PDA

View Full Version : pay decrease



04-22-2010, 12:53 AM
I have been hearing rumors that there may be a 1% decrease in leo's salary. If this is true then how can this be? They create 2 brand new LT. positions, a few months ago a new (giggles) Captains position. A couple of new Sgt. positions to cover the new LT. positions, and so on. I know they say they made adjustments to make way for that. But how can (if it IS true) it be justified to cut LEO's salary when other non essential positions were created. And please don't tell me a tac team LT. and a new civil LT. position are "essential"). And please don't get me started about all of the so called support personnel raises. Hell, at ths rate K.G. might as well run for Sheriff, lol. It's almost as if they are starting to forget the reason the agency exist. Namely for the law enforcement and the protection of our community. Happy LEO's make for LEO's that will stick around. As opposed to hiring 5 to 6 newbs per month and never having that experience factor.

Oh, and do you think we will ever reach a point where we are too top heavy. Because I think we passed that a looooong thime ago.


comments?

05-07-2010, 07:09 PM
I have been hearing rumors that there may be a 1% decrease in leo's salary. If this is true then how can this be? They create 2 brand new LT. positions, a few months ago a new (giggles) Captains position. A couple of new Sgt. positions to cover the new LT. positions, and so on. I know they say they made adjustments to make way for that. But how can (if it IS true) it be justified to cut LEO's salary when other non essential positions were created. And please don't tell me a tac team LT. and a new civil LT. position are "essential"). And please don't get me started about all of the so called support personnel raises. Hell, at ths rate K.G. might as well run for Sheriff, lol. It's almost as if they are starting to forget the reason the agency exist. Namely for the law enforcement and the protection of our community. Happy LEO's make for LEO's that will stick around. As opposed to hiring 5 to 6 newbs per month and never having that experience factor.

Oh, and do you think we will ever reach a point where we are too top heavy. Because I think we passed that a looooong thime ago.


comments?

Just a quick comment on your gripe about the Lieutenant positions.

The "span of control" concept mandates what rank is justified in various positions according to the number of people they supervise. These positions merit the rank. Particularly in Civil, it had been a Lt. position and was temporarily downgraded (to justify moving an incumbent without embarrassing him) and is now being restored to where it should be.

Did you ever stop to think that fewer positions of rank in the agency would translate into fewer opportunities for promotion? Your gripe then would be that no one ever gets promoted because there are so few promotional positions.

Either way you should be happy because you get to gripe.

:cop:

05-08-2010, 02:27 AM
So with that in mind, what is the span of control requirement for the recently created Captain position?

05-09-2010, 06:58 AM
Justified, is the best argument you have the fact that creating more top ranking positions means more opportunity for promotion?
That's lame as hell.
There are capt's that are in charge of no one but civilians, there is an lt over civil, when there isn't even a sgt under him/her.
It has gotten way to top heavy. The answer is no keep creating top positions. It has gotten over balanced and I think many have begun to think our boss has lost touch with what is truly going on in the agency.
Do you really believe that at least two of the capt's, one person of higher rank, and a lt or two will honestly keep their positions the day someone else takes the office? All I can say is pad those "highest 5 years of pay" for retirement. Because those persons know what will happen with a new boss, and what it will mean for their positions. I suspect they will have in place their plan for the post SB regime.