Issues and Trends
Peak, Chapter 12
\video projects\atc\atc.wmv
Police Officer
“Bill of Rights”

Protection from arbitrary
personnel actions
– Notice of subject matter of inquiry
– Entitled to representative of one’s choosing
– Cannot use statements made under threat of
sanctions in a subsequent civil proceeding
– Right of appeal
– Right to refuse polygraph examination
– One-year statute of limitations
Federal labor relations


Sovereignty
– Federal government will not defer
decision-making to non-governmental entity
Unionization
– Federal Hatch Act prohibits Federal employees from
engaging in partisan politics
– Civilian employees can unionize and bargain with Govt.
over “conditions of employment” – not wages
– Federal law enforcement officers cannot unionize
 Can join associations, but have no official role
– NO Federal employee – civilian or law enf. – can strike
 Cannot hold Govt. or the public hostage
 Reagan fired striking Air Traffic Controllers 
State labor relations




State laws much more liberal than Federal
All California government employees can
LAPD Protective League
unionize and engage in partisan politics
–
Can bargain all conditions of employment
–
Public safety officers prohibited from striking
Negotiation process
–
“Good faith” bargaining
–
If an impasse occurs, then...
1. Mediation
2. Fact-finding
3. Arbitration (if called for in the contract)
–
Best and final offer
 If rejected, employer can impose terms
Pressing issue: bargaining away management prerogatives
Women in policing


Women generally barred from field law
enforcement until the 1970’s
– Up to 1979 LAPD barred women from
advancing beyond Sergeant
 Remedied by Blake court decision: read more
– In 1971 only 1.4 percent of local police officers were women
– Current proportion hovers between 10 and 15 percent
Obstacles to entry
– Gender occupational preferences
– Bias against women in positions of authority
– Fear that women cannot physically handle violent suspects
 Height, weight and upper body strength
Increasing the number of
qualified female applicants




Few apply – need pool as large as possible - Why?
Before the 1990’s most females were screened out
with height/weight and physical agility requirements
Many requirements were set aside by Federal court decisions in the
70’s and 80’s because they violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
– Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971): Employment practice illegal if:
 Excludes a protected group (women, minorities), and
 No proof requirements meet an occupational necessity
Solution:
– Validate all requirements
– Set physical standards to the minimum possible level: LAPD
– Shift physical abilities pass/fail tests to the academy
– Help applicants prepare for the academy: LAPD
Minorities in Policing





In 2000, 23% of State/local officers were
minorities
In 2003, 56% of the members of the LAPD officer union
(LAPPL) were minorities (LaLey data)
– Latinos - 34.6 %, African-Americans - 13.4%,
Asians - 5.5%, American Indians/Filipino - 2.1%
Issue: relatively few apply, so pool is often small
– Why is this a problem?
Obstacles to entry
– Occupational preferences, affected by history of racial bias
– Educational opportunities
– Criminal records
Representation in supervisory and command ranks also lags
Woman and Minorities –
Solutions


1992 “Hunter – La Ley Consent Decree”
required that LAPD improve recruitment and
promotional opportunities for females and minorities
– Numerical goals (e.g., females to constitute twenty percent of
police force)
– Requires yearly reports
– Controversy whether goals are being met
What can be done?
– Aggressive recruitment
– Do not require college degrees
– Question the validity of any selection or promotional procedure
whose effect disproportionately excludes females and minorities
– Forgive juvenile or minor adult arrest records
 Lessons of Rampart
Higher Education for
Police

College education has been
found to be a “bonafide
occupational qualification” for police
–

Davis v. City of Dalls (5th. Circuit, 1985)
Some important attributes of police officers
–
–
–
–
–
Values (integrity, respect for others)
Personal characteristics (demeanor, working with others)
Decision-making skills
Analytical capabilities
Oral and written communications
Effects of Higher Education
on police job performance



Better on-the-job performance not
clearly borne out in studies
– Does nature of the assignment matter?
Some alleged benefits...
– Fewer citizen complaints
– Better peer relations
– Less dogmatic
– Fewer traffic accidents
– More judicious decisions
– Better compliance with agency regulations
Some alleged disadvantages...
– Less orientation to “public service”
– Less value on obedience to supervisors
– Less likely to make policing a career