Friday, February 06, 2009

The Unusual, the Not Good, the Phone Calls

So, what to make of the announcement this week that a handful of Police Department managers were getting demoted and taking a pay cut?

It’s unusual, it’s not good, and if I were a manager in another city department, I wouldn’t be taking too many calls from 345-9550.

First, the unusual. I’m not sure I’ve ever heard of this before. It’s creative, I’ll say that. It’s obviously an effort to keep cops on the street, which everyone agrees is the top priority. It’s probably worth mentioning that the “demotions” aren’t based on job performance (obviously), but instead are a mechanism for lowering pay. I don’t know if maybe they’ll all get “promotions” in the future, but I do feel bad for the “demoted” and their families. A pay cut is never a happy affair. It would be good if they were given some preference on details (yes, more work, but more opportunity) to make up some of the difference. (Note: This is not an endorsement of details as presently constituted. But if we’re playing by the rulebook, use the rules to their advantage.)

Now, the not good. Obviously, this is in reaction to current and upcoming local aid cuts, and there’s more to come. These guys are the first victims, but there’s certainly more to come. I’m not sure if this is the final solution to keeping cops on the street, or if there’s more to come. There’s no way of knowing right now, but this is a sure sign that things are going to more difficult in the next five months. Layoffs were avoided, and hopefully that remains the case. It’s easy to hammer the classic city employee/donut-eating cop stereotype, but this is no time to be wishing someone out of a job. Put this way: If you lost your job tomorrow, how many options would you have for a new one? More and more, people are realizing the answer is “very few,” or “none.” While this is predominately about numbers and services, there’s also human decency involved, and I wouldn’t want to be the one handing out pink slips. That’s gotta play a role now, and later. But this doesn’t soothe any jagged nerves in City Hall and other departments.

Finally, that phone call. There’s a very interesting thought process that seems obvious here. The goal is to keep police officers on the street. How do we that? One way might be get higher-paid members to take a pay cut, and use that savings to keep offices out there. This wasn’t a random numbers cut. It had a direct purpose. You’d have to think that the Mayor’s Office might have similar ideas – or other department-specific ideas – up their sleeve. Are other department managers going to play the same ball? Will they have a choice? Chances are, the phone is going to be ringing soon, and their not going to have any choice but to answer it. I guess we’ll see.

Additionally, what’s up with the Police Department. I’ll admit it. A year, nine months ago, I was really turned off by the union’s moves on raises. Since then, they’ve led the way on contract negotiations by agreeing to no retroactive pay and taking a fairly modest annual percentage increase. (Note: I know people are hung up on those settlements, but please, please, please, don’t forget the general dismissal of retroactive pay. That is such a huge savings, and can’t be overlooked. I’d think we’d be doubling the numbers, if not more, if retro were included. It might not have been the best time to settle, but if you get nowhere, the unions dig in, and a year from now you’re paying the same raises PLUS another year of retro? Yikes.) Now, some of the highest-ranking members of the department are taking bumps down. Looking back, I still can’t get happy about the public tactics, but the contract and this move has me impressed with what they’ve done. Knowing the guys who took this cut, they’ve got a lot invested in the department and the community. It would be unfortunate if they left. Wouldn’t blame them, but it would be unfortunate. I guess we’ll have to see.

So, it begins. $250,000 or so down, $2,750,000 to go (probably actually more, but don’t let big math get in the way of a literary device, I always say).

Labels: , ,

|