| San Diego Police Officers' Assoc. Website Editorial |
municipal workplaces. The never-ending onslaught of negative diatribe continues to demonize us as greedy pigs feeding at the trough of public largesse. We have been labeled, ostracized, and reviled. We are threatened repeatedly with layoffs, unemployment, and revocation of legally negotiated benefits. Periodically, the threat of the “B” word is uttered and invoked by certain dictatorial bullies and city critics who wield it as the ultimate weapon in their arsenal of tactics -- tactics meant to intimidate and coerce us to go down the path that the autocrats have preordained. We are incessantly maligned and berated by both the citizens and media and painted with one sensationalized brushstroke as the root cause of all the City's ills. Our employment situation is tenuous at best and our work environment has deteriorated to a historic low. Still, most of us persevere and continue to serve the city and its citizens as we have for so many years. We have calmly, passively, and until now, quite silently watched these events unfold. So much of the media coverage has wrongly placed blame squarely on the shoulders of city workers. The completely slanted and inflammatory "article" a month ago in The Union- Tribune’s Sunday business section about the "$100,000 Club" is a case in point. While city workers make a convenient scapegoat, your wrath is entirely misdirected. Both the media and the citizens need to wake up to the stark reality of the very negative consequences their rhetoric is fueling. I know of what I speak. As a 21-year veteran police dispatcher married to a 24-year veteran police officer, we have for two decades ridden the city's political and financial ups and downs like The Giant Dipper rollercoaster at Belmont Park. And while I cannot speak for other divisions and departments in the City, I can certainly tell you the reality that I see daily inside San Diego Police Department….a reality that directly affects the future of public safety in this city. What frustrates us as employees is the glaring fact that seems to be continually overlooked and ignored by both the media and civic "watchdogs", and the crucial fact is this: that for a good part of a decade, we had City leaders and high-level administrators who repeatedly chose to spend money on the City's wants before funding the City's needs. As a family, you make choices every day of how to live within your budget. Sometimes things are really good and you can afford that dinner at Peohe's or to take a vacation this year. Sometimes, things are tight and you give up your visit to Starbucks or a premium cable channel or whatever it is that your family splurges on in order to meet your obligations. In other words, you pay your bills first and then use what's left over to save or fund something on your family's wish list. It is therefore impossible for us as City employees to not be incensed at being tarred and feathered by both citizens and the media for the extremely poor choices that prior "leaders" made and enacted. Choices such as refurbishing the stadium in order to get a Superbowl, building Petco Park, hosting the Republican National Convention (laughingly, current City leaders turned down the recent offer to host another one saying it was a financial hardship). And who could forget the now infamous Chargers ticket guarantee. Knowing that the leaders of that era chose to subsidize millionaires and further their own political ambitions while ignoring its legal and binding obligations, we place the blame directly on their shoulders. But, alas, most of them are gone....on to greener pastures...as in ...Ben Franklin green. It is further a bitter pill to swallow to know that some of these high-level administrators left city employment and later ended up working for the very organizations that benefited financially from decisions made by these high-level “civil servants” during their tenure at City Hall. As such, we employees cannot, and will not, accept the blame that critics are now foisting upon us for the fiscal quagmire that San Diego is in. |
population in general is that you are exhibiting the exact same knee-jerk reaction reminiscent of the prior abysmal politicians and administrators who got the City into this mess. You are focusing solely on short term solutions while ignoring the imminent long term consequences. Shortly after Jerry Sanders was elected, he appointed Ronne Froman as the City’s new chief operating officer. She promptly managed to alienate all personnel with her statement “If there are people that want pay raises, then they can find a job somewhere else. That’s what they should do.” And shortly thereafter city attorney Michael Aguirre continued that antagonistic party line by stating “To the rest of them (City employees), we send the clearest message possible that one option you should consider is moving to another job.” Well Ronne and Mike, you should be careful what you wish for because you are certainly now getting it.
officers here and there who chose to leave. The vast majority however kept the faith that the City would honor the employment contract they had entered into more than two decades ago, as well as the negotiated increased benefits that were later approved by the leaders of that time. Never in our minds did we think the City would offer, negotiate, and confirm those benefits only to have a different administration come in a decade later and decree the City’s past actions illegal. Where were the watchdogs and critics at that time? This was all on public record. The citizens even went so far as to abet the situation by voting to put the City further in debt to fund the building of Petco Park. Now critics everywhere are stipulating that this is all the employees’ fault and that we should be the ones to pay the price. Articles like the one Sunday denouncing average City workers in the trenches who choose to work needed (by the City) overtime that keeps San Diego running are missing the point. It is not the majority of lower level employees who are a drain on City finances. We are the ones who are truly needed to keep San Diego government running. Ironically, two days after that opinion piece, an article appeared in the local section announcing the hiring of the head administrator for Neighborhood Services. He will start at a salary of $168,000. My bet is he will not be working holidays and graveyards, nor risking the perils of working a special events detail at a Raiders game. And what again seems to be lost on our critics is that it was not us cogs in the wheels of city operations that made the decisions that put us where we are now. It was exactly administrators such as that -- high-level senior employees and politicians garnering large salaries and who made short term decisions with no regard for the long-term impact. And the public thinks the average City employees are the ones feeding at the trough? Reality Check! It was the inept politicians and administrators who came and went and who used their positions for their own gain, then leapfrogged into greener pastures with no accountability for the phenomenal damage they inflicted upon this city. As the City’s financial situation continued to get more dire, the City imposed a contract on the police officers which has had a detrimental impact on the vast majority of officers. This ill-conceived and short-sighted action unleashed a maelstrom of discontent and hardship on many officers already struggling to live in a town with an inordinately high cost of living. Many of the officers already could not afford a home in this county and were forced to buy property in Temecula or further north if they wanted to own a home. During this past six months the exodus of sworn officers increased exponentially. Where as before I would get a message once or twice a month that today was Officer So-and-so's last day, I now get that message two or three times a week. In fact, I was just informed by a manager that the SDPD lost more officers to other agencies in the past three months than we did in all of the prior year. And while that fact alone should alarm all of you reading this, it gets worse. Just last month two officers left to go work for Riverside County Sheriff. They informed me that Riverside and the surrounding areas are growing so rapidly that the agencies up there are looking to hire 400 more officers. Do you think these agencies will hire people off the street with no prior experience and pay $100,000 a head to train them on their dime hoping the recruit will make it? Why would they, when there is such a vast candidate pool 75 miles southwest with fully-trained, experienced, and ready-to-hit-the-field officers available for them to pick & choose from. Their recruiting divisions must be salivating and singing with glee. And it is not just other counties. Many SDPD officers have left for Chula Vista PD, County D.A. investigators, and the Department of Justice. Our pain is every other agency's gain! |
up & running 24/7 demonstrates a vast abyss of ignorance of what it takes to keep a dispatcher on the other end of 911. Any field of emergency services, whether it be police, fire, hospitals, etc...all are based on levels of minimum staffing. And when someone calls in sick, another body does not automatically pop up like a blow-up doll with a headset to answer calls. The sick dispatcher is replaced by either someone who offers to stay over, or one on a day off who agrees to come in when called. A day off that she probably had plans to spend with family, or grocery shop, or garden, or whatever it is that YOU like and need to do on your days off. The crux of the overtime issue is that we are providing a vital and needed immediate service that cannot be obtained elsewhere. We are not going to be outsourced to India, tell you to hold when you call 911, or put you through phone branch hell to get some needed help. The whole concept of emergency services it that someone is there for you AT ALL TIMES. Until they invent the Robocop, the Robodispatcher, or the Robomedic, you are unfortunately stuck with the frailty of staffing your center with mere mortals who get sick, get in accidents, need surgery, take a day off for their kid's shadow-a- student day, etc. That is the nature of emergency services and people who are critical of the use of overtime need a reality check. Better yet... call recruiting at 619-531-COPS. We are always hiring. As I stated earlier I have been a dispatcher for 21 years and never, ever during that time have we ever achieved full staffing. I imagine the situation for patrol officers is not much different. This should be the hot topic of the media, not what we do to compensate for the shortage. Again, in a biting bit of irony, during a meeting of the last pay-scale commission that recommends salaries for elected officials, a councilman stated that while he would not support an effort to raise council members’ salaries this year, he would not preclude doing so in the future. His reason was that the City needs to attract qualified candidates from the private sector. This is laughable to us in emergency services because when have you ever heard of a lack of candidates for any given political office. And yet “Dispatcher” has been on City Personnel’s list of job openings for 21 years now and that is deemed as inevitable and even expected. Every council seat is filled but there are empty consoles and at times long hold times when one calls the administrative line for SDPD Communications. Again, city leadership and the media continue to fail to direct focus on the true priorities that go ignored for years by politicians and high-level administrators. And the media and public cast us and our “excessive overtime” as the pariahs that are ruining this city? If that is the case, what if it was your child drowning in a backyard pool and you call 911, frantically pleading for help to save your child's life? Would you care at that point if the dispatcher/cop/medic (coroner?) is on overtime or not? Or is that only relevant if you are lucky enough to never need our help? These are but a few of the dire unaddressed and often intangible realities that face the citizens and leadership of San Diego. You as citizens, civic leaders, and government watchdogs have a right to be outraged at the financial situation in which San Diego now finds itself. But it did not happen overnight and it was not caused by us City employees that you seem so eager to castigate. Kicking the dog because your husband beats you does not make the beatings stop. Likewise, bashing and blaming City employees for the fiscal mess we all find ourselves in is misguided. We are merely pawns who are in peril of being sacrificed by the chess masters now running the city. They are engaged in a grand game of political and legal maneuverings and we are the sacrificial lamb. We ask that you remember it is we who are in the position to keep the City operating while San Diego treads water during this volatile period. I ask the City leaders, the media, and the public to bear this in mind when they make decisions with little regard for the truly long-term consequences of their actions. Isn’t that what got San Diego into this mess to begin with? Is this really the legacy that you now want to leave for the next decade and beyond? |
Diego now has to spend $100,000 to train a raw recruit and hope that he or she doesn’t wash out. While that is a tangible and expensive consequence, it is hardly the most dire. Before the tsunami of departing officers hit SDPD, most officers who left did so for one of three reasons: retirement, disability, or lack of desire/ability to do the job. Of those three categories, we either lost people through calculated attrition or injury when they could no longer perform their duties. The last category consisted of usually very rookie officers who for whatever reason decided that police work was not for them. When they left, there was not much of an experience void to fill. However, the dynamics of this last category have changed dramatically. The officers we are now losing every month are the exact kind for which every department yearns. Many have 5-10 years of experience. They have demonstrated that they are competent in their abilities and committed to the job. They are also usually between 25-35 and have many years of service left to offer an agency. It is this category of officer that SDPD is now hemorrhaging and losing to other agencies. This should be of paramount concern to you as citizens. No longer are you more likely to get a 10-20 year patrol veteran who has proven himself time and time again in critical situations. The workforce is becoming diluted with less- seasoned officers. This is not to diminish the job that new officers do, but in any career there is a learning curve. Some occupations' curves are more steep than others. If the barista at your local coffee house tells you that your order is the first mocha she has ever made, would you sweat that? Doubtful. However, change that to your surgeon to telling you that you are her first surgery she has ever performed. Would it matter then? How about the pilot on your next flight getting on the intercom and informing you that he became a full-fledged pilot a week ago and you are now his inaugural passenger flight? Experience counts in any occupation. This loss of experience will never appear on any balance sheet in the auditor's office, but it has a direct affect on you as citizens. Wake up, San Diego! Not every cost to you and the City is a tangible one that pencil's out at the end of the fiscal year. Another crucial area that seems to have become a hot topic recently is "EXCESSIVE OVERTIME". Never have I seen any of the vocal critics stipulate what they deem "excessive." At some point, $100,000 seems to have been anointed as a magic benchmark. -- the Holy Grail of sieves used to separate the wheat of regular civil servant Joes from the chafe of their slacking public-largesse-abusing counterparts who are but leeches just working the system. This slanted and purposely inflammatory (but great for a sound bite) moniker "The $100,000 Club" is merely a matter of perspective. What critics view as a one- sided expense that needs to be pared down is tempered by the victim's perspective of having a dispatcher/cop/paramedic/lifeguard there 24/7 to help save that person’s life. One could also call it the "70-Hour Work Week & No Days Off Lifesavers Club" but then that doesn’t have quite the ring to incite outrage and sensationalism. Nor would it start a series of copycat reports by all the other stations in the media to run this "story" ad nauseam into the ground. No, my choice of a name would actually imply that someone was earning his pay with hard work and sweat and then being compensated accordingly. |