The Millionaire Cop Next Door

[E5RANGER375]

Just FYI, the nearest City P.D. to my house pays $24,000 a year to its patrolmen. That works out to about $11.00 an hour and I think they are the highest paid cops in the county.

thats dirty. would be better to go to fewer officers and double their pay in my opinion. or cut the fat out of the city budget. people working at white castle make more than that.

 

[UncleMike]

Just FYI, the nearest City P.D. to my house pays $24,000 a year to its patrolmen. That works out to about $11.00 an hour and I think they are the highest paid cops in the county.

The last I knew it was around $32,000 per year here. That's about $15.70 per hr.
Another factor that hasn't been brought up yet is overtime.
I can't speak for all of the State but the guys on my old Department do not, and never have, received paid overtime. They get "Comp Time" instead of pay. That's time off given at one hour off, per one hour worked, past the scheduled shift. Not time and one half like the Private Sector.
Comp time does not pay the bills. It's only a good thing is you have a part time job that you can work during the time off duty.
Comp Time also screws the Public big time. It means more Officers are not working their shifts and other Officers have to work overtime to fill in their spot. It's a vicious cycle that hurts Public Safety in the name of "budget control."
Mike

 

[JBusch8899]

My friend Mike, was appointed to the Indiana War Memorial Police in 2002. His annual gross salary was approximately $17K, and no officer that he was aware, was assigned a take home vehicle.

He lasted exactly 2 years, before taking another position with another department.

 

[Eddie]

The last I knew it was around $32,000 per year here. That's about $15.70 per hr.
Another factor that hasn't been brought up yet is overtime.
I can't speak for all of the State but the guys on my old Department do not, and never have, received paid overtime. They get "Comp Time" instead of pay. That's time off given at one hour off, per one hour worked, past the scheduled shift. Not time and one half like the Private Sector.
Comp time does not pay the bills. It's only a good thing is you have a part time job that you can work during the time off duty.
Comp Time also screws the Public big time. It means more Officers are not working their shifts and other Officers have to work overtime to fill in their spot. It's a vicious cycle that hurts Public Safety in the name of "budget control."
Mike

Its the same around here; government employees earn comp time and they take second jobs with the comp time to make ends meet. Some of the outlying towns get by with only a part time Town Marshall. It is possible there to call the police and be told that the Marshall is at work (at a different job) and to call back tomorrow. Emergency response is left to Clinton P.D., County or State, sometimes a C.O. as well.

When you consider we have a county 37 miles long and only 7 miles wide its kind of scary to think how far away help can be some nights.

 

[bigg cheese]

@ OP

I think there should be noted an important distinction between State and Federal employees -- My experience, personally, has been that state employees typically make 10-15% less than a private sector individual doing the same job.

For what I do, I make 30-40% less than my private sector counter parts.

Admittedly, though, we do get more holidays and sick days, excellent (but declining) insurance, and I haven't had even a COLA raise since before the recession began, but not enough to make up half the gap.

 

[Leadeye]

As a question to those publicly employed, are any of those jobs outsourced overseas? I've been working in manufacturing since the 70s in Indiana and have watched it vanish like snow in July. I remember in the 70s about any small to medium sized town had some sort of private industry serving automotive, furniture, and other industries, now all gone.

So much of "private" industry today gets it's revenue from tax money today that when you add it all up, today's economy is unsustainable.

 

[UncleMike]

As a question to those publicly employed, are any of those jobs outsourced overseas? I've been working in manufacturing since the 70s in Indiana and have watched it vanish like snow in July. I remember in the 70s about any small to medium sized town had some sort of private industry serving automotive, furniture, and other industries, now all gone.

So much of "private" industry today gets it's revenue from tax money today that when you add it all up, today's economy is unsustainable.

Unfortunately it's a sad fact of todays economics that many private sector jobs can either be done here, or in another country.
Most Public Employment requires that the worker be physically present within the work area.
We were required to live within the County where we worked. The Chief was required to live within the City Limits.
It would be kinda difficult to call the Police, EMS, or Fire Department in to work an emergency if they lived in India.
Mike

 

[irishfan]

My company gave all their employees that laid off 1 year recall rights. If they got called back within that year, they came back to their seniority, pay, etc but no vacation time if they were off so many hours. They called a few back here and there over the course of that year. They were laid of in Dec. of 08 and they didn't really start bringing temps in til the spring of this year.

In the early 2000's, my company nearly went bankrupt building 30,000 units. We skated by on 13,000 units last year. My company didn't take laying of 800 people lightly. If they wanted to keep the doors open and the other 1000 people still working, they had to make that choice.

How long are they supposed to give laid off people recall rights? How many employers would offer recall rights at all?

Just about every large(more than 100) employer I have worked for has call back rights. If the people worked there before and are brought back as temps then why not hire them back full time after the normal 90 day probation period? The reason most places use temps is to get cheap labor out of people for as long as possible. Also, they could have just gave you and the other thousand a pay cut like you rationalize as a good idea for public service jobs.

 

[hornadylnl]

Just about every large(more than 100) employer I have worked for has call back rights. If the people worked there before and are brought back as temps then why not hire them back full time after the normal 90 day probation period? The reason most places use temps is to get cheap labor out of people for as long as possible. Also, they could have just gave you and the other thousand a pay cut like you rationalize as a good idea for public service jobs.

I said earlier in this thread that I took a 5% paycut. The salaried people first took a 5% paycut and another 5% when we got ours.

There is talk that they are going to hire some of these guys back. A lot of companies hire temps because they don't have to waste their own money on physicals, drug tests, etc. when the new hire quits in less than a week. If they can hack it as a temp, they hire them on.

Look at the companies position from your own point of view. Do you think I'm going to go out and buy a brand new car just because I get my 5% back(if I ever do) in this economy. Our company is far from out of the woods. What good does it do for the company to hire these guys right back on if the economy tanks again (which I'm betting it will)? It costs the company money they don't really have and it's a bad PR move to hire people on and then turn around and lay them off again in just a few months.

If I were one of those laid off maintenance guys, I'd gladly come back at $17 an hour. Where else are you going to find that kind of pay?

 

[irishfan]

I said earlier in this thread that I took a 5% paycut. The salaried people first took a 5% paycut and another 5% when we got ours.

There is talk that they are going to hire some of these guys back. A lot of companies hire temps because they don't have to waste their own money on physicals, drug tests, etc. when the new hire quits in less than a week. If they can hack it as a temp, they hire them on.

Look at the companies position from your own point of view. Do you think I'm going to go out and buy a brand new car just because I get my 5% back(if I ever do) in this economy. Our company is far from out of the woods. What good does it do for the company to hire these guys right back on if the economy tanks again (which I'm betting it will)? It costs the company money they don't really have and it's a bad PR move to hire people on and then turn around and lay them off again in just a few months.

If I were one of those laid off maintenance guys, I'd gladly come back at $17 an hour. Where else are you going to find that kind of pay?

I understand what you are saying about not hiring brand new people straight on but why not the ones who were there before? Also, why didn't they make people like you go to $17 an hour rather than just 5% so that more people could have kept their job? Would you be willing to take the pay cut?

 

[hornadylnl]

I understand what you are saying about not hiring brand new people straight on but why not the ones who were there before? Also, why didn't they make people like you go to $17 an hour rather than just 5% so that more people could have kept their job? Would you be willing to take the pay cut?

I also took over a $30 a week cut on my 401k contribution. I never complained about the 5% cut and if another cut keeps me from losing my job, so be it. It's a reality of the times we are living in.

How many teachers or police are volunteering for cuts so their peers can keep their jobs?

 

[Fargo]

So much of "private" industry today gets it's revenue from tax money today that when you add it all up, today's economy is unsustainable.

You make an excellent point. I would think that before cutting police/fire/emergency wages and jobs, perhaps the posters here should consider de-subsidizing so-called "private" industry. I bet there is hardly a poster in this thread whose wages don't come in some part from tax dollars.

Best,

Joe

 

[irishfan]

I also took over a $30 a week cut on my 401k contribution. I never complained about the 5% cut and if another cut keeps me from losing my job, so be it. It's a reality of the times we are living in.

How many teachers or police are volunteering for cuts so their peers can keep their jobs?

School system in my town just cut 30 more teachers. If you read the paper you will see that is a common trend right now. What I asked is if you would be willing to go to $17 an hour so that others you work with could keep their job? Did you offer to do something like that so your company could keep more people on?

 

[rambone]

yeah i thnk that phrase was started by a rich guy who wanted to make all the profits from people who did the dirty work in this country. somewhere we got off track and started making people feel like its wrong to be happy that you make good money doing what you love, or that you should appologize for it. but its the true American Dream.

If your busting your azz for pennies and some dusch bag is sitting in an air conditioned office not even knowing how the company works, but still making double or tripple what you make, then thats wrong. the higher up the chain you go the lazier the people get, and the more $$ they make. its all about patting each other on the back and stomping on the average man.

This should be a letter to the editor, of The Daily Worker.

i believe that LEO's should be some of the highest paid possitions there are. we need to make it attractive to upstanding citizens, as well as reward them for the desire to help others.

Who's going to pay for that?

We pay politicians in Washington a handsome salary, and yet they are more corrupt than ever before.

If it were possible, I wish all public employees and every working person could be paid a trillion dollars an hour, unfortunately, I live in the realm of possibilities. It isn't always nice there, but I do know what's possible and what isn't possible. I also know that programs like these are what kill nations.

Haha, +1

I think a trillion dollars an hour should be minimum wage.

 

[hornadylnl]

You make an excellent point. I would think that before cutting police/fire/emergency wages and jobs, perhaps the posters here should consider de-subsidizing so-called "private" industry. I bet there is hardly a poster in this thread whose wages don't come in some part from tax dollars.

Best,

Joe

My employer just told us at a recent meeting that they were getting some defense work and acted like it was a good thing. I laughed at them.

 

[hornadylnl]

School system in my town just cut 30 more teachers. If you read the paper you will see that is a common trend right now. What I asked is if you would be willing to go to $17 an hour so that others you work with could keep their job? Did you offer to do something like that so your company could keep more people on?

if my employer told me tonight ghat my pay were cut to $17 an hour, I would be here tomorrow. I guess I could go sit on my hands at home and make nothing instead.

If there was work for them to do, I would. We went from 6+ production lines to 3. We went from building over 60,000 units at our peak to 13,000. How many people do you propose to stand around the same piece of equipment?

 

[irishfan]

if my employer told me tonight ghat my pay were cut to $17 an hour, I would be here tomorrow. I guess I could go sit on my hands at home and make nothing instead.

If there was work for them to do, I would. We went from 6+ production lines to 3. We went from building over 60,000 units at our peak to 13,000. How many people do you propose to stand around the same piece of equipment?

I am just wondering why you did not make a proposal to your bosses to take a drastic pay cut since they were having trouble making ends meet and having to get rid of people. This is the same thing you are wanting local governments to do with police officers, firemen etc.

 

[public servant]

I am just wondering why you did not make a proposal to your bosses to take a drastic pay cut since they were having trouble making ends meet and having to get rid of people. This is the same thing you are wanting local governments to do with police officers, firemen etc.

Let's be clear that I don't believe he "volunteered" for any cuts. He was however, intelligent enough to realize $20 an hour was more than what unemployment pays...and more than what he could go elsewhere and make. *Most* people are intelligent enough to make this distinction. Granted...some are not.

But did he or would anyone else throw a party at the news? Doubtful. But sometimes you have to weigh the options and make concessions.

If my boss came to me tomorrow and told me I would have to take an X% pay cut, I would weigh my options and decide if:

A: I could go elsewhere and make more money or,

B: Take the cut and live with it.

If the concession were something I could live with...I'd have no option but to accept it. The consequences would be less money to save and possibly a change in lifestyle. Depending on how deep the cut was.

 

[irishfan]

Let's be clear that I don't believe he "volunteered" for any cuts. He was however, intelligent enough to realize $20 an hour was more than what unemployment pays...and more than what he could go elsewhere and make. *Most* people are intelligent enough to make this distinction. Granted...some are not.

But did he or would anyone else throw a party at the news? Doubtful. But sometimes you have to weigh the options and make concessions.

If my boss came to me tomorrow and told me I would have to take an X% pay cut, I would weigh my options and decide if:

A: I could go elsewhere and make more money or,

B: Take the cut and live with it.

I agree with you 100% but the point I am making is that he constantly wants LEO's and other services cut because of cost and I believe that some cuts are needed. If a city budget is not going to cut it then yes cuts need to be made and worker wages need to be looked at and as you said they need to decide if they will accept or move on. Also, I believe that very few people will refuse a cut to keep their job and I wish nobody had to make the decision but that is life.

 

[hornadylnl]

I wasn't the complaining about teachers and police being cut. I understand it has to be done. If fellow officers want to complain about their peers being cut instead of increasing taxes, they could volunteer to take a cut to save jobs.

In my factory, it is completely unrealistic to keep 1800 people employed when you only have production requirements for 1000. If I were one of those laid off, I could cry and whine to my fellow coworkers for them to take a paycut to save my job. How much of a cut would they have to take just to cover health costs for the 800 that were laid off?

My companies ability to make payroll is directly related to the market. The governments ability to make payroll is only limited to the point at which the taxpayers are willing to march on the government with ropes and pitchforks.