Current Events > NYPD union sues over zero tolerance steroid policy

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.nydailynews.com/2024/04/29/nypd-union-sues-adams-administration-over-new-zero-tolerance-policy-on-steroid-use-among-cops/
It's behind a pay wall but I feel like the headline gives you what you need to know.

Seems bad

Cops work weird hours and are expected to stay in shape, but no special supplements allowed?

UndefeatedGOAT posted...

Cops work weird hours and are expected to stay in shape, but no special supplements allowed?

Goddamn right on cue to argue the worst take possible.

Cops should absolutely not be using steroids or other performance enhancing drugs, are you for real?

UndefeatedGOAT posted...

Cops work weird hours and are expected to stay in shape, but no special supplements allowed?

And rage inducing roids should be okay?

Not sure if its covered in the pay wall article but this might not be that crazy. Doctors prescribe steroids for legitimate reasons.

Also, from the article

"The new protocol which was enacted on Dec. 26, 2023, and described in an internal memo reviewed by The News as a zero tolerance drug policy beefs up the old rule by affirming that officers must immediately notify their district surgeon of any steroid prescription they receive and provide all supporting medical documentation to the surgeon backing up the need for the drug."

So basically they just have to provide the RX and proof that they're supposed to be taking it, and they're mad about that despite it being common sense.

These are the motherfuckers we keep giving more money too. But hey they are killing more people than they have in years. Let's give them some damn drugs.

UndefeatedGOAT posted...

Cops work weird hours and are expected to stay in shape, but no special supplements allowed?

Fucking no it should be .

Instead of working double overtime, they can use that time to go to the gym.

And cops already have free reign to abuse and murder people, what more do they want?

Murphiroth posted...

Also, from the article

"The new protocol which was enacted on Dec. 26, 2023, and described in an internal memo reviewed by The News as a zero tolerance drug policy beefs up the old rule by affirming that officers must immediately notify their district surgeon of any steroid prescription they receive and provide all supporting medical documentation to the surgeon backing up the need for the drug."

So basically they just have to provide the RX and proof that they're supposed to be taking it, and they're mad about that despite it being common sense.

Lmfao

Right so its not a zero tolerance policy at all and cops are just mad the law applies to them too.

Not sure why I even thought of giving them the benefit of the doubt

UndefeatedGOAT posted...

Cops work weird hours and are expected to stay in shape, but no special supplements allowed?

If it's too tough they should probably quit

Fuck those guys

UndefeatedGOAT posted...

Cops work weird hours and are expected to stay in shape, but no special supplements allowed?

You think steroids are for 'staying in shape'?

Of course. They actually use that drug.

They don't want to ruin lives over it like someone smoked a bit of weed in college.

This just made me imagine huge 'roided-out cops walking around, which is hilarious and terrifying

Quorthon109 posted...

This just made me imagine huge 'roided-out cops walking around, which is hilarious and terrifying

Ronnie Coleman says Hello.

https://image-cdn.essentiallysports.com/wp-content/uploads/E7qAjXAX0AAmjHw.jpg?width=466

If they can assure safe use practices then I support them.

Murphiroth posted...

Also, from the article

"The new protocol which was enacted on Dec. 26, 2023, and described in an internal memo reviewed by The News as a zero tolerance drug policy beefs up the old rule by affirming that officers must immediately notify their district surgeon of any steroid prescription they receive and provide all supporting medical documentation to the surgeon backing up the need for the drug."

So basically they just have to provide the RX and proof that they're supposed to be taking it, and they're mad about that despite it being common sense.

Acab, but I hate having to list the medicinal drugs I take for my employers. I have taken prescribed steroids in the past for my lungs (I have asthma). But if were talking the kind of steroids that get athletes kicked out of competitions being taken just because, yeah, fuck them cops.

Most cops I see are either really overweight or toothpick skinny. Once in a blue moon I'll see a cop who looks like they work out.

But even the fat cops wearing 50 lbs of equipment can run you down somehow. I always found that amazing.

Article for those that can't see it. The part you really need to read is in bold.

TL:DR - The Union isn't fighting about steriods being prohibited unless there is a prescription. They're fighting the fact that the change was made without the union's input.

New York Citys largest cop union is suing Police Commissioner Edward Caban and Mayor Adams for implementing a new zero tolerance policy on NYPD officers using steroids or other performance-enhancing drugs, the Daily News has learned.

In a lawsuit filed in Manhattan Supreme Court on Friday, lawyers for the Police Benevolent Association alleged the previously undisclosed policy flies in the face of a legal agreement the union entered into with the city in 2011.

The 2011 contract prohibited officers from ingesting or possessing any anabolic steroid or other forms of human growth hormones without a medical prescription. However, the old standard didnt require officers to run any such prescription by their NYPD district surgeon before starting to use it.

The new protocol which was enacted on Dec. 26, 2023, and described in an internal memo reviewed by The News as a zero tolerance drug policy beefs up the old rule by affirming that officers must immediately notify their district surgeon of any steroid prescription they receive and provide all supporting medical documentation to the surgeon backing up the need for the drug.

If officers are caught violating the new rule by, for example, deviating from a prescribed dosage, they can face firing, the memo says.

The PBAs lawsuit alleges the new protocol is illegal because it unilaterally revokes the 2011 standard without bargaining. The union says it is not challenging the prohibition on illegal steroid use.

In addition, defendants breached the 2011 contract by incorporating multiple provisions that deviate significantly from the originally agreed upon language of the 2011 order concerning new burdens it was placing on police officers, charges the suit, which names the NYPD as a defendant, in addition to Adams and Caban.

It wasnt immediately clear if any particular incident prompted the stricter steroid use rule.

The NYPD press office declined to comment on the new suit. Adams office didnt immediately return a request for comment.

Anabolic steroids, which are illegal without a prescription, can speed up muscle growth and have been abused by athletes. Side effects can include severe mood swings and violent behavior.

bigblu89 posted...

TL:DR - The Union isn't fighting about steriods being prohibited unless there is a prescription. They're fighting the fact that the change was made without the union's input.

Good, fuck police unions.

Also lmao at taking police unions at their word.

This is absolutely about them wanting to take steroids without prescriptions.

Wording seems clear and fair, I dont see an issue with this.

Police unions too powerful agreed. Get rid of the union and watch how fast reform happens. But honestly all it takes is for them to ask the meat head who his doc is and next thing you know the doc now has 20 new clients.

Yeah we know they are roided up. Not surprising.

bigblu89 posted...

TL:DR - The Union isn't fighting about steriods being prohibited unless there is a prescription. They're fighting the fact that the change was made without the union's input.

This definitely feels like a "Sure, Jan." Why would they be suing if they agree with the outcome?

I got several people replying to my first post I think its too much to reply to them all, I think some kind of TRT supervised by a doctor is beneficial, and may even regulate your mood

Shadow_Don posted...

Lmfao

Right so its not a zero tolerance policy at all and cops are just mad the law applies to them too.

Not sure why I even thought of giving them the benefit of the doubt

Well, it asks a cop for the barest shred of accountability, which really interrupts their busy schedule of driving the weeoweeo box and shooting unarmed people.

UndefeatedGOAT posted...

I got several people replying to my first post I think its too much to reply to them all, I think some kind of TRT supervised by a doctor is beneficial, and may even regulate your mood

Now try reading the actual topic before coming in with your bullshit.

Again.

UndefeatedGOAT posted...

I got several people replying to my first post I think its too much to reply to them all, I think some kind of TRT supervised by a doctor is beneficial, and may even regulate your mood

Translation: I can't back up my argument and generally don't know what the fuck I'm talking about.

texanfan27 posted...

Wording seems clear and fair, I dont see an issue with this.

The issue, or so the union claims, is that the change was made without negotiation, which violates a prior agreement.

I understand that there is a heavy ACAB sentiment here on CE, but imagine it wasn't the Police union and it was the Teacher's Union or UPS Drivers, and the district or company decided to unilaterally change the drug policy.

HashtagSEP posted...

This definitely feels like a "Sure, Jan." Why would they be suing if they agree with the outcome?

Becasue they would be able to negotiate the punishment.

Article doesn't say what the punishment is for a positive test, but if they decided that it was a flat out firing, loss of pension, loss of insurance, etc., the union should have a right to negotiate that.

bigblu89 posted...

but imagine it wasn't the Police union and it was the Teacher's Union or UPS Drivers, and the district or company decided to unilaterally change the drug policy.

Do the Teacher's Union or UPS drivers have the same history as the cop union?

Because if you think generalized union solidarity is enough to overcome the bullshit coming from them you're gonna have a disappointing time.

bigblu89 posted...

but imagine it wasn't the Police union and it was the Teacher's Union or UPS Drivers, and the district or company decided to unilaterally change the drug policy.

Probably because the police unions are fucking insane? Might want to consider why they are literally the only unions in the country that endorse trump.

bigblu89 posted...

The issue, or so the union claims, is that the change was made without negotiation, which violates a prior agreement.

I understand that there is a heavy ACAB sentiment here on CE, but imagine it wasn't the Police union and it was the Teacher's Union or UPS Drivers, and the district or company decided to unilaterally change the drug policy.

Gee whiz it's almost like there's an entirely different context between the Police Union and the other two unions you're trying to deflect to.

bigblu89 posted...

but imagine it wasn't the Police union and it was the Teacher's Union or UPS Drivers, and the district or company decided to unilaterally change the drug policy.

You lose me when you try to compare the police union to those.

Those unions exist to protect employees from unfair treatment by higher management.

The police basically are their own boss. The union only exists so they can avoid accountability, which is exactly why they want to "negotiate" this: To make sure they don't get punished when they inevitably break it.

DrizztLink posted...

Do the Teacher's Union or UPS drivers have the same history as the cop union?

I understand the sentiment and the opinion of everyone, and don't necessarily disagree.

I just posted the article, and an explanation, for those that couldn't read it behind the paywall.

I'm not making the argument for either side, just trying to explain why the union is fighting this. And, in theory, you can see why. The department broke negotiating protocols.

Whether or not you think the union deserves these protocols is a different argument.

But I'll let you all go back to just spamming ACAB, because the last thing I want to do is sit here and go to bat for the NYPD

Terry hates steroids

bigblu89 posted...

But I'll let you all go back to just spamming ACAB

Really showing your whole ass with this little snipe.

Murphiroth posted...

Really showing your whole ass with this little snipe.

Sorry, It was more frustration than anything else.

It seems like on here, even if you 100% agree with everyone, if you try to explain the "other side's" thought process, it's met with venom.

It's like "I understand their argument, even if it's 100% wrong" isn't an option. It has to be "fuck that side" or you get beatdown.

bigblu89 posted...

It's like "I understand their argument, even if it's 100% wrong" isn't an option. It has to be "fuck that side" or you get beatdown.

Probably because you're going to bat for people who deliver actual beatdowns when they get questioned.

DrizztLink posted...

Probably because you're going to bat for people who deliver actual beatdowns when they get questioned.

I guess.

But I wasn't looking at it in a "hooray cops!" way. I was looking at it on the basis of whether or not their argument had actual legal bearing.

Blanket ban on steroids is weird.

Like there is a world a difference between a guy who does a low dose of testosterone vs a guy who blasts Trenbolone.

deathproof12 posted...

Blanket ban on steroids is weird.

Like there is a world a difference between a guy who does a low dose of testosterone vs a guy who blasts Trenbolone.

It's not a ban, they have to supply medical documentation when they use a diagnosed steroid.

You know, the bare fucking minimum the rest of society follows.

It's unacceptable for police to be held accountable, however.

What could possibly go wrong with cops on roid rage?

bigblu89 posted...

It's like "I understand their argument, even if it's 100% wrong" isn't an option.

That's not what you're saying though. If that's what you were saying, you wouldn't be getting criticized

DarkChozoGhost posted...

That's not what you're saying though. If that's what you were saying, you wouldn't be getting criticized

But it is what I'm saying.

I'm not (nor is the union) saying the cops should be allowed to use illegal steroids without a prescription, I'm saying that they (probably) have a right to argue whether or not the Department can unilaterally change something the union agreed on and is in their contract.

bigblu89 posted...

, I'm saying that they (probably) have a right to argue whether or not the Department can unilaterally change something the union agreed on and is in their contract.

Correct. You did not say they are 100% wrong.

DarkChozoGhost posted...

Correct. You did not say they are 100% wrong.

I can't say if they are right or wrong because I have no idea how their agreement is worded.

The argument, again, isn't about whether or not the cops should be allowed to use unprescribed steroids, becasue even the union is saying they shouldn't.

The argument is whether or not the Department is allowed to change the parameters of the agreement without a window of negotiation with the union.

Whether or not we all think the union deserves that right is irrelevant.