It's That Time Again!
It's Friday, so everyone knows what that means, right? Time for another report on any illegal details that you hear about!
If you or your partner or any car in your district is sent OUT of your district of assignment for the tour tonight, call the FOP. If you are a north OR south sider and are sick and tired of the lack of police coverage in your district of residence and you get information that your beat car is assigned out of the district, call the FOP and call your alderman. Even better, drop the word with a few of your neighbors who would usually have no idea about the lack of coverage - once civilians start hearing about this "redeployment" from their neighborhoods and start calling the aldermen, it's dead. Deader than dead.
Here's the number so you don't have to look it up - 312-733-7776.
If you or your partner or any car in your district is sent OUT of your district of assignment for the tour tonight, call the FOP. If you are a north OR south sider and are sick and tired of the lack of police coverage in your district of residence and you get information that your beat car is assigned out of the district, call the FOP and call your alderman. Even better, drop the word with a few of your neighbors who would usually have no idea about the lack of coverage - once civilians start hearing about this "redeployment" from their neighborhoods and start calling the aldermen, it's dead. Deader than dead.
Here's the number so you don't have to look it up - 312-733-7776.
posted by SCC at 9:10 AM
66 Comments:
Go to the Illinois State FOP site and the announcement that 80% for downstate law enforcement pensions will be signed by the gov on Monday Go Mark your the greatest lobbist in the history of Chicago Lodge 7 keep up the good work how many bank accounts now
Can anyone confirm that despite the fact that hundreds of retirees have submitted applications for RETIREE CONCEALED CARRY, Mayor Daley is refusing to process H.R. 218 applications?
This is in flagrant violation of the U.S. Code, Title 18, Chapter 44, Section 926C (H.R. 218) and 50 ILCS 710 (P.A. 94-103).
Must we litigate to get da mare to comply with the Law of the Land?
The only thing that this CITY Politicians understands is LITIGATION and Federal Investigations so now you know why so many people sue. The retirees should get together sue these bastards and add to their nest eggs
Interesting that the last post said the "retirees should get together and sue the city for ignoring the federal law". I kind of thought that since many of us continue to be members of FOP that, that would be their job to sue on our behalf. Reading the posts wherein the FOP does nothing about flagrant violations of the contract, i.e details our of district, for example, I wonder what the FOP exists for. They do nothing for the retirees and seemingly do little for the active members. I guess it exists for the benefit of its officers and to run fishing tournaments, golf outings and parties.
One source told me that all the HR218 retired application forms are apparently gathering dust at Legal Affairs. ph#312-745-6115. I called but just got the runaround.
We pay over a million dollars in salary to the "inside" guys at FLOP just to have speaker phone Fallon tell you "if you" can find the article in the contract to file a grievance we will have someone help you if they are not busy planning for the three xmas parties we will have to spend your union dues
FOP does nothing without a complaint. If the members take the shit without saying anything, what can they do? It's time people stood up and instead of protecting their cushy spots, actually did something useful for all officers. Far TOO many officers looking out for only themselves these days.
I learned that aside from the mayor and the supt., the retiree concealed carry is being ignored by the General Counsel to the Supt., Sherry Mecklenberg.
What's going on? Can't the city just follow the law?
H.B. 218 caught the city and the department with their pants down. Many people of rank that I have spoken to over the years were of the opinion it would never pass. Well, it did. And now it's the law.
Problem is getting the mechanism in place to comply. I'm surprised Daley hasn't made some overt attempt to sabotage the process, but I know for a fact the personnel division is working as best they can.
Like any federal law placed upon the locals, it will take a bit to get it implemented. But I would advise my fellow police officers to be a bit patient as they work out the kinks.
The law took 13 years to pass, I don't think it unreasonable to wait a bit longer to get the "i's" dotted and "t's" crossed.
Bullshit!!!!!!
If gay marriage was passed today the forms with Bride/Bride and Groom/Groom on them would be ready by the end of the business day.
The city always wants to turn the most simple procedures into a federal case.
The problem lies with Legal Affairs who only answers to Daley & Cline
Call lawyer Mecklenberg at 745-6115.
FLOP can file a grievance on any city practice that violates the contract with or without an individual po. It fact it is the RESPONSIBILITY of FLOP to protect the contract from any violation because if they don't their silence can be viewed as ACCEPTANCE and any future violation will not be enforceable. FLOP is lazy and they hate activist POs because it takes away from Lunch, golf and video games. Has anyone really looked at Bella and DiMaria lately too too many banquets.
When FOP fails to file grievances on your behalf, just file a "duty of fair representation claim" against them with the State Labor Board.
Rich Aguilar from FOP was in 009 the other night and said 1) they just learned of the details and 2.) the "details" are not a violation of the contract as long as the officers go to roll call and check-off in their home district. In those cases they are not considered details
Sorry guys but the FOP has no obligation to enforce a state law on behalf of retirees. FOP is only required to enforce the contract. Retires are no members of the bargaining unit, they are fraternal members and FOP is not obligated in any fashion to pursue their interests. OTOH, FOP might take up the cause now simply because so many current members want to carry after retirement. But the officer who suggested that the retirees get together and hire their own attorney to pursue their rights was correct.
Guys, were blowing this out of proportion.
Retirees, just carry what you want. Do all the paper work, send it to the city. If you get locked up, comply. THEN get the atty and sue the crap out of the city!
Besides, what PO is going to lock a retired guy for having a pistol. Cmon.
1:28:13...It's easy to say BULLSHIT, but I can say you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. I've been following H.B. 218 since Randy "Duke" Cunningham (yes, THAT Cunningham...the one who just resigned the House and plead guilty to bribery) first introduced the bill in 1991. It was sponsored by the Law Enforcement Alliance of America (an organization I'm sure you are not a member of) who has been pushing the bill for years.
Although rank and file officers were naturally in favor of the bill, the IACP and other executive police organizations were AGAINST it. Why? Because they owe their jobs to the politicians who did not want the bill passed. Well, it was passed and now it's law!
It's easy to make a law but hard to put it in place. If you've read the bill, you know that retired police have to qualify yearly to be able to carry. Did you or anyone else actually think that the mechanisms to put that in place could be done overnight? Who will do the certification? Where will the testing be done? Who will pay for it? All these things have to be hammered out.
We should consider ourselves lucky as peace officers that the Congress shoved this bill down the throats of the politicians on the state and local level. Had we waited for the Illinois legislature to do something on par with H.B. 218, our grandchildren would be dead.
Applications for certification of good standing are in personnel as this is being written. Remember, the deal is, retired in GOOD STANDING. They have already received applications from people who did not retire in good standing, and if I was the one who would be held accountable, I'd be damn sure I only certify those who qualify before I'd put my name on it. Can you imagine the liability that would come to YOU if you signed off on someone who didn't qualify?
Mayor Daley may not like it, and he may even be dragging his feet, but rest assured he can't do it for long. Once things start moving along it won't be a logjam anymore.
to: 12/02, 03:00 p.m....going to work in one district, then being detailed out, i.e., spending the tour somewhere else, then returning for checkoff, is NOT a detail out of the district/unit??? That seems to be a challenge/grievance so winnable it seems ridiculous, unless....the FOP is not aggressive in protecting its members...
to: 03:15....I wouldn't go as far as to say that Daley doesn't like concealed carry for the retirees (and don't forget, it affects law enforcement officers across the country, not just here). My thought is that he has no opinion re: concealed carry, primarily because he either doesn't care, has no interest, or doesn't have the capacity to form an interest. And, besides, what real difference does it make what he thinks about anything?
3:15:09 PM
Can you (or anyone else) define "good standing" and "not good standing" or "bad standing"?
I have heard the same thing about retiree's. They r being screwed by the city. Why don't 5 retiree's get together and call the media? The media for the first time since I can remember r on a feeding frenzy against the city. They would put this on the afternoon news at a minimum. The truly ruthless guys on the networks love to ask Daley questions about why laws r being ignored. Don't wait for the FOP. They don't like to throw things in the citys face. They take their time and file lawsuits just like the city wants. Another law firm that is linked to Daley gets money and more oil for the Dem Machine.
The FOP must know about the practice alledgedly violating the contract before they can do anything about it. They need to get an agreement or ruling on this ASAP.
Just a quick scenario: Say they need manpower in 024 every day for an undetermined period of time with no exigent circumstances or "details". I go to roll call and they tell me I'm the one going to 024 and be back at checkoff in 004. And there is nothing I can do about it? I know it says Chicago Police on the car and all the other smart ass answers you brainiacs can come up with, but I have a problem with it on several fronts.
It's nonsense. If there are spots that they need manned, then just open the vacancies and fill them.
Is this daley's way of getting around district realignment. Just send the cars from another district that they choose to avoid the political ramifications of condensing districts or taking assigned spots from any districts.
Is this being done for our own good? Are the officers from 017 and 016 being (re)trained in the fine art of policing? If that is the case, then say so.
I believe that daley is avoiding the political firestorm of controversy which will be caused by realignment. THIS is a fight he has been avoiding for more than a decade. Remember who really runs this department.
Maybe the course of action to be taken is to email all of your alderman rather than the FOP to see if they can get it straightened out.
Most important point: Lts and that violence reduction overtime get time and a half for leaving their district to work. There is your precedent. Fight for that. If they have to pay time and a half, so be it, but at least something will have been done.
to 3:30.....so was the grievance that closed our lockups but we lost that one....the city gets what they want and justify's it somehow....
The F.O.P. first must know....blah blah. Its their job to know these things. Don't give me "da I dunno, no one told me" Mayor Daley bullshit excuses. If every copper in the city knows, I'm sure that the puds at F.O.P. know. Also, fuck the city and their selective enforcement of federal law. I'f they could bulldoze Meigs overnight, I think they are capable of processing some paperwork in a timely fashion.
to: 04:46...ah, good point, I had forgotten about that....
Oh, there are a lot of other ways to do realignment! They would just involve pulling the clout-bunnies and semi-retarded housemouses out of their slumbers.
Let's take an average of two districts, 011 and 013, on 3rd watch.
011: 15 2-man cars, 14 rapid response, 5 sergeants, 1 field lieutenant, 10 tactical officers, 1 tactical sergeant. 75 officers total.
013: 9 2-man cars, 8 rapid response, 5 sergeants, 1 field lieutentant, 10 tactical officers, 1 tactical sergeant. 51 officers total.
Average = 63.
For simplicity, lets just make that the average of officers required on all 3 watches for each district.
This therefore discounts, on the one hand, days off, furloughs, medical users, etc.... This also discounts, on the other hand that most districts do not put up a full crew on any watch, that second watch is one-man units, that 1st watch has no rapid response, etc etc.
So I'd guess that everything else is a wash. What do we get total? 189 average needed per district for field resources (grossly oversimplified).
Multiply that out by 25, and voila, 4675 officers.
You heard that right. What is the budgeted strength again? Of all the officers who are supposed to be out here, from area-assigned gang teams, SOS, TRU, thousands of house-mouse positions including assignments to the OEMC and all sorts of city hall offices, they need to redeploy the district field personnel to handle "emergency" redeployments?
Where the fuck are the other 8000 or 4000 or whatever?
Nope, when they need an extra 10 officers, God forbid they take some of the Mt. Greenwood or Sauganash clout bunnies and house mouses. Why do that when they can just take the only marked car assigned to Mt. Greenwood and/or Sauganash, and take away the supposed protection for the whole neighborhoods? Wouldn't want the 8000 connected insiders on this job to have to stay awake until 7AM, or you might have some 'splainin to do to someone's Chinaman.
It seems like the people that are complaining the most here might be some of the pos who live in the areas that are losing the police powers. I really have not heard yet one of the pos who has been detailed out complain, atleast not to me in person or on this board.
Let's all get this straight, the FOP has proven that theu do not give a damn about this and the city has proven that they do not either or this would not be happening.
We need to start calling and calling our alderman about this as people who live within those wards. Do not call bitching saying you are a cop and what the department is doing to you is bullshit. Call as a someone who put them in office to represent you and you area. Make it known to them that there is not police presence in your/their area. Tell you neighbors, have them tells others and everyone call.
Start looking at this problem at a different agnel because this current direction is not working. The FOP does not give a crap and the city does not give a crap about you as an employee. We need to start some grass roots things here so our voice can be heard and noticed.
sorry about the spelling above
The coppers being detailed out are not complaining for a reason, They are held down on a mission, not subject to radio calls, long lunch, and an early release to give them "travel time" to return to their district. Its actually a free day to visit another district and see how the other side lives. THATS WHY THEY DON'T CALL FOP
to: 05:23....I'm certainly not challenging your info, but....if that's the case, then why in the hell is the dept. sending cars from one dist. to another...is this one more example of "let's fool ourselves", i.e., seatbelt missions, curfews, and contact cards (also known as let's stop everybody who moves, and wait for the ACLU to figure out what's happening)..... all of which are by-products of administrators who have no idea what is going on....
how can FLOP not know. The trustees must visit two roll calls a month in order to get their hush money of $400.00 per month. Unfortunately they don't attend real roll calls, if they talk to the 2 people on the desk before rollcall that counts as attending a room full of angry pissed off coppers and tthey want no part of it.
You guys who think the media cares what Daley does or doesn't do about retired coppers carrying guns overestimated the media's attention span. I think the reality is that Daley doesn't care but isn't going to take on another unfunded mandate from the federal govt. As several have said there is no procedure or policy in place just a fed/stat that gives retirees the right to carry weapons. Is it really any wonder that nothing has been don? Where's the money to pay for all the paperwork and the qualifications? What are the liability issues? etc., etc.,
307 doesn't know what he's talking about. Yes, retirees are not members of the bargaining unit, however, the issue in question is not a contractual or bargaining issue. Its something that the morons in the FOP pushed on a national level, a federal law. The FLOP does have an obligation to seek redress of this issue for its members, which includes retirees. If we use your wharped logic (obviously and FOP officer or stooge) we can assume that, the city can tomorrow stop our pensions, which is not a violation of the contract, but a violation of state law and the idiot drunks running the Fop wouldn't do anything? Including the FOP lawyer for life Pleines?
Sorry but I beg to defer. Since when does a social or fraternal organization have a "duty" to pursue anything? At the State or National level, the FOP might have an interest in enforcing the fed/stat/law but Lodge 7 of FOP has as its primary duty the duty to its current members (read: bargaining unit) to enforce the contract with the employer and to conserve the assets of the organization - not to go off on "tilt the windmill" diversions to benefit retirees. BTW the pension plan, just like the health plans, are contractual and can't be yanked or modified without consultation with FOP. What you should be screaming about if the 5 million plus the FOP has spent to provide Burge with private representation!!!!!!
Well your obviously not a policeofficer or never were, your post gives you up. The FOP has the same duty, not to be confused with duty in the labor relations sense, as any organization which purports to exist to improve or enhance issues or matters for its members. Obviously its not a union but a faternal group as you say. If we use your logic, the Teamsters have no interest in matters pertaining to its retirees, since they are no longer members of the bargaining unit. So which is it are you a member of the people's law office, or some city hall political flunkey, certainly not or never were the police.
Maybe the retired po's association could do something, you know the one ran by the former ex director of the pension board, the one that was appointed by old man Daley and kept there by his son, rumored to be the old mans cousin. Or the other guy who's only function as a po was to drive the mayors mother around. Ya sure.
The coppers being detailed out are not complaining for a reason, They are held down on a mission, not subject to radio calls, long lunch, and an early release to give them "travel time" to return to their district. Its actually a free day to visit another district and see how the other side lives. THATS WHY THEY DON'T CALL FOP
12/02/2005 05:23:08 PM
Ding, ding, ding!!!! We have a winner!!! You hit the nail right on the head!!!
Right to carry does not require "good Standing" or any kind of standing at all. If you qualify to own a gun and go through the simple training course (usually 8 hours)Daley would have no say at all.
I know of the cases several retired (in good standing) cops who were charged but never convicted with crap gun charges within Cook County.
Let's support Right to carry and let Daley stew about that! Imagine if the FOP came out with a blanket public statement that rank and file officers support Right to Carry?
Any Illinois Right to Carry law must require cities with gun bans to allow possession of any handgun by a permit holder. Imagine you could even own a Glock if you wanted!
Cline could whine all year and nobody would be able to hear him...
The bottom line with sending cars from 016 for example to 011, is the clear fact that 016 has less cars to respond to calls and answer calls. Thats what we need to tell the aldermen and media. Who cares if it is not a detail, the car is not in the district, we need to send them examples of crimes that occured where the car was out of the district.
They could send 500 P.O.'s a night to 011, 015, 007, 008, it wont change a thing. Let them kill each other and rob each other. Keep the cars where they make a difference and your victim doesnt have a rap sheet longer than your offender, send the manpower to where the city workers live.
For CRIMEFILE, and anyone else who thinks they know what they are talking about, I'm adding an abbreviated version of H.B. 218 as it applies to retired Police Officers:
SEC. 3. EXEMPTION OF QUALIFIED RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FROM STATE LAWS PROHIBITING THE CARRYING OF CONCEALED FIREARMS.
`(1) retired in good standing from service with a public agency as a law enforcement officer, other than for reasons of mental instability;
`(2) before such retirement, was authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and had statutory powers of arrest;
`(3)(A) before such retirement, was regularly employed as a law enforcement officer for an aggregate of 15 years or more; or
Section 1, retired in GOOD STANDING, is part of the deal. If you retire under investigation, I.E. having a bad beef on you, you did not retire in good standing! The department will not issue retirement stars and/or ID cards (nor are they obliged to) to members who fail to retire in good standing. For example: Mr. KMA moves out of the city as he's getting ready to retire and sets up a suburban address. Unbeknownst to him, someone beefs on him and an investigation is initiated. Unless he retires before the investigation comes to light, he gets slapped with "retired under investigation."
What does that mean? It means although you get your pension, no retirement star, no retirement ID, no RETIRED IN GOOD STANDING!
Again, when they get things worked out, Mr. Mayor won't be able to stop it. I'm glad it's a federal law and not something the city or state can circumvent.
Re: RETIREE CONCEALED CARRY (H.R. 218)
To the 3 following posters:
1:10:11 pm (your third paragraph)
3:15:09 pm (third paragraph also)
6:09:42 pm "no procedure or policy in place"
Your statements cited above appear to be incorrect. Please check the following State of Illinois site and the left column to clarify:
www.rpocc.com
7:13:46 pm Can you provide a documented source explaining and defining "retired in good standing"?
All this talk about sending cars from one Dist to another.
I would like to know just how many calls for service a slow beat gets in 16 or 17 or what ever.
Chances are they would be romantizing some broad, goofing off in someother way or just bullshiting eachother, parked in some unlighted area.
So much for protecting the public on the 3rd. Would love to see their mover/parker and arrets for a 6 month period.
Used to get a kick out of "Boy were we busy last night" 6 calls of bullshit for 8 hours tour. Shit, thats retirement.
From what I read on here, if a supervisor WC,Lt,Sgt gives you something to do, he is Jerk $%*&^#@. You give me an active PO and I would bend over for him/her, and as for the dog-asses no special treatment. You don't give me anything ,you get nothing in return.
As for carrying a piece after retirement, never ran into a copper from a mid to large size city thatdidn't carry or have it handy in the car.
"RETIRED IN GOOD STANDING" is a requirement under H.B. 218 to qualify for concealed carry. If you retire from CPD while under investigation, they will not consider you in good standing. Is there a general order on what "good standing" is? I don't think there is, but like everything in this department, "past practices" come into play. Past practices have been that no one under investigation at the time they retired got retirement credentials (except for the connected few). With H.B. 218 in place now I'm sure there will be a G.O. next year covering it.
Before H.B. 218, a retirement star and ID card was a nice memento of service and nothing more. You had no police powers or right to carry a gun. That's all changed now and you can be sure the city is going to be careful on just who they certify for what amounts to a national lifetime concealed carry permit.
H.B. 218 mandates retirement credentials to carry. Everyone has to remember that the powers in charge not only in Chicago, but most big cities, never thought H.B. 218 would become law. Now it is the law and they have to figure out the logistics and put in place. So what does that require? Certification that a person retired in good standing. This means a copper has to send his application and a check of his personnel record has to be conducted to verify he retired in good standing.
As far as I know from talking to people in personnel, retired in good standing is having no open beefs. Even if you have a bad beef and take 30 days, as long as you do your 30 days, you can retire in good standing and get the star and ID card. Retire owing suspension time or having an open C.R. and you are not in good standing.
I've followed this law since it was first introduced and sponsored by the Law Enforcement Alliance of America. I've been a member of LEAA since that time too. I'm not one to excuse the department if they drag their feet, but I also can understand the practical applications of a law such as this. It's easy to bitch about how slow things are going, but I'm sure once they've caught up and get checks and balances in place, things will move smoothly. I'm sure very soon that when you go to personnel to retire, you'll submit your PAR form, and get your retirement star, retirement ID and certification for H.B. 218.
The point is not how many calls theat they answer as compaired to how many someone else does. I would hope that they are not the same number of calls for service and the same types of calls for service in 022, 016, of 17 that are in the shit districts, that is why people live there.
The point is that all these people are tax payers are deserve police so that when there is something wrong the police are there. Just look at the recent crime going on in 022 on the westside!
Musings,
Why does FLOP talk to you via speakerphone? Its rude and unprofessional, but then so are they.
WHAT TRAINING DO THE ALDERCREATURES UNDERGO TO CARRY GUNS.
December 02 and the FOP Hotline is still dated from November 10
I was at the roll call in 009 when the two FOP officers showed up. They claimed they JUST heard about the cars being detailed out and that there was absolutely nothing they c/would do. But they did tell us to keep our time due slips when we get denied time due. Gee, how much am I paying in dues per year to have some knuckelhead tell me to keep a fucking slip? Attend roll call once a year? Thanks FOP, your the best. And yes, I do attend the meetings (the beer is free and cold).
Is there any truth to the rumor that Supt. Cline had the police board certify ten of his friends for the retired concealed carry ahead of the curve???? P.s. Keep your bullshit comments to yourself....just want to know if anybody heard of this????
Also heard rumor that some retired officers were certified by CPD to qualify for concealed carry and then the process came to a screeching stop.
If true, why?
there is a difference between concealed carry and HR 218
Any citizen with a good conduct record in a concealed carry state can get a permit
The HR 218 applies to retired law enforcement officers who retire in good standing with 15 or more years of service
Good standing means still having your star when you retire.
A minor bullshit beef will not preclude you (like a verbal abuse beef)
But pissing hot or DUI etc where they take your star will preclude you, unless you get your star back first.
I hope I can stay clean for a few more weeks
Good standing
I have no faith in the FOP. Mark and his boys should be voted out. I never voted for him. The FOP boys are a bunch of party animal DRUNKS. They really push the alcohol in all their events. They should be leaders!!!! but they're not. They don’t enforce the contract. If I need a drinking buddy, I know I can count on the FOP. Shame on you FOP, your a disgrace to your members.
Isn't there a General Order regarding BEAT INTEGRITY? Why can a Inspctr or other boss hammer you for being out of your beat, but can sent you off do a different District or even Area?
Bam, You're an Alderman! Bam, You get to carry a gun. No Training!
Because you are supposed to remain on YOUR beat unless directed otherwise by a supervisor or given a job by OEC. Heres the rub and this really gets me. Why do some supervisors ALLOW OEC to assign simple paper jobs to other beats? I say they should be stacked or assigned to a rapid if it's a really old job. I understand in progress or "hot" calls being assigned to cars in different sectors or beats, but these B/S paper jobs should be stacked.
Is the City still issuing "retired stars to the retiree? Watch them stop that.If I pull a guy over and he has a gun and a retiree star, it's " thanks, and have a nice day Officer".
Not only is the city issuing retirement stars, but when you retire, you have two choices: 1. a 1955 design with a "Retired" banner across where the numbers go, or 2. a flat 2004 design built into a case (wallet) with "Retired" where the numbers normally would be and a banner affixed to the bottom with your star number. Takes about a week.
I doubt the city will stop issuing retirement stars because all the big bosses want them too!
>>Because you are supposed to remain on YOUR beat unless directed otherwise by a supervisor or given a job by OEC. Heres the rub and this really gets me. Why do some supervisors ALLOW OEC to assign simple paper jobs to other beats? I say they should be stacked or assigned to a rapid if it's a really old job. I understand in progress or "hot" calls being assigned to cars in different sectors or beats, but these B/S paper jobs should be stacked. <<
Unless things have changed from my time, the policy on paper is that nobody is supposed to be sent off a beat until every other type of unit in the district is on a job. That includes sergeants, field lieutenants, tac, gang, you name it. This is the way the CPD wrote the orders.
The paper policy is that all priority 1 and 2 calls go out within 10 minutes, priority 3s go out within one hour. That is the way the CPD wrote the orders.
Here's the rub... and anyone in a district who claims never to have heard or experienced this is either deaf or a liar. There are thousands of incidents every year where a rapid says "not my sector" or a supervisor says "ha ha, very funny squad". The closest I ever came to turning in a refused-assignment notification to operations command was a rapid response car who demanded a supervisor's approval to leave a sector.
The answer to all this (on second and third watches), if there is enough time on the radio (i.e., not on zones 6, 8, 10 or 12), is to have the dispatchers communicate with field supervisors more. Field supervisors can have certain types of jobs held. Namely, field supervisors can have priority 2 and 3 jobs held for particular units.
Dispatchers rarely asked, and field supervisors rarely ordered, that the lower priority (2 and 3) jobs be held, e.g., for the beat car or for a rapid response car.
Bottom line, they can write all the orders they want. But nobody wants to follow them. Most supervisors don't want to take jobs. C/D units don't want to take domestics. Response cars don't want to leave their sectors.
Don't get me wrong. For shots fired or other hot jobs, I almost always would assign a neighboring beat car before a response car out of a sector. That just makes sense theoretically, and the last thing anyone needs is to answer questions as to why the first car assigned was coming from 5 miles away to these types of jobs.
Bottom line: I wouldn't be happy if I was a beat car getting assigned off the beat to handle paper or parkers or whatever. But it wasn't the OEC who came up with the time limits for assigning jobs. The time limits were in place long before 1995 and long before CAPS.
If any supervisors are reading this, my suggestion (and this is well within your authority) is to communicate with dispatchers and request/order that priority 3 jobs be held for beat cars... unless the beat cars are down on something that is likely to take more than 2 hours. ANd then I'd just tell them to assign a rapid to cover the beat.
But no matter how you implement a policy, some people are always gonna complain about getting work. Not my beat; not my sector; rapidly responding! squad; you know we're civilian dress, right?; tell me what every beat and rapid in the district is doing now squad; hold me down on paper in the station; hey... I got a TVB; oh, we were just gonna ask for lunch/personal; time check squad?; etc etc etc.
to: 12:29....excellent points. Other observations/comments: 1) priority job selections? Who the hell decided that? I mean, every domestic is a 1 (even though many are bulls**t); so we run from one to another, while other citizens are getting stuck up, burglarized, etc.; 2) speaking of domestics, in the event a domestic viol. victim doesn't get timely police response (and something serious happens), everyone makes a big deal of it; question: what is the average dispatch/response time of EVERY domestic over the year? the media might be surprised; 3) has there ever been a policy connection between the CPD and OEMC, since OEMC was disconnected from the Dept.? There doesn't seem to be a clear understanding (from CPD bosses) as to dispatch policies/problems, etc. (but that's no surprise, since most CPD exempts either never worked the street or have no capacity to appreciate street work); 4) speaking of the disconnect between OEMC and the CPD....there doesn't seem to be any relationship between dispatch priorities/policies and conditions on the street. OEMC seems like one big computerized call intake system, with no human discretion applied to call volume, seriousness (or lack thereof) of incident, or the availablity of street personnel....in short, a creation of the politicians, and an insult to the citizens...
12:29 again. You and I are most certainly in agreement.
The categories and priorities came from the CPD exempts, and the occasional changes are (or at least were) all cleared by a committee of them.
Here's how idiotic it is that stuff like this comes from a committee. When the place first opened in '95, they made Burglar Alarms prioirity 1s and Robbery Just/Occureds priority 2s.
Whoever came up with that policy deserved to be shot. You would have joe-citizen standing on a street corner after some thug shoved a gun in his face... because Burglar Alarms are more important?
After Bratton went to LA, he talked the city council into agreeing not to respond to burglar alarms anymore unless there was a human being on the scene to verify that a burglary had taken place or was in progress. A study there showed that something like 5 of 100,000 in 1 year were "founded" by responding units. As far as I could ever tell, Chicago's numbers are similar.
But they were more important than responding to a guy who just had a gun shoved in his face?
It was changed after 6 months or a year after everybody and their brother pointed out how ignorant the policy was. Nevertheless, it still absolutely kills me that anybody was so disconnected that they didn't see that as a problem.
And I TOTALLY agree with you about domestics. The way the orders are written, basically anythink that "can" be classified as a domestic... "must" be classified as a domestic. As a result of it being a 1A, they can't be held... even if a supervisor tried.
So someone's 8 year old is talking back? Lights and sirens boys, this is a TOP PRIORITY.
The fact is, they have you guys responding to way too much stuff. The only parking violations you guys should get should be the handicapped violations. 75% of the paper should be done over the phone or the internet (perhaps with a brief follow-up verification from field units). And so on and so on.
Its funny that today's article has Cline or whoever touting the importance of having 50 extra officers present in uniform in high crime areas. Imagine the effect they'd achieve if they actually let the patrol division patrol!
and the bottom line (or maybe so) is to have a police administration: 1) whose members completely and intelligently understand the mission and the workload; 2) who assign and promote employees, supervisors, and exempts, based totally and completely on performance, intelligence, and experience, without regard to race, gender, political or familial connection.....assignments, personnel deployment, promotions, priorities re: neighborhood crime.....a wonderful thing, no? Then, why not here in Chicago? and the answer?....
Long before the sector concept came into being, there were beats and even if you were 1126 you roamed a little. You might be up on the north end of the dist and that beat may be down in your beat area. No matter what, if you were a working PO and the job was assigned and you were close, you answered up and took it.
Looks like not now man, its not in my sector so fuck off..
Someplace along the line, officers have forgotten just what thay took an oath for. The union says I don,t have to!
Great, You wern't around when COP, CONFEDERATION OF POLICE was formed and broke ice for you.
We did have a PO> as founder, no 1st. vice pres, no 2ed vice pres, no 3rd vice pres and no other bullshit coppied from the teamsters. Ya Unions are great, but they can fuck you more ways than one.
When Push comes to shove because of demands of the union, 2013 comes to mind, not really that far in the future. No Health Care, unless you pay for it, just like in the early 60's, have a nice day.
While I don't disagree, it should be noted (so long as we are revisiting history) as follows. O.W. Wilson and Summerdale let to the national adoption of the 911 policy (i.e., put the police in squads and tell the public to call early and often for everything). O.W. Wilson, Chicago's own, led to the policy of chasing 9-1-1 call and thereby letting the squeakiest wheels be heard first and most.
America followed this system nationally.
And what have we seen as a result? Police everywhere who know not their assigned neighborhoods. Sure, ya know who gets arrested, and ya know who keeps calling for the same nonsense, but do the kids know you? Do people tip their hat and say "g'day officer X" when you drive by?
Nope!
And what accompanied this disconnect? Why, the quadrupling of our nation's homicide rate! OK, OK, maybe just a doubling.
They blamed it on urban unrest, racial strife, crack wars, and anything else they could dream up. And they just kept telling people to call more for more things.
The whole point of TRU, SOS, just about everything-Bratton etc., is to get officers away from the 9-11 system except for actual emergencies. And it would probably work fine, except there is no leadership or accountability in this department.
All in all, like Public Enemy said (but not like Public Enemy meant), 9-1-1 is a joke. The whole purpose of the system was to make sworn police part of the welfare state. Government, the one-stop-shop for all life's problems...
Still, you reduce the burdens of the 9-1-1 system by 50% and you still have an incredibly corrupt city, with mindless political lackeys in charge of every department. They wouldn't know what to do with 10000 police if they couldn't tell them to chase ever-increasing numbers of 9-1-1 calls around.
Soooooo what that the FOP hotline is still dated 10 Nov. Me and my officers are busy. I have parties and stuff to go to, I have to get all my Christmas handouts and freebees from the Joint Council and City Hall. I'm a unions boss, yous guys don't mean nothing, I'll tell you when there is a union problem. Until then shut up and pay your dues.
Markee boy
H.R. 218: The Law Enforce4ment Officers Safety Act of 2004.
United States Code, Title 18, Chapter 44, Section 926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers.
(c) As used in this section, the term "qualified retired law enforcement officer" means an individual who--
(1) retired in good standing from service with a public agency as a law enforcement officer, other than for reasons of mental instability;
F.O.P. SUK'S ASS! dose nothing for anyone but themselves!
TOO MUCH POWER TOO RUN against! Look at the recent pension board election. Steve Robbins FOP endorsed canidate WINS!!! Illiterate f...in hillbilly, vice prez of fop state lodge appointed by Mark Donahue!
Doesn't give a shit about THE MEMBERS! ONLY THEMSELVES!@!!
What a f...in joke.
<< Home