NBC Boston reports.
Nice of her to agree. I guess she's one of the good ones.
Let's kiss it and make it better.
Why wasn't she?
Whether it is the CBA or civil service protection, it's an absolute racket. Meanwhile, we're paying her $126K per year.
And no politicians are willing to address this sweetheart deal.
These are Boston's "Finest" -- maybe we should start by prohibiting them from describing themselves that way. "Boston's Mostly Below Average."
My municipal worker’s Union here in Boston would have no hesitation supporting the firing of my ass if I was caught stealing on the job.
I’m not sure what I’d be stealing…Pupperoni or kibble? I’m reminded of the old adage that those that seek power are the least capable of wielding it. Policing as a profession and culture needs to be rebuilt from scratch.
Because she wasn’t charged with a crime? Which is odd so there has to be more here. I’ve heard rumors but if they charged here they would have moved to fire her. BPD fires (or tries to) fire officers for a lot less than this.
Why would the police only move to fire her if she were charged with a crime? The rest of us mere mortals are fired for a lot less. (Also, this seems at odd with your other statement that BPD fires for less than this.)
Where are all the news stories about officers being fired? I must be reading the wrong sources, because all I hear about is suspensions, suspensions with pay, and overturned suspensions.
First of all. You don’t have a duty to report your off work conduct do you? Especially if you weren’t charged with a crime?
as for the other part, the BPD (or schools/fire/Dpw) don’t put out news releases on HR movements.
If an employer (BPD or other), finds out about such an incident, I expect the employee to be fired. That's what happens in the real world. I'm asking why the police of all institutions has a more lenient bar.
And this is not about what the BPD puts out news releases about. We all know they would like to operate under the complete cover of darkness and only release overwritten "reports" about their heroic deeds. Thankfully, we have journalists who cover the deeds of our public servants. I'm asking why those journalists seem to find out about suspensions, but not terminations (again, based on my reading).
Your jobs HR in the real world isn’t going to be notified by the State Police about a Larceny investigation where charges aren’t filed. And you clearly have no idea what the BPD does (or any city department) because you are even asking these questions. Journalists find about suspensions (Turtleboy inckuded) because the police officers themselves leak this information (or will threaten to) most of the time. You watch too many movies bud.
I think it’s also common knowledge that most of these HR moves aren’t public record. IA ones yes, Personnel files no.
Cops only leak news about suspensions, but not terminations? I'm having a hard time following this logic.
(I never said or implied that "HR moves" are public record.)
I generally respect your contributions here. Don't call me "bud," it's beneath you.
Employees resign, transfer, get fired often. Really not much more to it than that. Don’t think most of the suspensions get published either?
The bud comment was in response to your comment about people losing their jobs for this stuff. Of the 100 OUIs in the state this weekend how many people will be fired because of it? Probably close to zero. Larceny charges will most likely be similar unless they happen on company time.
I have other things to do than set up Google Alerts to track all BPD punishments. But my original comment was that I see a lot more articles (in my browsing) that involve suspensions than I do terminations. So either (1) I'm reading bizarrely sorted articles and missing all of the terminations; or (2) there are not many terminations that are reported.
I can't see why (1) would be the case. I also can't see why reporters would be getting more information about suspensions than terminations, and thus not publishing stories about terminations that occurred. I also think that I am not the only person who has the impression that news of BPD terminations is hard to come by.
So those are all the reasons for my original questions.
I’m guessing there are 100x the amount of suspensions or disciplinary actions as there are terminations (as there would be in any job). But I would also agree than many are forced to resign or sign last chance agreements and the like.
But the terminations don’t usually come after the suspensions you might read about? I dunno I don’t follow them that close to have a count either.
If HR finds out about OUI or larcency, there is very likely to be a termination unless it's prohibited by law. That's a fact.
A Newton school teacher who gets arrested for larceny or ouil in Wellesley would get fired? For the police the guilty doesn’t even matter. Officers can be suspended for not guilty verdicts.
And forget about a teacher, what about a waiter, bartender, auto mechanic, lawyer, judge, doctor…? Hell doctors get arrested all the time in Boston for domestic violence charges and get ROs against them and I never see them losing their jobs over it. I could be wrong?
for being so stupid thinking that a casino doesn’t have security cameras everywhere.
if i'm not mistaken, this city employee makes more money than any city councilor
I'd rather cops be well paid and held to a high standard vs the later. As of right now this officer is paying a higher price for a lesser crime vs Councilor licenses-are-optional. (Has she reimbursed the homeowner for the damage she caused?)
Police should be like doctors: Well paid but with extensive training and highly regulated.
Well, that's just the point, they are barely regulated with no meaningful outside oversight. Police can do almost anything and get away with it under the current misguided judicial philosophy of "qualified immunity"
They SHOULD be highly regulated. They SHOULD be trained for 5-10 years like doctors.
It's just that isn't how things are currently done.
I have no problem with cops being paid very well if the level of training and oversight is extensive.
but it would seem to me that folks would be a little more outraged since she is paid so well
Where they say suspensions are for peons.
Having this on her record will keep her from ever having any significant impact in cases for the rest of her career, a defense lawyer will simply ask about the time she stole money and her credibility will be questioned.
previous cases where cash was involved.
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Copyright by Adam Gaffin and by content posters.Advertise | About Universal Hub | Contact | Privacy