Massachusetts Cop Forum banner
21 - 40 of 46 Posts

· Subscribing Member
Joined
·
3,562 Posts
I guess I'm kind of surprised the archaic residency rule still exists in 2023. This rule severely limits the pool the department can draw from. There are many qualified people who live outside the City of Boston who over the years would have liked to get on the job there, myself included.

While I was born in Boston and spent my first few years there, I grew up in the suburbs but when I took the Civil Service tests back in the 80s when I was trying to get on, I was forced to list my town of residency first. Boston was one of the cities we could add after that. That obviously didn't work out.

I'm thankful the City of Los Angeles does not have that rule. In fact, there are a lot of us Bostonians that have been on the job with the LAPD and none of the guys I know, ever lived in the City of LA... Including a guy by the name of Bill Bratton.

Just a thought after reading through this thread.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
638 Posts
I guess I'm kind of surprised the archaic residency rule still exists in 2023. This rule severely limits the pool the department can draw from. There are many qualified people who live outside the City of Boston who over the years would have liked to get on the job there, myself included.

While I was born in Boston and spent my first few years there, I grew up in the suburbs but when I took the Civil Service tests back in the 80s when I was trying to get on, I was forced to list my town of residency first. Boston was one of the cities we could add after that. That obviously didn't work out.

I'm thankful the City of Los Angeles does not have that rule. In fact, there are a lot of us Bostonians that have been on the job with the LAPD and none of the guys I know, ever lived in the City of LA... Including a guy by the name of Bill Bratton.

Just a thought after reading through this thread.
Boston used to be able to get away with it, back when everyone wanted to be a cop. Boston PD getting into non-residents on the CS list was unfathomable 20 years ago, never mind accepting lateral transfers.

The rules are different now, no one wants to be a cop anymore, compared to past years. Boston is going to have to lift the residency requirement, or they’re really going to be in the hurt locker.
 

· I think, therefore I'll never be promoted.
Joined
·
19,156 Posts
The stubbornness of BPD is truly biting them all in the ass. A great department on so many levels, but the refusal to share ANY details at ANY time will cost them. Wu is now looking to take away all details because so many would remain unfilled and the resources available to fill them were ignored. Personally, I doubt I would ever take any of them anyway, we do 4 hour blocks on my job and that's perfect for me. However, we've got plenty of guys who are hungry and have no problems working 8. If these details ARE taken away (and yes, this sabre has been rattling statewide for YEARS....) then the job will become just a little less attractive. And the first people to shake a finger at (besides the folks who take a detail and are only seen when the slip has to be signed) are the ones who said, "OUR DETAILS! NO ONE ELSE!" Empty details DO get attention.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USAF286

· Registered
Joined
·
381 Posts
They could extend it to eternity, they can keep waiting.

Until they get rid of the residency requirement, it’s going to be a non-starter.

I’m not even sure it’s the primarily residency that’s killing recruitment. BFD has ten year residency and they’re one of the toughest jobs in the state to get, if BFD took laterals they’d have a line around the block. A good contract, good quality of life, and not being publicly disparaged for the job that they do makes recruiting a non-issue at BFD
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,299 Posts
Good luck getting any chiefs to sign off on a lateral transfer when everyone is hurting for people. No signature you can’t go


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We’ve had a handful of people come to our dept as a civil service new hire because their former chief would not sign off…they had to resign, retest and go through our process. Even with everyone needing bodies I still find that risky.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: j809

· Registered
Joined
·
638 Posts
We’ve had a handful of people come to our dept as a civil service new hire because their former chief would not sign off…they had to resign, retest and go through our process. Even with everyone needing bodies I still find that risky.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You don’t need to resign to take the civil service test, you can keep your current job, take the test, and then go through the regular hiring process with another department.

Of course, that doesn’t stop your current employer from being vindictive. The Transit Police (which will not sign off on ANY laterals) are notorious for making people’s lives a living hell once they find out that they’re seeking employment elsewhere.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
638 Posts
How, Legally, is an agency allowed to keep someone by not signing off?
At some point, someones gonna pop…
No one is preventing anyone from leaving, but for a true lateral transfer (one CS department to another), you need the approval of both chiefs; the department you’re leaving and the department you’re going to.

CS police departments aren’t indentured servitude, you can leave whenever you want, but to get a lateral transfer you have to play the game.
 

· G-Rap made me do it!
Joined
·
2,772 Posts
Any chance in hell they’d open it to out of state officers? I work in RI and would be interested.
Wouldn’t be a civil service lateral transfer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
21 - 40 of 46 Posts
Top