Although the US Department of Justice demanded several reforms from the Seattle Police Department today in a damning report, which cites systemic "unconstitutional patterns" in SPD’s excessive use of force, police unions could stymie the city by refusing to cooperate. Page 36 of the DOJ's report acknowledges that "many of the issues identified in this letter may implicate some aspects of the SPD Collective Bargaining Agreement." In other words, the two police unions—the Seattle Police Officers Guild (representing all uniformed officers) and the Seattle Police Management Association (representing lieutenants and captains)—may need to approve these changes in their labor contracts.

The DOJ seems to believe this won't be a problem: "Seattle’s policing community has an established history of coming together to address shortcomings," it writes. "We have every reason to believe it will do so now."

But that is, in fact, quite the opposite of what we've seen.

SPOG is notorious for filing more unfair labor practice complaints than any other city union, and currently SPOG's roughly 1,200 members operate under an expired contract because SPOG officials object to reforms and have deadlocked with the city in hammering out a new contract. For example, SPOG filed a labor complaint this year because the city is denying police their preferred private defense attorneys (City Attorney Pete Holmes insists this matter doesn't even need to be negotiated). Likewise, SPOG is at another impasse with the city over releasing the names of officers accused of misconduct. If these fringe concerns about transparency and lawyers can hold up contracts for a year, tie up the city's resources in court, and still remain unresolved, then it raises questions about our ability to comply with federal orders.

Does Washington State labor law allow the city to "make improvements swiftly," as the DOJ insists, or must every step need be collectively bargained with a right-wing, anti-reform police union? If we do need to bargain, what happens if it takes too long?

"Resolution of our findings will require a written, court-enforceable agreement that sets forth remedial measures to be taken within a fixed period of time," the DOJ report warns.

If Seattle doesn't comply fast enough, the city could face expensive fines or a federal lawsuit.

Thomas Bates, a spokesman for the local US Attorney's Office, says the DOJ believes "there can be strong labor and employment protection and constitutional policing. It's going to require people coming together to work on these issues."

But the police union believes it is empowered to negotiate whether or not it complies.

SPOG president Rich O'Neill wrote in a statement that "if the city intends to adopt any changes that affect the working conditions of the officers then we look forward to discussing those at the bargaining table." Which is to suggest that SPOG would like to be where it's most comfortable: at a bargaining table where it has closed doors and time on its side.

Labor law should be rightly enshrined when it comes to health care and other basic benefits. But the city shouldn't have to "bargain" over Constitutional use of force—not after all this. And if that requires changes to SPOG's contract, either by passage of law or a legal challenge, then our elected leaders should be willing to tackle it.