Screw over the cops and the cops fight back

[AggieDave 6]

Local law enforcement doesn't make much money to begin with, then you get an ungrateful town trying to screw them over. Personally I think this is great and it should teach the politicians a lesson. Most politicians, even city councial types in the small town I grew up in lived much better then the police officers did...they have no idea.


Note: The cops are still writing warnings, so its not a public safety issue, its a greedy town issue since they're refusing to help out those who help everyone and are getting finacially screwed for it. IMO, they deserve it.

http://www.ecnnews.com/cgi-bin/04/s/sstory.pl?fn-dcopy

Quote

Danvers officials accuse cops of 'silent strike' in ticket writing

By Michael Puffer
Staff writer

DANVERS — Patrolmen have cost the town $173,000 by refusing to write traffic tickets in a ploy to influence contract negotiations, top police brass and town management officials allege in a complaint filed with the state last week.

Town officials claim police union members are handing out warnings rather than tickets in an effort to cost the town money and gain leverage at the bargaining table, according to their complaint to the state Labor Relations Commission. The 44-strong police union has gone nearly a year-and-a-half without a new contract in a dispute over raises.

But at least on police union official has accused the town of buttressing its case with "immoral and unethical behavior."

The union has demanded a 3 percent raise for fiscal year 2004. The town, citing huge cuts in state aid during that year, first offered no pay increase as part of a new contract.

Money brought in from traffic citations is put into the town's general fund and used for expenses or to cut the tax rate.

During the first nine months of 2003, Danvers police issued 2,069 traffic citations with fines. During the first nine months of 2004, only 254 traffic fines have been issued, according to the complaint. At the same time, the number of warnings issued has soared.

Nonunion police brass and town employees began investigating a drop in citations after they became apparent late last winter. The resulting accusations were based on the plummeting number of tickets, threats allegedly made by union leaders and e-mails sent among union members using the town's Internet service.

Police union President Dana "Mike" Hagan, who could not be reached for comment yesterday, told Town Attorney Brian Callahan and other members of the bargaining team last December that "If the town continues to insist on no raise for the first year, then the $255,000 in traffic fees can change," according to a passage in the complaint.

As part of its body of evidence, the town also includes copies of e-mails sent to police union members from a computer at police headquarters.

"... Union members have to stick together ... stay the course ... it is not going to be easy ... and will definitely be long/drawn out. Officers are reminded ... police officers may use discretion when issuing traffic citations," reads a portion of a message attributed to Hagan.

The town is asking the state labor commission to order the union to end the silent strike and begin writing tickets "in accordance with longstanding department policy," Town Manager Wayne Marquis said. The complaint also asks the police union be required to pay for lost ticket revenue — estimated at $173,388 and counting.

Marquis said the town may have to trim this year's budget to reflect the lost revenue.

"If this is a trend that continues in 2005, it would have serious ramifications for our ability to maintain a balanced budget or set the tax rate," Marquis said. "From a revenue perspective, the numbers speak for themselves, but just as important, traffic citations serve as a deterrent. The public's safety is at stake if the public felt we don't take (traffic enforcement) seriously."

Detective Carole Germano, the union's vice president, called the allegations "ludicrous."

Traffic fines may be down, but traffic-related arrests and other police activities are all on the rise, proof that the union members are doing their jobs, Germano said.

"It seems they are trying to generate more revenue for the town by ticketing their citizens," Germano said, "and I don't think that is the way they should go about it."

Germano also protested the tapping of e-mails between officers as a source for these charges. Surveillance of union activities is prohibited by law, she said.

"I believe management has engaged in immoral and unethical behavior," Germano said. "Employee rights, particularly those of our union members, have been violated."

Marquis said the union members' correspondence were written on town computers and delivered using town software, and so were fair game to be used as part of the investigation.

Police Chief Stuart Chase referred all questions about the complaint to the town manager. Union attorney Paul Hynes did not return phone calls yesterday.

While the town has filed arbitration requests occasionally with the state commission — it's currently in arbitration with the police union, as well as other unions — it's never before filed a request for a strike investigation.

"We usually have very few because, as you know, it is illegal for public employees to strike," said Edward Srednicki, executive secretary for the Labor Relations Commission. "We get maybe three a year."

A hearing before the state commission has been set for 10 a.m. next Tuesday. The commission would likely issue a judgment a few days later. But it would be nonbinding. Should the town or union wish to the decision to be enforced, they would have to file a case in Superior Court, Srednicki said.

Selectmen Chairman Michael Powers said town officials approached union leadership several times to request they halt the covert strike before filing the official complaint.

Powers said he wasn't concerned the police union's actions could hamper public safety.

"It's a financial situation," Powers said. "But the police are issuing warnings so it doesn't become a public safety issue."

"The Police Department continues to do a quality job on day-to-day activity," Powers added. "This is one element of their job. Everything else is as it should be, so people are getting the services they are expecting of police."

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Paulipod 0]

I agree that police should be addequately paid.
I agree that traffic fines are partly a revenue generation

However, I still think these officers need to be disciplined for changing issuance guidlines to suit the desire to get a raise.

Bodyflight Bedford
www.bodyflight.co.uk

[mr2mk1g 10]

Direct action's one thing but this just seems a little short sighted. Now the city simply wont have the budget to give them a raise even if they'd like to...

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Hey, Dave, you're the evil monkey that lives in my closet?!?

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

I agree that police should be addequately paid.
I agree that traffic fines are partly a revenue generation

However, I still think these officers need to be disciplined for changing issuance guidlines to suit the desire to get a raise.

You think that they should be disciplined for doing something that the law provides them the discretion of doing?

If you don't like them deciding not to issue tickets instead of warnings, you should do away with that discretion. What you should not do, though, is punish them for doing what they are empowered to do.

It's not surprising that the pinhead who is suggesting that the lost revenue be billed to the police union is named "Marquis." Reminds me of the guy in Rob Roy who wanted to hold Rob to repay a loand of money he himself stole from Rob.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Paulipod 0]

I dont think that the police officers are 'doing their job' by deciding to punish the town by deliberately not issuing fines.

I am sure there are 'guidelines' to help identify where a fine or a warning should be issues... and I bet those guidelines dont mention 'when you need to stick it to the local authority for not paying you enough'

Yes discretion should and is used... but not where a deciding factor is their own gains.

Bodyflight Bedford
www.bodyflight.co.uk

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

I dont think that the police officers are 'doing their job' by deciding to punish the town by deliberately not issuing fines.

That may be true, but the police are specifically prohibited from using work stoppages as a bargaining tool in labor negotiations. That is a right that most everyone else has that is denied to certain professions for public safety reasons. This is their alternative recourse. Basically, they are striking while still providing the same level of public safety protection that they always have. The local gov't, their employer, just isn't profiting from their work. Would you rather that the police walked off the job?

[miked10270 0]

"Yes discretion should and is used... but not where a deciding factor is their own gains."

Is this an argument against the police officers for not issuing fines, or against the council demanding fines money for revenue.

Police officers ARE NOT local tax collectors! A police force is raised and maintained to preserve public safety and maintain public order. This public safety and public order should be maintained by use of "Minimum Force". If a problem can be solved by the police giving instruction and advice then "fines" or other more coercive methods should not be used.

So... Strictly speaking, those officers who can effectively police WITHOUT issuing tickets are the better, more efficient police officers.

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[Paulipod 0]

Basically, I dont agree that the police offices have the right to make this sort of choice regardless of what other choices they have.

Strictly speaking, the penalty for breaking the law (which a speeding fine or any other fine is) should be applied in a fair manner to all.

In handing out a punishment, these officers are applying a bias to their decisions of a personal nature.

Fines perform two functions, yes they raise revenue but they are also supposed to punish and prevent re-offending.

Do you think it would be fair that a motorist in one town is given a fine while another not given a fine because the officer wants to make a point?

The guts of this is, they are applying law enforcement differently to get better pay...

I sympathise with any professional that a difficult job and is not rewarded adequately. I just dont think this should be the way they protest.

Bodyflight Bedford
www.bodyflight.co.uk

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Fines perform two functions, yes they raise revenue but they are also supposed to punish and prevent re-offending.

And do speeding tickets accomplish that preventative measure? It's generally accepted that speed limits are an unenforceable law. Tickets are issues for one reason only, to generate revenue. Virtually every single driver in the country commits the crime of speeding, so obviously ticketing is ineffective to prevent that crime.

Quote

The guts of this is, they are applying law enforcement differently to get better pay...

I sympathise with any professional that a difficult job and is not rewarded adequately. I just dont think this should be the way they protest.

How should they do it then? Go on strike? They aren't allowed.

[Paulipod 0]

What else do I think they should do?... no idea... maybe vote with their feet - get another job... petition - peaceful protest...

I am not saying they are in a nice or easy position... just that they should not choose how to enforce laws.... laws are passed through democracy and should be enforced as such - not the will of the police officers

Alot of profession work-to-rule as a protest measure, its another step to make up the rules.

Bodyflight Bedford
www.bodyflight.co.uk

[miked10270 0]

"What else do I think they should do?... no idea... maybe vote with their feet - get another job... petition - peaceful protest..."

"Resign" doesn't work. Along with having no right to strike, a police officer can't just resign. They can apply to resign, but such a request can be refused!

"Petition" is what their union body already does.

"Peaceful Protest"? It is a disciplinary offence to "sow dissent". THey could (and in the circumstances most certainly would) be fined for it!!!

That leaves "Work to Rule". By definition police officers HAVE to "work to rule" all the time.

One of the "rules", hammered into police officers from day one, is that they should use "Minimum Force" in dealing with transgressions in the law. (Then "minimum force" is defined as sufficient to enforce the law and no more. In effect, Just Sufficient to Win Son. Once THEY'RE Coming Second, You Can Stop.)

That's why a police officer doesn't point a gun at you for jaywalking - why "Tackleberry was such a funny character in the "police Academy" films.

So, you have officers at the scene of a minor transgression. They have to assess the incident and apply "Minimum Force" to sort the problem. If the problem CAN be rectified by "Advice and Instruction" then the police officer has done his job.

Plus, a police officer who solves a minor transgression through "Advice and Instruction" instead of a fine invariably contributes to the police service's "positive image".

For example: Take a minor speeding offence.

"You were doing 53mph in a 45 area. I catch you again and I'll fine you. Slow down a bit"

or

"You were doing 53mph in a 45 zone. That'll cost you $80."

Which one leaves you bitter? Which one leaves you grateful and more likely to drive a bit slower? Which one was the correct PROPORTIONAL response to the transgression?

I've done both in my police career, it depended on the offender passing what's called the "Attitude Test". Believe me, a cop WILL be more likely to resort to "Advice and Instruction" if it looks like you'll actually heed it.

As I said before, I bet that the cops NOT issuing tickets are gaining the respect, and thus the compliance of the vast majority of the citizens. The town council are probably worried about not being able to afford their 5-course lunches out of the city budget".

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[Paulipod 0]

I agree with all of that... and that fines are not the best way to go... but if that was the case... and the police officers agreed with that, surely thats what they would normally do?!

I can accept the argument that the reason to do this is to improve the way in which a law is enforced... but I still dont think it should be used as a bargaining chip for a pay deal.

If they truely have absolutely no options, and they truely are on the bread line.. I am sympathetic to their cause.

Bodyflight Bedford
www.bodyflight.co.uk

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

If they truely have absolutely no options, and they truely are on the bread line.. I am sympathetic to their cause.

So what you're saying is that police officers, the men and women sworn to protect you and your things, to save your ass in a traffic accident, the people who strive to provide a safe and crime free living environment at risk to their own lives...those people should only make enough money to be barely off "the bread line?" You want to keep them just barely out of poverty? Why not let them make a little more then that so they can live decnetly and raise a family. No one goes into law enforcement with any sort of dream of making it rich, that's understood, but being forced to basically live in poverty, that's a seriously low blow guy, very low. I guess you view them as lower class citizens that don't deserve better, that's what it seems like you're implying atleast.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Paulipod 0]

Thats not what I am implying at all Aggie...

Maybe breadline was a bad choice of words.

I do believe however, that unless they have been refused increases for a great number of years and inflation has made a significant difference in their current position, that they signed up knowing the pay.

I would back people in a position like theirs for a pay rise, and personally think that they deserve to be well paid.

I dont believe they have the right to demand it, given they knew the vocation, I also believe they dont have the right to coerse it through mis-implementation of the law or guidelines.

Bodyflight Bedford
www.bodyflight.co.uk

[billvon 2,421]

>those people should only make enough money to be barely off "the bread line?"

They should make more money than that. They also shouldn't not do their jobs to try to _get_ more money. Imagine if our military started just firing warning shots (and dropping bombs short of targets) until they got better pay.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

I dont believe they have the right to demand it, given they knew the vocation, I also believe they dont have the right to coerse it through mis-implementation of the law or guidelines.

I fully believe they have every right to be given proper compensation due to inflation and job requirements.

The arguement that "they knew what they were getting into" is a falicy and has no basis in a demcratic society except by those intent on proving their social class is supierior.

I'm a firm believer that folks like police officers, military personal, firemen(women) and EMTs deserve much better pay and we as a society are incredibly lucky thus far that there have been good people who's desire to do these thankless jobs have been abundant. Without which society would have been screwed a long time ago.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

They also shouldn't not do their jobs to try to _get_ more money.

Show me how they haven't done their job.

Their job is to enforce the law, NOT to levy fines against people. Mike had a very good explaination of that earlier in the thread from a trained police officer's definintion. Before trying to continue this line of arguement, please take the time to go read the very insiteful and accurate post.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[billvon 2,421]

>Their job is to enforce the law, NOT to levy fines against people.

If you think it is true that traffic infractions declined by 90% just as the police began demanding more money and suggesting they might change enforcement actions, then there's no problem. You need some pretty rosy glasses to believe that, though.

I'm all for a) paying cops more and b) hiring more of them. I am against cops gaming the system to make that happen.

[AggieDave 6]

Bill. Did you go back and read Mike's post?

Quote

I am against cops gaming the system to make that happen.

Ok, so make it legal for them to go on strike, I'm sure that would be a much better answer. The officers are not breaking the law, they are continuing to fully do their job, but they're getting screwed.

Pay attention to the news and notice how every couple of years there's a battle for pay raises for firefighters and cops (atleast that's the case in every city I've lived in in TX and the surrounding metroplexes...DFW and Houston for instance). The cities know the officers can not legally go on strike so 9 times out of 10, they get screwed.

Finally some police officers are taking a stand, still fully performing their job to the extent of the law, and folks are insisting the police officers are in the wrong.

Since you don't believe these officers are in the right, please tell us how they should go about fulling providing their services as required by law and not be screwed by the city council.





(oh and thanks asshole, Rose Colored Glasses (an old country song) is now stuck in my head).

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

>those people should only make enough money to be barely off "the bread line?"

They should make more money than that. They also shouldn't not do their jobs to try to _get_ more money. Imagine if our military started just firing warning shots (and dropping bombs short of targets) until they got better pay.

Bill, your analogy doesn't add up. Try this one.

Imagine if our military stopped picking up the brass at firing lines until they got better pay.

They're still doing their job, they are just letting auxiliary functions, not significant to their primary purpose, slide.

The cops are still out there enforcing the law, arresting people, stopping speeders, and overall fighting crime. They're just not handing out as many tickets.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[miked10270 0]

You know, there has existed a VERY fair way of "setting" police pay.

It'd also work VERY well for all other essential services (Fire, EMT, Nursing etc...)

It was called The Edmund-Davies Formula

What you do is take the national average earnings (The IRS can give that) for the previous tax year, and pin the median police salary (say a patrolman with 8 years service) to that point. Everyone above and below that point is paid a fixed percentage of the previous years "average earnings". For example, a new recruit may get 85%, a Sergeant 115% etc...

In that way the average "essential person" doesn't get screwed, but doesn't get better than the average
This pay formula was applied to the UK Police Service for over 15 years without problems, until it "was decided" (yeah... by the politicians) to abandon it.

But would anyone call this system unfair?

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

Local law enforcement doesn't make much money to begin with, then you get an ungrateful town trying to screw them over.

Due to poor revenues the last company I worked for suspended their performance/cost-of-living based raises for over a year. I took a 6% pay cut when I changed jobs. Working for the government shouldn't exempt people from today's economic reality.

Some careers don't pay well. Unfortunately "politician" isn't one of them. People need to acknowledge this and either accept the pay+benefit+work combination or look elsewhere.

[diablopilot 2]

It's a small step from this to being "crooked".

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

It's a small step from this to being "crooked".

That's a big leap, actually that's a huge leap.

Back up your statement, show me how and why. My opinion has come from being around law enforcement a good part of my life. I have a feeling you're basing your opinion on nothing more then the movies.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."