Massachusetts Cop Forum banner
481 - 500 of 522 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts
So a full time grad, a bridge grad, is equal to or greater than an SSPO for hiring status?
Yes, both will be considered full-time academy trained. That doesn’t change individual department requirements; for instance, a department can still specify they will only hire full-time academy graduates, and the Boston PD can still require that you have to go through THEIR academy only.

Thank you. So let’s say a reserve officer who went through bridge academy and was full time certified after. He/she gets hired by a campus police department, will he/she be able to get a SSPO license?
Yes, that satisfies the base training requirements for appointment as a SSPO, but as stated, individual departments can still specify their own standards.

For instance, some college/university departments in Boston (BU and BC for 2 examples) require the full-time municipal academy, they won’t accept SSPO or the bridge. If they hire you, you have to go through and graduate the full-time municipal academy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Yes, both will be considered full-time academy trained. That doesn’t change individual department requirements; for instance, a department can still specify they will only hire full-time academy graduates, and the Boston PD can still require that you have to go through THEIR academy only.


Yes, that satisfies the base training requirements for appointment as a SSPO, but as stated, individual departments can still specify their own standards.

For instance, some college/university departments in Boston (BU and BC for 2 examples) require the full-time municipal academy, they won’t accept SSPO or the bridge. If they hire you, you have to go through and graduate the full-time
Yes, both will be considered full-time academy trained. That doesn’t change individual department requirements; for instance, a department can still specify they will only hire full-time academy graduates, and the Boston PD can still require that you have to go through THEIR academy only.


Yes, that satisfies the base training requirements for appointment as a SSPO, but as stated, individual departments can still specify their own standards.

For instance, some college/university departments in Boston (BU and BC for 2 examples) require the full-time municipal academy, they won’t accept SSPO or the bridge. If they hire you, you have to go through and graduate the full-time municipal academy.

this is the problem with Massachusetts. It all should be the same regardless…
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts
this is the problem with Massachusetts. It all should be the same regardless…
Individual departments should be able to have whatever hiring standards they deem appropriate. The state standards are 21+, a GED, a driver’s license, and no felony/drug/DV convictions. However, many departments require a totally spotless record (no criminal record whatsoever, even misdemeanor charges), a college degree, etc.

The same thing should hold true for training requirements. Departments that have always required the FT municipal academy now have no headaches with the bridge academy, unlike departments that took the hodgepodge route of reserve academy plus Associate’s degree, etc. The FT academy checks all the boxes.

If you want the job bad enough, you’ll jump through whatever hoops are put in front of you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,358 Posts
Discussion Starter · #485 ·
This hiring standards are different from training standards. Though I agree some agencies will still have their own spin on things, it seems very inefficient to do it that way.

If one has attended and graduated the most recent R/I Academy (400 ish hours), and completed the bridge academy (200 ish hours) and applies to “Mayberry PD” but “Mayberry PD” wants a full time MPTC ROC academy…. You’re now sending an officer through another 700 ish hours of the same training. Now 1300 ish hours of the same EXACT training.

Before anyone makes the MSP argument of having to do their academy after working Full time with an MPTC academy, it’s a bit different….

MPTC ran the reserve academy. Put on this bridge academy. And also runs the full time ROC’s. It’s all one in the same in terms of academics and knowledge. The tests are all the same. The print outs are all the same. The power points are all the same. So if MPTC says you’re all on the same playing field now. What sense does it make for a town to send a Bridge guy back to the FT academy…logistically speaking…?

Mind you the Bridge graduate must have 2400 hours road time, so they aren’t exactly coming to you with zero experience….

Just seems silly for a town to mandate a full time ROC for someone the state (MPTC) is saying does not need to attend to work FT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
492 Posts
This hiring standards are different from training standards. Though I agree some agencies will still have their own spin on things, it seems very inefficient to do it that way.

If one has attended and graduated the most recent R/I Academy (400 ish hours), and completed the bridge academy (200 ish hours) and applies to “Mayberry PD” but “Mayberry PD” wants a full time MPTC ROC academy…. You’re now sending an officer through another 700 ish hours of the same training. Now 1300 ish hours of the same EXACT training.

Before anyone makes the MSP argument of having to do their academy after working Full time with an MPTC academy, it’s a bit different….

MPTC ran the reserve academy. Put on this bridge academy. And also runs the full time ROC’s. It’s all one in the same in terms of academics and knowledge. The tests are all the same. The print outs are all the same. The power points are all the same. So if MPTC says you’re all on the same playing field now. What sense does it make for a town to send a Bridge guy back to the FT academy…logistically speaking…?

Mind you the Bridge graduate must have 2400 hours road time, so they aren’t exactly coming to you with zero experience….

Just seems silly for a town to mandate a full time ROC for someone the state (MPTC) is saying does not need to attend to work FT.
Agreed 100%
There is still so much rumor and in-fighting still as well. Capt. Marc Spigel has hired a PR Firm to advocate "fighting" to save the "3000" volunteer and reserve officers in this state from the MPTC. They have put out there that the MPTC is "discriminating" and therefore eliminating all reserve officers as part of what the reform program is about. If that were true why would we even have a bridge program in the first place? Seems these guys are trying to save a few auxiliary departments by lumping them in with actual sworn reserves.

 

·
MassCops Member
Joined
·
92 Posts
Agreed 100%
There is still so much rumor and in-fighting still as well. Capt. Marc Spigel has hired a PA Firm to advocate "fighting" to save the "3000" volunteer and reserve officers in this state from the MPTC. They have put out there that the MPTC is "discriminating" and therefore eliminating all reserve officers as part of what the reform program is about. If that were true why would we even have a bridge program in the first place? Seems these guys are trying to save a few auxiliary departments by lumping them in with actual sworn reserves.
This is not just about auxiliary officers. It’s about making the training not accessible to many reserve trained officers, and by attaching other hurdles.

The Act says additional training, nothing else… No issues with the Bridge.

Not sure why you have issues with auxiliaries who have taken the same training, and have kept up with in-service.

For the record, I’m also a sworn reserve - Same training - don’t understand why you see the need to differentiate. Happy to connect off-line to talk it through.

Here is an article that’s not about auxiliary officers - but “actual sworn reserves” in your words. The issues are the same! Let’s stick together on this…




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
492 Posts
This is not just about auxiliary officers. It’s about making the training not accessible to many reserve trained officers, and by attaching other hurdles.

The Act says additional training, nothing else… No issues with the Bridge.

Not sure why you have issues with auxiliaries who have taken the same training, and have kept up with in-service.

For the record, I’m also a sworn reserve - Same training - don’t understand why you see the need to differentiate. Happy to connect off-line to talk it through.

Here is an article that’s not about auxiliary officers - but “actual sworn reserves” in your words. The issues are the same! Let’s stick together on this…




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I don't personally have issues with auxiliaries, but MPTC say's they can not/will not support or train auxiliary volunteers going forward. They can only certify sworn police officers who perform L.E. functions. You heard Chief Hicks and others explain this. Your also a sworn reserve with the same training and" don't see the need to differentiate." Please sir, you know there several reasons, both by statute and in practice that makes auxiliary volunteers quite different. Right now there are officers attending the Bridge Academy at night in Boylston for DT. There are evenings scheduled at Reading and another location to take knowledge tests. Yes it's hard for many, but as Roy Fehler above pointed out, "if you want the job bad enough, you'll jump through whatever hoops are put in front of you." As for "sticking together" there is no need to talk it through off-line. Let's be transparent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts
This hiring standards are different from training standards. Though I agree some agencies will still have their own spin on things, it seems very inefficient to do it that way.

If one has attended and graduated the most recent R/I Academy (400 ish hours), and completed the bridge academy (200 ish hours) and applies to “Mayberry PD” but “Mayberry PD” wants a full time MPTC ROC academy…. You’re now sending an officer through another 700 ish hours of the same training. Now 1300 ish hours of the same EXACT training.

Before anyone makes the MSP argument of having to do their academy after working Full time with an MPTC academy, it’s a bit different….

MPTC ran the reserve academy. Put on this bridge academy. And also runs the full time ROC’s. It’s all one in the same in terms of academics and knowledge. The tests are all the same. The print outs are all the same. The power points are all the same. So if MPTC says you’re all on the same playing field now. What sense does it make for a town to send a Bridge guy back to the FT academy…logistically speaking…?

Mind you the Bridge graduate must have 2400 hours road time, so they aren’t exactly coming to you with zero experience….

Just seems silly for a town to mandate a full time ROC for someone the state (MPTC) is saying does not need to attend to work FT.
As I said, individual departments can do whatever they want, it’s their time and money to waste. If you don’t like it, then don’t apply to that department.

More than once, someone who graduated from the Boston Police Academy for a different department has been hired by Boston PD, and they have to go through the Boston Academy all over again, with a different patch on their sleeve.

Again, if someone isn’t willing to do that, then don’t apply to Boston PD. If you want the job bad enough, then you’ll play the game and jump through the hoops.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,358 Posts
Discussion Starter · #490 ·
That’s kind of the perfect example of how inefficient this state can be.

Im not debating anyones desire or drive to put themselves through the repetitive nonsense of multiple academies, of the exact same training... I’m pointing out that part of the police reform was more or less suppose to create a level playing field in terms of training requirements, and agencies are still playing the games.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts
That’s kind of the perfect example of how inefficient this state can be.

Im not debating anyones desire or drive to put themselves through the repetitive nonsense of multiple academies, of the exact same training... I’m pointing out that part of the police reform was more or less suppose to create a level playing field in terms of training requirements, and agencies are still playing the games.
It created a base level of training/certification, not a level playing field for everyone. It’s very much how a state can grant more personal rights than granted by the US Constitution, but not less. For example, a state cannot institute death penalty by torture, but theoretically could decriminalize pretty much everything. We’ve seen that with marijuana; still illegal under Federal law, decriminalized and even totally legalized by many states.

Same thing with training; agencies are free to require more training than what POST mandates, but not less. If Boston PD wants to make everyone they hire go through their academy with their patch on the khakis, even if they just finished the Boston Academy with a different patch, that’s absolutely their right. It’s their time and money.

I think what’s in play here is that many people who had what I call the “hodgepodge” of training (reserve academy plus Associate’s degree) thought they could skate through the Bridge Academy, and that was their Willie Wonka Golden Ticket. Not so, many departments will still require their own training standards that are in addition to base POST certification. I know of at least one major Boston campus PD that will not accept anything but the full municipal academy. No SSPO, no Bridge, nothing but the full academy.

As I said, if anyone wants the job bad enough, they’ll jump through the hoops.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,358 Posts
Discussion Starter · #492 · (Edited)
1 job, 1 standard. Bottom line. Let each agency tack on additional certs or specialized trainings all they want. That’s fine. And to each their own.

Florida LE all goes through the same. Campus, State, City, County, Fish and Game. All the same training. All. The. Same. Training.

Agencies can mandate their own training on top of the LE academy. For instance Hillsboro County has some sort of pre academy cert to get their guys in line with the way they do things before sending them off to the regional academy. Fish and Game obviously has their own training outside of the basic LE.

Makes way more sense. I think Mass., is getting there, minus the examples Roy is citing about Boston and repeating the exact same academy. Those will eventually fade away.

“If anyone wants the job bad enough, they’ll jump through hoops.”

My man, no one wants these jobs anymore. That in and of itself is yet another problem this country is facing.
 

·
Back Out in the Sticks
Joined
·
346 Posts
Individual departments should be able to have whatever hiring standards they deem appropriate. The state standards are 21+, a GED, a driver’s license, and no felony/drug/DV convictions. However, many departments require a totally spotless record (no criminal record whatsoever, even misdemeanor charges), a college degree, etc.
Some departments want an almost total sinless life. Tried pot once, even as a teenager? Disqualified. Had a beer underage? Disqualified. Hell, one PD in PA I know of permanently disqualifies anybody who has ever been fired, or even laid off, from a job at any time on their life. I know another that won't hire anybody who has ever been turned down for a job at another police department for any reason. That's their prerogative I suppose, but then they turn around bitch that they can't fill any of their openings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts
1 job, 1 standard. Bottom line. Let each agency can tack on additional certs or specialized trainings all they want. That’s fine. And to each their own.

Florida LE all goes through the same. Campus, State, City, County, Fish and Game. All the same training. All. The. Same. Training.

Agencies can mandate their own training on top of the LE academy. For instance Hillsboro County has some sort of pre academy cert to get their guys in line with the way they do things before sending them off to the regional academy. Fish and Game obviously has their own training outside of the basic LE.

Makes way more sense. I think Mass., is getting there, minus the examples Roy is citing about Boston and repeating the exact same academy. Those will eventually fade away.

“If anyone wants the job bad enough, they’ll jump through hoops.”

My man, no one wants these jobs anymore. That in and of itself is yet another problem this country is facing.
I’ve been hearing that “these things will fade away” for over 30 years, yet here we are. Wishful thinking by those looking for shortcuts.

Police hiring is cyclical. Back in the 60’s & 70’s, everyone hated the police, then by the 1980’s it became a VERY desired career. Then, the dot.com boom hit, and cops were suckers for doing a dangerous job for relative peanuts. Then when the market crashed, everyone wanted to be a cop again.

After George Floyd and the reform/defund efforts, it’s again on the downswing. As soon as the fakedemic and associated government handouts/excuses stop, it will again be a desired career. I’ve seen the cycle repeat too many times to believe otherwise.

If I’ve learned anything in my time on Earth, it’s that shortcuts will eventually bite you in the ass, unless you’re content with mediocrity. I’ve lost count of how many people I’ve seen who want to be a (insert department here) cop, but aren’t willing to do whatever it takes to actually be one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts
Some departments want an almost total sinless life. Tried pot once, even as a teenager? Disqualified. Had a beer underage? Disqualified. Hell, one PD in PA I know of permanently disqualifies anybody who has ever been fired, or even laid off, from a job at any time on their life. I know another that won't hire anybody who has ever been turned down for a job at another police department for any reason. That's their prerogative I suppose, but then they turn around bitch that they can't fill any of their openings.
Then let them bitch. As you said, their prerogative.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,358 Posts
Discussion Starter · #496 · (Edited)
Again individual departmental hiring standards vs state certified training standards.

My point is that POST being established should more or less negate the repetitive need to have the same academies teaching the same things, and the need to graduate from more than one of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts
Again individual departmental hiring standards vs state certified training standards.

My point is that POST should more or less negate the repetitive need to have the same academies teaching the same things, and the need to graduate from more than one of them.
What you’re proposing is for police departments to relinquish their hiring standards, surrender them to the state, which I suspect (tell me I’m wrong if I am) is based in your own inadequate training to satisfy many police departments in Massachusetts, and you’re looking for a shortcut. Your passion for shortcuts leads to no other logical conclusion.

As I’ve stated ad nauseum, there is absolutely nothing preventing police departments in Massachusetts from accepting the bare minimum of POST standards. If any police department wants to require a higher standard than that, then that’s no one’s damn business, except for those departments and those for whom they have to answer (voters, etc.).

Once AGAIN….if you or anyone else doesn’t like it, then seek employment elsewhere. No one will mourn your absence, I’ll guarantee that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,358 Posts
Discussion Starter · #498 · (Edited)
Dude - relax. I haven’t once even uttered the word short cut …. Not sure what your malfunction is?

You’re fixated on departments having the ability to mandate their own training requirements to be employed for said department. MSP and agencies like Boston may in-fact have their own academy. It is what it is.

What I’m saying (not proposing, as it’s already being established) is that POST has already established that MPTC ROC, SSPO and Bridge academy are now considered equivalent in the eyes of POST and state training requirements.

Officers will need to be POST certified to be eligible for hire. The academy they attended (as it’s all one level of training now) will have little bearing on whether they are qualified or capable of doing the job as it’s all under one umbrella now of POST.

Im not even talking about additional hiring standards of education, military, experience, etc….whatever the agency requires. I agree with you on that.

I simply said it’s inefficient (using your own example of a recruit attending the Boston academy for another agency and then being required to attend the exact same academy with a different patcg On your arm) for agencies to do that. Period.

You made your point “want the job, jump through hoops, repeat training” yadda yadda. I got it. Cool.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Sorry to interrupt the discussion… but does anyone know what’s the next step after completing bridge? I heard we have to go through a board interview and an extensive background check of all the places you have worked before? Has anyone heard the same thing or heard otherwise?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,358 Posts
Discussion Starter · #500 ·
A board interview for…? MPTC / POST?

Im sure there will be some sort of vetting process to complete the FT certification… probably more to do with your employer submitting all applicable records and hours of employment?

Where are you hearing this from?
 
481 - 500 of 522 Posts
Top