Police contract reflects tough times

After more than a decade of runaway paycheck growth, a public employee union has finally agreed to cut back the generous annual salary increases that have left local governments awash in red ink, pushing buyouts and preparing for layoffs.

But in bringing some long-needed restraint to the ever-rising labor costs imposed on valley taxpayers, the one-year contract negotiated by the union for rank-and-file Las Vegas police officers also demonstrates how much more must be done to bring public-sector compensation back into parity with the private sector.

The Las Vegas Police Protective Association deserves much credit for offering some recognition that the Southern Nevada economy is hurting, and that declining commerce can't sustain the kind of wage growth officers have become accustomed to. The four-year contract that ends June 30 has seen most officers' overall compensation increase about 40 percent over that period.

While tens of thousands of valley workers have dealt with schedule and income cuts, benefit reductions and layoffs, the typical Las Vegas police officer got a 3.75 percent "cost-of-living" raise in addition to a 4 percent "step in grade" raise marking an additional year of service. Officers with more than 10 years on the force do not receive step raises, but earn "longevity" pay of 5 percent plus an additional half-percent for each subsequent year of service, to a maximum of 15 percent.

To spare further slashing of the city and county budgets, Las Vegas police officers will not get a cost-of-living raise on July 1, when the new pact takes effect.

"We tried to do the right thing," union president Chris Collins said. "Our guys and gals are members of the community first."

That's an acknowledgment other local bargaining units have yet to make. Sheriff Doug Gillespie said this outlook made negotiations a breeze compared with the bruising battle of four years ago.

"I give them credit for coming into this negotiation with an open mind," the sheriff said. "They did in a month what normally takes six."

So are Las Vegas officers, who already are among the best-paid police in Amerca with starting annual salaries above $53,000, going to have to make do with an unchanged paycheck through the summer of 2010? Most certainly not.

Less-experienced officers will still get their 4 percent step raise. More experienced officers will still collect their longevity pay. And the city and the county will pick up the entire cost of a mandated 3.5 percentage-point increase in contributions to the state pension fund. Thousands of valley workers have seen their employer matches to devastated 401(k) accounts suspended, but as taxpayers, they'll fully subsidize the benefit increases that will stabilize officers' guaranteed retirement income.

This contract certainly imposes a smaller increase on the Metropolitan Police Department's overall budget than any labor deal negotiated before it. Unfortunately, taxpayers and local governments can't afford any increase in pay and benefits for any public employees right now. The sheriff will have to make additional cuts to the force to afford this deal, as will the city and county.

Most of the blame rests with the state's absurd collective bargaining process, which is closed to the public and allows no one to advocate for the interests of the taxpayer.

It's just and appropriate that Las Vegas police are willing to forgo a "cost-of-living" increase that has no nexus to any change in the area's cost of living at all. "Cost-of-living" increases for police and every other local government labor group are nothing more than straight giveaways. Are we supposed to believe a detective who makes more than $100,000 per year has the same increase in essential household expenses, as a percentage of his income, as a second-year cop? They're paying the same amount for a gallon of milk, a loaf of bread and a gallon of gasoline. A true cost-of-living increase would be represented by a flat dollar amount, not a percentage-based pay raise.

Why can't local governments take the position that "cost-of-living" raises as the union knows them must end, and that "step" and "longevity" pay must no longer be automatic increases, but variant raises tied directly to exceptional, not minimal, performance? And why are the city and county so eager to enter a one-year contract, a term that clearly benefits officers, when four-year deals were the norm during better times?

This isn't about whether police are deserving of their current pay or the proposed pay raises -- surely, many officers are. It's about what local governments can afford amid a recession that's causing widespread hardships to the taxpayers who will forced to fund pay and benefit increases they can't reasonably expect themselves.

The police contract, which still must be approved by officers and the department's Fiscal Affairs Committee, is a reminder that the Legislature must make significant changes to the local government collective bargaining process to slow cost increases. And it's a start in eliminating the overly generous guarantees that have put local governments under such financial stress.

Taxpayers must hope it's not the end.