Great moments in public sector arbitration

“A police lieutenant, fired for covering up a hit and run crash involving a fellow officer [she] was involved in a relationship with, has been reinstated following an arbitration decision that chastised the city’s Police Commission.” Christine Burns also got six months back pay. The arbitrator found that Burns’s boyfriend had been treated leniently, drawing only a one-year unpaid suspension despite serious misconduct, which in turn deprived her of her right to be treated “evenhandedly and without discrimination.” [Connecticut Post]

And while we’re at it: Police union defends Denver cop fired for driving drunk at 143 mph [Tina Korbe, Hot Air; The Truth About Cars]


  • Hereby reaffirming the truism that, if you want to break the law, it’s best to do it if you’re a cop.

  • I realize that only the most bizarre decisions make headlines but I can not recall the last time I read an arbitrator’s decision that made sense.

  • Maybe this is part of our gradual movement towards “collective justice”, where everyone who could conceivably be connected to an event is held responsible for the outcome, and any effort to apportion responsibility is deemed to be “unfair”. Sort of like joint and severable (sp?) liability on steroids. After all, we try to induce collective guilt in the populace for racial and environmental crimes, and diffuse guilt when leaders are clearly responsible, so why not extend it everywhere?

  • C’mon. It’s Bridgeport.

  • Sounds like something they would decide in the U.K.

  • So, he was driving 143 mph in a 55 zone while legally intoxicated and he keeps his driver’s license?