Nurturing Misconduct
Tim Dees
Editor-in-Chief
Officer.com
There is a Latin phrase often used when the oversight of law enforcement officers is discussed: Quis custodiet ipso custodes? (the first word is often cited without the “s”. Not being a Latin scholar, I can’t tell you which is correct.) It’s difficult to translate literally, but it comes out to something like “Who will watch the watchmen?” or “Who will watch the watchers themselves?” The idea is that there is always a question among the watched–in this case, the citizenry–about who will make sure that the police are doing their jobs, and doing them properly. It’s a valid concern.
Left to their own governance, just about anyone will start to goof off or only follow the rules that suit them, sooner or later. This applies to everyone from fast food workers to members of Congress–come to think of it, especially to members of Congress. So, although we hate to admit it, it’s actually good to have someone around who will kick us in the butt when necessary. This assumes, of course, that you are actually interested in getting the job done, or in doing it properly. That’s most of us. There will always be a few whose primary interest is in getting away with as much as they can. If the job is one that doesn’t lend itself to close supervision, or if the supervision is inadequate, then the worker can do exactly that. The worst of all worlds is when the supervisor is also one of the people subscribing to the minimalist work philosophy. If that happens, even well-planned controls are useless.
Police work is one of the jobs that isn’t supervised all that closely. The independent nature of the typical police assignment is one of the aspects that appeals to many cops. Most of the time, this isn’t because they fear being supervised. They just like the freedom that the job offers. You have to answer the radio and perform certain tasks as prescribed, but most of the time, you decide how you will spend your uncommitted time. You can work traffic, check doors and windows, stop in on the convenience store clerks, bartenders and security guards on your beat, visit all the vacation house checks, or just pull over and watch the world go by for a few minutes. Some of my most pleasant memories of patrol are nothing more than driving down the street with the window down and the radio turned low, not knowing what I was going to be involved in one minute from now, and appreciating that there were a thousand guys who would love to be me at this moment. I understand that last part even better now, because when I see a patrol car, I’m usually one of those thousand guys.
Of course, there are police supervisors, usually called “sergeants.” The sergeant is the first-line supervisor, with anywhere from zero to ten officers or other employees reporting to him. Because his subordinates are usually spread all over the jurisdiction, he has to rely heavily on spot checks of their work, reports from citizens, the quality and quantity of their paperwork, and what he hears over the radio. The supervisor can always follow his people to calls and show up at their traffic stops, but doing that too often lowers morale, makes him unable to accomplish the various administrative tasks he is assigned, and brands the sergeant as a micromanager.
The good sergeants learn the balance between being available and/or present when needed, and not harassing the troops. He will identify the emergent leaders among his flock and ask them to quietly look out for officers who are inexperienced or are having problems, counsel them when needed, and report back on their progress. He shows up on selected calls after the main festivities have ended, so that he can get the gist of what happened and bring in additional resources if needed. He gives the officers who will do the job the freedom to do it.
Unfortunately, not all sergeants are good sergeants, just as not all cops are good cops. Police work is unlike most other professions, in that being promoted through the organizational hierarchy often means that less, not more, is expected of you. There are a few others like this. In large law firms, new associates toil at 80 and 120-hour work weeks in the hopes of making partner. Once you’re there, the job is less lawyering and more bringing in and keeping business–being a “rainmaker.” Academia is similar. Instructors, lecturers and assistant professors teach multiple “preps” of courses, often taking on night classes, courses held at remote sites, and summer sessions all in the hope of being offered tenure. Once you get that, you might teach several classes, but they will be only one or two preps, so that they’re in essence giving the same lectures, papers and tests several times a week. Publish a paper that no one will ever read now and again, and you’re fixed for life.
In most private industry, where any expense reduces the bottom line, a promotion may mean more money and perquisites, but it also means more work and responsibility. It’s nice to have the big corner office and ride on the private jet, but the office is there for the frequent meetings the manager will chair, and the jet is a place where one is expected to meet and confer more and work while getting from A to B. Time is money. The typical big business executive is a driven, Type A person who challenges his subordinates to keep up with him. Slackers, they ain’t.
The police supervisor and manager can be like this, too, but there is often a tremendous opportunity to be a slug, if that’s the objective. Sergeants respond to very few calls–lieutenants and above go to none, or close to it. The sergeant can be so laissez-faire that he never sees his troops anywhere outside the station. One sergeant I know of was known to the troops as “the eternal flame.” He never went out.
The sergeant who does this has little idea of what his troops are up to, in part by design. If he doesn’t know about any misconduct, he doesn’t have to do any personnel investigations or follow-up, doesn’t do extra paperwork, and continues to live his working life in blissful ignorance. Well, that’s not entirely true. Cops are some of the most vicious gossips in creation, and there isn’t much that goes on in a police agency and remains secret for long. If an officer is engaging in a pattern of misconduct, you can bet someone knows about it.
How is it that the sergeant is allowed to do this? It happens because his lieutenant is practicing the same level of nonfeasance, as is the captain, and so on. This chain non-reaction perpetuates throughout the agency for generations of cops, because the old regime will see to it that the people coming up are people who won’t rock the boat. This is one of the ways that an organizational culture develops and entrenches.
Law enforcement organizations plagued with this kind of problem are not only ripe for officer misconduct, they also have no hope of progressing in any meaningful way. Doing something new means that someone has to acquire more knowledge, and even worse, might have to take a risk that the venture doesn’t work. No, too much trouble.
This is where strong leadership is critical. If the chief executive decides that he is going to coast into retirement, the people he serves are screwed. But if the top dog starts holding people accountable, provides incentives to excel, and ensures there are consequences for poor performance, the results can be breathtaking. When William Bratton was the police commissioner in New York City, he initiated the Compstat program. Compstat tracked all sorts of measurements of performance for cops: absenteeism, hours lost to on duty injuries, cases closed, crimes reported, summonses written. Periodically, meetings were held where precinct and unit commanders stood in front of the assembly and reported their progress, and then were grilled on how they were addressing their deficiencies. Those that didn’t have good answers were told to report to One Police Plaza for reassignment. If they couldn’t or wouldn’t do the job, it was time to find someone that would. When the survivors, or their replacements, got back to the office, you can bet that the stuff started rolling downhill and lower-echelon managers were given their marching orders. Cops were forced to get out of their comfort zones, and crime rates dropped.
Poor supervision doesn’t create bad cops, but it does nurture them. The good cops that work with the bad ones can continue to strive for excellence, but they will escape recognition for it until the regime changes or they move someplace where their efforts will be more appreciated. More often, they succumb to the standard of mediocrity and become one of those people that Thoreau described, leading quiet lives of desperation.
This is another area where the cops are relatively powerless to change things. The individual cop that reports misconduct will not only take heat from his peers, he will be ridiculed or just ignored by his supervisor. If he is persistent, he’ll find himself the target of “package building,” where every transgression, real or imagined, is documented and held out for discipline, until there’s enough to fire him or he quits. This might sound overly dramatic, but it happens far more often than most people know.
The solution lies more with the citizen who has the tenacity to demand accountability from the local government, but most citizens are content to stay in their own comfort zones, not rock the boat, and not put forth any effort to make things better. Maybe this organizational culture thing is more contagious than I thought.
Your pessimism is showing, sir. Some supervisors are lax, and the quality of policing where they work shows it. But is it everywhere? Is it part of that evil, shadowy police culture boogyman? The civilian bashers who will flock to this column will agree and cite you as proof, and those of us who disagree as “protecting bad cops”.
I will say this for the posts that will follow about us protecting bad cops: As said before, the anger good cops have for the bad is huge. They screw us all of us over.
Poor supervision is a problem in all occupations. Bad supervisors often surround themselves with fellow slackers. Yes men. Suck-ups. Brown-nosers. Who created whom? The slugs or the slugs that nurture them? Its not a cop thing: civilian jobs have the same problems, especially those where the ‘big bosses’ are not there for 2/3 of the day.
You seem resigned to something that is not as pervasive as you say it is, nor is it getting worse. In fact, tacit approval of mediocre and/or bad cops, supervision and chiefs is shrinking at an exponential rate. What I saw tolerated at the beginning of my career is now a career ender. This is good.
Its funny that you use business world examples. I will say part of the problem we do have is that in adopting more of a business approach to policing — and in rejecting our roots and traditions — we worry more about creating ‘police managers’ and ‘police executives’ than building and nurturing real leaders. Leaders are needed more than anything, but in adapting good ideas from business, we have sometimes lost focus who we are: and it certainly isn’t a business.
Allow me an example: if X is up for promotion, its likely the question won’t be “What kind of a leader is he in his current position?” More likely it will be: “Has he got college?” Don’t get me wrong. Education is a wonderful, enriching thing to be encouraged. But we have gotten wrapped up in displaying the appearances of progress instead of making rapid and real progress. Perhaps this is the source of your frustration and pessimism. It frustrates me.
A shift sergeant who leads raises the quality of his officers. A midrank Captain or Commander who actually leads raises the levels of their divisions. A Chief who really leads creates an effective, proud department. It still happens, thank goodness. My current chief holds our traditions high but also demands we do things better, too.
I do submit that in your last paragraph, you are correct in saying the citizens must continue always to demand better. But they should not be fooled by feel-good programs and change-for-the-sake-of-change in their law enforcement agencies. The measure of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder…
It’s a mess Tim, and affects small and large depts. It all boils down to personal accountability, and fortitude in the face of adversity. Thanks for bringing this issue up for discussion.
Excellent article!
I am a retured cop of 31 years and an instructor in the polcie academy, and the Ethics instructor. This article was excellent. I now live in Central Fl and I seee lots of ethical dilemmas that turn into officer arrests here.
This is so right on the money! Good Job!!
Good job Tim. Your comments about what happens to cops who report other cops is exactly right.
It is true. People get the goverment they want …and deserve.
Excellent article. My agency suffers horribly from this type of scenario. People getting promoted frequently don’t deserve it and the good Officers who want it to be a great job don’t put in for management because they know they won’t be able to change anything then they are stuck being one of “them”. This kind of incompetence and poor quality of managing (more management and NO “leadership”) has led to some of the lowest morale that I or other Officers I work with that have twenty and more years on the job have seen. I only pray that we can, as a group, tough it out until it changes, which it will…. eventually!
This is so true. I have had first hand experience with SLUGS in comand. The Sheriff’s Office that I recently worked in prided its self on promoting screwups. These people were borderline criminals. The worse you are the higher rank you could get. It makes me sick and that is why I intend to run for Sheriff.
Most cops want to do their job and do it well. It is when they are second quessed for every decision they make, especially by civilian managers or mayors who are always looking for something wrong.
There are even “police accountability firms” out in the business world whose sole purpose is to look for situations to penalize cops. Evaulating police calls and decisions by police officers as Monday morning quarterbacks is not what is needed.
More police supervision by good leaders will go a long way….and I said it right…”good leaders” not “good executives.”
GREAT ARTICLE, YOUR COMMENT REGARDING GOOD OFFICERS SUCCUMBING TO THE STANDARD OF MIDIOCRITY IS RIGHT ON TARGET.
Nice!
Sounds like my department (NYPD-retired sergeant). Not to brag , but I was often riddiculed for not taking it easy but I felt that I took the job to fight crime so that is exactly what I did and that is what I expected from my cops. I didn’t much care about activity for activity’s sake but I expected crime conditions to be addressed to the best of each officer’s abilities. By the way, the slugs found ways to remain slugs even after Bratton. The real reason crime dropped under Bratton (my opinion) is that he untied the hands of the beat cops to make drug arrests. Prior to Bratton drug arrests by uniformed patrol officers where considered a corruption hazard. I was a Housing Cop so my department did not share the same organizational viewpoint. I (as a PO) and my officers (as a sergeant) made countless drug arrests while the precinct officer literally stood by and watched. It wasn’t the cops fault. The supervisory chain of command, all the way to Police Plaza, was afraid of potential liability. Bratton made failure to take action a liability. Once the workers were allowed to work the work got done. Commanders that now wanted drug locations cleared up found little resistance from the cops. One precinct in particular had to borrow arrest reports from us because they were not prepared for the increased patrol activity. Pride was re-instilled and morale shot up over night.
Excellent article and very true, the good cops carry the slugs due in part because of lazy supervision. The slugs are treated as out of sight, out of mind by supervision. Example, a traffic officer I know will make an arrest for a Suspended license 2-3 hrs prior to off duty and will still be on that basic report for an hr after. This happens daily and nothing is said or done about it. He’s continually inside screwing around while the rest of us are making up for his absence and incompitence and he’s getting ot on top of it.
GREAT article. It’s a horrible situation but alive and well in Oklahoma. I thought it was an isolated problem it’s comforting to see that I’m not alone.
In this age of finger pointing and reporting the negative aspects of the Police community, it would be refreshing if the good was reported with the same frequency as the bad. As much as people want to believe that officers are doing a good job, it is hard to believe if the good is never reported. More times than not it is a tragedy that brings forth stories of officers good deeds. Awards may seem meaningless sometimes but the publication of decorated officer’s achievements can go a long way to changing the perception of a department, both within the community and the department. A public pat on the back every now and again goes a long way to increasing morale and perception.
A well written and well put article. Unfortunately everyone can see this situation in their departments to one degree or another. I always wonder if political favors, ass kissing, nepotism, or just plain dirty knees are new/recent ways of getting ahead, or if these prerequisites for promotion have existed forever. Unfortunately, my DNA does not allow me to do those things, thus keeping me a lowly patrolman forever. It’s a real shame that when I went through the academy 17 years ago, I can’t help but feel that I was lied to then regarding how things “really” operate. I guess I was just really naive, and probably still am. Amazing!!!!
The article makes good points, but the pendulum can swing too far the other way too. Try having a chief who prides himself on making his officers accountable, and demands that they deliver an honest day’s work. Sounds good on the surface right? It does until every bogus citizen complaint gets you in hot water. Or you get written up because your traffic stops are down due to the fact that you’ve been answering calls all night and haven’t had a chance to take a lunch break much less pull someone over. Chanting about accountability is usually a good thing, but it can be taken way too far. Being micromanaged and over disciplined for minor incidents can be very demoralizing. Morale in my department is currently the worst it has been in decades. We are being treated like children. Most of us took this job to help people and make the world a better place. We are now being told that citizens’ calls for service are not a priority. We are pushed to our limits and are constantly pushed for “stats”. The constant stress is starting to get to many of us. We are being rewarded for neglecting the public and generating as many stats as possible. Pulling over a soccer mom for a broken tail light is not why I became a cop. Compstat can be a good thing, but it can also be something terrible.
Compstat initially was a great tool but it has evolved into a nightmare. Boss knock down felonies all day long to misd and often the cops are ordered to do nothing at all that does not generate money for the city of ny. (summons) Ask any cop on the job here about Constat and he will tell you the truth. It is BS. If they don’t, tell them to lay off the koolaid.
Great Article. My Question is Who Is Policing the Police?? check out this link http://www.teamliberty.net/id224.html
I agree. To give a personal example, I am a professional male with no history of police involvement. While visiting New York, my collegue and I were approached by a Port Authority Police Officer(Brock) who told us in a brusque manner “move along, now!” My acquaintance was waiting for his Amtrak. I remarked, “let’s go or he’ll shoot us.” The officer responsed, “You’re G–damned right I will..right between the eyes.” I turned to him and said “are you threatening us?” He then responsed, “what are you talking about, you must have a hearing impairment.” His female partner then said, “he didn’t say a word to you.” When I informed him that I would make a formal complaint, he gave me his full name and badge number and said “do what you want, nothing will be done.”
I immediately tried to locate a supervisor and approached another officer and briefly related the encounter. He replied, we don’t have supervisors and then proceeded to question me about my whereabouts, etc. etc. I finally spoke to a lieutenant who gave me a form for the IAD. I will definitely follow up with this complaint.
In short, this episode has erased any respect that I ever had for police officers and I realize that they do have the very real potential to abuse their power and in fact, get away with whatever they want to get away with.
I am just hoping for the opportunity to serve on a jury involvement a law enforcement officer. I would conceal my biases and do whatever I can to return a guilty verdict.