Police Suggestion Union Rep

Jack P · 2026-06-26T01:41:28+0100

Suggestion Title: Union Rep
Suggestion Description: A union rep. This idea was actually created by @Dekkrior but I believe this idea is something that would actually be useful. Like in real life, the purpose of a union rep would be to assist and guide you through if you're going through disciplinary actions or IA, as it is right now I believe command is technically acting as some sort of Union Rep, somebody in actual union rep would be different to actual command and wouldn't necessarily be related to command. Their entire purpose is to make sure people can feel like they have some sort of support system and guidance if they aren't sure what to do or how to do it.

Why should this be added?:
- A better support system for people under Investigation. Both witnin IA and other Disciplinary actions.
- Less stuff for command to deal with, when they are already super overloaded.

What negatives could this have?:
- More paperwork I presume?
- Needs to be planning and guidelines and rules to set up regarding the position/title.

What problem would this suggestion solve?: It would simply show a better support system for people who's not confident in what to do, or how to go about their current investigation and actually know what to do and where to go for help and guidance.

Dekkrior · 2026-06-26T02:33:29+0100

SomeUser · 2026-06-26T02:57:17+0100

This is something that imo the chiefs should look into, i think IA has a fatal flaw when it come to transparency, i understand that there is some form of confidentiality that needs to be upheld but there should be someone that can help you in my opinion when looking at punishments as theres alot of rules. I also to add onto this point that the way IA’s are rn, of you get an IA you don’t know what you may have been reported for, At least for a few days while on command review

I feel like IF this where to be a thing, what you would have to do is explain what has happened what the min / max punishment how the process goes ect, i feel like another downside is having dank do more work where you would have to make it so they have limited access to IA complaints.

(Sorry if this is all over the shop its too hot even at 3am)

Jack P · 2026-06-26T03:52:03+0100

SomeUser said:
This is something that imo the chiefs should look into, i think IA has a fatal flaw when it come to transparency, i understand that there is some form of confidentiality that needs to be upheld but there should be someone that can help you in my opinion when looking at punishments as theres alot of rules. I also to add onto this point that the way IA’s are rn, of you get an IA you don’t know what you may have been reported for, At least for a few days while on command review

I feel like IF this where to be a thing, what you would have to do is explain what has happened what the min / max punishment how the process goes ect, i feel like another downside is having dank do more work where you would have to make it so they have limited access to IA complaints.

(Sorry if this is all over the shop its too hot even at 3am)

Yeah there would be a bit of work, especially planning into how the role would/should actually be setup, and how much access they would have. It should probably also be something with the defendant themselves having to contact the Union Reps to prevent any union rep being able to see any IA etc, potentially something that just tells the rep that there is an IA on this person, but not particularily any info regarding it, but even that may be too much without the persons consent, so I understand the difficulty it COULD bring, but I also think there needs to be somebody who can be specifically there if you need it.

I found myself quite a few times not knowing what to do or uncertain what would happen to me, and wished I had somebody who could guide me.

miss piggy · 2026-06-26T04:16:07+0100

how would this work?

Jack P · 2026-06-26T04:27:29+0100

miss piggy said:
how would this work?

I'm thinking it'll probably be a request thing, which I believe you can still do with command aswell or atleast you used to be able to, but command just seems to have much more work than having to deal with all the people who gets constantly reported etc. Thinking might be something that is fitting into Human Resources or smt like that, you would create a ticket request somebody to act as your Union Rep and they would just guide you through everything you need to do, including potentially some point of idea as @SomeUser also suggested.

Dekkrior · 2026-06-26T05:22:48+0100

Well, I wasn't really suggesting this seriously but now that some people seem to like it.

I would structure a union with one union president, who works with command and has a seat at the table for IA affairs. Their job would be to speak on behalf of the union to command, and would coordinate with the elected union reps. How exactly union reps are broken up would be complicated and I'm probably not well versed enough to come up with a great structure so I'm not really able to come up with anything concrete. At a bare minimum, I would say four are needed, one for TFU, one for RTU, one for Patrol, and one for dispatch. They would be responsible for gathering concerns of their constituents and raising them with the union president. They would also work with officers with active IA complaints, or who think they may have been wrongfully disciplined. Their role in IA and with disciplinaries would be purely advisory, particularly with officers who may be less versed in procedures or are just very new.

Union reps and presidents should be chosen entirely through voting. Any officer, SO, or corporal could run for any of these positions, and they would be re-elected frequently. (Probably quarterly) to ensure that the positions aren't held without being adequately fulfilled. Exclusions from eligibility would need to be a result of gross misconduct, not simply a matter of experience or preference.

I would probably say an initial nomination system would be the best way, everyone gets one vote on who to nominate, and everyone who gets at least 3 (Or potentially five) nominations gets put into the general election for that position. Go from there to a general, and if anyone gets over 50%, they win, if nobody does, the top 2 go to a runoff vote. It'd be a lot of coordination, and a lot of effort, but you'd have to be very intentional if this were to work.

The most important thing is that this would all be non-supervisory. Nobody ranked SGT+ would be able to be a part of this, as this is a union, not a formal division of command. While the union would still have to follow the code of conduct and SOP, they would not directly answer to command, nor have hard power over the department.

This is not necessarily me saying we should do all that, this is me saying how I think if would have to work should it be done.

Sap Sapire · 2026-06-26T05:42:54+0100

I personally think that lower ranking officers and newer officers having someone to help guide them through an IA process and learn how to defend themselves, especially when there newer to the server/newer to the PD would be nice. I saw you doing this IC kinda for memes. but it would fill a legit need for the PD honestly.

SomeUser · 2026-06-26T05:46:40+0100

Dekkrior said:
Well, I wasn't really suggesting this seriously but now that some people seem to like it.

I would structure a union with one union president, who works with command and has a seat at the table for IA affairs. Their job would be to speak on behalf of the union to command, and would coordinate with the elected union reps. How exactly union reps are broken up would be complicated and I'm probably not well versed enough to come up with a great structure so I'm not really able to come up with anything concrete. At a bare minimum, I would say four are needed, one for TFU, one for RTU, one for Patrol, and one for dispatch. They would be responsible for gathering concerns of their constituents and raising them with the union president. They would also work with officers with active IA complaints, or who think they may have been wrongfully disciplined. Their role in IA and with disciplinaries would be purely advisory, particularly with officers who may be less versed in procedures or are just very new.

Union reps and presidents should be chosen entirely through voting. Any officer, SO, or corporal could run for any of these positions, and they would be re-elected frequently. (Probably quarterly) to ensure that the positions aren't held without being adequately fulfilled. Exclusions from eligibility would need to be a result of gross misconduct, not simply a matter of experience or preference.

I would probably say an initial nomination system would be the best way, everyone gets one vote on who to nominate, and everyone who gets at least 3 (Or potentially five) nominations gets put into the general election for that position. Go from there to a general, and if anyone gets over 50%, they win, if nobody does, the top 2 go to a runoff vote. It'd be a lot of coordination, and a lot of effort, but you'd have to be very intentional if this were to work.

The most important thing is that this would all be non-supervisory. Nobody ranked SGT+ would be able to be a part of this, as this is a union, not a formal division of command. While the union would still have to follow the code of conduct and SOP, they would not directly answer to command, nor have hard power over the department.

This is not necessarily me saying we should do all that, this is me saying how I think if would have to work should it be done.

See this part is way too complicated, Lets say a select few whos job it is to answer and help with these questions make it under the CC banner as they are the ones that make disitions at the end of IA's

They would have to be compitent first off, they would have to know what they are on about, and be willing to do it.
Another person to ask is @Viper see if this would be even possable

Dekkrior · 2026-06-26T05:56:45+0100

SomeUser said:
See this part is way too complicated, Lets say a select few whos job it is to answer and help with these questions make it under the CC banner as they are the ones that make disitions at the end of IA's

They would have to be compitent first off, they would have to know what they are on about, and be willing to do it.
Another person to ask is @Viper see if this would be even possable

It is complicated, the bigger intention is to make sure that its ability to function as an advocate group for both officers individually and collectively without direct influence of command is the summary of it all thought

Acerius · 2026-06-26T06:10:37+0100

I wouldn't mind looking into how people can be better supported through IA or other internal disciplinary processes, however I'm not sure about the whole elected body and collective bargaining piece. We have a suggestions forum that is open to the whole community and anyone can vote on suggestions, including police ones, and there is also a Helpdesk where any division can be contacted, including the Chiefs of Department directly.

Dekkrior · 2026-06-26T06:19:30+0100

Acerius said:
I wouldn't mind looking into how people can better be supported through IA or other internal disciplinary processes, however I'm not sure about the whole elected body and collective bargaining piece. We have a suggestions forum that is open to the whole community and anyone can vote on suggestions, including police ones, and there is also a Helpdesk where any division can be contacted, including the Chiefs of Department directly.

I do understand that, but especially to the more lay persons, quite frankly as I find myself after not being very engaged with the PD since before the pandemic, the PD is a very complicated and intricate box, and while all the information about command is there, the procedures in how it works and everything, it's a lot to take in.

The collective bargaining side of it comes down to ensuring that the vast majority of officers feel like their needs are listened to fully, and that issues the officers as a whole may have with command decisions, or other actions are given significant enough attention to not fall by the wayside. While individually people have a voice, that also requires them to either publically voice those concerns and potentially face retaliation (Whether intentional, accidental, or even perception of it due to things that are purely incidental) or do so anonymously in a manner that locks it down in confidentiality. A union system would also provide a structure and filter for issues to be provided to command in a negotiated way, with actual mediation versus a very very large conversation.

It would be much easier (And productive) to have one or a few people who are appointed by the body represent their interests than to have the body as a whole try to do so themselves. It's the same reason we have elected officials in so many different aspects in our lives.

There's also likely many things that go unexpressed simply because there's inherently a barrier to entry with PLPD and it's structure. People are more willing to talk to someone who is an appointed advocate than someone who can take disciplinary action against them. Issues can, and have arisen from the PLPD command structure before, and I feel like this could also help provide additional trust, as well as potentially pick up on details indicative of a potential problem more effectively than just waiting and hoping the right person witnesses it and can be bothered to take action and report it.

SomeUser · 2026-06-26T06:23:25+0100

Acerius said:
I wouldn't mind looking into how people can better be supported through IA or other internal disciplinary processes, however I'm not sure about the whole elected body and collective bargaining piece. We have a suggestions forum that is open to the whole community and anyone can vote on suggestions, including police ones, and there is also a Helpdesk where any division can be contacted, including the Chiefs of Department directly.

Ye, I think i was speak to one of the cheifs (A little while back) about something simular as one of them implied that im a fuckin moron so we need someone to counter you being a moron, and you know thats valid hahaha but one thing I do find annoying as i mentioned is i feel like all the CC shit and all that is burried under the fine print per say, trying to find any of the things you guys come up it feels your pulling policies out your ass, when there probs there but us normals that are not in CC or IA try and find it and it feels impossable to find, so something like via IA, wise like a tab with what you have been accused of, Where this policy lies kinda deal again im not part of CC and IA, Which also ties into my orignal part, as if your apart of CC you should know some of that stuff already u know so having a rep to talk you through WHY they are looking at it that way would be benefishal in my opinion

Baba · 2026-06-26T11:32:16+0100

Command ain't overlaoded they be scratchin they ballz and shi ngl

Jack P · 2026-06-26T11:42:35+0100

Acerius said:
I wouldn't mind looking into how people can be better supported through IA or other internal disciplinary processes, however I'm not sure about the whole elected body and collective bargaining piece. We have a suggestions forum that is open to the whole community and anyone can vote on suggestions, including police ones, and there is also a Helpdesk where any division can be contacted, including the Chiefs of Department directly.

Something that would also be the point of the Union is the fact, yes you can speak to command and even Chiefs but people need to have a place they feel they can express their frustrations. Ofc it shouldnt be discriminatory or directly insulting, but still feel like a safe space.

If you vent to command and accidently says smt you shouldnt, that very command members might end up giving you a disciplinary action which will just make people will like they Arent properly listened to. Thats where a union would come in to be instead. Im not sure what I think about the whole voting thing either, mainly because I dont see how that would work with PLPD but at the same time could be a fun change.

Jack P · 2026-06-26T11:43:42+0100

Baba said:
Command ain't overlaoded they be scratchin they ballz and shi ngl

Oh trust me, if you look at what they need to do every month, that is absolutely insane amount of work for a game, especially for people with irl jobs.

Ricky Streak · 2026-06-26T12:59:25+0100

miss piggy said:
how would this work?

Its called a "PBA" (Police Benevolent Association).

There's many functions of the PBA (Contract negotiation, fund-raising, charity work, legal representation, disciplinary representation, etc.) The only function that would apply to PLPD is the legal and disciplinary representation. Anyone who is considered "command" would not be a member of the union. Massive departments like NYPD have different unions for everyone up to Lieutenant I think.

The way it works for my department is that if an officer receives any kind of disciplinary action, a PBA representative accompanies them during meetings or hearings to negotiate on their behalf. For example, if an officer is facing a minor punishment like a six-month letter of counseling, the PBA rep advocates for a reduced or alternative outcome by presenting the officer’s prior record and negotiating with command. For legal representation, if I was sued civilly for an action I took on-duty, the PBA retains a lawyer that represents the department.

Most PBAs have (President, Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer) as ranks and every year or two there is elections for the spots.

I definitely think that there would be a benefit to having a PBA for PLPD and it would also add more roleplay for the officer termination process or when punishing a officer.

Police Suggestion Union Rep

Similar threads