1 thought on “Police Detail Changes will Hurt Officers”
Very nicely put, but I see this as a restriction of trade in which this City is vying for a monopoly of a business that has long been established. I understand that the City is trying to pass this off as yet another “Best Practices of OTHER departments” but that is neither here nor there. I would like to know what the AFL/CIO think of this taking over of business opportunities that many new officers will never get to see. I believe this is why a Lawsuit needs to be filed to stop this. The sad thing is that regardless of Lawsuits, or any other action, this City will go forward with their plans and thus destroy the business opportunities for all. My question to Salomone now, as it was back in June when I talked to him, is “What happens on a Saturday afternoon when a person (Let’s say a moving company) calls and requests a detail for that evening or on Sunday morning?” I wouldn’t work it for 40 an hour, much less 29. Some people will, but then it will be very few, and fewer as the years go on. Because even in the days when I WAS a detail hound, I’d rather do things with my family than work for the minimum, or less than I would in overtime… Unless the pot were sweetened to say 50 an hour or so, then my Wife would quickly say, “Oh really? We can have our anniversary dinner tomorrow, you should go make a quick 200.” So where will the manpower come from to fill the details when no one wants to work? Although I do not work details, and could not if I wanted to at this point, I am the contact person for two Details that I have been involved with for over 20 years. It’s sad to say that neither of these two entities will use NOPD ever again, because part of one detail is already partially covered by Criminal Sheriffs, and the other is only a result of a personal friend who contacted me as a courtesy many years ago.
On funny note, I recently called a person who came to work part of one of the annual details last year in an emergency. I asked him if he’d like to work it again this year. His answer, “Thanks for the offer, lieu, but I’m sick of this shit, so I’m boycotting details from now on…” I applauded him his stance, and added that I wished I could be there with him. I am with him, but It seems shallow given the fact that I am not allowed to work them anyway.
As I told Mr. Salamone, I don’t see anything good coming from this, and I see nobody benefitting from it other than HIM, and those who eventually obtain employment to work under him.
Again, this is an infringement on free trade, and that’s how I’ll continue to view it. Thanks for fighting for us.
Signal 108 
Very nicely put, but I see this as a restriction of trade in which this City is vying for a monopoly of a business that has long been established. I understand that the City is trying to pass this off as yet another “Best Practices of OTHER departments” but that is neither here nor there. I would like to know what the AFL/CIO think of this taking over of business opportunities that many new officers will never get to see. I believe this is why a Lawsuit needs to be filed to stop this. The sad thing is that regardless of Lawsuits, or any other action, this City will go forward with their plans and thus destroy the business opportunities for all. My question to Salomone now, as it was back in June when I talked to him, is “What happens on a Saturday afternoon when a person (Let’s say a moving company) calls and requests a detail for that evening or on Sunday morning?” I wouldn’t work it for 40 an hour, much less 29. Some people will, but then it will be very few, and fewer as the years go on. Because even in the days when I WAS a detail hound, I’d rather do things with my family than work for the minimum, or less than I would in overtime… Unless the pot were sweetened to say 50 an hour or so, then my Wife would quickly say, “Oh really? We can have our anniversary dinner tomorrow, you should go make a quick 200.” So where will the manpower come from to fill the details when no one wants to work? Although I do not work details, and could not if I wanted to at this point, I am the contact person for two Details that I have been involved with for over 20 years. It’s sad to say that neither of these two entities will use NOPD ever again, because part of one detail is already partially covered by Criminal Sheriffs, and the other is only a result of a personal friend who contacted me as a courtesy many years ago.
On funny note, I recently called a person who came to work part of one of the annual details last year in an emergency. I asked him if he’d like to work it again this year. His answer, “Thanks for the offer, lieu, but I’m sick of this shit, so I’m boycotting details from now on…” I applauded him his stance, and added that I wished I could be there with him. I am with him, but It seems shallow given the fact that I am not allowed to work them anyway.
As I told Mr. Salamone, I don’t see anything good coming from this, and I see nobody benefitting from it other than HIM, and those who eventually obtain employment to work under him.
Again, this is an infringement on free trade, and that’s how I’ll continue to view it. Thanks for fighting for us.