Trio of Flagger Bills on Beacon Hill Could Help Police
September 11, 2009
Three separate bills heard in two hearings at the Massachusetts State House this week could be good news for police fighting the use of civilian flaggers on roadside construction projects. While one bill would mandate the use of police on public utility projects, the other two could reveal the truth behind claims that using flaggers saves money—and bring help to police officers across the Commonwealth.
Protecting Utility Workers at Details
House Bill 3067 was one of the bills considered at a September 9 hearing of the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy. Filed by eighteen sponsors on behalf of the Utility Workers of America and the state AFL-CIO, House 3067 would require the use of police details at roadside projects involving gas, electric, telecommunications and cable television companies. IBPO Legislative Director Ray McGrath testified in support of the telecommunications workers who sponsored the bill.
"I want to thank the UWA, the IBEW and the men and women who sponsored this bill," McGrath said. "They filed it to protect the safety of their workers and the public at their worksites, because they know everyone is safer around these sites with police officers there. We were happy to give them our support."
Bills Require Cost, Safety Analyses
On Thursday, September 10, the IBPO and the Boston Police Patrolmen's Association were the only police unions at a hearing of the Joint Committee on Transportation, where lawmakers considered two bills calling for detailed studies of the cost effectiveness of using civilian flaggers versus police at detail sites.
Senate Bill 2018, sponsored by Sen. James Timilty (D-Walpole) and Sen. Scott Brown (R-Wrentham) would fund a study by the University of Massachusetts Donahue Institute of public works projects in calendar years 2008 and 2009. The study would compare the costs, injuries to workers and non-workers, and emergency calls to public works projects staffed by flaggers to those at sites staffed by police. The institute would have to submit its report to the committee by March 1, 2010.
The second bill, Senate Bill 1965, would require the state to report similar information from state and municipal public works projects to legislative committees every year from 2011 to 2015.
McGrath believes that these bills will expose the true political motive behind Governor Deval Patrick's push for civilian flaggers.
"We already know that using flaggers doesn't save money and does reduce the single best crime deterrent we have, which is police presence on our streets. These studies will show that this isn’t about savings, it's about the governor playing politics with public safety."
Disturbing Reports about Political Interference with Public Safety
Our brother and sister officers at the Boston Police Patrolmen's Association have heard disturbing reports involving alleged political interference with public safety at two projects on a busy Boston thoroughfare. According to these reports, the contractor had prepared a safety plan using police officers at the details, but someone "high up" in state government allegedly ordered them to rebid the project using civilian flaggers. The contractor is said to have complied unhappily—and accepted bids for $53 per hour for civilian flaggers, compared to the $37 per hour for Boston police officers.
The IBPO will keep you updated on the progress of these bills and any developments regarding the battle for maintaining public safety at public works projects.