By Gary Craig, Rochester Democrat and Chronicle (New York)
Rochester police do not have the right to demand union representation if questioned about possible misconduct by other officers as part of a criminal investigation, an appellate court has ruled.
Friday’s ruling reversed a decision by the state’s Public Employment Relations Board, which had determined that police had a right to the union representation.
“PERB abused its discretion in expanding a public employee’s rights to include the right to have a union representative present during a criminal investigation,” ruled the Appellate Division of state Supreme Court. “New York State has a strong public policy that prohibits union interference with criminal investigations.”
The dispute stems from a police investigation into an incident in which a man died shortly after his arrest by Rochester police.
The union challenged police decisions not to allow lawyers to be present when police witnesses were questioned.
The city also refused union representation for police officers who might be targets of a criminal investigation.
The appellate ruling focuses only on the issue of union representation. Courts have refused to overturn the city’s practice of prohibiting legal representation for police who are witnesses but not targets of an investigation.
Any officer who may be considered the target of a criminal investigation can have an attorney present, city officials say. But city lawyers have argued that there is no legal right to union representation in a criminal probe.
Ronald Evangelista, the president of the police union, the Locust Club, said it will appeal to the Court of Appeals. “Why is it important for everybody else in the world to have union representation but not cops?” he said.
Municipal attorney Jeffrey Eichner said a police officer’s rights are still protected as part of the investigative process.