Massachusetts Cop Forum banner
341 - 360 of 400 Posts

·
Get off my lawn!
Joined
·
3,759 Posts
But they stay on that step if they are out on a 72, right? Or does it further increase as time goes on?
 

·
Subscribing Member
Joined
·
4,376 Posts
But they stay on that step if they are out on a 72, right? Or does it further increase as time goes on?
It stays at that. It only goes up like a 2 percent out of the 3 percent it’s horrible. Percent out of a percent it’s like a penny.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Retired Fed, Active Special
Joined
·
8,755 Posts
Anyone have the link to the Q&A website they talked about at the end of the meeting?
It was basically the end of the meeting from about time 1:20 something onward (roughly). Director and Chief Hicks were discussing emailed questions out loud.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
It was basically the end of the meeting from about time 1:20 something onward (roughly). Director and Chief Hicks were discussing emailed questions out loud.
O I meant in that section of the video they mentioned posting answers to the questions they discussed and ones they didn’t have time to talk about at the meeting. Maybe I was mistaken though
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
475 Posts
During the Q&A phase it seems Specials are still going to be OK for traffic, it'll be up to the towns. Auxiliaries are going to be limited to "town events" and Traffic. They were pretty specific that those folks will have no law enforcement authority or duties going forward. I think there are only a dozen aux departments left around anyway and only Framingham was doing patrol stuff right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,274 Posts
Discussion Starter · #348 ·
Liability and the unknown will force towns to probably eliminate specials / Auxies if I had to guess.

Outside of that you’re essentially creating a municipal security outfit? Or town employed traffic guys (eg flaggers) . . . Not sure what that would look like.
 

·
Southern Campus Cop
Joined
·
148 Posts
Seems like calling people who don’t posses police powers “police”, whether it be “special police” or “auxiliary police” seems to be exactly the sort of thing that this reform system should be seeking to eliminate. If you’re not a cop and don’t have cop powers, you shouldn’t be called “police”.

Down here where I work, we have reserves and auxiliary police, but they are all fully certified officers. Pretty much all of them are people who either retired from law enforcement or left for some other reason, but still stay on in a reserve capacity to make some side money working details and special events. Some departments also have non-sworn volunteers who work at special events or do “patrol” by driving around and calling in anything suspicious. However, they’re called something like “safety watch” or “community volunteers” NOT “police”.
 

·
MassCops Member
Joined
·
83 Posts
Seems like calling people who don’t posses police powers “police”, whether it be “special police” or “auxiliary police” seems to be exactly the sort of thing that this reform system should be seeking to eliminate. If you’re not a cop and don’t have cop powers, you shouldn’t be called “police”.

Down here where I work, we have reserves and auxiliary police, but they are all fully certified officers. Pretty much all of them are people who either retired from law enforcement or left for some other reason, but still stay on in a reserve capacity to make some side money working details and special events. Some departments also have non-sworn volunteers who work at special events or do “patrol” by driving around and calling in anything suspicious. However, they’re called something like “safety watch” or “community volunteers” NOT “police”.
Problem in MA is we have a smorgasbord of titles, roles and responsibilities. For example we have auxiliary (volunteer) officers who, pre-police reform bill, have the requirements (reserve academy, and annual in-service) to work part-time and get paid, and we have some auxiliary officers with no formal training. What we need to focus on is the training, not the title.

Per the reform bill those with the reserve academy training (same curriculum as full time for the classes included - the classes that the same MPTC determined were needed to obtain part-time status) needed “additional training” to remain certified. The problem, IMHO, is not the 200 hours of “additional training” AKA “Bridge Academy” - but the non legislated criterial (Physical, PAT and Hours) that the MPTC is working on implementing- that will limit the number of experienced part-time officers who will be required to return to square one, even though they completed much of the materials in the full-time academy.

IMHO this is a coordinated discriminatory attack on a class of employees in the commonwealth- volunteer, part-time and full-time reserve trained SSPO’s. Total number impacted are more than 3,000, some of which make their entire living working as police officers.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
G-Rap made me do it!
Joined
·
2,741 Posts
MPTC was given the authority to establish the curriculum of the bridge not the qualifications to attend. They are over stepping to push their agenda. We’ll see how it plays out


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: AUXCAPT

·
Registered
Joined
·
475 Posts
Problem in MA is we have a smorgasbord of titles, roles and responsibilities. For example we have auxiliary (volunteer) officers who, pre-police reform bill, have the requirements (reserve academy, and annual in-service) to work part-time and get paid, and we have some auxiliary officers with no formal training. What we need to focus on is the training, not the title.

Per the reform bill those with the reserve academy training (same curriculum as full time for the classes included - the classes that the same MPTC determined were needed to obtain part-time status) needed “additional training” to remain certified. The problem, IMHO, is not the 200 hours of “additional training” AKA “Bridge Academy” - but the non legislated criterial (Physical, PAT and Hours) that the MPTC is working on implementing- that will limit the number of experienced part-time officers who will be required to return to square one, even though they completed much of the materials in the full-time academy.

IMHO this is a coordinated discriminatory attack on a class of employees in the commonwealth- volunteer, part-time and full-time reserve trained SSPO’s. Total number impacted are more than 3,000, some of which make their entire living working as police officers.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Problem is you can't just shift focus away from title, when many of the folks in those titles have no sworn status and/or individual arrest authority within those titles. There are no easy answers and not everyone is going to be able to meet certain criteria whether it be hours, actual duties, training or all three.
The Physical exam and PAT are by themselves, pretty basic. They are not requiring 40 and 55 year old veterans to go run 1.5 timed miles or meet Cooper standards for push ups, sit ups, etc......
Finally, most Mass Chiefs and rank and file officers see the extremely rare and dying aux departments as "hobby cops" and not worth focusing on in this battle. The beginning of the end was over two decades ago when the premier Quincy Auxiliary was exterminated overnight by the new Chief. He pioneered the dirty word "liability" when ignoring the cries of City administrators and the citizens to save the program. The SSPO's who are already FT, but not New Braintree grads,won't have much much to worry about except attending Bridge Academy, which they DO qualify to attend. Yes it's going to hurt some folks, and we may not agree with a lot of how it's being done, but it's the shit sandwich our great legislators passed.
 

·
Subscribing Member
Joined
·
4,376 Posts
I believe part time firefighters have to attend an academy that is the same amount of hours as the full time academy, firefighter 1 and 2. So if you carry a gun then you should have the same level l of training as a full timer , especially if you do the same job. That will not happen as many chiefs, all in western mass, complained and will probably get their way. You are correct that mptc decides on the curriculum but POST must ultimately approve it. That’s the final decision so we shall see what will happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Back Out in the Sticks
Joined
·
332 Posts
Seems like calling people who don’t posses police powers “police”, whether it be “special police” or “auxiliary police” seems to be exactly the sort of thing that this reform system should be seeking to eliminate. If you’re not a cop and don’t have cop powers, you shouldn’t be called “police”.

Down here where I work, we have reserves and auxiliary police, but they are all fully certified officers. Pretty much all of them are people who either retired from law enforcement or left for some other reason, but still stay on in a reserve capacity to make some side money working details and special events. Some departments also have non-sworn volunteers who work at special events or do “patrol” by driving around and calling in anything suspicious. However, they’re called something like “safety watch” or “community volunteers” NOT “police”.
I think it's appropriate to call unsworn auxiliary officers "police". Usually, though they're only doing traffic direction, but some would call that "policing" traffic. It's one thing to call that division of a PD "auxiliary police" and another for an auxiliary officer referring to himself as a cop. All the aux guys here in CT that I know never say they're police officers; they just say they do traffic work with the auxiliary police.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,274 Posts
Discussion Starter · #356 ·
Problem is you can't just shift focus away from title, when many of the folks in those titles have no sworn status and/or individual arrest authority within those titles. There are no easy answers and not everyone is going to be able to meet certain criteria whether it be hours, actual duties, training or all three.
The Physical exam and PAT are by themselves, pretty basic. They are not requiring 40 and 55 year old veterans to go run 1.5 timed miles or meet Cooper standards for push ups, sit ups, etc......
Finally, most Mass Chiefs and rank and file officers see the extremely rare and dying aux departments as "hobby cops" and not worth focusing on in this battle. The beginning of the end was over two decades ago when the premier Quincy Auxiliary was exterminated overnight by the new Chief. He pioneered the dirty word "liability" when ignoring the cries of City administrators and the citizens to save the program. The SSPO's who are already FT, but not New Braintree grads,won't have much much to worry about except attending Bridge Academy, which they DO qualify to attend. Yes it's going to hurt some folks, and we may not agree with a lot of how it's being done, but it's the shit sandwich our great legislators passed.
So I sincerely hope so, but my understanding was that if someone is working under SSPO waiver with the reserve academy and a degree that they will have to attend some sort of full time academy. That they cannot bridge?
 

·
G-Rap made me do it!
Joined
·
2,741 Posts
So I sincerely hope so, but my understanding was that if someone is working under SSPO waiver with the reserve academy and a degree that they will have to attend some sort of full time academy. That they cannot bridge?
If you have a degree and reserve academy you aren’t on a waiver. Temporary waiver is for if your enrolled in an MPTC/SSPO academy or enrolled in a college degree program, but haven’t yet finished.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
I think, therefore I'll never be promoted.
Joined
·
18,508 Posts
What's so unclear about all of this? It seems pretty clear to me that NOTHING is clear and probably won't be for a decade or two. It's like the big MERGE that happened at the state level in 1992, it was as smooth as sand paper for a long time and everyone got along and there were NO glitches beyond everything being screwed up. By 2020, it's all good?

Give it time and before you know it, Almost all of us will be retired and have no need to give a shit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RodneyFarva

·
Subscribing Member
Joined
·
4,376 Posts
It will be very clear this month because in October they have to start the bridge. They are mandated under the legislative act and have no choice


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Regarding the PAT test, I still think it’s unfair for older officers. the unfair point is for people who are 50 and above, who has at least over 15 years of experiences. If it’s that important for officers over 50 to pass the PAT test because they have to make sure they can do the physical aspect of the job, shouldn’t there be a PAT for FT certified officers who are also over 50 to do it? FT officers also graduated the academy 20-25 years ago.
 
341 - 360 of 400 Posts
Top