Massachusetts Cop Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
968 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This article was in the paper, I thought it may interest some due to some information regarding current layoff list, etc......

Police want money for overtime;
Union opposes grant match plan


TELEGRAM & GAZETTE (Massachusetts)
November 18, 2003 Tuesday, FINAL EDITION

- The local police union opposes the city's planned use of state community policing money to fund its match to a federal grant that will be used to hire 50 new police officers.
Instead, the union wants the community policing money used for overtime so more officers can be immediately deployed to neighborhoods where crime has been rising.

Union leaders believe the city can then use surplus money in the Police Department's salary budget to match the federal grant.

They contend there is more than $400,000 surplus in the police salary account. The city administration disagrees with that, contending that the salary account is on target for a year-end deficit of about $150,000.



Officer Richard P. Cipro, president of Local 378, International Brotherhood of Police Officers, said the union opposes using the state community policing money as the match to the federal grant because it could be more than a year before those 50 new officers join the Police Department.
Because the city will use a $3.75 million federal grant to hire new police officers, it is required by state law to first offer the positions to police officers who have been laid off in other communities throughout the state. There are 95 laid-off police officers on the state's re-employment list.

City Manager Thomas R. Hoover hopes to hire 50 police officers from that list and have them on board in March. But Officer Cipro said it is highly unlikely the city will be able to get 50 officers from the re-employment list to accept jobs here.

As a result, he said, a new recruit class would have to be planned to make up the difference, and it could be 14 months before the members of that class are selected, trained and finally put to work on the street.

''We can't afford to wait that long to meet the policing needs in some of our neighborhoods,'' Officer Cipro said in a telephone interview last night. ''There is a crying need for more police patrols in several areas like Main South, near the PIP (People In Peril) shelter, in the Piedmont area and even in Green Hill Park. People want these additional patrols and they should be provided now.

''Community policing grant money is available for us to increase patrols in those areas through overtime,'' he added. ''That is the only answer. But we won't be able to do that if the city manager is going to tie up the community policing money to help pay for these 50 new police officers. It could be months before we see some of them.''

Mr. Hoover said the cost of 50 new police officers starting in March is about $1.05 million for the balance of this fiscal year. The federal grant will pay for about $650,000 of that cost, and the city will contribute $400,000.

To help fund the city's match, Mr. Hoover said, he requested approval from the state Executive Office of Public Safety to use $300,000 of this year's community policing allocation for that purpose. He said the state approved that request.

Mr. Hoover said the balance of the state community policing money for this year will be used for foot patrols in the Vernon Hill and Green Island neighborhoods, among other things.

Officer Cipro has sent a letter to the City Council outlining his union's opposition to the city manager's plan, which will go before the council at its meeting tonight.

Officer Anthony M. Petrone, vice president of Local 378, said he cannot understand how the city administration projects the police salary account will end up with a $150,000 deficit this fiscal year.

Since the start of the fiscal year, he said, there have been 17 retirements and four other officers have been on military leave.

''What happened to the savings from these retirements and the four officers on military leave?'' Office Petrone asked. ''We have met with the city administration and asked that question, but we feel it has not been properly answered in our opinion. How can our analysis and the city administration's projection be so far off?''

In a previous report, John P. Pranckevicius, city budget director, said when the police budget was put together for this year, it already took into account savings from four expected retirements and one full-year military leave.

In addition, he said, four civilian clerks who were laid off this year have been recalled.
 

·
Chapter 90 Enforcer
Joined
·
3,299 Posts
Interesting... "We don't want more cops, we want more OT"... That's the answer? unbelieveable

When something bad happens the union will then blame lack of staffing by the Administration.
 

·
Chapter 90 Enforcer
Joined
·
3,299 Posts
MT1, I agree that it would be nice to have experienced Officers on the streets now rather than rookies 12 mos later. But it will only get worse if they don't hire more bodies, and we all know the OT sucks up the budget quick and would not make an ideal long term solution.
 

·
Subscribing Member
Joined
·
292 Posts
Hm. Do you think the people in these crime ridden areas would rather see experienced officers on the street NOW or rookies a year from now? Something bad is already happening and it's not the Union's fault.
Well, my question is what happens when the 'experienced' officers turn down the overtime? It happens. Then there is no one left to patrol the streets. Maybe the answer is temporary overtime until a class can be formed and new recruits put on the street. Just my 2cents.
 

·
Chapter 90 Enforcer
Joined
·
3,299 Posts
Exactly ROBO... OT is not a solution, just a tempororay relief. Ignoring the need to put on 50 more will just create more problems. In some situations like this, it sounds like greed on behalf of the union. Do they really think that would last for years? They've got to be joking.... We all know that OT sucks up the budget and it doesn't take long until the OT starts getting turned down.
 

·
Chapter 90 Enforcer
Joined
·
3,299 Posts
My angle is simple...

If the money is sucked up to budget the OT, how will they pay for 50 new Officers?

My point about the Sheriffs in Brimfield was simply that they would be better than what they had, which was nothing. Of course I rather that ALL of the previous PO's have gotten their jobs back...but at least 5 out of 9 got their jobs back.
 

·
screw you...
Joined
·
2,692 Posts
I'm on the job for Worcester and can give you my opinions and experiences. I'm definitely not all knowing and won't pretend to be because I can't bear to listen to either my "union" or Hoover too long because they both make me want to draw my weapon.....

OT to quick fix is needed right now. We need more guys on the street, now.. The savages are restless and they know we're down guys. We definitely have enough guys to fill the OT slots. But would the OT go to filling empty routes (safety issues) or to the problem areas?

Vacant slots aren't being filled because the city doesn't have the money... Wait for it... Wait for it.... Wait for it..... Bwaaa hahahah...... Just like the city didn't have the money when they laid off 20 cops.. Bullshit, they had it, Hoover laid them off to save face.... They hired them back with the clerks when a grant magically appeared after a congressman "stood up for us".......

COPS grant is being used for a recruit class. The only thing with that is the grant only pays for little more than half, and the city has to kick in the other half. Then after a year the city picks up the rest... More lay offs because the city always seems to have a deficit??

Where's the saved money going?? I can tell you where it's not... Other than that maybe Hoover can enlighten us all. I'd welcome an audit on the city books......

Damn where was I? All this talk of the city's bull got me ranting.. Did I answer any questions? OT for guys on the street right now? Damn right.. Save the money for a class of 50? Maybe 20 with the rest of the money toward OT.. After a year or so if the books ever get balanced put another 20 or so on...
 

·
Chapter 90 Enforcer
Joined
·
3,299 Posts
Happily non-union... I've heard too many nightmare stories with dept. unions, I'm not really looking forward to the day I have to be part of one. I currently work for 2 Campus Dept's, both non-union. I worked as a Reserve PO before and was not subject to the union..thank god... they were like a bunch of sissy's (not all, just the union Prez and whatnot)... Christ, some guys would file a grievance if you put the toilet paper roll on backwards.

Deuce, Be safe man!! Hope you guys get what you need!
 

·
screw you...
Joined
·
2,692 Posts
I often wonder more times than not what my dues are going to and what my union is doing for us. I think the union is a necessary evil though. Otherwise the city would REALLY screw us. We consistently go 1 to 2 years w/o a contract. Each negotiation the city wants to take EVERYTHING we've bargained for in the past. They want us to take the worst health insurance and pay 90% of it. Arbitrators are needed every time. In the dept, hell, favoritism and nepotism is bad enough.... Unfortunately grievences are necessary due to the amount of BF'ing.....
I can't imagine what kind of due process we'd have if someone pissed in one of our "leaders" Cheerios... But a union only has teeth when it's members have solidarity. The city knows it can screw w/ the union because we lack the afore mentioned.... More members than not are in it for themselves (payjobs) and it's just a paycheck.....
 

·
Chapter 90 Enforcer
Joined
·
3,299 Posts
Duece,

Even with my less than enthusiastic desire for a union, I agree with you. The town or city would screw you even more. And yes, its only as strong as its members. But I guess I have often seen too many sissy's take advantage of it... filing grievances for any little stupid thing. But ultimately the town/city has the upper hand anyway. PO's can't walk off the job, and the downs can continue to say no over and over... I guess the "relationship" is more the key than the Unions "teeth".

But good point Deuce
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
HAPPILY NON-UNION

RPD931 said:
Happily non-union... I've heard too many nightmare stories with dept. unions, I'm not really looking forward to the day I have to be part of one. I currently work for 2 Campus Dept's, both non-union. I worked as a Reserve PO before and was not subject to the union..thank god... they were like a bunch of sissy's (not all, just the union Prez and whatnot)... Christ, some guys would file a grievance if you put the toilet paper roll on backwards.

Deuce, Be safe man!! Hope you guys get what you need!
HAPPLIY NON-UNION, YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE NO CLUE AS TO WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT. LETS SEE HOW HAPPY YOU ARE THE DAY THE CHIEFS OF YOUR CC POLICE DEPARTMENTS DECIDES THAT FOR ONE REASON OR AN OTHER THAT YOUR NOT THEIR FAVORITE PO ANY MORE, SEE YOU ON LAST HALFS. THOSE LAYOFFS THAT ARE COMING DOWN, NOT GOING TO EFFECT ANY OF HIS HIRES, HERE IS YOUR PINK SLIP. BUT I HAVE TIME ON THE JOB, SO WHAT! THAT'S THAT? NO UNION! WE DON'T CARE. AND I'LL BET IT IS JUST SO EASY TO GET A FAIR INCREASE IN YOUR WAGES WITHOUT THAT WHINING UNION PRES TO DEMAND MORE. NO ONE EVER SAID THE UNIONS WILL SOLVE ALL OUR PROBLEMS, BUT THEY SURE MAKE WORKING ONE HELL OF A LOT EASIER, AND HARDER FOR THOSE WHO CHOOSE TO SCREW US. YOU WILL NO DOUBT BENIFIT GREATLY FROM ANY UNION YOU HAVE THE PRIVILEDGE OF JOINING, REGUARDLESS OF HOW SMALL IT IS. AND AS FOR THE TIOLET PAPER BEING PLACED ON BACKWARDS, IF THERE WERE NO UNION TO OPPOSE THE IMPROPER POSITIONING OF THE ROLL, WHAT'S TO SAY THEY WOULD GIVE YOU ANY PAPER AT ALL. BUT THAN AGAIN, WHAT WOULD YOU KNOW ABOUT IT.

FROM THE FORMER MEMBER OF AN E BOARD
PROUD TO BE UNION
 

·
Chapter 90 Enforcer
Joined
·
3,299 Posts
Not on a CC PD... Private - more money there. Anyway I think Deuce put it in perspective correctly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Well said jtsmh. Anyone who has any time on the job (20 years for me) knows that union protection is an absoulute must. Dealing with uninformed selectmen and town administrators require us to fight with all the resources that we can muster. We are currently in negotiations, or I should say, mediation. The town feels that they were hoodwinked into agreeing to the 4&2 schedule during the last contract and of course now want to take it away. Well, it ain't gonna happen. Can you imagine if we didn't have a union? I'd have Mondays and Tuesdays off and the town would tell me I should be happy to have a job. It's a constant battle and thank god we've got what little protection we have...thanks to our union.
 

·
Subscribing Member
Joined
·
308 Posts
I feel that a union offers some excellent protections to its members. The dept I work full time for is union. The dept I work part time for is not union. I have gained an interesting perspective by watching how things unfold between the two. Every Union has their problems and alot of times people do not get along or see eye to eye on certain things. The one thing I have observed however is a Muncipality whether it be a city town authority or state agency, or state college if there was no union Everything would be done at the whim of the administration. Scheduling, Wages, Assignments, and Discipline. Officer A has 20 years on the job and does something the boss doesnt like and he finds himself on a different shift with the worst days off the worst assignment and a 30 day suspension. A union prevents most of that from happening and can be given an impartial place to air a grievance if needed.
 

·
Seekonk Detective
Joined
·
41 Posts
hmm union, can you say labor laws for the jobs without unions, they must show cause to do anything to you. unions are for those who dont want to do their jobs and run and hide behind the unions, nonsense. no-one wants to do anymore than they are PAID to do or they cry to the union, please. Take pride in what you do and you dont need protection from a union. They were good but now I dont see what any of them do for us. We pay dues and see nothing, go 2yrs with no contract then after 2yrs you get 2,3,1 great. Salary should be based on performance like in the real world and raises given accordingly. Hey then you would get 2 percent every year and no fight. Ha dont mind me just needed to vent. Rock on Unions!!!!!! :shock:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
I am on the lay off list and I received a card today from Worcester Police. They are looking to hire 50 temporary full time police officers. I do not know if these temporary positions would turn into permenant or not. The list must be signed on or before December 10.
 

·
Subscribing Member
Joined
·
4,316 Posts
hmm union, can you say labor laws for the jobs without unions, they must show cause to do anything to you
Easton, you have no clue in what you are talking about. No union means you are an at will employee and yes they can do whatever they want. Unions are very important because it keeps the balance of power and keeps everyone in chekc, management and staff. Take your head out of your ass and if you don't like unions, go work at McDonalds or Wal-Mart. :twisted:
 

·
Subscribing Member
Joined
·
233 Posts
hmm union, can you say labor laws for the jobs without unions, they must show cause to do anything to you. unions are for those who dont want to do their jobs and run and hide behind the unions, nonsense.
I don't have 35 years on my job but I know guys who do. You might want to ask someone like that what it was like to have to live in the barracks, work 108 hours a week (no OT), and get paid sh*t. That's if you got paid. If the Commonwealth was running a little short, they might just issue you a promissory note (an IOU) and tell you to suck it up. A senior Trooper in the 1970s could qualify for food stamps.

And oh yeah, transfers. In the middle of the night, you could get launched out to Nantucket. Kinda tough if you live in North Adams. In fact in the 1950s, just to make sure nobody was getting too comfortable, all of 'A' Troop was transferred to 'B' Troop and vice versa.

Take pride in what you do and you dont need protection from a union. They were good but now I dont see what any of them do for us.
The men of the MSP took pride in what they did then, just as the men and women of the MSP take pride in their careers today. By the same token, the Commonwealth took advantage of the work ethic of Troopers then as it actively attempts to today. Feel free to ask any SPAM rep who handles bargaining or grievances. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Salary should be based on performance like in the real world and raises given accordingly. Hey then you would get 2 percent every year and no fight.
Easton, I guess you're not aware that average rate of inflation (which translates to the increase in your cost of living) is 3 percent. If you'd enjoy the steady downward spiral into poverty, join some non-union outfit. I don't intend this post as a slam, but you may want to investigate the union vs. non-union issue a little further. :roll:
 

·
Chapter 90 Enforcer
Joined
·
3,299 Posts
Dane,

This is no longer the 50's or 70's. And Easton is right, they can't terminate you without cause. If they have a legit reason to can you without a union, they can still can you with a union. Example, last year Natick PD fired an Officer due to poor performance. That dept is union and Civil Service... he still got canned. Excellent!

Yes, the Troopers had (still have) pride when they got their Troops "swapped". Because they were dedicated cops. You are probably dedicated too. But think of the people who have the job simply for money and retirement - the ones who hide behind the union... who really don't wanna do anything... they dodge calls... hide all night... should they be protected? Should they get the same raise we do? I don't think so.

I also agree with (Easton on) the pay increase, it should be on performance not "across the board". Think about it, how many times to you see a co-worker do nothing or try to dodge calls? And he deserves a pay raise?! I don't think so. I find it an insult that they give guys a raise the same as me when they don't earn it. And a 2 or 3% raise each year is better than going without one for 2 or 3 years...

Don't get me wrong, I see the point of the union. There are jerks in the brass that would try to screw someone over. But Easton states the same point I stated, some guys try to hide behind the union, you know, the slackers... or some complain about every little thing.

But what strength does a union really have? They can't strike. And most of the time they end up having to accept what the City/Town can "afford". The union says we want X,Y,& Z.... the town says we will only give X... the union "rejects" the proposal... whoopie, you still have to work.

The use of a union? Put your dues together and hope the union retains a good Lawyer.

Don't piss the Brass off too much and you'll be fine.

Simply my opinon. I'm know everyone has a different feeling about things.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top