Report: LA police officers who alleged ticket quota system win $2M judgment
04-13-11, 11:53 AM
#46
Changes to what?
As I said, I don't disagree that he shouldn't have been pulled over if the officer didn't have the equipment to test the tints. I wasn't there so I can't offer an opinion any more than that. If it's not the first time he's had his tint checked then he needs to ask himself if it was worth it.
04-13-11, 12:30 PM
#47
Alot of you guys are missing the point....
this case has been on going for a few years now and being in the ambulance industry here in Los Angeles i've followed this case pretty closely. TICKET QUOTAS ARE AGAINST THE LAW!!!!....it cannot be instructed, demanded, or pressured for an LA police officer to meet a quota. In LA it specifically states that quotas are a direct violation of the vehicle code. It has nothing to do with right and wrong. Or even how serious the offense is. Bottom line, you cannot be instructed by your commanding officers to write a certain number of tickets per day. Again, this is illegal!!! Superior officers cannot instruct other officers to go against government regulated vehicle codes and break state law. To make matters worse. Your performance review is not based on the number of tickets recorded in your file. Again, this is breaking state law.
When Nancy Lauer took over in 2006 there was this hush hush policy that officers needed to wite a certain # of tickets per day in order to get good performance reviews or else be threatened with reassignment and even worse harrassment from superior officers. She refered to quotas as "goals." Which is indirectly implying that you must write a certain number of tickets to reach this "goal." These officers (Chan and Benioff) were often given poor performance reviews because of the number of tickets they issued and the low number of vehicles they impounded (also illegal under state law.)
I keep hearing this "if you dont do anything wrong they cant write you a ticket", or "why cant they be asked to do their job to the best of their abilities?".....but that is not what this case is about. This case is about these 2 officers who were given instruction by their superiors to do something illegal (meet a quota/goal) and the repercussions (poor reviews, harrassment) of not following orders.
this case has been on going for a few years now and being in the ambulance industry here in Los Angeles i've followed this case pretty closely. TICKET QUOTAS ARE AGAINST THE LAW!!!!....it cannot be instructed, demanded, or pressured for an LA police officer to meet a quota. In LA it specifically states that quotas are a direct violation of the vehicle code. It has nothing to do with right and wrong. Or even how serious the offense is. Bottom line, you cannot be instructed by your commanding officers to write a certain number of tickets per day. Again, this is illegal!!! Superior officers cannot instruct other officers to go against government regulated vehicle codes and break state law. To make matters worse. Your performance review is not based on the number of tickets recorded in your file. Again, this is breaking state law.
When Nancy Lauer took over in 2006 there was this hush hush policy that officers needed to wite a certain # of tickets per day in order to get good performance reviews or else be threatened with reassignment and even worse harrassment from superior officers. She refered to quotas as "goals." Which is indirectly implying that you must write a certain number of tickets to reach this "goal." These officers (Chan and Benioff) were often given poor performance reviews because of the number of tickets they issued and the low number of vehicles they impounded (also illegal under state law.)
I keep hearing this "if you dont do anything wrong they cant write you a ticket", or "why cant they be asked to do their job to the best of their abilities?".....but that is not what this case is about. This case is about these 2 officers who were given instruction by their superiors to do something illegal (meet a quota/goal) and the repercussions (poor reviews, harrassment) of not following orders.
Last edited by rpx13; 04-13-11 at 12:50 PM.
04-13-11, 12:57 PM
#48
Alot of you guys are missing the point....this case has been on going for a few years now and being in the ambulance industry here in Los Angeles i've followed this case pretty closely. TICKET QUOTAS ARE AGAINST THE LAW!!!!....it cannot be instructed, demanded, or pressured for an LA police officer to meet a quota. In LA it specifically states that quotas are a direct violation of the vehicle code. It has nothing to do with right and wrong. You cannot be instructed by your commanding officers to write a certain number of tickets per day. Again, this is illegal! Commanding officers cannot instruct officers to break state law. To make matters worse. Your performance review is not based on the number of tickets recorded in your file. Again, this is breaking state law. When Nancy Lauer took over in 2006 there was this hush hush policy that officers needed to wite a certain # of tickets per day in order to get good performance reviews or else be threatened with reassignment and even worse harrassment from superior officers. She refered to quotas as "goals." Which is indirectly implying that you must write a certain number of tickets to reach this "goal." These officers (Chan and Benioff) were often given poor performance reviews because of the number of tickets they issued and the number of vehicles they impounded (also illegal under state law).....I keep hearing this "if you dont do anything wrong they cant write you a ticket", or "why cant they be asked to do their job?".....but that is not what this case is about. This case is about these 2 officers who were given instruction by their superiors to do something illegal (meet a quota/goal) and the repercussions (poor reviews, harrassment) of not following orders.
Back to the quota issue:
A beat cops job is to do what? Make arrests and cite violators of the law. Simply put that is the crux of their job. So how do you evaluate one beat cop from another if you don't judge them on how they perform their job? In NY they don't use the word 'quota'; they use performance goals but what is the difference?
What makes for a better officer? The cop who sits in his car using his computer to watch **** or pulls over women just so he can get their number. Or cop #2 who is out there making LEGIT (this is the key word) arrests and issuing LEGIT tickets?
Cop #2 is out there just doing his job, nothing illegal, no harrassment, not stopping any Lexus' at all but still has 5 arrests and 25 tickets for the month. You as a dept (after review) find this to be what you believe all officers should be doing on their shifts and set minimum performance goals for all officers going forward.
Where is the negative side to any of this?
Yes bad cops may cheat to accomplish these goals but the effort needs to be made into putting a system into place that gets rid of those cops (eliminating the PBA would be a start) not the system used to evaluate them.
I'd really like to see a poll of anyone on CL who has gotten pulled over for doing absolutely nothing wrong and given a bogus ticket (Bogus meaning, you got a tint ticket and have clear windows). It just doesn't happen as much as everyone would like to fantasize about.
04-13-11, 01:03 PM
#49
Lexus Fanatic
The issue is quotas in this thread, not blah, blah and blah (yes I know it's the internet and some want to pontificate on unrelated topics and spread hearsay, no stopping that). I'm against quotas and I'm glad the law supports that position. I do realize and acknowledge that others have a different opinion on this topic.
Thanks rpx13 for bringing facts related directly to the case as presented in article originally.
Thanks rpx13 for bringing facts related directly to the case as presented in article originally.
04-13-11, 01:05 PM
#50
Not disagreeing with you, if the cop didn't have the equipment to perform the check, then he should have left him alone. But that has nothing to do with quotas. If it did, the officer would have found a way to write a ticket. It actually goes against the case of quotas.
Really, please explain exactly how an officer makes money for the city. That's a myth and has no factual basis that people keep spreading for their own agenda. The money from tickets rarely (IF EVER) stays within their own jurisdiction so why would the officer care about the money aspect? It's not like they get a bonus of whatever revenue is produced.
Really, please explain exactly how an officer makes money for the city. That's a myth and has no factual basis that people keep spreading for their own agenda. The money from tickets rarely (IF EVER) stays within their own jurisdiction so why would the officer care about the money aspect? It's not like they get a bonus of whatever revenue is produced.
Although the fines didn't go directly to NYPD, these incomes played a important role on approving budget for NYPD. Another reason resulting in layoff on other dept such as FDNY.
I don't wish to see layoff on both NYPD or FDNY. Just hope they can be more reasonable when giving out ticket.
Last edited by grabber2; 04-13-11 at 01:11 PM.
04-13-11, 01:13 PM
#51
In Los Angeles, differentiating a good police officer from a bad one is not based on the number of tickets he or she issues. There is no minimum and no maximum. Cops aren't salesmen. Arrests, seizures, convictions have a much larger impact on an officers performance then does issuing tickets. Believe it or not, when u arrest and convict a person it actually costs the state more money, but it removes a bad element from the street. LESS CRIME!!! To make up for the cost of arresting and convicting a person, money has to be made somewhere, and the easiest thing superior officers can influence are tickets, citations, tow fees, etc. However, this is illegal.
04-13-11, 01:29 PM
#52
NYC is a perfect example. Government cut spending on all dept except police dept. Everytime there's new traffic law, our mayor clearly states that it will bring income for the city. NYC hired hundreds of new traffic police as our Mayor states it will gurrantee millions of income for the city. Another reason why no layoff in NYPD but layoff on FDNY (fire dept). FDNY brings no income thus our mayor purpose "car accident fee" which our mayor states it will bring income for the FDNY.
Although the fines didn't go directly to NYPD, these incomes played a important role on approving budget for NYPD. Another reason resulting in layoff on other dept such as FDNY.
I don't wish to see layoff on both NYPD or FDNY. Just hope they can be more reasonable when giving out ticket.
Although the fines didn't go directly to NYPD, these incomes played a important role on approving budget for NYPD. Another reason resulting in layoff on other dept such as FDNY.
I don't wish to see layoff on both NYPD or FDNY. Just hope they can be more reasonable when giving out ticket.
The city is postponing this month's Police Academy class until July to save money.
The 540-cadet class - already postponed in January - will be pushed back to the summer and combined with the 900-member July class, officials said.
By moving the class to July, the city will push the costs to next year's budget and save money by only opening the Police Academy once.
The NYPD currently has a head count of approximately 34,500 - down 6,000 from its peak in 2001.
The department, which last graduated a class in December, loses about 1,500 officers annually because of attrition. City Hall insisted the decision to postpone would not affect public safety.
"The last three years were the three safest in New York City's history, and crime is down again this year," said mayoral spokesman Stu Loeser.
The 540-cadet class - already postponed in January - will be pushed back to the summer and combined with the 900-member July class, officials said.
By moving the class to July, the city will push the costs to next year's budget and save money by only opening the Police Academy once.
The NYPD currently has a head count of approximately 34,500 - down 6,000 from its peak in 2001.
The department, which last graduated a class in December, loses about 1,500 officers annually because of attrition. City Hall insisted the decision to postpone would not affect public safety.
"The last three years were the three safest in New York City's history, and crime is down again this year," said mayoral spokesman Stu Loeser.
04-13-11, 04:51 PM
#53
Pole Position
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cop need to take these scum out of the road by arrest, impound their car. Just tickets??? What is the point of that, they most likely got LIC suspened & no insurance due to no $$$. Another silly thing cop done to the public. These people can cause extreme danger to public!!!
Whoa, slow down little buddy. States have different laws and police departments have their own policies.
His license was "none issued." He had an old (expired) license in his wallet. DMV records showed he was in the process of renewing his license, but instead of "expired" it was "none issued." The car was registered to his wife. He had a passenger in the car with a valid license. In CA you can't impound a car for not having insurance. I gave him the tickets and let his friend drive the car home. It was my discretion and legal.
04-14-11, 08:23 AM
#54
Hey...if quotas are such a great idea, why don't we impliment them for ALL police officers?
So, next time there's the Million Man March on the DC National Mall, or the Million Mom March, or the NYC St. Patrick's Day Parade...every officer who is assigned to provide "police presence" should be required to arrest at least 2 people.
I'm sure...in large events like these...it should be no problem at all for officers to find people breaking the law. It happens all the time around us, right?
Many local events around here - town hall meetings, even large condo-association meetings - often have local police presence. These officers should be REQUIRED to haul at least one person from each of these meetings away in handcuffs.
Come on...who's with me! We need to make our towns safer!
(Oh, and I'm being sarcastic)
So, next time there's the Million Man March on the DC National Mall, or the Million Mom March, or the NYC St. Patrick's Day Parade...every officer who is assigned to provide "police presence" should be required to arrest at least 2 people.
I'm sure...in large events like these...it should be no problem at all for officers to find people breaking the law. It happens all the time around us, right?
Many local events around here - town hall meetings, even large condo-association meetings - often have local police presence. These officers should be REQUIRED to haul at least one person from each of these meetings away in handcuffs.
Come on...who's with me! We need to make our towns safer!
(Oh, and I'm being sarcastic)
04-14-11, 08:58 AM
#55
Lexus Fanatic
TICKET QUOTAS ARE AGAINST THE LAW!!!!....it cannot be instructed, demanded, or pressured for an LA police officer to meet a quota. In LA it specifically states that quotas are a direct violation of the vehicle code. It has nothing to do with right and wrong. Or even how serious the offense is. Bottom line, you cannot be instructed by your commanding officers to write a certain number of tickets per day. Again, this is illegal!!! Superior officers cannot instruct other officers to go against government regulated vehicle codes and break state law. To make matters worse. Your performance review is not based on the number of tickets recorded in your file. Again, this is breaking state law.
When Nancy Lauer took over in 2006 there was this hush hush policy that officers needed to wite a certain # of tickets per day in order to get good performance reviews or else be threatened with reassignment and even worse harrassment from superior officers. She refered to quotas as "goals."
When Nancy Lauer took over in 2006 there was this hush hush policy that officers needed to wite a certain # of tickets per day in order to get good performance reviews or else be threatened with reassignment and even worse harrassment from superior officers. She refered to quotas as "goals."
04-14-11, 09:08 AM
#56
Some comments from an 'officer only' board:
foursixzero
I am very pleased with the replys that I received for patrol zones. Thank you. I have another one. How does everyone feel about setting quotas or goals for a year. Such as, so many tickets, DWI's, and so on and so forth.
Does this cause pressure? Or is it just a way to get officers to work more efficient. There is a catch however, if you do not meet your quotas you may suffer unknown consequences, obviously ones you may not like. Such as zones you do not prefer.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Landric
Howdy,
I don't think setting numerical goals is the right way to go. Officers who do their job should have no problem writting "enough" tickets and making "enough" arrests. Simply expect your officers to do their job. My agency doesn't have any quota or number system, but if a cop isn't doing anything, the numbers will suggest that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Niteshift
Quotas are illegal in my state.
Further, I find them counter-productive. I'm one of those guys that goes out and does my job. If you want to start putting minimum numbers on me, then that's what you get. For example, I used to check doors of businesses all the time. Then they came out with some stupid policy saying that you'd check a minimum of 20 per night and leave a stupid tag hanging on the door. Guess what? That's exactly what they got from me then, 20. No more, no less.
They also don't take into account the differences in activity between zones, shifts etc.
And they're a publicity nightmare.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PtlmZ_7
We used to have a quota, but now the chief lets us write all we want..... just a joke.
Seriously though, I find it hard to set a quota in this line of work. If things are slow, they're slow. A quota works in a factory but I just can't see setting a baseline for these types of things. Just my opinion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LBomb
Quotas are a no-no here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SGT Dave
Quotas are illegal here-I guess I assumed they were everywhere.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evnings
Quotas are illegal in Texas also. There have been some big brass in the Dallas area get fired over setting " informal " quotas.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MPD3P59
Quotas may be illegal but they are implied and enforced in my dept. I have co-workers with letters in their files for not writing enough tickets to meet expectations. I think that's ChickenS4it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
foursixzero
The implied quota is what I was getting at. However, some officers are being punished for not meeting this implied quota.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cajuncop
I'm one of those guys that doesn't like being forced into anything. I consider myself a very proactive Police Officer. I just don't like someone telling me that I have to write a certain number of tickets, or making a certain number of citizen contacts, etc..
I'm with Nite. I do the bare minimum if someone tells me that I have to do something. When they just leave me alone, I tend to be more productive.
Also, we don't have quotas either. However, our supervisors are always pushing some type of quota, as in the "implied" one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dinosaur
In the absence of numerical production standards, police management is often at a loss when it comes time to evaluate performance, both their own and that of their employees. Every other evaluation method requires a degree of subjectivity that will inevitably be subjected to challenge and dispute.
Numbers are popular because they are easy to record and they are objectively verifiable. Conversely, they are unpopular because they do not accurately reflect the attainment of police objectives..
Police work is much different than a manufacturing facility and it is not fairly quantifiable as a service provider. Our goals and accomplshments, for the most part, reflect intangible ideals. A careful reading of a few random mission statements will make this fact obvious. How does one measure, for instance, a "reduced fear of crime".
Customer surveys don't really work well for us. Production quotas are only marginally applicable to the arbitrary circumstances of policing and are viewed with justifiable suspicion by the public.
In some rspects, setting activiity quotas for police is akin to setting fire quotas for firemen or sunny day quotas for weathermen.
But I digress...., supervisors are always going to look at numbers as part of an officer's overall performance. An officer that want's to be perceived as a good worker will consequently produce numbers. The process doesn't hold up very well under scrutiny, so we try not to think about it too much and we certainly know not to use the word "quota".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guard Dog
I see nothing wrong with a standard, not a quota.
Quotas denote a means to increase revenue. That is why quotas per se are illegal in many states. Here in Illinois there is a case that went all the way to the supreme court. It is Beggs V Park Ridge.
Beggs was a slug that refused to do anything. Park Ridge had an activity standard of 0.8 tickets per day. Based upon the number of accidents and the high volume of vehicular traffic ( Next to Chicago O'Hare Airport) they started disciplinary action. The FOP fought it and he refused to write tickets. He lost and was discharged.
The court in Beggs rules that a production standard so low was not against the public interest.
The average patrol officer on the street should be able to come up with one moving violation per shift. Traffic accident investigation, every deputy's take home squad had a moving radar unit. Some months your write an average of a ticket a day the next it may be above or below. The yearly average of 240 days working (AVERAGE) should work out. Shifts need to be taken into account also. Obviously the Midnight shift does not have a traffic presence as much as the day or afternoon shift.
Sparky is also right. If you impose a standard, the officers will meet the standard and nothing more. We look for a well rounded activity. Some many tickets, so many warrants, so many papers all which directly relates to the ratio of discretionary time the officer has.
A police officers job is very hard to fairly evaluate because it is very subjective. Some quantitative measure is often necessary since job performance is so hard to measure.
I am against QUOTAS...reasonable performance standard do not offend me.: Message edited by: Guard Dog ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
207
Originally posted by Guard Dog:
<STRONG>
Here in Illinois there is a case that went all the way to the supreme court. It is Beggs V Park Ridge.
Beggs was a slug that refused to do anything. Park Ridge had an activity standard of 0.8 tickets per day. Based upon the number of accidents and the high volume of vehicular traffic ( Next to Chicago O'Hare Airport) they started disciplinary action. The FOP fought it and he refused to write tickets. He lost and was discharged.
The court in Beggs rules that a production standard so low was not against the public interest.
</STRONG>
I read through the case, not only was Beggs inept in doing his job he didn't like to show up for work either.
He has to be a real moron to put in 18 years of service only to get fired.
We have one of those "slugs".. a dispatcher that hasn't worked a day this year.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tcsd1236
Officers SHOULD be expected to have a certain level of performance OVER TIME. Unless there is a good reason, full time officers who only write a dozen or so tickets a year are not being pro-active enough. Of course, some agencies are so busy they don't give the average officer much time for regular, routine traffic enforcement.
The problem with the Q word is that too many admin types can't seem to evaluate officer performance outside the tangible number of tickets their oficers write. You could have 12 domestics a night and write 10 reports every day, but they want to see those tickets when it comes time to evaluate you!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jay
The biggest problem that I have seen with quotas is that it leads to B.S. tickets. Quotas are illegal in Texas, but that doesn't stop many agencies. Our State police operate on a "point" system, which basically equates to a quota. Most of the departments here are "at will employment", so if you don't meet whatever quota, point system, or whatever, you're gone with very little, if any, recourse. Quotas also prohibit much of the officers discretionary ability, especailly if the officer is short of the "goals", "quotas", "points", or whatever.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TinStar
In California, quotas are illegal.
There was a time when the administration struggled with this whole issue on how to properly evaluate a deputy.
What it boiled down to was, they decided to grade each person on what they DO, not what they DON'T do.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zamboni
At my dept were expected to write a ticket a day. But we don't have radar guns (the patrol guys might not take care of them) so were stuck with finding other stuff. Well during a busy shift with only a little time between calls that means I have to find a non speeding traffic infraction worth writing. Failure to signal is a chicken***** ticket. I'll stop people for it looking for drunks but I never write it. Sometimes you just don't see stop sign or red light violations in your shift. So even the ticket a shift thing is bogus sometimes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H8Criminals
No quotas here either (per se) ,however, we have "monthly stats" posted. It shows the officers' names in roster format, how many cases, criminal complaints, moving cites, other cites, arrests and I think one more thing. It's idea is to get officers to encourage each other to do better. I don't particularly like it though, because it doesn't show adjustments for vacations or when officers are instructing in FTO. Those stats during FTO go to the new officers, not toward the trainer. Some people like it, I personally don't, but I'm not a supervisor. Oh yeah, the top 3 numbers in each category are highlighted with the number 1, 2 or 3 next to the top 3. If there is a tie, then both are highlighted and numbered and a "t" is included to show a tie. Ugh.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPD209
In NJ quotas were outlawed in a bill signed by the governor...However everyone knows...if you are on the list for a day off and the captain can give that extra person off.".But Officer Smith, I see your quality of lifers are down this month", Not enough public drinkers or juvenile curfew tickets"," You still want that day off" God forbid you get a complaint while doing these things.....Then the captain is on you for that.....You cant win
I am very pleased with the replys that I received for patrol zones. Thank you. I have another one. How does everyone feel about setting quotas or goals for a year. Such as, so many tickets, DWI's, and so on and so forth.
Does this cause pressure? Or is it just a way to get officers to work more efficient. There is a catch however, if you do not meet your quotas you may suffer unknown consequences, obviously ones you may not like. Such as zones you do not prefer.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Landric
Howdy,
I don't think setting numerical goals is the right way to go. Officers who do their job should have no problem writting "enough" tickets and making "enough" arrests. Simply expect your officers to do their job. My agency doesn't have any quota or number system, but if a cop isn't doing anything, the numbers will suggest that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Niteshift
Quotas are illegal in my state.
Further, I find them counter-productive. I'm one of those guys that goes out and does my job. If you want to start putting minimum numbers on me, then that's what you get. For example, I used to check doors of businesses all the time. Then they came out with some stupid policy saying that you'd check a minimum of 20 per night and leave a stupid tag hanging on the door. Guess what? That's exactly what they got from me then, 20. No more, no less.
They also don't take into account the differences in activity between zones, shifts etc.
And they're a publicity nightmare.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PtlmZ_7
We used to have a quota, but now the chief lets us write all we want..... just a joke.
Seriously though, I find it hard to set a quota in this line of work. If things are slow, they're slow. A quota works in a factory but I just can't see setting a baseline for these types of things. Just my opinion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LBomb
Quotas are a no-no here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SGT Dave
Quotas are illegal here-I guess I assumed they were everywhere.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evnings
Quotas are illegal in Texas also. There have been some big brass in the Dallas area get fired over setting " informal " quotas.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MPD3P59
Quotas may be illegal but they are implied and enforced in my dept. I have co-workers with letters in their files for not writing enough tickets to meet expectations. I think that's ChickenS4it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
foursixzero
The implied quota is what I was getting at. However, some officers are being punished for not meeting this implied quota.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cajuncop
I'm one of those guys that doesn't like being forced into anything. I consider myself a very proactive Police Officer. I just don't like someone telling me that I have to write a certain number of tickets, or making a certain number of citizen contacts, etc..
I'm with Nite. I do the bare minimum if someone tells me that I have to do something. When they just leave me alone, I tend to be more productive.
Also, we don't have quotas either. However, our supervisors are always pushing some type of quota, as in the "implied" one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dinosaur
In the absence of numerical production standards, police management is often at a loss when it comes time to evaluate performance, both their own and that of their employees. Every other evaluation method requires a degree of subjectivity that will inevitably be subjected to challenge and dispute.
Numbers are popular because they are easy to record and they are objectively verifiable. Conversely, they are unpopular because they do not accurately reflect the attainment of police objectives..
Police work is much different than a manufacturing facility and it is not fairly quantifiable as a service provider. Our goals and accomplshments, for the most part, reflect intangible ideals. A careful reading of a few random mission statements will make this fact obvious. How does one measure, for instance, a "reduced fear of crime".
Customer surveys don't really work well for us. Production quotas are only marginally applicable to the arbitrary circumstances of policing and are viewed with justifiable suspicion by the public.
In some rspects, setting activiity quotas for police is akin to setting fire quotas for firemen or sunny day quotas for weathermen.
But I digress...., supervisors are always going to look at numbers as part of an officer's overall performance. An officer that want's to be perceived as a good worker will consequently produce numbers. The process doesn't hold up very well under scrutiny, so we try not to think about it too much and we certainly know not to use the word "quota".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guard Dog
I see nothing wrong with a standard, not a quota.
Quotas denote a means to increase revenue. That is why quotas per se are illegal in many states. Here in Illinois there is a case that went all the way to the supreme court. It is Beggs V Park Ridge.
Beggs was a slug that refused to do anything. Park Ridge had an activity standard of 0.8 tickets per day. Based upon the number of accidents and the high volume of vehicular traffic ( Next to Chicago O'Hare Airport) they started disciplinary action. The FOP fought it and he refused to write tickets. He lost and was discharged.
The court in Beggs rules that a production standard so low was not against the public interest.
The average patrol officer on the street should be able to come up with one moving violation per shift. Traffic accident investigation, every deputy's take home squad had a moving radar unit. Some months your write an average of a ticket a day the next it may be above or below. The yearly average of 240 days working (AVERAGE) should work out. Shifts need to be taken into account also. Obviously the Midnight shift does not have a traffic presence as much as the day or afternoon shift.
Sparky is also right. If you impose a standard, the officers will meet the standard and nothing more. We look for a well rounded activity. Some many tickets, so many warrants, so many papers all which directly relates to the ratio of discretionary time the officer has.
A police officers job is very hard to fairly evaluate because it is very subjective. Some quantitative measure is often necessary since job performance is so hard to measure.
I am against QUOTAS...reasonable performance standard do not offend me.: Message edited by: Guard Dog ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
207
Originally posted by Guard Dog:
<STRONG>
Here in Illinois there is a case that went all the way to the supreme court. It is Beggs V Park Ridge.
Beggs was a slug that refused to do anything. Park Ridge had an activity standard of 0.8 tickets per day. Based upon the number of accidents and the high volume of vehicular traffic ( Next to Chicago O'Hare Airport) they started disciplinary action. The FOP fought it and he refused to write tickets. He lost and was discharged.
The court in Beggs rules that a production standard so low was not against the public interest.
</STRONG>
I read through the case, not only was Beggs inept in doing his job he didn't like to show up for work either.
He has to be a real moron to put in 18 years of service only to get fired.
We have one of those "slugs".. a dispatcher that hasn't worked a day this year.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tcsd1236
Officers SHOULD be expected to have a certain level of performance OVER TIME. Unless there is a good reason, full time officers who only write a dozen or so tickets a year are not being pro-active enough. Of course, some agencies are so busy they don't give the average officer much time for regular, routine traffic enforcement.
The problem with the Q word is that too many admin types can't seem to evaluate officer performance outside the tangible number of tickets their oficers write. You could have 12 domestics a night and write 10 reports every day, but they want to see those tickets when it comes time to evaluate you!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jay
The biggest problem that I have seen with quotas is that it leads to B.S. tickets. Quotas are illegal in Texas, but that doesn't stop many agencies. Our State police operate on a "point" system, which basically equates to a quota. Most of the departments here are "at will employment", so if you don't meet whatever quota, point system, or whatever, you're gone with very little, if any, recourse. Quotas also prohibit much of the officers discretionary ability, especailly if the officer is short of the "goals", "quotas", "points", or whatever.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TinStar
In California, quotas are illegal.
There was a time when the administration struggled with this whole issue on how to properly evaluate a deputy.
What it boiled down to was, they decided to grade each person on what they DO, not what they DON'T do.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zamboni
At my dept were expected to write a ticket a day. But we don't have radar guns (the patrol guys might not take care of them) so were stuck with finding other stuff. Well during a busy shift with only a little time between calls that means I have to find a non speeding traffic infraction worth writing. Failure to signal is a chicken***** ticket. I'll stop people for it looking for drunks but I never write it. Sometimes you just don't see stop sign or red light violations in your shift. So even the ticket a shift thing is bogus sometimes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H8Criminals
No quotas here either (per se) ,however, we have "monthly stats" posted. It shows the officers' names in roster format, how many cases, criminal complaints, moving cites, other cites, arrests and I think one more thing. It's idea is to get officers to encourage each other to do better. I don't particularly like it though, because it doesn't show adjustments for vacations or when officers are instructing in FTO. Those stats during FTO go to the new officers, not toward the trainer. Some people like it, I personally don't, but I'm not a supervisor. Oh yeah, the top 3 numbers in each category are highlighted with the number 1, 2 or 3 next to the top 3. If there is a tie, then both are highlighted and numbered and a "t" is included to show a tie. Ugh.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPD209
In NJ quotas were outlawed in a bill signed by the governor...However everyone knows...if you are on the list for a day off and the captain can give that extra person off.".But Officer Smith, I see your quality of lifers are down this month", Not enough public drinkers or juvenile curfew tickets"," You still want that day off" God forbid you get a complaint while doing these things.....Then the captain is on you for that.....You cant win
As I pointed out in the other thread, what is wrong with quotas? In a given month, a busy stretch of highway is going to have a number of traffic violations incurred on it. If you require cops to catch 1% of those, maybe it'll reduce infractions there until they're catching 5%... but there's no way it's going to stop. There are too many people out there, and there's that tiny minority who will do illegal crap if they think they can get away with it that requires cops to, well, be cops.
Also, as mentioned before you have to have some way of demonstrating that your police force is doing something other than hanging out at the donut shop. Working at a call center with a lot of people in it, I can sympathize with the quota crowd. If you make it mandatory for people to check in at appointed times, some people will screw around until they have to check in. If you make them check in a lot, they'll still screw around in between check-ins and you'll probably end up hacking off the vast majority of the policemen who *are* doing their jobs. Requiring them to write X number of tickets at least insures you that the deadbeats are doing their job *some* of the time. That fleet management software that's coming out all over the place will help as well ("hey, Bob, according to your GPS your car spent 6 hours parked outside of Denny's yesterday... let's have a talk"), but there are still going to be those jackasses who do the absolute minimum they can get away with and who require their bosses to come up with ways to make them earn their paycheck. Maybe you won't see that in a rural county in Georgia because the boss in question sees everyone often enough to be able to ride the *** of the slacker, but even in a place like Seattle and its surrounding suburbs, people can and will fit through the cracks and find ways to fall into the rich creamy center of unwork.
I doubt police forces make that much money on traffic tickets anyway; once you take court costs, wages for the police and secretaries, and maintenance of the vehicles into account, the margin on a $80 speeding ticket is probably not all that high. Whining about quotas is something lawbreakers do, I am sorry to say.
Also, as mentioned before you have to have some way of demonstrating that your police force is doing something other than hanging out at the donut shop. Working at a call center with a lot of people in it, I can sympathize with the quota crowd. If you make it mandatory for people to check in at appointed times, some people will screw around until they have to check in. If you make them check in a lot, they'll still screw around in between check-ins and you'll probably end up hacking off the vast majority of the policemen who *are* doing their jobs. Requiring them to write X number of tickets at least insures you that the deadbeats are doing their job *some* of the time. That fleet management software that's coming out all over the place will help as well ("hey, Bob, according to your GPS your car spent 6 hours parked outside of Denny's yesterday... let's have a talk"), but there are still going to be those jackasses who do the absolute minimum they can get away with and who require their bosses to come up with ways to make them earn their paycheck. Maybe you won't see that in a rural county in Georgia because the boss in question sees everyone often enough to be able to ride the *** of the slacker, but even in a place like Seattle and its surrounding suburbs, people can and will fit through the cracks and find ways to fall into the rich creamy center of unwork.
I doubt police forces make that much money on traffic tickets anyway; once you take court costs, wages for the police and secretaries, and maintenance of the vehicles into account, the margin on a $80 speeding ticket is probably not all that high. Whining about quotas is something lawbreakers do, I am sorry to say.
Last edited by oohpapi44; 04-14-11 at 09:13 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
JDKane527
CL of Southern California
17
12-30-09 12:56 PM
