UPPD officers file complaint over required new fitness test

University Police officers filed a complaint against Penn's Police Department last month after University Police Chief Maureen Rush instituted a mandatory physical fitness test for all officers. The officers, who are organized under Lodge No. 113 in the Fraternal Order of Police, claim the test involves unfair labor practice under the National Labor Relations Act. Held at Hutchinson Gymnasium, the test required officers to complete a series of physical endurance courses simulating a chase and arrest, in addition to a body fat analysis. Officers who fail the test are required to be re-tested at three month intervals until they pass. If officers continue to fail the test after a year, they may be disciplined. Rush sent two memos in July and September to the department regarding the test, saying that the physical fitness program had been mandated by the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, under which the UPPD is still seeking accreditation. The officers' attorneys claim, though, that their clients are not upset about taking the physical fitness test, but rather because Rush never discussed the matter with the FOP. Attorney Eric Stoltenberg said the program "constitutes an implementation of a new term of employment... carrying the potential for discipline." He added, "The employer in this case is required by law to bargain or negotiate with the union before implementing that kind of requirement," which the complaint alleges Rush did not do. Accompanying the mandatory test was a voluntary testing program, with which the officers take issue because they claim it would entitle participants to "extra considerations/benefits in employment matters." While Rush did meet with two officers from the FOP to discuss standards for the annual test back in August, the lodge claims the two officers were not authorized to represent the group. The complaint says Kathleen O'Neill, of Philadelphia's chapter of the National Labor Relations Board, advised the officers' attorneys that the matter could best be resolved under departmental contractual grievance procedures. The officers had originally wanted to bring the complaint before the NLRB. The FOP also petitioned for an injunction to postpone the fitness test, but that was denied, allowing the test to take place as scheduled on October 16. The complaint cites potential for injury to occur during the test, adding the issue of disability benefits to the mix. Rush's memo maintained, though, that any injuries acquired during the testing program would qualify officers for standard Worker's Compensation benefits. Stoltenberg could not comment on whether his clients actually participated in the program. "There is a grievance process that is currently in effect that we are looking at," Deputy Chief of Operations Mike Fink said, who declined to make any additional comments with an arbitration hearing pending.