Union rules protect pepper-spraying cop from the firing he deserves

By David McElroy · April 20, 2012

After UC-Davis Police Lt. John Pike was shown pepper-spraying peaceful students five months ago, the biggest question on the minds of some people was how quickly the guy would be fired. Due to union rules, though, Pike is still on the job and it’s unlikely he’ll ever be fired.

It was pretty clear to anybody who watched the initial video that Pike was way out of line, but it’s become clear since then that he and the school were even more in the wrong than we realized at the time. In fact, the official investigation into the incident shows that there wasn’t even any legal basis for police or college officials to demand the students leave the school’s quad.

At the time, we all thought the students were engaging in civil disobedience. The actions of Pike and other police that day were clearly excessive, but we assumed that the order to disperse was legal. It turns out that it wasn’t even a legal order. So there wasn’t a legal basis for asking the students to leave and the official report faults Pike with bad judgement and unprofessionalism for the pepper-spraying and other things that day. So why is he still employed?

In California, police unions have negotiated due process rights that ordinary citizens would never be allowed. First, the official report of the incident by the university can’t be used against Pike. The only thing that can be taken into account is an internal affairs investigation done by two former police officers and an attorney. Pike refused to cooperate and his superior likewise refused to be interviewed by the investigators. And the panel isn’t allowed to use any information that it didn’t gather itself.

Their methods are secret. After the report is prepared, it won’t be made public. It will be submitted to a committee to certify that it was conducted properly. Even then, there’s no guarantee that any action will be taken based on what they might find. The public will never have any idea what happens. The only thing we know is that Pike is still employed. It seems unlikely that will change.

It’s ironic that Pike is going to be protected by his union-negotiated rules. Unions are pretty tightly allied with the progressive left agenda of the Occupy movement. Those who advocate for unions don’t seem to understand what they really stand for and how much power they really have, especially among government workers.

It’s theoretically possible that Pike will be disciplined, I suppose, but the rules are set up to protect him and I see no reason to believe he won’t get away with it. The interests of the union is keeping jobs for its members at all costs. Justice and public safety are completely irrelevant — and that’s why this law should be changed and why naive people need to realize that unions aren’t the saintly organizations they believe.

Share on Social Networks

There was a time when I was idealistic enough to believe that if a writer expressed his thoughts clearly and simply enough, any bright and honest person would understand his point. I know better now. We all bring so many unconscious assumptions to the things we read that we often see what we expect to see instead of what the writer intended. This is incredibly frustrating to me as a writer, but I’m trying more and more to just say what I need to say — as clearly as I know how — and then ignore the inevitable responses which show that others perceived something which was not intended. I have to write for those who “get” where I’m coming from, not for those who see my words through personal filters that change my meaning. I hope my intentions are clear to you and I hope what I write can be useful to you, but if not, maybe my work just isn’t right for you. And there’s nothing wrong with that.

I found out this evening that someone I casually knew killed himself last Wednesday. I didn’t know him well — and I never found him personable — but he had started work a couple of months ago at a restaurant where I go. He was a 26-year-old who struck me as a confused and unhappy person, but I didn’t think much about it since he stayed to himself and resisted my efforts to chat with him. It turns out that he had a history of depression and had a lot of gender confusion. He seemed very androgynous to me and I learned today that he presented himself as female in some situations. He was rejected by a romantic interest last week, so he went to the woods and killed himself. His body wasn’t found for three days. It’s tragic how miserable people around us can be and how we so rarely know the truth about things they struggle with.

I’ve been with people for most of this day, but I feel lonely tonight. I’ve had things on my mind for the last few days that I feel the strong need to talk about. I need someone to share my thoughts with — someone who’s interested in ideas and how they affect us. Someone who gets excited to discover new things and can find joy in seeing new ways those things might change our lives. I feel lonely tonight because I painfully remember what it feels like to have that — and I’m craving that sort of connection. I miss having someone I can call and say, “I’ve been reading something and it’s sparked some thoughts I want to share with you.” Those sorts of conversations have lasted for hours for me in the past — or for thousands of words if it’s an exchange of mail — and it feels wrong that there is nobody who wants to hear such things from me tonight. I used to think being lonely was about being alone, but I understand now it’s a longing for one particular person. The loneliest place to be when you need one person is in a crowd composed of people who cannot be who you need.

I don’t agree with everything the late Neil Postman wrote, but I would argue that no other recent scholar gives coherent structure to the last few hundred years in the way his books do. I’m currently re-reading his book, “Technopoly,” and I’m comforted to have a scholar give structure and definitions to things which I’ve observed and barely understood. I was enough of a technophile when I first read this book that I bristled at much of what it said. I didn’t want him to be right and it was easier to dismiss him as a Luddite. But as I see technology continue to enable an information glut which is changing society for the worse, I find comfort in his explanations for how we got here. I don’t yet know the solutions, but I finally understand the problems more clearly. I suspect that much of what we need to make life more meaningful can be found in things we accidentally threw away in the past to make room for technologies. I strongly urge you to read the book and think about its implications.

I’d like to write a modern version of “The Emperor’s New Clothes” — a more cynical one — with a realistic ending for today’s audience. In this new version, the little boy points out on social media that the emperor is naked but nobody listens to him. Instead, everybody keeps posting grander and grander praise for the emperor’s non-existent clothes. The cognitive dissonance makes the people unable to hear the child who tells them the truth, because they’re getting social media praise — likes and so forth — for their lies. The confused child eventually feels so defeated that he shuts up and walks away. He’s so hurt and disappointed by this that he withdraws from the world and spends years in therapy, trying to figure out whether the rest of the world is crazy or if he’s the crazy one. Ever since I was a child, I wanted to be that little boy, but few want to hear the truth today. Either I’m crazy or else our culture has gone insane.

Related Posts