Inbred Work Environment

[wfraser]

Just needed a place to vent and get some feedback.

A thing that I noticed in my law enforcement career is that the administrators always seem to work off a inbred system. About 3 years ago I changed agencies in hopes of getting into a better environment. Once everything started rolling I noticed that the administrators were still inbred. No one was wanting to impliment new ideas of doing things. "So and so did it like this and it still works so why change it?"

I switched back to my original agency because of educational perks however, I was still able to pull great information from the other agency that I had just left. While speaking to the senior officer who also is the training officer I mentioned several ideas that seemed ideal to put forth.

1.) More frequent officer training...currently 20 hours a year..state minimum

2.) Ammunition and range practice...currently qualification only...no combat shooting or senario based shooting.

The response that I received was, "You sure do have high hopes...they aren't going to go for that."

This officer basically shot down my whole spill....he went on to say how he had worked at this agency for 12 years and he knew what was going to fly and wasn't going to fly...basically, he has become inbred with the rest.

I even opted to set up an account for everyone to give $25 dollars a week and
when the money was sufficent, order everyone 500 rounds to practice with....got shot down.

Anyone else work in a inbred enviroment?

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

Anyone else work in a inbred enviroment?

I think most folks in uniform have from time to time been in that environment.

I have found that what worked best for me is to make sure that what you are wanting done will result in the betterment of the organization and not just make you feel more comfortable about who you are and what you are doing. The easiest way was to look at the stated mission of the organization, analyze what its abilities and shortcoming are in meeting that mission, and what steps could be taken to get to the desired goal. In order to do that you have to look at everything objectively from within the organization as well as those things that impact on it from the outside that the organization cannot control but to which it must react. Now I do not know a whole lot of people that are comfortable with change, especially if it upsets the way that they have been doing business over the years. But you can get folks to change if they feel that it is in their best interest. You need to show them why your suggestions are in their best interest and in the best interest of the department. Saying that they need more training time or time on the range might sound like common sense, but showing them why and how they can get there will give you some credibility in your efforts. You know it might not even be your department that is causing the resistance to change but those above your department. I found, for instance, that the perception of an organization of which I had just assumed command was one that was painted by uninformed folks at echelons above "god" and because of this we were about to be "over supervised". My solution was very simple. I walked into the bosses office, told him what I could do for him and that if he allowed me to do so he would look like a hero to his boss. To back that up I invited him to see for himself what our capabilities were and the rest was easy. I know that this sounds like an over simplification, but resistance to change is more about fear of the unknown by those that are either uneducated/misinformed about the effects of the change or that even change is needed. It also has to do, in some cases, with protection of one's rice bowl while others just feel inadequate in their own competencies to be able to deal with the situation and capabilities that any improvements might bring. Just some thoughts.

[glebo]

Just needed a place to vent and get some feedback.

A thing that I noticed in my law enforcement career is that the administrators always seem to work off a inbred system. About 3 years ago I changed agencies in hopes of getting into a better environment. Once everything started rolling I noticed that the administrators were still inbred. No one was wanting to impliment new ideas of doing things. "So and so did it like this and it still works so why change it?"

I switched back to my original agency because of educational perks however, I was still able to pull great information from the other agency that I had just left. While speaking to the senior officer who also is the training officer I mentioned several ideas that seemed ideal to put forth.

1.) More frequent officer training...currently 20 hours a year..state minimum

2.) Ammunition and range practice...currently qualification only...no combat shooting or senario based shooting.

The response that I received was, "You sure do have high hopes...they aren't going to go for that."

This officer basically shot down my whole spill....he went on to say how he had worked at this agency for 12 years and he knew what was going to fly and wasn't going to fly...basically, he has become inbred with the rest.

I even opted to set up an account for everyone to give $25 dollars a week and
when the money was sufficent, order everyone 500 rounds to practice with....got shot down.

Anyone else work in a inbred enviroment?

Sounds like SWC to me. But is getting better with all these combat vet O's coming in. It was terrible before. You got more results beating your head against a wall.

[Peregrino]

Change = Work. If you want the change, be prepared to do the work. COL M's post hits the nail on the head. After you've done what he suggests try contrasting the price of training against the cost of losing a lawsuit because officers lacked adequate training. Persuading bean counters to support LEO training is an art. (Any of our regular members who are LEOs can chime in here! :D) There has to be a clear cost/benefit analysis (and somebody else has to do the WORK) before they will act. There are some national level LEO organizations who might be able to help (or at least advise) you. Good Luck.

[Dozer523]

10071

Just be careful you are not seen as this guy. ;)

(

[The Reaper]

Change = Work. If you want the change, be prepared to do the work. COL M's post hits the nail on the head. After you've done what he suggests try contrasting the price of training against the cost of losing a lawsuit because officers lacked adequate training. Persuading bean counters to support LEO training is an art. (Any of our regular members who are LEOs can chime in here! :D) There has to be a clear cost/benefit analysis (and somebody else has to do the WORK) before they will act. There are some national level LEO organizations who might be able to help (or at least advise) you. Good Luck.

Amen.

Does your Chief realize that the legal precedents have been set that periodic live fire on a static range are not considered to be adequate training for lethal force engagements?

Suits have been brought and won against departments which do not adopt more rigorous and realistic training. Whether an officer is shot, or a suspect, there will be litigation, and a few thousand per year in practice ammo and an improved training program are going to look like a pretty good deal then.

TR

[JJ_BPK]

Besides the other reasons given,, It could also be budget restraint..

As home values go down,, the tax man has to find new & creative ways to squeeze us..

Here is a case it point,,



http://www.local6.com/news/17554307/detail.html

Police May Stop Responding To Some Crimes, Budget Crunch Forces Move To Be Considered

PALM BAY, Fla. -- A budget crunch in Palm Bay could mean city residents who forget to secure car doors or close garages will get only a case number and nothing in terms of a visit by patrol officers if something is stolen.

The possible policy revision is part of a wider cost-cutting look at the Palm Bay Police Department's $20 million annual budget, Local 6 News partner Florida Today reported.

"We're looking very seriously at the types of calls we would go to," Palm Bay Police Chief Bill Berger said. "Still, about 85 to 90 percent of the people who've had their cars broken into left the car doors open. But, obviously, if it's an actual break-in, we'll respond."

The potential move is seen as an unusual step.

Other surrounding agencies -- such as Melbourne Police Department -- continue to respond to similar vehicle break-in calls.

Berger, however, pointed out that his agency has been hit hard by higher fuel costs and a cut in revenue. Earlier this year, Berger implemented a number of cost-saving efforts, including a no-idling policy for patrol cars.

"Certainly, Amendment 1 had an impact," Berger said, referring to the sweeping, statewide property-tax ballot item voters approved earlier this year. "The big promise was that it wouldn't affect public safety, but it has."

The department likely will lose four police officer positions -- all held for officers either working or serving in the military in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Those officers will have their jobs when they return, but we're having to keep those positions vacant," Berger said.

Also under review will be whether officers who take home marked patrol cars will need to pay for their own gas or reimburse the city about 50 cents for every mile driven away from work.

Berger said he also is working hard to keep the department's non-taxpayer-funded programs running, including its DNA database program that uses officers to collect blood, saliva and other biological evidence at crime scenes.



I hope they keep enough in the budget for SOME ammo????

[greenberetTFS]

Besides the other reasons given,, It could also be budget restraint..

As home values go down,, the tax man has to find new & creative ways to squeeze us..

Here is a case it point,,



I hope they keep enough in the budget for SOME ammo????

JJ_BPK,

If I hadn't read this with my own eyes I wouldn't have believed it! :rolleyes:

GB TFS :munchin

[exsquid]

Do some internet research on police departsments being sued for "willful negligence" for "failure to train". Show your department what the possible consequences of losing one of these suits is. Cost benefit analysis will show that in the long run any money spent in officer training safes money.

x/S