a case involving drug testing for police officers, the court looked at similar cases and decisions from the NLRB to make its decision. My research found two cases from other places where police unions were not happy about body cameras being used by the police. In both cases, the unions asked to talk about it with the employers, but the employers said no. The courts said the employers had to talk about it with the unions and make some changes. In a Maryland case, a union was able to negotiate a proposal to limit the employer from searching through police officers’ body camera recordings for misconduct. In Florida, a court ruled that police body cameras will be decided through collective bargaining, and not solely by the employer. The court also rejected the argument that drug testing police officers was solely within the management’s prerogative, stating it was subject to collective bargaining. The court said that the City of Miami has to bargain with the police union about drug testing and other changes to wages and work conditions. The court didn’t agree with the city’s argument that drug testing is too important to be part of bargaining. The court pointed out that police departments have been working without drug testing for a long time. It also noted that police officers have been doing their jobs without body cameras for a long time too. The city argued that they have the right to regulate the police, but the court ruled that compulsory drug testing should be included in collective bargaining. The court also said that body cameras worn by police officers should be negotiated with their union. They also mentioned that their labor organization didn’t want to negotiate about the cameras. The court cited previous cases to support their decision. These are references to legal cases that deal with the rights and responsibilities of unions and employers. They talk about things like the union’s duty to represent employees fairly, the employer’s use of surveillance cameras, and the decisions that are considered part of the employer’s core control. These cases help determine how labor disputes are resolved. These are court cases and arbitration involving police unions and their employers about whether certain rules and programs, like drug testing and body cameras, have to be negotiated with the union. In one case, the employer had to negotiate about a body camera program, and in another case, the specific terms of the program were in dispute. This is a legal document about a case involving a police union in Montgomery County. The document includes references to specific cases and a lawyer’s background in labor and employment law. It also mentions the Labor and Employment Law Section and its members.

Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/will-police-body-cameras-be-a-mandatory-subject-of-bargaining-in-florida/