[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by transplanted

Okay - I'm going to give you a real life example that I lived through with the FOP and the union and their defense of an accused police officer. January 2019. A police officer was the second on scene of a domestic issue, I'll call him Cliff. A drunk and high woman was, let's say acting out, at her "baby daddy's" home, demanding immediate physical custody of their 5 year-old daughter. The solution decided by the on scene commander was to remove the woman from the scene. Showing a bit of compassion, he chose to relocate her rather than arrest her. Cliff, deciding not to just drive her down the street and dump her at the 7-11, because she would just walk back to the scene and start up again, offered her a ride to the metro (subway) station so she could get home. She didn't have any money, having spent it all on a taxi to take her to another county to get to the scene. Upon arriving at the station and parking under a security camera at 5:30 in the morning, the woman refused to get out of the cruiser. Cliff offers to call a friend to come get her if she didn't want to take the metro. He calls the friend (with his number blocked) and leaves voice message. He calls back a few minutes later and the friend answers. Cliff gets out of the cruiser and walks a few feet away and offers the phone to the woman -- which gets her out of the cruiser, which he immediately locks. The woman talks to her friend on the phone, with people walking by, into the station to get the metro to go to work. When she is done, she demands Cliff take her all the way home - to a county outside his jurisdiction and he refuses. She asks for money to ride the metro and he gives her a $ rather than just totally leave her stranded. She then tells him "if you leave me here, you'll regret it." And Cliff drives off. Ninety minutes later, while finishing up his shift, Cliff gets a call to come straight away to the station. Upon arrival, he is swabbed for dna, his uniform, weapon, credentials, cruiser, etc., is confiscated and he's told he's under suspension due to an accusation of 'inappropriate touching' -- the actual description is over the top, but that's the category used. Allegedly all this touching, by the woman, who was wearing long pants, occurred in the front seat and in the back seat of the cruiser, in the metro parking lot, under the camera, and while all these people were walking by, and she was under NO restraints. The woman walks into the metro station and makes the accusation and is rushed off to a hospital for all kinds of testing. This is in today's world of the phone camera, where anyone would have heard any screams or seen any kind of scuffle, etc... yet there is no one reporting anything, no one filming anything - nothing. Okay - Cliff is sent off to suspension land to guess what the H is going on; having been officer of the year the previous year and awarded a medal of valor for stepping into a shoot-out to save a toddler's life. He must undergo psych therapy, wear civilian clothes to work at a desk job, be buzzed in and out of the office, give up ALL off-duty work and sit at a desk where all he can do is answer the phone and call someone in off the street if a report needs to be taken. Metro says they have jurisdiction to investigate and his own IA can't investigate until metro is finished. Of course the hospital tests reveal all kinds of 'activity' by the woman, but none of the 4 dna's they gather match Cliff's. A multitude of illicit drugs and an elevated level of alcohol are also found. By the next day, the local media catches wind and runs out to the metro to interview random people, telling them of the broad accusation and recording their shock at such behavior by the police. This is played on tv for several days, along with teasers that say "see the evidence at 9". I have recorded all those shows, and am still waiting to see any evidence related to the case. Okay - Cliff asks for an attorney as he wants to have the woman prosecuted when it's all over 'cause he knows he didn't do anything and the investigations will bear it out. He's told he'll get an attorney if he needs one during the investigations. Jump to May - 5 months later - metro has finished it's investigation and has been unsuccessful in finding the woman so they can ask her more about her side of the story, and baby-daddy refuses to cooperate with any investigation, 'cause he's the first to call the police for help, but doesn't want to help with any investigation... stellar citizenry in action. The local prosecutor sends EVERYTHING to a grand jury if it involves police, 'cause she wants to protect her backside - forget about the police officer. And since, you guessed it, this is a white officer and an african-american woman, we better triple make sure he didn't look at her cross-eyed. The grand jury subpoena's baby-daddy who still won't cooperate, and baby-mama is still hiding out. I say tell ME where baby-daddy lives and I'll FIND baby-mama... those two are gonna meet up over that child at some point! Grand jury says the case is BS and doesn't indict. Where is the media and their follow-up reporting... crickets... crickets... the crickets are deafening. So that all happens by May. IA now does their thing and finally, in August, Cliff is returned to duty. Having lost about $50,000 in moonlighting, having been shamed by the accusations, having gotten a good case of PTSD -- he has been refused a body cam, even offered to pay for it himself and told no, only certain units can have them, and he no longer wants to be alone in any fashion with a female 'suspect' for lack of a better word. And, oh by the way, all accusations, unfounded or not, stay in the record. And here's the best prize - for both him and the taxpayer who spent over $60,000 for the investigations, hospital tests, etc., they won't prosecute the woman because it might discourage true victims from coming forward if they think they might be prosecuted. Seriously. So forgive me if I seem a bit jaded about how the police unions, etc., protect the police officer. I lived this one - Cliff is my brother and I was living there when it all happened. Sorry to take up so much space, but this experience has greatly colored my world and vision of what I see on the news and what I know goes on in the background. I know he is not the only one who has experienced such politically correct nonsense.

While there's no question that what happened to your brother was dead wrong and there's probably lots of similar stories, don't lose sight of how many times cops have gotten away with assault (even sexual)...and excessive violence toward suspects.

In other words, one needs to look at the big picture...not just lone anecdotal incidents.

[mahoyd86]

So I though the purpose of the demonstrations was to hold those responsible, accountable for there actions, but yet there are celebrities, politicians and the media defending and donating money to defend those destroying property and looting. The reason for a union to defend the actions of there officers is that about 99% of citizens complaints are dismissed and to insure that the office has a chance to defend himself.

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by transplanted

Okay - I'm going to give you a real life example that I lived through with the FOP and the union and their defense of an accused police officer. January 2019. A police officer was the second on scene of a domestic issue, I'll call him Cliff. A drunk and high woman was, let's say acting out, at her "baby daddy's" home, demanding immediate physical custody of their 5 year-old daughter. The solution decided by the on scene commander was to remove the woman from the scene. Showing a bit of compassion, he chose to relocate her rather than arrest her. Cliff, deciding not to just drive her down the street and dump her at the 7-11, because she would just walk back to the scene and start up again, offered her a ride to the metro (subway) station so she could get home. She didn't have any money, having spent it all on a taxi to take her to another county to get to the scene. Upon arriving at the station and parking under a security camera at 5:30 in the morning, the woman refused to get out of the cruiser. Cliff offers to call a friend to come get her if she didn't want to take the metro. He calls the friend (with his number blocked) and leaves voice message. He calls back a few minutes later and the friend answers. Cliff gets out of the cruiser and walks a few feet away and offers the phone to the woman -- which gets her out of the cruiser, which he immediately locks. The woman talks to her friend on the phone, with people walking by, into the station to get the metro to go to work. When she is done, she demands Cliff take her all the way home - to a county outside his jurisdiction and he refuses. She asks for money to ride the metro and he gives her a $ rather than just totally leave her stranded. She then tells him "if you leave me here, you'll regret it." And Cliff drives off. Ninety minutes later, while finishing up his shift, Cliff gets a call to come straight away to the station. Upon arrival, he is swabbed for dna, his uniform, weapon, credentials, cruiser, etc., is confiscated and he's told he's under suspension due to an accusation of 'inappropriate touching' -- the actual description is over the top, but that's the category used. Allegedly all this touching, by the woman, who was wearing long pants, occurred in the front seat and in the back seat of the cruiser, in the metro parking lot, under the camera, and while all these people were walking by, and she was under NO restraints. The woman walks into the metro station and makes the accusation and is rushed off to a hospital for all kinds of testing. This is in today's world of the phone camera, where anyone would have heard any screams or seen any kind of scuffle, etc... yet there is no one reporting anything, no one filming anything - nothing. Okay - Cliff is sent off to suspension land to guess what the H is going on; having been officer of the year the previous year and awarded a medal of valor for stepping into a shoot-out to save a toddler's life. He must undergo psych therapy, wear civilian clothes to work at a desk job, be buzzed in and out of the office, give up ALL off-duty work and sit at a desk where all he can do is answer the phone and call someone in off the street if a report needs to be taken. Metro says they have jurisdiction to investigate and his own IA can't investigate until metro is finished. Of course the hospital tests reveal all kinds of 'activity' by the woman, but none of the 4 dna's they gather match Cliff's. A multitude of illicit drugs and an elevated level of alcohol are also found. By the next day, the local media catches wind and runs out to the metro to interview random people, telling them of the broad accusation and recording their shock at such behavior by the police. This is played on tv for several days, along with teasers that say "see the evidence at 9". I have recorded all those shows, and am still waiting to see any evidence related to the case. Okay - Cliff asks for an attorney as he wants to have the woman prosecuted when it's all over 'cause he knows he didn't do anything and the investigations will bear it out. He's told he'll get an attorney if he needs one during the investigations. Jump to May - 5 months later - metro has finished it's investigation and has been unsuccessful in finding the woman so they can ask her more about her side of the story, and baby-daddy refuses to cooperate with any investigation, 'cause he's the first to call the police for help, but doesn't want to help with any investigation... stellar citizenry in action. The local prosecutor sends EVERYTHING to a grand jury if it involves police, 'cause she wants to protect her backside - forget about the police officer. And since, you guessed it, this is a white officer and an african-american woman, we better triple make sure he didn't look at her cross-eyed. The grand jury subpoena's baby-daddy who still won't cooperate, and baby-mama is still hiding out. I say tell ME where baby-daddy lives and I'll FIND baby-mama... those two are gonna meet up over that child at some point! Grand jury says the case is BS and doesn't indict. Where is the media and their follow-up reporting... crickets... crickets... the crickets are deafening. So that all happens by May. IA now does their thing and finally, in August, Cliff is returned to duty. Having lost about $50,000 in moonlighting, having been shamed by the accusations, having gotten a good case of PTSD -- he has been refused a body cam, even offered to pay for it himself and told no, only certain units can have them, and he no longer wants to be alone in any fashion with a female 'suspect' for lack of a better word. And, oh by the way, all accusations, unfounded or not, stay in the record. And here's the best prize - for both him and the taxpayer who spent over $60,000 for the investigations, hospital tests, etc., they won't prosecute the woman because it might discourage true victims from coming forward if they think they might be prosecuted. Seriously. So forgive me if I seem a bit jaded about how the police unions, etc., protect the police officer. I lived this one - Cliff is my brother and I was living there when it all happened. Sorry to take up so much space, but this experience has greatly colored my world and vision of what I see on the news and what I know goes on in the background. I know he is not the only one who has experienced such politically correct nonsense.

What happened to your brother was dead wrong.

Just as wrong though, are those who have actually done and gotten away with...that which your brother was wrongly accused of.

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by mahoyd86

So I though the purpose of the demonstrations was to hold those responsible, accountable for there actions, but yet there are celebrities, politicians and the media defending and donating money to defend those destroying property and looting. The reason for a union to defend the actions of there officers is that about 99% of citizens complaints are dismissed and to insure that the office has a chance to defend himself.

And then we watch as so many (coerced by their union) applaud and support, two cops who shoved a 75 year old man to the ground as we watched it happening, causing a serious head injury...then not even stopping to help.

THIS from the people hired to..."Serve & Protect?"

What's wrong with this picture?

[John_W]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

And then we watch as so many (coerced by their union) applaud and support, two cops who shoved a 75 year old man to the ground as we watched it happening, causing a serious head injury...then not even stopping to help.

THIS from the people hired to..."Serve & Protect?"

What's wrong with this picture?

That guy is just like the people who get up everyday and try and think of ways to sue Walmart. What am I going to do today to agitate the police and get myself on television. Even the black mayor of Buffalo called out the guy!!!!!! Kind of makes you look silly now to bring this up!!!




Buffalo, N.Y., Mayor Byron Brown (D) on Friday said he was told that the 75-year-old man who was pushed down by police in a viral video was a “major instigator” and an “agitator.”

“According to what was reported to me, that individual was a key and major instigator,” Brown told WBEN in a radio interview.

In a graphic video shot by a WBFO journalist earlier in the week, Martin Gugino is seen slowly approaching the police until one officer tells him to move and pushes him.

A person can be heard yelling, “He’s bleeding out of his ear!” and calling out for medics. Gugino is then seen lying on his back with blood spilling from his ear.

Brown claimed that the police asked Gugino to leave the premises several times as law enforcement tried to disperse protesters after an 8 p.m. curfew.

"He was trying to spark up the crowd of people,” Brown said. “Those people were there into the darkness. Our concern is when it gets dark, there is a potential for violence. There has been vandalism. There have been fires set. There have been stores broken into and looted. According to what was reported to me, that individual was a key and major instigator of people engaging in those activities."

[roscoguy]

Originally Posted by Stuart Zaikov

With the automakers plenty of blame to go around. Poor management and unions that allowed their members to do shoddy work and not be accountable for such.

I do agree with your first statement. The last part of the second one, not so much maybe. At least as far as the production part of the business, anyway. Some vehicle problems could be blamed on assembly line workers I have to admit, but there were inspectors that could have, should have and mostly did catch those. There were also antiquated machinery, processes and methods that made it very difficult to build a decent vehicle in years past. There were cases when the inspectors were told to ignore certain types of problems if it meant slowing or stopping production.

[billethkid]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

And then we watch as so many (coerced by their union) applaud and support, two cops who shoved a 75 year old man to the ground as we watched it happening, causing a serious head injury...then not even stopping to help.

THIS from the people hired to..."Serve & Protect?"

What's wrong with this picture?

A specific incident presented as a general condition.
An individual who happens to be "one" of "...the people..." hired that do in fact protect and serve.

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by John_W

How did you come to that conclusion?? What part didn't you understand??

Here's a lesson in Comprehension 101!!!

That guy is just like the people who get up everyday and try and think of ways to sue Walmart. What am I going to do today to agitate the police and get myself on television. Even the black mayor of Buffalo called out the guy!!!!!! Kind of makes you look silly now to bring this up!!!

Buffalo, N.Y., Mayor Byron Brown (D) [I]on Friday said he was told that the 75-year-old man who was pushed down by police in a viral video was a “major instigator” and an “agitator.”

“According to what was reported to me, that individual was a key and major instigator,” Brown told WBEN in a radio interview.

In a graphic video shot by a WBFO journalist earlier in the week, Martin Gugino is seen slowly approaching the police until one officer tells him to move and pushes him.

A person can be heard yelling, “He’s bleeding out of his ear!” and calling out for medics. Gugino is then seen lying on his back with blood spilling from his ear.

Brown claimed that the police asked Gugino to leave the premises several times as law enforcement tried to disperse protesters after an 8 p.m. curfew.

"He was trying to spark up the crowd of people,” Brown said. “Those people were there into the darkness. Our concern is when it gets dark, there is a potential for violence. There has been vandalism. There have been fires set. There have been stores broken into and looted. According to what was reported to me, that individual was a key and major instigator of people engaging in those activities."

Feeling silly?

Hardly.

I can't help but laugh...and shake my head in disgust.

A lesson in comprehension is definitely in order...but it's not for me.

Read it again..."According to what was reported to me"..."said he was told."

NOW, I wonder exactly who...was "doing the reporting"?

I'll help you.

It's the exact same ones, who support the act and the two that did it...as we ALL watched with our own eyes.

[lindaelane]

I spent 34 years as a classroom teacher.

In the United States, teachers are trained not to touch students for any reason, not even to protect themselves or others. Every campus I ever worked on had "Security" - workers in uniforms authorized to use "necessary but not excessive" force - plus we had intercoms on which to call them. We also normally had one campus police officer, though the police officer never came to the many fights I saw, basically, security handled it.

There was no "right to peaceful protest" on campus. Students were to be in class (or the library or eating in the cafeteria). A few times, a peaceful protest happened at the end of lunch hour, but there was not time for things to get out of hand. If groups of students refused to go to class, security escorted them. Teachers were hands off.

(It was different when I taught in the United Kingdom and was trained to intervene to prevent a student from harming themselves or another student. I was taught the safest way to restrain a student, going around back and clasping them in my arms at the student's elbow level. I supposed the student could have kicked my shins, but the one time I had to intervene in such a way I was not kicked.)

I was assaulted 3 times in 34 years and I would guess that is a below average number (not seriously harmed, just pushed or given a single punch.) I certainly did not strike back. In no case was the student punished who assaulted me. In no case was I accused of causing the assault by anything I said or did. (Well...in one case students said I put my hands on my hips and said "stay there", which is said to be a provocative gesture in their culture that I was unaware of at the time, but that's hardly an accusation of inciting an assault.)

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by roscoguy

I do agree with your first statement. The last part of the second one, not so much maybe. At least as far as the production part of the business, anyway. Some vehicle problems could be blamed on assembly line workers I have to admit, but there were inspectors that could have, should have and mostly did catch those. There were also antiquated machinery, processes and methods that made it very difficult to build a decent vehicle in years past. There were cases when the inspectors were told to ignore certain types of problems if it meant slowing or stopping production.

Years ago it was common knowledge that if you can help it never buy a car assembled on a Friday or a Monday. Apparently lots of workers would regularly use vacation or personal time to get a long weekend and the replacements would put out cars that would be a lemon.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by transplanted

Okay - I'm going to give you a real life example that I lived through with the FOP and the union and their defense of an accused police officer. January 2019. A police officer was the second on scene of a domestic issue, I'll call him Cliff. A drunk and high woman was, let's say acting out, at her "baby daddy's" home, demanding immediate physical custody of their 5 year-old daughter. The solution decided by the on scene commander was to remove the woman from the scene. Showing a bit of compassion, he chose to relocate her rather than arrest her. Cliff, deciding not to just drive her down the street and dump her at the 7-11, because she would just walk back to the scene and start up again, offered her a ride to the metro (subway) station so she could get home. She didn't have any money, having spent it all on a taxi to take her to another county to get to the scene. Upon arriving at the station and parking under a security camera at 5:30 in the morning, the woman refused to get out of the cruiser. Cliff offers to call a friend to come get her if she didn't want to take the metro. He calls the friend (with his number blocked) and leaves voice message. He calls back a few minutes later and the friend answers. Cliff gets out of the cruiser and walks a few feet away and offers the phone to the woman -- which gets her out of the cruiser, which he immediately locks. The woman talks to her friend on the phone, with people walking by, into the station to get the metro to go to work. When she is done, she demands Cliff take her all the way home - to a county outside his jurisdiction and he refuses. She asks for money to ride the metro and he gives her a $ rather than just totally leave her stranded. She then tells him "if you leave me here, you'll regret it." And Cliff drives off. Ninety minutes later, while finishing up his shift, Cliff gets a call to come straight away to the station. Upon arrival, he is swabbed for dna, his uniform, weapon, credentials, cruiser, etc., is confiscated and he's told he's under suspension due to an accusation of 'inappropriate touching' -- the actual description is over the top, but that's the category used. Allegedly all this touching, by the woman, who was wearing long pants, occurred in the front seat and in the back seat of the cruiser, in the metro parking lot, under the camera, and while all these people were walking by, and she was under NO restraints. The woman walks into the metro station and makes the accusation and is rushed off to a hospital for all kinds of testing. This is in today's world of the phone camera, where anyone would have heard any screams or seen any kind of scuffle, etc... yet there is no one reporting anything, no one filming anything - nothing. Okay - Cliff is sent off to suspension land to guess what the H is going on; having been officer of the year the previous year and awarded a medal of valor for stepping into a shoot-out to save a toddler's life. He must undergo psych therapy, wear civilian clothes to work at a desk job, be buzzed in and out of the office, give up ALL off-duty work and sit at a desk where all he can do is answer the phone and call someone in off the street if a report needs to be taken. Metro says they have jurisdiction to investigate and his own IA can't investigate until metro is finished. Of course the hospital tests reveal all kinds of 'activity' by the woman, but none of the 4 dna's they gather match Cliff's. A multitude of illicit drugs and an elevated level of alcohol are also found. By the next day, the local media catches wind and runs out to the metro to interview random people, telling them of the broad accusation and recording their shock at such behavior by the police. This is played on tv for several days, along with teasers that say "see the evidence at 9". I have recorded all those shows, and am still waiting to see any evidence related to the case. Okay - Cliff asks for an attorney as he wants to have the woman prosecuted when it's all over 'cause he knows he didn't do anything and the investigations will bear it out. He's told he'll get an attorney if he needs one during the investigations. Jump to May - 5 months later - metro has finished it's investigation and has been unsuccessful in finding the woman so they can ask her more about her side of the story, and baby-daddy refuses to cooperate with any investigation, 'cause he's the first to call the police for help, but doesn't want to help with any investigation... stellar citizenry in action. The local prosecutor sends EVERYTHING to a grand jury if it involves police, 'cause she wants to protect her backside - forget about the police officer. And since, you guessed it, this is a white officer and an african-american woman, we better triple make sure he didn't look at her cross-eyed. The grand jury subpoena's baby-daddy who still won't cooperate, and baby-mama is still hiding out. I say tell ME where baby-daddy lives and I'll FIND baby-mama... those two are gonna meet up over that child at some point! Grand jury says the case is BS and doesn't indict. Where is the media and their follow-up reporting... crickets... crickets... the crickets are deafening. So that all happens by May. IA now does their thing and finally, in August, Cliff is returned to duty. Having lost about $50,000 in moonlighting, having been shamed by the accusations, having gotten a good case of PTSD -- he has been refused a body cam, even offered to pay for it himself and told no, only certain units can have them, and he no longer wants to be alone in any fashion with a female 'suspect' for lack of a better word. And, oh by the way, all accusations, unfounded or not, stay in the record. And here's the best prize - for both him and the taxpayer who spent over $60,000 for the investigations, hospital tests, etc., they won't prosecute the woman because it might discourage true victims from coming forward if they think they might be prosecuted. Seriously. So forgive me if I seem a bit jaded about how the police unions, etc., protect the police officer. I lived this one - Cliff is my brother and I was living there when it all happened. Sorry to take up so much space, but this experience has greatly colored my world and vision of what I see on the news and what I know goes on in the background. I know he is not the only one who has experienced such politically correct nonsense.

Wow that stinks, sorry that happened to your brother and hope he has a long and happy and safe career and he should be thanked for his service.

In the future could you please use paragraphs.

[bmit16]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

I also speak from 35+ years experience...in regards to dealing with unions.

Early in my career, I was a union steward who was even sent to a week school outside of Seattle...to be "trained."

A lot of what I heard in that week, is what began making me see my particular union...in a different light.

What was hammered into us, was the fact that we were legally obligated to defend even the "problem children"...as hard as we could.

That didn't make sense to me...but the law was the law.

What I did receive, from our local union President, was some very sage advice.

His attitude was that although we were required to defend the union members, there are some that you "don't have to get up early or stay up late...in their defense."

Later on in my career, when I had worked my way up through the system and had become a senior manager, I was on the other side of the table and negotiated a number of CBA's...with three separate unions.

The old president of my union at the time when I was a steward, had retired and the new/younger group(s) (all 3 unions), did not have the same wisdom and didn't bother to differentiate between the employee that was in a hearing for the umpteenth time...and the one that simply made a mistake.

Needless to say, they were not usually happy when I was at the table, because I often knew their argument and strategy...before they even expressed it.

Our standard punishment for a serious rules infraction conviction...was 30 days off without pay.

Recognizing that the time off didn't just affect them, but also affected their families and family finances, I often proposed an "alternative discipline" in cases...where the employee wasn't a constant problem child.

My proposed alternative discipline consisted of determining how much money they would lose with the 30 days off and offering them to keep working, at a lower rate, that would in effect make them pay the same amount of money they would lose...but to do it over a period of up to year.

Since this allowed the employee to keep working and getting a regular paycheck, albeit less than they would normally receive... about 80% accepted this alternative discipline.

The other 20% were financially OK and were actually happy...to have the 30 day "vacation."

Anyway, I saw it as a win-win...for both sides.

I didn't have to replace the employee and the employee was able to continue to pay their bills...even if it meant that they might have to tighten their belts a bit.

My long-winded point is, that I believe we need more "out-of-the-box" thinking with police unions...if we're going to solve this issue.

What about police departments that do not have unions? Believe it or not, there are probably more that do not have union representation. Many only have the FOP and that is not a union. You seem to be painting with a very broad brush!

[newgirl]

Watch Patriot act on utube or Netflix-policing. Everyone needs this info about police unions, will terrify you!!!

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

I also speak from 35+ years experience...in regards to dealing with unions.

Early in my career, I was a union steward who was even sent to a week school outside of Seattle...to be "trained."

A lot of what I heard in that week, is what began making me see my particular union...in a different light.

What was hammered into us, was the fact that we were legally obligated to defend even the "problem children"...as hard as we could.

That didn't make sense to me...but the law was the law.

What I did receive, from our local union President, was some very sage advice.

His attitude was that although we were required to defend the union members, there are some that you "don't have to get up early or stay up late...in their defense."

Later on in my career, when I had worked my way up through the system and had become a senior manager, I was on the other side of the table and negotiated a number of CBA's...with three separate unions.

The old president of my union at the time when I was a steward, had retired and the new/younger group(s) (all 3 unions), did not have the same wisdom and didn't bother to differentiate between the employee that was in a hearing for the umpteenth time...and the one that simply made a mistake.

Needless to say, they were not usually happy when I was at the table, because I often knew their argument and strategy...before they even expressed it.

Our standard punishment for a serious rules infraction conviction...was 30 days off without pay.

Recognizing that the time off didn't just affect them, but also affected their families and family finances, I often proposed an "alternative discipline" in cases...where the employee wasn't a constant problem child.

My proposed alternative discipline consisted of determining how much money they would lose with the 30 days off and offering them to keep working, at a lower rate, that would in effect make them pay the same amount of money they would lose...but to do it over a period of up to year.

Since this allowed the employee to keep working and getting a regular paycheck, albeit less than they would normally receive... about 80% accepted this alternative discipline.

The other 20% were financially OK and were actually happy...to have the 30 day "vacation."

Anyway, I saw it as a win-win...for both sides.

I didn't have to replace the employee and the employee was able to continue to pay their bills...even if it meant that they might have to tighten their belts a bit.

My long-winded point is, that I believe we need more "out-of-the-box" thinking with police unions...if we're going to solve this issue.

Impressive "out of the box" thinking. We need more of that.

[Number 10 GI]

Originally Posted by Neils

Retrain and instill a new (old) attitude through the ranks.

Job should be to “Protect and SERVE” Not just “Law Enforcement”

Huge difference

Andy G didnt usually carry a gun but got his job done.

Stop dressing and arming officers to look like storm troopers

The Andy Griffith show was a television show, absolutely no real life depictions.