High Risk Retirement

Has anyone at other agencies heard anything from the FRS regarding regaining high risk retirement? We have been told that FRS is sorting through all of the information.

You gotta be kidding. This is like the dispatchers wanting high-risk retirement coverage. In order to get high-risk retirement, you actually need to be in a HIGH RISK position! What's the high risk, dusting for prints or taking pictures???

You gotta be kidding. This is like the dispatchers wanting high-risk retirement coverage. In order to get high-risk retirement, you actually need to be in a HIGH RISK position! What's the high risk, dusting for prints or taking pictures???
It's very clear you have no knowledge of the risks that are taken by these individuals. The on scene officer pokes his or her head into a bio-hazardous scene and runs to their car to call for Forensics/Crime Scene and never sets foot in there again. Yet, the technicians is exposed to all kinds of infectous fluids. Technicians handle scenes without having a firearm, and without a "sworn" officer being around for protection, so we can do our job. While officers are on the perimeter, the technician is working with the bomb technicians cataloging post blast evidence, or the arson investigator needs us to help with his scene and building or floor may give way. You may put bad guys in jail, but technicians keep them there....It could be you out there dusting the next time...Be Safe....RealCSI

You gotta be kidding. This is like the dispatchers wanting high-risk retirement coverage. In order to get high-risk retirement, you actually need to be in a HIGH RISK position! What's the high risk, dusting for prints or taking pictures???

You have no clue. We are exposed to all kinds of things that the "officers" would never touch. There was a hot scene just the other night with the suspect running around with a gun. When our deputy was shot and killed, CSTs were in the woods documenting the scene with the suspect still armed just a short distance away. We had NO VESTS and NO GUNS to protect ourselves. We deserve high risk for all of the chemicals, powders, and dangers we are exposed to. So get a clue and stay on your own site.

You gotta be kidding. This is like the dispatchers wanting high-risk retirement coverage. In order to get high-risk retirement, you actually need to be in a HIGH RISK position! What's the high risk, dusting for prints or taking pictures???

How many meth labs and grow houses have you been in? We get called to just about every one in our county. So get back in your car, type some reports, and wait for us to work the scenes.

We just received notice today that we again have high risk.

The on scene officer pokes his or her head into a bio-hazardous scene and runs to their car to call for Forensics/Crime Scene and never sets foot in there again.

And you use the proper personal protective equipment to process those scenes. It's the officers who initially show up who are exposed to the REAL danger by entering those scenes to either make arrests, rescue victims, or clear the building to make it safe for you WITHOUT all of the protective equipment. And if you're talking about hazardous material scenes such as meth labs, it's LEOs who are CLET certified who clear those up--not crime scene techs.


Yet, the technicians is exposed to all kinds of infectous fluids.

Hence why you wear all that protective gear. You aren't exposed to anything more than someone who works in the healthcare field, and I don't see them getting any sort of hazardous duty status.


Technicians handle scenes without having a firearm, and without a "sworn" officer being around for protection, so we can do our job.

What? Do you think the dead body you're photographing is going to attack you? Maybe that firearm on the floor will jump up and shoot you on its own. You do not "handle" a scene, you process the evidence. The officers have already secured the scene and cleared it of threats, so you don't need them inside for protection. The only threats to you are going to come from outside the scene, so that's why the officers are on the perimeter to keep them out.


While officers are on the perimeter, the technician is working with the bomb technicians cataloging post blast evidence, or the arson investigator needs us to help with his scene and building or floor may give way.

The key word there is "POST-blast." The people taking the real risks (bomb techs) aren't going to call you into the scene to catalog the evidence until they have determined that there is no additional threat of detonation. Arson investigators also will not ask you to enter (or enter themselves) parts of a structure that are believed to be unsound.

Let's see. In 2007, 188 law enforcement officers died in the line of duty. How many crime scene techs died in the line of duty? In fact...why don't you post a link to a story from last year showing ONE crime scene tech dying in the line of duty due to some of these "hazards" that you face.

The statistics speak for themselves. Your job isn't anymore hazardous than a nursing assistant in an ER. I'm not saying your job isn't important, but don't try to play it up to be something it's not. You do NOT face the same hazards that LEOs or firefighters face and your rates of on the job injury and death show that.

Well, obviously you are one of the officers that actually makes sure the scene is secure. When is the last time you were sent into a scene (unarmed) to be processed and were surprised by a individual who came out of a locked room with a gun after the scene was described to you as "safe"? True story...turns out that person was the owner of the business and wasnt a threat, but what if that had been the bad guy? Like our fingerprint brush is going to stop them? Oh right, I guess thats when we use our flash! And another true story...a Tech is processing the outside of a window for prints and is surprised by the bad guy looking back at her through the window. Yet again, another "safe" scene. And the officer, yeah, safely tucked away in his cruiser typing his report.
Additionally, when is the last time you made a bad arrest and were fired for it? Latent Print Examiners everyday are called on to make perfect conclusions. One bad ID and guess what, career is over. You make a bad arrest and you're checking on for your shift the next day. So in addition to the other facts from the other posts, Forensics should be considered high risk. Why would you deny it to the individuals that are there to help make your cases stick, and often times are the main, if not only, reason these bad guys end up off the street for good.
And if you are going to tell me that the Techs and Examiners don't help you, I would think maybe hiding your degrading attitude towards them might improve your situation.

Had a Sig 5 Suspect try to turn himself in to the CST working Sig 5 scene. Outside scene. CST's are in uniform. Suspects dont know the difference, let alone the civilians. CST's have earned High Risk.

Again....post some links to all these crime scene techs who have been killed in the line of duty. Actually, you could also just post a link to show how many are injured in the line of duty. Neither are going to come anywhere close to those who are actually sworn officers or firefighters. The Department of Labor keeps such statistics, so feel free to go look.

You can make whatever arguments you want, but in the end it comes down to that. High risk is high risk for a reason. Nobody is "belittling" those of you who do the job, all that's being done is pointing out simple facts. Being in the science field you should understand empiricism and statistics. The statistics don't support your job being considered high risk.

Again....post some links to all these crime scene techs who have been killed in the line of duty. Actually, you could also just post a link to show how many are injured in the line of duty. Neither are going to come anywhere close to those who are actually sworn officers or firefighters. The Department of Labor keeps such statistics, so feel free to go look.

You can make whatever arguments you want, but in the end it comes down to that. High risk is high risk for a reason. Nobody is "belittling" those of you who do the job, all that's being done is pointing out simple facts. Being in the science field you should understand empiricism and statistics. The statistics don't support your job being considered high risk.

Obviously there is something to support us getting high risk since we got it back.

Obviously there is something to support us getting high risk since we got it back.

Too bad nobody knows what that something is--no actual statistics or documented cases other than personal anecdotes that show how dangerous it is to collect evidence and examine fingerprints in a lab setting.

Obviously there is something to support us getting high risk since we got it back.

Too bad nobody knows what that something is--no actual statistics or documented cases other than personal anecdotes that show how dangerous it is to collect evidence and examine fingerprints in a lab setting.

I do not work in a lab!!!! I work the scenes. I have been exposed to AIDS, TB, and god knows what else in meth labs and grow houses! I have been out on scenes worried about getting shot and I am not issued a bullet proof vest! You can believe whatever you choose to but I believe and the government of this state believes that I deserve high risk.

I have been a certified LEO a lot of years, most of them as a detective. I absolutely agree that the CSI and Forensic Investigators deserve high risk retirement. Some newby officers and deputies think the only threat out there is the bad guy with a gun. They'll learn, in time, that there are other risks, such as bloodbourne pathogens, chemical and biological agents, infected cuts, needles, etc. This is one reason the paramedic/EMT's get high-risk. There is also the psychological effect of pulling prints off a dead infant, close-up photography of the fatal injuries to a child, etc.

I know I and my fellow detectives are always glad to have the FI's arrive to take care of the dirty, potentially dangerous scenes. They handle the stuff the rest of us don't want to, and aren't trained to. They are specialists. They deserve the pay.

the crime scene techs earn the high risk. they work in contaminated and dangerous environments.

The on scene officer pokes his or her head into a bio-hazardous scene and runs to their car to call for Forensics/Crime Scene and never sets foot in there again.

And you use the proper personal protective equipment to process those scenes. It's the officers who initially show up who are exposed to the REAL danger by entering those scenes to either make arrests, rescue victims, or clear the building to make it safe for you WITHOUT all of the protective equipment. And if you're talking about hazardous material scenes such as meth labs, it's LEOs who are CLET certified who clear those up--not crime scene techs.


Yet, the technicians is exposed to all kinds of infectous fluids.

Hence why you wear all that protective gear. You aren't exposed to anything more than someone who works in the healthcare field, and I don't see them getting any sort of hazardous duty status.


Technicians handle scenes without having a firearm, and without a "sworn" officer being around for protection, so we can do our job.

What? Do you think the dead body you're photographing is going to attack you? Maybe that firearm on the floor will jump up and shoot you on its own. You do not "handle" a scene, you process the evidence. The officers have already secured the scene and cleared it of threats, so you don't need them inside for protection. The only threats to you are going to come from outside the scene, so that's why the officers are on the perimeter to keep them out.


While officers are on the perimeter, the technician is working with the bomb technicians cataloging post blast evidence, or the arson investigator needs us to help with his scene and building or floor may give way.

The key word there is "POST-blast." The people taking the real risks (bomb techs) aren't going to call you into the scene to catalog the evidence until they have determined that there is no additional threat of detonation. Arson investigators also will not ask you to enter (or enter themselves) parts of a structure that are believed to be unsound.

Let's see. In 2007, 188 law enforcement officers died in the line of duty. How many crime scene techs died in the line of duty? In fact...why don't you post a link to a story from last year showing ONE crime scene tech dying in the line of duty due to some of these "hazards" that you face.

The statistics speak for themselves. Your job isn't anymore hazardous than a nursing assistant in an ER. I'm not saying your job isn't important, but don't try to play it up to be something it's not. You do NOT face the same hazards that LEOs or firefighters face and your rates of on the job injury and death show that.

You must work for a very small department. My department we have to fingerprint subjects who can't seem to remember who they really are. There are times the fingerprinting is done after a take down and cuffs applied-by the Technician. Our injuries do not receive the media coverage as the sworn personnel, we don't find out about the infectous items until later, maybe even months. Safety Equipment, you what to much tv...the average technician does not get into "gear" for every call for service. Arson calls are very dangerous, but you are sitting in your car playing "mine sweep", because your report was one paragraph of maybe four lines. I know you haven't had to talk a mother about allowing us to take her dead child from her arms. There are so many lethal aspects of both of our jobs, that you have no clue about. Having been on both sides of the badge after 35 years, I believe I know what I am talking about. Be Safe and don't forget to duck....

[MOD 498]

Wow, someone has some real strong negative feelings for crime scene techs. To add and reiterate what has already been said...most crime scene tech's are non-sworn, UNARMED, not trained with any defense tactics, and not issued bullet proof vests. We are OFTEN left alone on all types of crime scenes were suspects have and do return. Lets see, most crime scenes are not in all upscale communities. Our backs are usually to the world, so we can't see what could be sneaking up behind us. Our only weapon is the radio and we know those aren't always reliable. Sure, we are not the first responders who go into the hot scenes, but we face hidden dangers.

Most of the chemicals we use are cancer causing or may cause some form of illness. No, studies may not show how many CSI's have died as a result, but maybe that is because these illnesses could be seemingly normal - not proving that the illness was due to one of the chemicals we use. Maybe no one has really done a study other than to test the chemicals to say they do cause terminal illnesses. Does the average officer who might have to process for fingerprints use masks? Well better think about it, because black powder might be cancer-causing.

We wear a uniform, an equipment belt, and often drive in a vehicle marked 'police.' You think the bad guy takes the time to notice we are not a cop, do not have a gun, etc? I can't tell you how many times I've been mistaked for a sworn police officer (and yes I do correct them).

We're not the first responder, but it doesn't mean we don't get flagged down, or pull up on something in progress that we don't know what's up. Not the first responder typically, but it could happen just by nature of being in the wrong (or right) place at the right time.

We too suffer when cops are killed in the line of duty. They are OUR FAMILY TOO! Just because we don't carry a gun, doesn't mean we don't bleed blue! Maybe there are a # of CSI's who have been killed in the line of duty, and we just don't hear about it.

TB, HIV, Hepatitis, MRSA - we are exposed too! Needle sticks - happens to us too! Our exposures to things is often for a longer period of time. Hours at the Medical Examiner's Office or at a crime scene (decomp, fire, drug house, house of filth, you name it - we come across it, and probably more often than the officer who works the same area. We usually work the entire jurisdiction).

Lets not forget the fact that while we are not the one's "making the arrest" but we are the ones who likely collected the fingerprint, the DNA or anything else that likely is THE REASON a murderer is put to death (or sentenced to life). We are not afforded those little benefits cops get!

If you were in our shoes, you'd feel the same way too! Yes our jobs are important, but they too are dangerous. Just not in the same dangerous way as the first responding cop or firefighter.

I have heard that there was some things changing for FRS, but I am not under the State retirement system so I don't have the answers. Check with MDPD, BSO or PBSO - probably the labs might have more info.

Well said.....here here..... :)

Here's the real deal about Special Risk for Crime Scene Techs in Florida.

Several years ago, a joke of an organization called "Florida Association of Forensic Professionals" was formed. While it appeared to be a typical professional organization to outside observers, it really only existed for one reason: get Special Risk status for CSI's. The FAOFP set about recruiting CSI's from all over Florida to join and pay dues. But the dues weren't making enough money, so they encouraged their members to hold fundraisers of all kinds. Rummage sales, Bake sales, Cookbook sales, Auctions. You name it. During 2004-2005, Forensics units all over Florida held fundraisers. Hell, if you go to their website today, you can order a freakin' cookbook. You sure won't find any useful forensic science information on the website.

What did the FAOFP do with all this money, you ask? THEY HIRED A LOBBYIST! This guy (who's name is Ron Book, Google him) happily took their money and did what lobbyists do with money. He bought influence with legislators. He probably wrote the exact wording of the legislation, handed it to a State Senator he had bought off and....voila! Legislation is passed, and CSI's have Special Risk membership. It has nothing to do with their work, whether they deserve Special Risk or not. It happened because of one thing: MONEY. Did you buy anything at a at a forensics fundraiser sometime around 2004-2005? If so, then your money went straight to their lobbyist.

At this point in the story, you would think the FAOFP would lean back and pat themselves on the back for a job well done, right? Oh no. Their greed knows no bounds. They decided that Special Risk wasn't enough. They needed retroactive Special Risk, back to the date of hire. By now, you all know how this works. Fire up the fund raising machine, pay the lobbyist, buy the legislator. But, the budget climate during the 2008 Legislative session was a lot tighter than 2005. The lobbyist couldn't just get his version of the retroactive bill pushed through. Political horses were traded, and when the dust settled, retroactive was enacted... but the legislature made sure the criteria was changed to remove some types of forensic employees from Special Risk status. Oh well, collateral damage. The FAOFP got theirs, that's all that matters.

So don't just take these high minded justifications about why they got Special Risk at face value. No lawmakers sat around and said "Those CSI's do dangerous stuff, let's reward them like we do certified cops." They decided what they wanted, and then they spent the money to make it happen. Simple as that.

Oh yeah, it didn't hurt to have the number one TV show in America at the time convincing everybody that your job is more important and difficult than it really is.

I can tell you have never walked in the shoes of a Crime Scene Technician...But wow what a knowledge in another field..

I don't think any CSI on this site has asked to be treated the same as an officer. We fully acknowledge that officers face a risk every time they put on the uniform. BUT, we would like to know that when all these chemicals we use to catch the bad guys make us sick down the road that we have been compensated appropriately so we can take care of ourselves! Just like with asbestos, we may not know the how hazardous some of the chemicals we work with currently are until it's too late. I know in my 8 year career as CSI, departments have stopped using certain chemicals because they have been deemed too toxic to work with even in the most guarded applications. I wouldn't deny an officer his pay or protection because he doesn't get shot at every day, most officers never actually use their weapons in their own defense. So why would an officer come to this message board and type such ignorant things? (I'm assuming its an officer, BTW)

And yes, in the years of being a CSI, I have been attacked by a dog (the officer forgot to tell me the dog was there), chased by a suspect wielding a machete, had a confrontation with a rape suspect who returned to the scene, and almost walked into a homicide scene with the suspect still inside (this scene had been "CLEARED" by an FTO). The only thing that kept me from entering the scene was that the suspect came to the front door and started shouting at me. All of this and many more instances, without a gun, without a vest, and with some officer who wants to berate us and say we are not deserving of high risk pay. Nevermind the rounds of meds I have taken over the years because i have been exposed to HIV, TB, MRSA, oh yes, the non lethal but ever so much fun body lice! I respectfully ask this officer to get off our board and ***** about someone else on the police boards... or maybe they are sick of him as well!

My husband is an sworn officer and would NEVER even suggest that CSI do not deserve high risk pay, not because I am his wife, but because he sees what I go through on a daily basis and knows that some day if the chemicals I work with don't harm me then an inept cop may get me killed!!!

My thanks to CSIGIRL13...You have said a mouthful. I believe that the individual that has created all of this wanted to be an officer and failed. I think he feels that being a CSI/CST is beneath him. It is very obivous that he/she has their head up their fourth point of contact, because his arguements about stats make no sense. He doesn't know how the system really works. Our officers receive 65% of their pension if they should be injured on the job. That includes back and knee injuries. If on of my technicians should get injured for the same thing, we get and fight for Workers Comp. Same injury different result. So the next time the technician needs help getting on the roof of a building to recover a firearm, try holding the ladder. :evil:

Apparently our doubting officer feels that he alone is the savior of Law Enforcement and that anyone not wearing a gun is beneath him. It takes team work to successfully investigate a crime and the civilian members of that team are just as much involved as the officer on the scene.- from the call takers/dispatchers to the crime scene personnel. We have all worked with officers who have this mentality. They are the same officers who will cancel a back-up on a 'routine' call and moments later be screaming on the radio for a back-up. They are the officers who whine like babies when they're not cleared for their meal break and will milk a call for as long as possible, not advise when they are done but suddenly be available for a 'hot call'. They are the officers who are rude to the dispatchers and take pride in berating them on the radio.

With 30 years on the job I can tell you that no officer with this attitude has ever climbed up the ranks in my department. They never earn the respect of their co-workers.

Enjoy your career on the road and stay safe.

Just read the posts! good job! click here (https://wiki.citizen.apps.gov/NEA_OPI/index.php/About_Antennadeals.com).

Thanks for ones awesome posting. (http://blackdiamondengagementrings.weebly.com/)