Special Service Program for Law Enforcement

[blackjack50]

Would you support a program that pays officers extra to a pension, or another reward of similar nature, to officers (with good records) who serve in areas of high crime, low income, or other locations that require more professional officers? This idea was sparked by Radcen and it got me thinking about how this is done for educators. It seems to me that it would make as much sense to do it with law enforcement too.

Maybe a paid college education? Or extra paid time off? Something along those lines. It doesn't have to be pension based. But something to encourage better officers to crappy areas.

 

[Lutherf]

Those programs don't attract better officers. They just attract "lifers".

The issues with problem neighborhoods run deep and there is no easy fix. These areas tend to be the product of political pandering from the local level all the way up to the federal level. They are generally beset by all manner of pimps and thieves and one should remember that the worst of the bunch tend to be the ones who don't deal in "dirty" work. The social worker who scours the streets for "victims" is no less a pimp than the guy running a dozen bitches.

 

[blackjack50]

Those programs don't attract better officers. They just attract "lifers".

The issues with problem neighborhoods run deep and there is no easy fix. These areas tend to be the product of political pandering from the local level all the way up to the federal level. They are generally beset by all manner of pimps and thieves and one should remember that the worst of the bunch tend to be the ones who don't deal in "dirty" work. The social worker who scours the streets for "victims" is no less a pimp than the guy running a dozen bitches.

I don't disagree with the second half. But I think a big reason people won't join those departments is because there is no real incentive. Crappy pay for a bad job. I mean the city of Orlando is down 45 slots for officers. They can't keep them because they can't pay them, they deal with the worst, and the city sucks too.

 

[joG]

Would you support a program that pays officers extra to a pension, or another reward of similar nature, to officers (with good records) who serve in areas of high crime, low income, or other locations that require more professional officers? This idea was sparked by Radcen and it got me thinking about how this is done for educators. It seems to me that it would make as much sense to do it with law enforcement too.

Maybe a paid college education? Or extra paid time off? Something along those lines. It doesn't have to be pension based. But something to encourage better officers to crappy areas.

I believe strongly in incentives and am surprised it isn't already done.

 

[blackjack50]

I believe strongly in incentives and am surprised it isn't already done.

I haven't heard much other than the public service loan forgiveness. And that program apparently sucks.

 

[Lutherf]

I don't disagree with the second half. But I think a big reason people won't join those departments is because there is no real incentive. Crappy pay for a bad job. I mean the city of Orlando is down 45 slots for officers. They can't keep them because they can't pay them, they deal with the worst, and the city sucks too.

We're down a number of officers too but it's more of a funding thing than anything else. The city council would rather fund social engineering projects than streets or law enforcement. The chief down here is a real piece of work too as is the sheriff. That combination of factors is what drives good people away.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

I support incentive pay for police who work in more challenging areas. I also support incentive pay for teachers in such areas as well.

 

[blackjack50]

We're down a number of officers too but it's more of a funding thing than anything else. The city council would rather fund social engineering projects than streets or law enforcement. The chief down here is a real piece of work too as is the sheriff. That combination of factors is what drives good people away.

I defiantly understand that. This officer I road with the other day (university cop) has an EXCELLENT résumé. I was very impressed, and he came from doing all kinds of other work. He left the sheriff's department because the politics were awful. They impacted the job and job security of officers. That is wrong in my book. And I personally am not a fan of how elected sheriff's work. They end up doing a lot of harm because of the politics involved.

 

[blackjack50]

I support incentive pay for police who work in more challenging areas. I also support incentive pay for teachers in such areas as well.

That is where I got the idea

 

[radcen]

Would you support a program that pays officers extra to a pension, or another reward of similar nature, to officers (with good records) who serve in areas of high crime, low income, or other locations that require more professional officers? This idea was sparked by Radcen and it got me thinking about how this is done for educators. It seems to me that it would make as much sense to do it with law enforcement too.

Maybe a paid college education? Or extra paid time off? Something along those lines. It doesn't have to be pension based. But something to encourage better officers to crappy areas.

I inspired this? How so?

Anyway, I pretty much no longer support the idea of public pensions in general, as I believe they are a big part of what is bankrupting many governments*.

Having said that, I would definitely support some kind of (other) incentive for what you are suggesting. It could be even a variety of things, even direct bonuses in each paycheck, as far as I'm concerned. I'm good with that.

*-I believe public employees (new hires) should be moved to 401k type plans, but that's a topic for a different forum.

 

[logansrun]

Would you support a program that pays officers extra to a pension, or another reward of similar nature, to officers (with good records) who serve in areas of high crime, low income, or other locations that require more professional officers? This idea was sparked by Radcen and it got me thinking about how this is done for educators. It seems to me that it would make as much sense to do it with law enforcement too.

Maybe a paid college education? Or extra paid time off? Something along those lines. It doesn't have to be pension based. But something to encourage better officers to crappy areas.

Are we going to penalize them if they do not lower crime in those areas, or if they get complaints filed against them? If we are handing out carrots, shouldn't we also be swinging sticks?

 

[blackjack50]

I inspired this? How so?

Anyway, I pretty much no longer support the idea of public pensions in general, as I believe they are a big part of what is bankrupting many governments*.

Having said that, I would definitely support some kind of (other) incentive for what you are suggesting. It could be even a variety of things, even direct bonuses in each paycheck, as far as I'm concerned. I'm good with that.

*-I believe public employees (new hires) should be moved to 401k type plans, but that's a topic for a different forum.

Our discussion on what is wrong with law enforcement and that whole bit about crappy officers being in the poor areas.

 

[blackjack50]

Are we going to penalize them if they do not lower crime in those areas, or if they get complaints filed against them? If we are handing out carrots, shouldn't we also be swinging sticks?

Meh.

I would want to study the practice in a test environment first. Would complaints against particular officers rise if they go to one of these areas? I don't like basing judgement on "complaints." That cop who was run over in Orlando is having a suit filed against him for shooting at the person who tried to murder him. "Complaints" don't equate to guilt.

Apparently a lot of parents will file complaints against officers who interact with their children...because their sweet innocent kid would never be a piece of crap dealer/thief/etc/petty bs criminal. Ya know?

But some form of stick? Maybe. Plus crime may not drop and the program could be a bust. So maybe not. It would have to be tested. I would say if they are ineffective cancel. That kind of thing. The stick should be losing the opportunity for the incentive. As in they have to prove the system works to get the incentive.

 

[logansrun]

Meh.

I would want to study the practice in a test environment first. Would complaints against particular officers rise if they go to one of these areas? I don't like basing judgement on "complaints." That cop who was run over in Orlando is having a suit filed against him for shooting at the person who tried to murder him. "Complaints" don't equate to guilt.

Apparently a lot of parents will file complaints against officers who interact with their children...because their sweet innocent kid would never be a piece of crap dealer/thief/etc/petty bs criminal. Ya know?

But some form of stick? Maybe. Plus crime may not drop and the program could be a bust. So maybe not. It would have to be tested. I would say if they are ineffective cancel. That kind of thing. The stick should be losing the opportunity for the incentive. As in they have to prove the system works to get the incentive.

Not every low income area is a high crime area. A neighborhood with a lot of blue collar and retirees would likely be low income, so there would be no reason to offer such a bonus unless something was being gotten out of the bargain. In high crime areas, I think that giving people extra just for being there is wasted money unless they actually achieve something when there.

 

[blackjack50]

Not every low income area is a high crime area. A neighborhood with a lot of blue collar and retirees would likely be low income, so there would be no reason to offer such a bonus unless something was being gotten out of the bargain. In high crime areas, I think that giving people extra just for being there is wasted money unless they actually achieve something when there.

Forgive me for not being "PC." But I think you knew what I meant. Low income typically means less police. And inner cities suffer as a result. So do some rural areas, but that is uncommon.

I do agree that results would be needed, but honestly you need to understand that "results" would take time. They would take effort. And they would require officers doing things like stepped up patrols and so on. It is a pipe dream I know. But it is an idea.

 

[dirtpoorchris]

Would you support a program that pays officers extra to a pension, or another reward of similar nature, to officers (with good records) who serve in areas of high crime, low income, or other locations that require more professional officers? This idea was sparked by Radcen and it got me thinking about how this is done for educators. It seems to me that it would make as much sense to do it with law enforcement too.

Maybe a paid college education? Or extra paid time off? Something along those lines. It doesn't have to be pension based. But something to encourage better officers to crappy areas.

As long as they agreed to have an open public review record of any and all of their interactions that result in any and all complaints. And this would probably have to be very select so it doesnt morph into some super politicized bandwagon for a gravy train that needs to be in every station.

The more you reward people for honest good the less common you have to punish for honest bad.

If you give people a tangible reward for remembering not to be a jerk they are more likely to remember, possible affecting people for whom this stuff doesnt come natural.

 

[Caine]

Would you support a program that pays officers extra to a pension, or another reward of similar nature, to officers (with good records) who serve in areas of high crime, low income, or other locations that require more professional officers? This idea was sparked by Radcen and it got me thinking about how this is done for educators. It seems to me that it would make as much sense to do it with law enforcement too.

Maybe a paid college education? Or extra paid time off? Something along those lines. It doesn't have to be pension based. But something to encourage better officers to crappy areas.

No. I wouldn't support this.

Police Officers get placed in divisions within a city and get moved around as the department sees fit for professional development.

 

[Caine]

Forgive me for not being "PC." But I think you knew what I meant. Low income typically means less police. And inner cities suffer as a result. So do some rural areas, but that is uncommon.

I do agree that results would be needed, but honestly you need to understand that "results" would take time. They would take effort. And they would require officers doing things like stepped up patrols and so on. It is a pipe dream I know. But it is an idea.

Not only that.... it is hard to "measure" results in law enforcement. If you "measure" them in just arrests and citations... that isn't necessarily a good thing. In many high-crime areas there is a high calls for service volume... which means officers are handling the first and foremost duty, tending to the needs of the public. With that comes alot of reports with no arrests taking up much of their time. So then the officers who avoid calls (stay listed on a previous call when they aren't doing anything while trying to get a traffic stop for example) would have higher "production", which throws that whole system for a loop.

Do we "measure" it via some sort of "Officer-Citizen Rating Scheme"? No. Citizens don't typically (not to say it doesn't happen) go out of their way to inform the administrators of how good an officer did, ESPECIALLY in low income high crime areas (because they can never do enough, and then.... at the same time... do too much). That would also lead to officers ASKING the citizens to rate them highly.

So... just how do you measure "results" ?? Reduction in overall crime statistics as a team effort... that is possible. But with COMPSTAT, the incentive for District/Precinct Commanders to "juke the stats" is already present because of that system...... you turn what was essentially a Burglary that was interrupted into a "Damage to Property" reducing it from a major crime to a minor one...... conveniently forget to turn a missing person later found dead into a homicide and leave it as a missing person...... Turn a Robbery into a Larceny.....

 

[dirtpoorchris]

Not only that.... it is hard to "measure" results in law enforcement. If you "measure" them in just arrests and citations... that isn't necessarily a good thing. In many high-crime areas there is a high calls for service volume... which means officers are handling the first and foremost duty, tending to the needs of the public. With that comes alot of reports with no arrests taking up much of their time. So then the officers who avoid calls (stay listed on a previous call when they aren't doing anything while trying to get a traffic stop for example) would have higher "production", which throws that whole system for a loop.

Do we "measure" it via some sort of "Officer-Citizen Rating Scheme"? No. Citizens don't typically (not to say it doesn't happen) go out of their way to inform the administrators of how good an officer did, ESPECIALLY in low income high crime areas (because they can never do enough, and then.... at the same time... do too much). That would also lead to officers ASKING the citizens to rate them highly.

So... just how do you measure "results" ?? Reduction in overall crime statistics as a team effort... that is possible. But with COMPSTAT, the incentive for District/Precinct Commanders to "juke the stats" is already present because of that system...... you turn what was essentially a Burglary that was interrupted into a "Damage to Property" reducing it from a major crime to a minor one...... conveniently forget to turn a missing person later found dead into a homicide and leave it as a missing person...... Turn a Robbery into a Larceny.....

Measured pretty simply. If an officer has 200 incidents. 5 complaints. And 8 people who went out of their way just to give him a compliment compared to an officer who has 400 incidents, 42 complaints, 2 compliments. Who do you think is the asshole?

 

[Caine]

Measured pretty simply. If an officer has 200 incidents. 5 complaints. And 8 people who went out of their way just to give him a compliment compared to an officer who has 400 incidents, 42 complaints, 2 compliments. Who do you think is the asshole?

Maybe he just dealt with more assholes himself????

You really don't know.... nor are you genuinely interested in learning more about law enforcement.... so don't respond to my posts.

 

[radcen]

No. I wouldn't support this.

Police Officers get placed in divisions within a city and get moved around as the department sees fit for professional development.

Does seniority play a part? It's pretty common in most endeavors that people with seniority get... have "earned"... first choice of assignments/shifts, so I would think that if an experienced officer wanted to make some extra cash by working in a higher risk neighborhood that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. And I'm not sure they'd have to be in the bad neighborhoods exclusively. They could still be moved around some depending on need.

Provided it doesn't weaken the mission elsewhere, I mean.

 

[radcen]

Measured pretty simply. If an officer has 200 incidents. 5 complaints. And 8 people who went out of their way just to give him a compliment compared to an officer who has 400 incidents, 42 complaints, 2 compliments. Who do you think is the asshole?

I don't think it's that simple. You could have a hard-ass cop, but who is still within legal and ethical boundaries. The result being a better neighborhood but complaints filed nonetheless.