New Haven Independent

Posted by: nfjanette | March 24, 2008 12:11 PM

Close to 100 cops earned over $100,000 each last year thanks to overtime and extra-duty work.

Since the breakdown of overtime vs. extra-duty work was not provided, Mr. Bass should be careful not to lump that figure too closely with the overtime total cost. The cost of extra-duty work, as Mr. Smuts noted, is not paid by the city. As Mr. Bass notes in the interview, the issue with extra-duty work, and overtime as well, is setting and enforcing rational limits for the maximum time officers are allowed to work per day/week, and 16 hours a day seem too much. I would prefer to avoid putting armed officers on the street that are getting less than 6-7 hours of sleep per 24 hours. It would be better to pay the officers a higher salary and restrict total duty time allowed.

Posted by: DAFeder | March 24, 2008 12:30 PM

Recruiting problems? Wait until word gets out that 1/4 of NH cops are making more than $100K.

NFJ: Higher salaries/fewer hours sounds great, but then where do we get enough coverage for time-intensive community policing? A well-rested cop-hour is probably more useful than a sleepy cop-hour, but does the bump in quality outweigh the quantity?

I'm concerned about another part of the equation. Extra duty paid from outside sources is great, but if it counts as part of the 16 hours/day max, it reduces the number of hours available for overtime work. And much as I hate to pay overtime for hours that could be covered by another (well rested) officer, I'd rather have police deployment set by qualified public servants than by private parties in need of security.

NHPD experts out there -- am I understanding this system correctly?

David

Posted by: fac Chek | March 24, 2008 12:42 PM

It's obvious from the video that neither Smuts or Police management personnel has a handle on how to control overtime usage for the Police department in general or the city overtime as a whole.
The current Overtime budget@ 8.300M exceeds the annual budgets of more than 31 individual city departments.

Police and fire together consume 7.3M of the 8.3M overtime budget. Since the overtime is disportionately being used by only two departments and the two are under Smut's supervision, it would seem that he clearly should have and idea of the problem and it's cure.

One would think that the hiring of more police and fire personnel would equal a reduction in overtime usage, not so in New Haven. The opposite appears the norm. Hiring additional police means more vacation, sick leave, personal leave, funeral time off, tardiness, LOA, AWOL, hurt, suspensions, quits and fires, overtime and the list goes on.
What is missing from this scenario is experienced people who know how police and fire is functioning, and how they should be functioning effectively and efficiently. Certainly, there is sufficient data collected and analyzed over the years, which should form the basis for functional systematic planning and evaluation. To suggest that overtime will continue to climb for these two departments unchecked, signals a management system in crisis.

Unfortunately Perf did not recommend to New Haven, how to cure this problem. The cure will fall on the New Police Chief.

If this city were a for profit making company, it would be bankrupt, period, END.

Posted by: robn | March 24, 2008 12:53 PM

NFJ is right,

Pilots are restricted to certain hours becuase they are responsible for lives. To some extent, so are the police.

I would also like to have clarity on the numbers. If the city , as this article states, is spending $5M on overtime on approximately 100 officers, that means that each officer is getting 50K in overtime pay from city. Their overtime pay is nearly twice the median income of city residents. Their overtime also appears to be almost 50% of their total pay. This all seems strange. It would be interesting to know what the average and average peak workweek is for officers.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | March 24, 2008 2:52 PM

The first question to ask, is what is the appropriate staffing level for a city our size, listed by speciality? Support, beat, investigators etc. Overall, the mayor wants to have the largest armed force in the State of Connecticut. Is that necessary? I doubt it.

Second, whatever staffing/shift model for police officer deployment Smuts and managment are using is clearly not the correct one or for three years running, you wouldn't have overtime that rises predictably and uncontrollably. Are the officers leveraged in the neighborhoods with problems? Are they leveraged in the right time of day? Is the city using technology (email in cars for starters, on line reports with word processing vs. handwriting) that can cut down on trips to the substation, waiting in line for a computer, etc.

Third - it is clear police overtime in particular has not been a priority. It should have been and must now be a priority. It's now officially, another crisis.

With regard to the fire department which is both smaller and whose members are paid straight time overtime vs. time and half - the question is really one of staffing. Do we need a full compliment of firemen on all shifts, and do we need all the substations we currently operate? Since 80% of the calls are medical, and not fire, should the policy be changed that rolls both to every call, transports nobody, and where there is no fire?

Posted by: Webblog 1 | March 24, 2008 3:05 PM

Robn,

For clarity purposes only...

The 100 officers earning over $ 100,000K ea. includes city and private duty pay. The article does not separate out the two. The city has over 400 officers assigned to the streets, they could not all be receiving 50K in overtime/yr.
The city expects to spend 5M in the current budget for overtime, according to Fac Chek( above) police & fire are spending 7.3M of the 8.3M budgeted overtime for all departments.

I agree, that whether it is straight or overtime pay, both exceed the medium income of the average Joe taxpayer in New Haven.

Posted by: WESTVILLER | March 24, 2008 4:20 PM

It seems that the New Haven Police and Fire Department's are being mismanaged by Chief's that fail to understand their business and are not well versed on managing their personnel. How can such individuals allow subordinates to hire members on OT, straight-time, etc. in ways that violate their contracts. This seems to be especially true in the fire department where Deputy Chief's hire at will. They almost ensure they get their fair share of OT too. My friends tell me that OT slips are submitted in the PD without any form of check and balance. With the City budget reaching a breaking point, its about time Mr. Smuts reviews each department under his control and takes charge in places others cannot. As a taxpayer in this City, we must begin to hold individuals accountable for their actions! After all, if they worked for Yale, UI, SNET, or BC/BS they would be unemployed based upon their failing their annual performance review.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | March 24, 2008 5:05 PM

Again thanx Rob for talking to the people that read the independent! We are a rough crowd.... some big gahonas to put yourself out there.

OK OK here are my rambling thoughts if anyone cares....
They are working all these hours there is no way that is not effecting the quality of service there job requires! When do theses officers sleep?? Second what effect do all these hours have on there pensions!! That is key here. Because OT no matter what kind it is does effect it...yes the moonlighting part of the pension is to be payed for by the company that hires them but it still makes for an amazing retirement!

Posted by: Kevin Ewing | March 24, 2008 6:01 PM

Not criticizing but can someone explain why we have cops watching construction work? I used to be a cop in another city and we used security guards for that and only in an area where we thought the equipment might get stolen or there was a need for traffic control. They were paid much less which reduced the cost to the developer/contractor (plus created jobs for citizens) and did just as good a job.

If there is a good reason then please inform me.

Posted by: THREEFIFTHS | March 24, 2008 6:54 PM

Here is how you can help with the overtime, Use the pension of the crooked cops!!!

Posted by: Common Sense | March 24, 2008 7:42 PM

CedarHillResident asks the question: ... "what effect do all these hours have on there (their) pensions!! That is key here. Because OT no matter what kind it is does effect it...yes the moonlighting part of the pension is to be payed for by the company that hires them but it still makes for an amazing retirement!"

The pension will be based on the average of the gross pay (includes overtime and a portion of extra duty pay) received over a span of years. Not sure if its best four or five years. Maximum pension percentage is figured at 30 years of service. For the Police Department that can be 83% of the average gross pay. In many cases accumulated sick leave can be traded for years of service up to a maximum of 150 days. Thirty days for each year. If someone works 25 years they can get credit for 30 years by trading in the sick days. In every case involving OT & extra duty work the gross pay is much more than the annual salary. If I am not mistaken a police officer can retire at over 100% of their annual salary! This has a major impact on the unfunded liability of the pension fund.

I am not suggesting any benefits be taken away. The pension is negotiated as part of the Union Contract and working the number of hours that many due is a great sacrifice on their families. However, if the OT issue is not brought under control we will find the budget/pension hole getting deeper and deeper.

Posted by: concerned jake | March 24, 2008 8:28 PM

Mr. Doyens,

Please stick to whatever it is you do, I am sure you are good at it, manager of a metropolitan fire department you are certainly not.

If you want swing shift fire stations you need to look no further than The previous mayor "The Swersey Plan" was a complete disaster.

If you get an inclination on where and when a fire, medical or some other calamity is going to occur, please let me know so I can patent it. Also I would like to know so I can get the hell out of the way.

Furthermore, modern fire departments all over this country are providing the same service that new havener's are getting. This is what modern fire department's do. That is what your taxes pay for. Commercial providers simply do not provide the same service and in as timely a fashion as your local fire department.

A cross - trained fire department such as the one we get here in new haven save us money, firefighters do double duty. We are getting more for less.

Posted by: unprotected | March 25, 2008 7:07 AM

The overtime in police departments are usually applied to keep a certain number of cops on the streets at any given time, or address a specific problem area (burglaries near Rte 80). New Haven doesn't have a minimum man power clause in their contracts. They are trying to negotiateone, but he City hasn't budged on accepting it. That means overtime needs to be paid to cover shifts adequately, or you are citizens have to wait 4 hours for an accident report or neighbor complaint, while police are answering robberies and shootings.

Posted by: jeffreykerekes | March 25, 2008 9:41 AM

Instead of waiting 4 hours for an accident report or neighbor complaint, why not have cheaper security personnel? Yale has both a PD and Security. YNHH also has this. I believe this makes a lot of sense. Send the armed police officers to appropriate calls and send security personnel to take reports, ticket vehicles, collect found items etc... This would lead to a cost savings without a reduction in services. Additionally, we cannot afford to have all this extra duty pay contributing to retirement. I am not against people who want a few extra dollars working extra shifts, but do that on your own time not adding to the pension costs. We could also have security people do the traffic duty. This would cost the utilities (aka, you and me through rate hikes) and others less, which is good for all the development we keep hearing about. Why make construction cost more when we are spending a lot of money trying to attract people to develop here?

Posted by: Gary Doyens | March 25, 2008 3:15 PM

Concerned Jake: I was simply asking questions to try and get a handle on the extraordinary expense of both the fire and police departments. Perhaps you could share what The Swersey Plan was - I am not familiar with it - and why it was so bad.

Secondly, I am suggesting that it makes little common sense to roll out a fire truck or two, an ambulance and a commercial ambulance to a medical call. If it's a medical call only - roll the ambulance - both city and private - if the city doesn't want to transport. (Why is that?) What's the point of rolling a fire truck too? That's akin to you and your wife driving seperately to the grocery store to shop for same bag of groceries and maybe having your son drive over there too. If the cross trained firemen operating the ambulance get to the scene and discover there is a greater emergency, they can always call for the truck, no?

Posted by: unprotected | March 25, 2008 4:11 PM

Unfortunately, alot of accidents in New Haven have criminal charges attached to them.(dui, no insurance, no license). you can't arrest with a square badge & flashlight. You also can't tow cars or assist a robbery if you don't take oath to protect & serve. i like your thought process though. I think a cap on hours worked in a week would be a nice start.

Posted by: concerned jake | March 25, 2008 9:43 PM

Gary,

The swersey plan was a bizarre concept developed by a Yale group.

It compared response numbers for medicals and fires. It is no secret that fires were down even in 1991 when this plan was developed and implemented. But the concept here was to have two companies staffed by the same number of people as you would normally have assigned two one. Lets say an emergency unit, and an engine company.

If a medical came in two cross trained firefighters would drive the emergency truck to the call. The engine would now be out of service. Essentially the two remaining firefighters would sit at the station unable to respond. Not a really good plan, now it is simply dated and would just not work. Swesey will tell you it was because he was an outsider. I don't believe that. It flew in the face of modern firefighting and ems practices.

Now all firefighters are cross trained. Back then there was a skeleton crew of EMT's. It would more likely not be a profitable enterprise for NHFD to get in the transport business, due to problmes with collections that other cities new haven's size have.

The city of new york recently tried to close fire stations during predicted slow times and the program was a disaster. Browning out does not work. It was also a dangerous prectice undertaken in our city until recently.

When a call comes into 911 dispatchers are trained to triage calls based on the callers complaint. Based on the what the caller tells the Emergency Medical and Fire Dispatcher determines what type of response. So, you answered your own question.

Less than life threatening calls only get a ambulance. More significant calls get a fire apparatus with its cross-trained firefighters equipped with defib and other life saving stuff. The most serious calls, get a FD paramedic, A first responder engine which is strategically located to get you help the fastest, and an ambulance to get you to the hospital.

This is called a tiered system, it is the ideal and probably the best ems system. Are there other ways to work the system....yes. Are they better....most are not. You are getting the most bang for your buck, and seconds truely count.

Hope that helps gary....

Posted by: Heights Resident | March 25, 2008 10:32 PM

I have a general question on the hours, what is a safe amount, I personally work a 70 to 80 hr. work week sometimes, although I work in an office and don't have people's lives at stake, I think I can function just fine.

I would also like to say to the person who suggested security doing the jobs of cop's, if God forbid a family member or loved one were involved in an accident, would you want a guard showing up?, I wouldn't.

Lastly the cop's on the construction site's are hired by the company and not by the city, and what Paul did not mention, or may not know the companies hiring extra duty pay the City, and get there cut also.

Posted by: unprotected | March 26, 2008 9:42 AM

70 to 80 hours is reasonable to some, but when you need to make a quick decision that can't be fixed the next day, being tired doesn't help. I see cops sitting in their cars at construction sites with their eyes closed. Rumor has it that there is a rule in the PD on paper that limits work hours, but like other things, it gets ignored. When small things are ignored, bigger things start to follow suit, sound like corruption in the making??? The PERF report says fill management and update policy. 20 vacancies in supervision and rules requiring 38 cal. ammunition (they carry 9mm) sounds like PERF is working!!!

Posted by: Gary Doyens | March 26, 2008 11:35 AM

Concerned: Thanks for the lesson and insights. It was helpful.

Posted by: PRO COP | March 26, 2008 4:03 PM

HEY KEVIN EWING! U SOUND LIKE A SMALL TOWN COP WHO NEVER WORKED EXTRA DUTY BEFORE. LISTEN JUST SO U KNOW COPS WORK THESE HOURS TO SUPPORT THERE FAMILIES, AND BY WORKING LONG HOURS THEY SACRIFICE SPENDING TIME WITH THERE WIFE&KIDS. SO THE NEXT TIME YOU SEE A COP WORKING AT A CONSTRUCTION SITE AGAIN YOU SHOULD SAY TO YOURSELF HMM...I WONDER HOW LONG HE'S BEEN AWAY FROM HIS OR HER FAMILY!!!! OH JUST SO YOU KNOW I AM MARRIED TO A COP.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | March 26, 2008 8:09 PM

Pro cop needs a hug. (I knew you had to be a cop)

Pro cop over time and extra duties are fine. Everyone, no matter what there job wants and need that extra income. I think the question is when is enough, enough?? Cops that make over 100,000 a year to most seems a bit to much. And even your statement says you sacrifice to work these hours and your family is suffering. But are the citizens suffering to? Remember extra duty is your choose, you choose to work those hours so you do have some control over that.
Are we getting officers that are on the top of there game? Or are they getting runned down tired because of all the hours? Are they stung out and angry? Are they a live wire ready to fry? These are important questions.
Kevin does make a valid point. Many citys use flag men that are paid alot less.
But..... do I want a flag man directing traffic out of air rights garage at 5:00 rush hour.....hell no. Do I want a security guard working at Van Dome on a Friday night..hell no again. But do I think there should be a cop at every little road repair no. There has to be a way of rating the construction sites and side jobs to see if a cop is really needed. We realize that that money is paid by private industry it is just the question of when is enough enough? Now be nice my fine uniformed person. No need to be a "blue meany"

Posted by: Heights Resident | March 26, 2008 9:38 PM

Pro Cop

You do need a hug, or a switch to decaf. My question goes to CedarHill, who cares if they make 100k, as long as the bulk is coming from the private industry. They do a dangerous and stressfull job and like I mentioned in a prior comment a 70 to 80 hr. work week is kinda a norm in our socity. The bills have to be paid and the cost of living keeps going up.

If you check around at other professions, doctors for example, an intern has to clock in astronomical hours and have to act with little or no sleep, I don't hear a big movement to change that practice......... I could be wrong, is there a doctor in the house?

Posted by: cedarhillresident | March 27, 2008 9:10 AM

Heights as a tax payer I do care. I get the point that some make about, they have no choose we do not have enough officers. And as stated I do understand that we all need that extra cash... but up top of the comments here, I asked about pensions... and "Common Sense" posted the perfect answer. So I am going to just Ditto that answer as a Tax Payer of New Haven.... and as we see the state just di_ked us out of 10 million more and guess who's taxes are going up more now even more! I give a hoot even more now!

Jeffy posted some great ideas above that can help the city PD get some spending under control to.

Posted by: Heights Resident | March 27, 2008 10:25 AM

Cedarhill

I really don't know much about the pension, to even comment. I did read the post and I didn't read a solution to the problem. It all boils down to their contract and the union, if they have those benefits in place, you can't take them away without giving up a whole lot more.

And the post by Jeff, was just unrealistic and cost ineffective, first off I wouldn't want a securtity guard showing up in an hour of need, and how much would it cost to hire them and give them benefits and the insurance the city would have to pay, if your worried about the mill rate now!!! .

I really don't have a solution and wouldn't prusume to have a solution, I leave that to the egg heads with brains, but I do have the common sense to know that when dealing with Unions and contracts there is always a give an take and you have to be very carefull when dealing with the two.

Posted by: Edward_H | March 31, 2008 10:26 PM

It appears Jeff's suggestion is being tried in some areas:

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20080331/a_civiliancops31.art.htm