The following is the entirety of my post regarding the NOLA.COM story entitled Sewerage & Water Board, not Civil Service, to blame for hiring delays.
The Civil Service Commission Chairman is right that the Sewerage & Water Board asked that the ability to hire people be delegated to the Sewerage & Water Board. At that time, I stood up and argued against that delegation on behalf of the Fraternal Order of Police. It was not that the request to delegate that authority directly impacted the police department, but that it adversely impacted the civil service system in general.
The Civil Service Commission Chairman correctly states that the Sewerage & Water Board has failed in hiring new people, not the Civil Service Department. What she fails to state is that in spite of these failures, the Civil Service Commission has not revoked that delegation of authority and continues to facilitate weakening Civil Service.
As the article points out, the Landrieu administration has attempted to “reform” the Civil Service Commission since 2010. The “reforms” they have instituted are antithetical to the purpose and goals of the Civil Service system. The Civil Service Commission has been complicit in these “reforms” since Mayor Landrieu began replacing Commissioners on the Civil Service Commission with people who are inclined to give the Mayor what he wanted in spite of the basic tenets of any merit-based system of employment.
As I stated above, I argued against delegating hiring authority to the Sewerage & Water Board. What they have done is reduce funding and staffing for the Civil Service Department and then complain about how the Civil Service Department is unable to meet the needs of various departments and then used this to justify decimating the Civil Service system in New Orleans. The other “reforms” the Landrieu administration and the Civil Service Commission have implemented are as much of a failure as the Sewerage & Water Board hiring delegation. Unfortunately, those failures do not result in street flooding or maybe they would have gotten some media attention. So, while we are on the subject of Civil Service, let’s talk about some other stuff.
The Mayor’s Great Place to Work Initiative, which was the greatest part of the “reforms” implemented by Landrieu, changed the way promotions were made. In effect, employees seeking a promotion take a test and all persons who pass the test are eligible to be promoted. Unfortunately, Louisiana Constitution Article X, Section 7 reads as follows:
“Permanent appointments and promotions in the classified state and city service shall be made only after certification by the appropriate department of civil service under a general system based upon merit, efficiency, fitness, and length of service, as ascertained by examination which, so far as practical, shall be competitive. The number to be certified shall not be less than three; however, if more than one vacancy is to be filled, the name of one additional eligible for each vacancy may be certified. Each commission shall adopt rules for the method of certifying persons eligible for appointment, promotion, reemployment, and reinstatement and shall provide for appointments defined as emergency and temporary appointments if certification is not required.
Promotions under the Great Place to Work are not competitive and the test is not used to determine merit, efficiency, fitness, or length of service, as the Constitution requires. In addition to these recently acquired deficiencies, the Civil Service Rules on promotions prior to the Great Place to Work Initiative were the product of a consent decree in the matter of Larry Williams v. City of New Orleans, 725 F2d 1554 (5th Cir. 1984). The consent decree in the Williams case set out to eliminate discrimination in the promotional process.
The Williams consent decree developed the use of banding test scores to allow the NOPD greater flexibility in choosing promotional candidates to ensure racial equity while maintaining the Louisiana Constitution’s requirements of assessing merit, efficiency, fitness, and length of service through competitive testing. In addition the usage of banding allowed the Civil Service to reduce the error inherent in testing, making test results more accurate. The Williams consent decree, and the resultant banding system, was the result of a number of expert psychometricians and experts from other relevant fields under the oversight of a federal judge. The Great Place to Work Initiative undid the changes implemented by the those experts via the Williams consent decree. The Great Place to Work Initiative re-opened the door to discrimination, favoritism, nepotism, and other ism’s. The Great Place to Work Initiative was not compiled by experts in the field, but it negated changes that were made by experts.
The Great Place to Work Initiative has also led to morale problems. Employees are now uncertain about what it takes to get promoted. Given that uncertainty, it is nearly impossible to resist the conclusion that promotions are being made on the basis of who you know instead of what you know or your ability to perform the job. None of this inspires confidence in the system or the department’s leadership.
In addition to the changes made to the promotional system, the Civil Service Commission has recently added 16 unclassified positions to the New Orleans Police Department. These 16 unclassified positions were previously held by classified employees. The Civil Service Commission approved this request in spite of objections by the Civil Service Department and arguments presented by myself and others. Simply put, the addition of these unclassified positions was contrary to the Civil Service Rules and the underlying notion of the merit-based system of employment. Unclassified positions are the exception to the rule and the addition of these unclassified system effectively denies classified employees a promotional opportunity because they have effectively replaced the classified position of Police Captain.
This just skims the surface of what is wrong with the Civil Service Commission now and the problems caused by the Great Place to Work Initiative. The New Orleans Fire Department has experienced many of the same problems as the NOPD. I am sure there are issues I am unaware of. Deputy Mayor Andy Kopplin, CAO at the time, once told me that the Civil Service Department was too overly concerned with fairness. Maybe in private enterprise an employer can place other things ahead of fairness. However, in public service, fairness is the cornerstone of a healthy Civil Service system.
The Civil Service Commission was right to point the finger at the Sewerage & Water Board regarding these hiring problems. But, the Civil Service Commission needs to look a little closer to home regarding the Great Place to Work Initiative. Maybe they can avert the inevitable disaster that will result from this wanton destruction of the Civil Service Rules.
The Great Place to Work Initiative needs to be repealed. There is nothing wrong with implementing changes to improve the efficiency of the Civil Service Department. However, wholesale changes to a system which was the biggest reform to public service this country has ever seen is a tremendous mistake — a mistake which has already been made.
Donovan Livaccari, Spokesman
Fraternal Order of Police
Crescent City Lodge #2
The New Orleans Police Department announced new pay increases on July 5, 2017. Since then, I have been approached with numerous questions about this pay plan. The following is my appreciation for the plan as it exists now. The plan has to go before the Civil Service Commission and the City Council for approval, but that seems like that won’t be a problem. During recent discussions of a proposed special rate of pay for Homicide Detectives, the FOP suggested that the NOPD needed to examine all special rates of pay and advocated for a bold pay initiative to help with recruitment and retention. This plan, which was put together by the NOPD’s Deputy Chief of Staff, is a step in the right direction. We made some additional suggestions and there are a few questions about this plan that remain unanswered. The following is the plan as it exists today. Salaries below do NOT include state pay or millage.
Police Recruit salaries will remain unchanged at $40,391.84. Our suggestion was that NOPD increase this and all other salaries by an additional 5% so new hires also benefit from the round of increases.
Police Officer I will become Police Officer and the base salary will increase to $46,885.00, a 10.45% increase.
Police Officer II, III, and IV will be consolidated as Senior Police Officer. The base salary for Senior Police Officer would be $51,783.84, a 16.08% increase over P/O II, 10.45% over P/O III, and 5.09% over P/O IV. Anyone who is a P/O II, III, or IV will automatically become a Senior P/O at the time the plan is implemented. The FOP is encouraging the department to allow P/O II promotions prior to the implementation of the plan to maximize the number of officers who are eligible to become Senior P/O.
A new classification titled Master Police Officer would have a base salary of $57,194.53. The Master Police Officer position would be unlike Senior Police Officer insofar as there will be a limited number of Master P/O positions available and the test will be a competitive test. Everyone who qualifies to be a Senior P/O will become a Senior P/O. Master P/O’s would be selected in much the same way Sergeants are selected now (which, frankly, is a mystery to me). Master P/O’s will be limited by assignment. For example, each district may have one Master P/O per platoon. Master P/O’s may also have some supervisory responsibility. There will probably not be an educational requirement for Master P/O.
Police Sergeant will have a base pay of $63,170.56. This represents an increase of 16.08%.
Police Sergeant will have a base pay of $69,771.01. This represents an increase of 19%.
Police Captain will be increased to $77,061.11, an increase of 10.45% and Police Major will be increased to $80,987.01, an increase of 6.41%. Of course, we are operating under the belief that there won’t be any new Captains or Majors any time soon.
The plan also includes 4 detective “positions.” Detective would be the effective equivalent of Senior Police Officer. Lead Detective will be the effective equivalent of Master Police Officer. Detective Sergeant would be the effective equivalent of Police Sergeant and District Detective Lieutenant would be the effective equivalent of Police Lieutenant.
I do not think that a decision has been made about whether the detective positions would be actual classifications, some type of sub-classification, or a special rate of pay. Based on the administration’s recent addition of unclassified commanders and an overall assessment of the department’s current philosophy about various positions, it is my belief that the department will want to be able to un-make a detective easily. In order to be able to un-make a detective easily, the detective’s positions has to either be a special rate of pay or some type of sub-classification. Any change of classification which results in a reduction in actual pay (not a special rate of pay) is a demotion. Demotions must be supported by cause expressed in writing and are disciplinary actions. It is my belief that the department wants to be able to make and un-make detectives much like they can make and un-make Commanders now. We will see how this shakes out, but I think we can count on detectives making 10% more than their effective equivalent. Of course, this is speculation.
So, the questions that remain are things like:
- How much time in grade will be required for Senior P/O? I believe the answer will end up being 3-4 years.
- How much time in grade will be required for Master P/O? I believe the answer will likely be the same as for Police Sergeant.
- Will the minimum requirements for Police Sergeant change? I don’t think so.
- How will the detective positions shake out? It may not be a true career path.
If there are questions, feel free to ask. I don’t know if I have the answer, but I will try. Also, any NOPD employees who have thoughts or suggestions about the foregoing, feel free to share. A copy of the proposal can be downloaded here (.pdf).
Recently, I wrote about the New Orleans Police Department’s request to the New Orleans Civil Service Commission for the creation of 16 new unclassified jobs in the NOPD. The NOPD made its pitch at the February 20, 2017 meeting of the Civil Service Commission and it received some media attention here and here. The Civil Service department opposed the creation of these unclassified positions, referring to the request as “unprecedented.” After hearing from the NOPD, myself, on behalf of the FOP, Capt. Mike Glasser, PANO, Lt. Keith Joseph, BOP, and a few others, the Civil Service Commission took no action to allow the Civil Service Department to complete its work and put the matter on the agenda for the March meeting (March 20 if anyone wants to accompany me on behalf of the FOP).
I do not intend to re-post my argument against the creation of the unclassified positions, but for those who have not had the chance to read this article or my letter to the Civil Service Commission in this regard, the Civil Service Rules, which have the force and effect of law, require that in order for a position to be considered unclassified, the job’s responsibilities are not appropriate for anyone in the classified service and should not be performed by anyone in the classified service. Furthermore, someone serving in an unclassified position must have policy-making authority which is not subject to further review or modification. Finally, the Civil Service Commission is required to audit the position regularly to make sure that it is still not fit for the classified service. As both Superintendent Harrison and myself made a point of saying, unclassified positions are the exception to the rule in a merit-based system of employment like Civil Service.
Currently, there is no “Commander” position, really. There is a “Commander” assignment. The Commander assignment, which must be filled by someone holding the rank of Police Lieutenant or higher, comes with a special rate of pay. While I am unaware of anyone actually pushing this particular issue, the NOPD stated that one of the reasons we need to reconsider this special rate of pay is that a special rate of pay does not confer any grant of authority. So, the question is does a Police Lieutenant in the position of Commander have the authority to issue orders to a Police Major? While I am unaware of anyone pushing this issue, there are reasons to reconsider the use of a special rate of pay for commanders. The majority of people assigned to Commander positions are in the rank of Police Lieutenant. Police Lieutenants are non-exempt employees. That means they should make overtime like all other non-exempt personnel under the FLSA. However, they do not get overtime. They are currently being treated as exempt employees. While their pension is controlled by their actual rate of pay, terminal leave is paid to these individuals based on their Civil Service classification. Finally, it is just an abuse of the special rate of pay provisions. This special rate of pay scheme was put in place in 2011 after the Civil Service Commission told then Superintendent Serpas that he could not have 16 unclassified Police Colonel positions.
So, if the positions were not fit to be unclassified in 2011, what has changed that would make them appropriate today? Well, while not answering the preceding question, Superintendent Harrison said that Department of Justice report which led to the current Consent Decree indicted the prior leadership “had largely acquiesced to wide-spread abuses by officers at all ranks.” Superintendent Harrison went on to praise the accomplishments of individuals currently in the position of Commander. Finally, the Superintendent insisted that it was critical that he be able to “swiftly replace leaders who are not performing to standard.”
What is exceedingly clear from the arguments made by Superintendent Harrison is that the NOPD has some good leaders in the position of Commander and that Commanders are performing the jobs previously held by officers in the classified service and that Commanders do not have the type of policy-making authority that is not subject to further review or modification. What is clearly lacking is any logical connection between the existence of the Commander special rate of pay and any of the accomplishments of the folks holding those positions.
During the meeting, Commissioner Stephen Caputo, the newest member of the Civil Service Commission, noted that on several instances in my letter to the Commission I stated the position of Commander had been historically held by Police Captains and Police Majors. He then asked if I was advocating for the status quo, or doing things as they have always been done.
My response was that I was not arguing for the status quo, but that the Civil Service Rules require that the job responsibilities be unfit for performance by anyone in the classified service. History shows us that prior to 2011, the job responsibilities were performed by employees in the classified service. Nothing has changed to make the jobs unfit for the classified service.
That does not mean that we have to maintain the status quo. For example, the NOPD has the longest working-test period for employees. Working-test periods, otherwise known as probationary periods, are set at 6 months in the Civil Service Rules with a maximum of 1 year. The NOPD has 1-year working-test periods across the board. That means that if someone is promoted to the rank of Police Captain and is unable to meet expectations, they can be demoted to their prior classified position — for just about any reason. Generally speaking, if someone is incapable of performing a job, that incompetence will reveal itself within a year. My point is that before we go shopping for a new toolbox, maybe we should make sure that we are making the best use of the tools we already have.
Civil Service Commission Chair Michelle Craig said that the Commission wanted the opportunity to examine best practices. While the idea of “best practices” aggravates me to no end, I was fascinated by Superintendent Harrison’s reply that NOPD was re-writing the best practices and, therefore, what they are doing is the de facto best practice.
In today’s environment of instant gratification, we have to be able to point out real-time problems to demonstrate why these ideas that run contrary to the civil service philosophy should be avoided. That is an impractical demand. However, make no doubt about it, it is coming. There will be a discriminatory application of the “Great Place to Work Initiative,” if there hasn’t been one already. The creation of 16 unclassified Commander positions, would eventually prove problematic.
The first merit-based civil service system can be traced back to Imperial China and Emperor Wen of Sui (AD 605). It wasn’t until the 1940’s that Louisiana embraced the civil service system. Even then, it was repealed in 1948 and re-established in 1952. Since then, more than a few changes have been made to how civil service systems are administered. However, the idea of a merit-based system of employment utilizing objective standards and competitive testing has persisted.
So, while I am not advocating doing things as we did them in 1992, I am advocating the maintenance of the underlying set of guiding principles which have served us well for a long time. We don’t have to throw the baby out with the bath water. We don’t ditch democracy just because there is a more efficient way to administer the Department of Education. The New Orleans Civil Service Commission has taken some steps recently which are downright scary. The “Great Place to Work Initiative” dismissed important civil service principles relating to promotions and competitive exams. Of course, the NOPD would point to successes of newly promoted sergeants or lieutenants as if that is the result of the new system in some way. If you are thinking they wouldn’t do that, that is exactly what they are doing with the Commander position. Granting the NOPD 16 unclassified positions to replace the special rate of pay for Commanders would be counter to the underlying fundamentals of the civil service system. Does that mean it has to be done the old way? No. It just means it shouldn’t be done the way the NOPD has proposed.
The New Orleans Civil Service Commission is set to hold its regular monthly meeting on Monday, February 20, 2017. At that meeting, the Commission will consider a request by the New Orleans Police Department to add 16 unclassified positions. These 16 unclassified positions would seek to legitimize the position of Commander, which is currently a special rate of pay based on the assignment as commander of one of the Department’s 16 divisions.
The Crescent City Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police opposes this request. In short, the Department should use classified positions wherever possible. This protects the employee, the public, and the integrity of the system. Since the beginning of time until Chief Serpas’s recent tenure as Superintendent, these positions have generally been held by officers holding the classified rank of Police Captain and Police Major. Those classifications are still available.
The use of Police Captain and Police Major for these positions not only shores up the integrity of the system, but provides officers with a well-defined career path. As it stands today, these positions are being held by Police Lieutenants who have no job security. So, the administration can cut their pay significantly for any number of unlisted reasons.
This, along with the changes made to the recent promotional system, has taken much of the fairness out of the promotional system of the NOPD and left it vulnerable to the type of political interference the Civil Service system was designed to eliminate.
Today (9/30/16), Jarvis DeBerry published his opinion on the recent interest in the NOPD’s investigation into the sex crimes unit and several officers that resulted from a report by the Office of Inspector General. Mr. Debeery’s opinion is not that of a reporter — someone interested in ascertaining the facts of a situation. Mr. Debeery’s opinion is exactly that — an opinion — based on fallacies and prejudice.
Let’s start with what is true (partly). Mr. Debeery charges that my statements about this investigation prove “the unions (the FOP) reflexively defend their members, no matter the details of criticism.” I am an attorney. Several of the officers investigated by the NOPD in this matter are my clients. The relationship is attorney (me) – client (officer). The FOP is not a party to that relationship. A lawyer should act with “commitment and dedication to the interests of the client and with zeal in advocacy on the client’s behalf.” I have a responsibility to defend my clients. That is what I was hired to do. While it is true that the Fraternal Order of Police in New Orleans does not hesitate defend its members when it is called for, that simply does not fit into the equation in these circumstances.
Mr. Debeery seems to find it incredulous that I indicated that I did not know what the officers were accused of. He says “But there’s no excuse for Livvacari not knowing what the accusations are.” He then refers to the November, 2014 report by the Office of the Inspector General making which made their “transgressions” “quite plain.”
Mr. Debeery states that the Inspector General “didn’t treat it’s investigation in to the sex-crimes unit like the typical report that accuses an agency of being wasteful with its resources.” I agree with that statement and maybe this investigation is an indication that the Inspector General should stick with what he knows.
The first thing cited by Mr. Debeery from the Inspector General’s report is that 1,290 sexual assault and child abuse cases had been assigned to five detectives and 86% of those had not been followed up on with an investigative report. He goes on to say that 2/3 of those cases (840) were labeled as miscellaneous incidents. On its face, this appears to be problematic for those five officers. However, it was not long before the NOPD determined, and announced publicly, that 677 of those 840 cases were sex offender registry checks. That is, sex crimes detectives were responsible for verifying that the information provided by sex offenders following their convictions was correct. Those 677 cases were properly classified as miscellaneous incidents. The NOPD has since created a new category for sex offender registry checks, but they are still not sex crimes investigations requiring follow-up. The report, along with Mr. Debeery, also ignores the system of 21-x and 21-y signals designed by the police administration in an attempt to pigeon hole cases which required more information before they could be properly classified. The report also relies on the lack of supplemental reports by officers on investigations as an indication that detectives were being lackadaisical. This demonstrates a lack of knowledge of police procedure on both Mr. Debeery’s part and the Inspector General’s part. The investigation into this matter also revealed that some of the case identified by the Inspector General’s report had already reached their conclusion in the criminal justice system — the cases had already been prosecuted and had come to their conclusion. This would not be possible if they had been ignored as the Inspector General’s report had declared. There were likely some cases which did not get the attention they deserved. But, supplemental police reports are only required when evidence was logged in or an arrest was made. Otherwise, updates were logged in the case management system (CMS). This is an overly simplistic explanation, but the short version is that manpower, not indifference, was responsible for cases which were not followed up on as thoroughly as the detectives would have liked.
Debeery then goes on to recount the Inspector General’s allegation that a child younger than 3 appeared at a hospital with a sexually transmitted diseased and that Akron Davis ignored this. The lack of follow-up by Debeery, or possibly his inattention to information learned at a later time, much like the OIG’s inattention to detail, leads to reckless allegations such as this which are damaging to Detective Davis’s reputation. First of all, this case was not assigned to Detective Davis. Secondly, and much more importantly, the NOPD had already investigated this case and was well-aware of how this child had contracted a sexually transmitted disease. There is a case file several inches thick on this particular child. So, the NOPD already knew the source of the sexually transmitted disease. How much time should Detective Davis have spent determining the source of the sexually transmitted disease when there were so many other victims the understaffed unit had to try to help? He then points to two other cases which Detective Davis would not have enough information to defend, explain or take responsibility for.
The next case cited Mr. Debeery is when Sgt. Merrell Merricks allegedly backdated an investigative report requested by the Inspector General. This clearly shows a lack of understanding of police procedure. In any event, those charges were not substantiated against Sgt. Merricks. I do not represent Sgt. Merricks. The same is true of the allegations about Detective Williams and his report writing. Finally, Mr. Debeery cites a statement allegedly made by Detective Damita Williams regarding the applicability of a simple rape charges. There is no context to this statement. Did you know there are circumstances when simple rape is not an applicable charge? For example, a husband cannot be accuse of simple rape of his wife. Context is important.
Mr. Debeery winds up with his opinion that this should have been enough information for me and the public. Unfortunately, I know more about this investigation than the public. I certainly know more about this investigation than Mr. Debeery.
The Louisiana Constitution, something I would think Mr. Debeery would favor being applied to everyone as it was intended, establishes due process for civil service employees. The process that is due requires that civil servants be apprised of the exact violations leading to disciplinary action. The obviously flawed report by the Inspector General is insufficient to satisfy that requirement. I should know the details of the circumstances leading to the discipline of my client. That is the law.
We agree on one thing: there has been a significant change in the operation of that unit (except that the detectives are still under water with an exorbitant case load). This is a good thing. This is also the only thing that really addresses the problems, in general terms, that existed in the structure of the sex crimes unit. Disciplinary actions taken against good officers are not what led to this improvement.
2015 has been a banner year for both the FOP Legal Defense Plan and the firm of Livaccari Villarrubia Lemmon. Hopefully, next year Livaccari Villarrubia Lemmon LLC will transition to Livaccari Law. The staff, office location, phone number, etc., will remain the same – only the name will change.
This firm began in the early 80’s as Brough and Livaccari, made up of William R. Brough and Anthony J. LIvaccari, Jr.. Brough and Livaccari was mainly an insurance defense firm. In the 90’s, there were a number of notable insurance company failures in Louisiana, such as Champion Insurance. The Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association (LIGA) was responsible for picking up where these failed companies left off. Brough and Livaccari began representing LIGA. In addition, they began to handle more plaintiff work, specifically automobile accidents and other personal injury cases. Since then, Todd Villarrubia joined Tony Livaccari. Todd has subsequently left to run his own firm, the Wealth Planning Law Group, which is next door to my office. My sister, Jenifer Lemmon, graduated law school and subsequently began working in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeal. So, Livaccari Villarrubia Lemmon no longer contains a Villarrubia or a Lemmon. I joined the firm on part-time basis when I graduated from law school and was admitted to the bar, and on a full-time basis when I left the NOPD in 2008.
Today, the firm is composed of myself, Donovan Livaccari, and my father, Tony Livaccari. My work is primarily composed of representing law enforcement officers through the FOP Legal Defense Plan. My father, Tony Livaccari, concentrates on personal injury litigation cases — automobile accidents, motorcycle accidents, etc. as well as other general practice cases.
During 2015, my father represented a number of police officers with automobile accidents and other filled in for me once or twice. Automobile accidents, motorcycle accidents, scooter accidents, and other injuries are common for law enforcement officers. When you drive a car 8 hours a day, it is inevitable that accidents happen. Police officers who are involved in automobile accidents should consult with an attorney, particularly when the other party is at fault. When consulting with an attorney post-accident, it is extraordinarily helpful to have an attorney who is familiar with law enforcement. For example, when recovering lost wages, it is vital for an attorney to understand how police details work or the difference between a workers compensation injury and an injured on duty injury. Here, at Livaccari Law, we can provide that type of knowledge and familiarity to law enforcement officers in addition to the 30+ years of experience handling these types of cases in general. There is no harm in calling. Involved in an accident? Call Tony at 504-621-2636 or me at 504-905-8280. The office number is 504-488-3702.
With regard to the FOP Legal Defense Plan, I represented 427 individual police officer clients in one capacity or another. For those 427 police officer clients, the following services were provided:
DI-1 Statements – 253
Disciplinary Hearings – 123
Rule IX Hearings – 24
Accident Review Boards – 10
Civil Service Appeals filed – 26
Civil Service denial of promotion appeals – 5
Civil Service subpoenas – 34
Civil Service hearings – 20
Civil Service extension hearings – 77
Notary services – 63
Officer Involved Shootings – 8
Media interviews – 82
In addition to these regular, repetitive services, I attended numerous City Council meetings, City Council committee hearings, and regular Civil Service meetings. I represented several officers with regard to reclassifying workers compensation injuries as injured on duty injuries. In addition, I drafted a rule amendment which was adopted by the Civil Service Commission to include injuries sustained while engaged in traffic enforcement or the investigation of traffic incidents as injured on duty incidents (Rule VIII, Sec. 2.9(a)).
The FOP was also active in the 2015 Louisiana legislative session as usual. We made several trips to Baton Rouge in furtherance of the FOP’s legislative agenda. In addition, the FOP is the only rank and file law enforcement group to be included in the Louisiana Body Worn Camera Task Force. Myself, Jake Lundy, and Jim Gallagher attended the Body Worn Camera Task Force meeting in Baton Rouge in support of Darrell Basco, Louisiana FOP President, who has a seat on the task force.
It has been a busy year and I look forward to continuing to be there for FOP members when they need someone the most in 2016. Having been a law enforcement officer, I am grateful for the opportunity to represent FOP members.
For 2016, I plan on bringing the FOP’s Critical Incident Response Team online. When officers are involved in critical incidents, such as officer involved shootings, or in-custody deaths, it is crucial for the FOP to be able to provide prompt, quality legal services to its members. But it is much more than that.
Being involved in a critical incident can be one of the most traumatic experiences in the life of a law enforcement officer. Officers are subjected to the type of scrutiny we have never seen before. At the scene of an officer involved shooting, representatives of the Office of the Independent Police Monitor, federal monitors, FIT investigators, etc., etc., are present. The media is usually there and very interested in the incident and people involved. Questions are flying and recordings are being made.
In short, it is important for an officer to be able to have someone by his or her side who is unquestionably looking out for their best interest. The FOP Critical Incident Response Team will be able to provide that.
First, it is of the utmost importance that someone notify me as soon as possible. If I do not know about a critical incident until I read about it in the news the next day, it is impossible to respond to the scene. I need someone to call me, assuming the officer or officers involved wants someone notified. Once I receive the call, I will get as much preliminary information as I can get, such as the number and identities of officers involved.
So, for illustrative purposes, let’s assume that there is an incident involving two officers involved in an officer involved shooting which led to the death of a suspect. I need to know the foregoing. I also need to know if the officer has a preference with regard to a lawyer to be notified. I have a list of attorneys who have agreed to answer the phone in the middle of the night, get dressed, and respond to a critical incident scene if possible. Right now, that list includes: Bruce Whittaker, Ed Doskey, George Hesni, Kevin Boshea, Roger Jordan, Tanya Faia, Townsend Myers, and William Dunn. All of these attorneys are experienced criminal attorneys. So, once I learned there were two officers involved, I would go down the list until I have two attorneys in addition to myself who are able to respond to the scene.
I, along with the two criminal attorneys will respond to the critical incident. I will attend to any administrative matters and make sure that the criminal attorneys file the proper claim forms with the FOP Legal Defense Plan. Hopefully, that will clear up the criminal attorneys so that they can attend to the legal needs of the officer involved without having to be concerned about some of the potentially distracting administrative issues. These criminal attorneys will be available to represent the officer throughout any criminal investigation. After that, I will be available for administrative proceedings or the officer may be able to continue with the criminal attorney if they wish to do so.
I am also planning on securing a use of force expert to respond to the scenes of critical incidents to advise myself and the criminal attorneys with regard to any use of force issues identified on the scene. I am excited about the benefit this will provide to officers and I know, from my own experience, how beneficial it is to the officer to have someone by their side during these types of events.
Please feel free to call me or Tony with any legal needs you may have. We appreciate your business and promise to deliver the type of service that you deserve whether it be with a DI-1, a Civil Service appeal, a 4th Circuit appeal, an automobile accident, a will, a power of attorney, or a succession.
UPDATE: This article has been revised to redact individuals’ names. While I received an overwhelming number of supportive reactions to this article, I am concerned about those who thought it was unfair to one particular individual. It was never my intent to belittle anyone or throw anyone under the bus. It is the process that is the issue, not the individuals involved. Therefore, I have redacted all names except for the list of promotions. The names are unimportant. I congratulate those who were promoted.
On September 23, 2015, the New Orleans Police Department announced 8 promotions. Typically, promotions are something to be celebrated and a boost to morale. Unfortunately, this cannot be the situation. The round of promotions before this was not much better. Unfortunately, these promotions have done little more than make morale in the NOPD just a little bit worse.
On September 23, 2015, the following promotions were made:
Lt. Derek Frick to Police Commander
Lt. Bryan Lampard to Police Commander
Sgt. Daryl Watson, I to Police Lieutenant
Sgt. Sabrina Richardson to Police Lieutenant
Sgt. Duralph Hayes to Police Lieutenant
Sgt. Kenrick Allen to Police Lieutenant
Police Officer Charles Love to Police Sergeant
Police Officer Stephanie Taillon to Police Sergeant
Sgt. Daryl Watson was promoted to Police Lieutenant. Lt. Watson was 61st on the list of 65 Police Sergeants who passed the promotional examination That means that 60 out of 65 people performed better on the promotional examination. This is not a multiple choice test. This is an exam specifically created to test a candidate’s proficiency as a Police Lieutenant with the New Orleans Police Department. Not only was Lt. Watson 61st on the list, but candidate numbers 3, 4, 7, 8, 11, 13, 16, 18, 19, 22, 24, 25, 25 (tie), 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 47, 48, 49, 49, 49 (tie), 52, 55, 55 (tie), 57, 58, 59, and 60 remain unpromoted.
Candidates go into promotional exams thinking that they know what it takes to get promoted. A candidate who scores well on the test and doesn’t have a pending disciplinary investigation can count on being promoted once the NOPD gets to that candidate’s place on the list. It simply doesn’t work that way any longer.
What does it take to get promoted? Some kind of special qualifications, experience, or training? Well, Lt. Daryl Watson has been assigned to the Criminal Section of the Public Integrity Bureau for a long time. Certainly that kind of experience must be hard to find. It might be, but Sgt. Kevin Stamp, number 30 on the list, shares the same assignment and has been in that assignment for quite a while. So, I guess that is not it. Is it education? Sgt. Eric Berger, number 22 on the list, graduated from law school. I don’t think Lt. Watson has a law degree, so that is not it. What is it?
Here is what the Louisiana Constitution tells us:
Permanent appointments and promotions in the classified state and city service shall be made only after certification by the appropriate department of civil service under a general system based upon merit, efficiency, fitness, and length of service, as ascertained by examination which, so far as practical, shall be competitive.
La. Const. art. X, § 7
The Civil Service system is designed to ensure that promotions and appointments are made based on objective criteria that are no secret to anyone. The Constitution clearly envisions those objective criteria being accounted for in the examination process.
The Louisiana Constitution goes on to explain the process for picking promotional candidates with a little flexibility built in:
The number to be certified shall not be less than three; however, if more than one vacancy is to be filled, the name of one additional eligible for each vacancy may be certified. Each commission shall adopt rules for the method of certifying persons eligible for appointment, promotion, reemployment, and reinstatement and shall provide for appointments defined as emergency and temporary appointments if certification is not required.
La. Const. art. X, § 7
This is where the problem comes in. In spite of the obvious logical flaws, the Landrieu administration has fought to interpret this as saying that the number to be certified could be 3 or 103. Once they had the right people appointed to the Civil Service Commission, the rules were changed basically making everyone who passed the test equal. Whatever the competitive nature of the testing is, if there is any beyond passing the test, is a mystery.
What I can say for certain is that the men and women of the New Orleans Police Department believe that the competitive criteria is friendship with the right person.
What I can also say for certain is that whether or not that is true is irrelevant because perception is reality.
The Civil Service system was developed to prevent that perception. The Civil Service system was designed to prevent political interference and “the spoils system.” The Civil Service system was designed so that an objective set of criteria could be applied to candidates for promotion in the public employ and employees could count on getting promoted, even if they were not friends with the boss.
These revisions to the Civil Service rules made as part of Mayor Landrieu’s Great Place to Work initiative need to be repealed. The Fraternal Order of Police has a lawsuit filed in Civil District Court asking a Judge to declare the new rules unconstitutional. We would all be better off if the Civil Service Commission repealed these changes on their own accord or if the NOPD sought to have these rule changes repealed. Of course, that won’t happen. The NOPD could have continued to apply the old rules to promotions. Had the NOPD continued using the old rules in spite of the rule changes, perhaps officers wouldn’t feel like their chances of getting promoted were impacted by potentially anything other than test score. Superintendent Serpas sought to kill the last promotional register for Police Lieutenant after the first half of the list was promoted. It was his stated belief that he would have rathered give a new test to generate a new list in order to avoid promoting from the bottom half of the list (the list being comprised of all who have passed the exam).
At this point in the history of the NOPD and the City of New Orleans, police manpower is at critical levels. Manpower has been at critical levels for several years now and will take years to correct. As long as the men and women who make up the NOPD believe that they are not being treated fairly or that promotions aren’t being administered fairly, it will be hard to convince officers that they should be trying to encourage potential law enforcement professionals that this is the place to start a career.
It was not my intention to pick on Daryl Watson for any reason. I am only trying to illustrate a point. Nothing written here is intended to infer in any way that Daryl Watson is not a capable police officer or that he will not make a capable Police Lieutenant. Indeed, I have spoken with others who had been promoted from the bottom of the list who have indicated that they too wished the NOPD had used the old rules to promote people so that people would not be as quick to question their potential as a supervisor. Hopefully, he will understand. I used 62 as my example last time.
This needs to be fixed or morale will never improve.
The NOPD promoted 18 sergeants to lieutenant and 8 police officers to sergeant on July 24, 2015. Many people have inquired about lawsuits and appeals regarding these promotions. The Crescent City Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police is taking the following actions.
NOPD: Over the Precipice
It will take over 40 years to return to full strength
The New Orleans Police Department has gone over the precipice. We may be beyond the point of return. And the blame rests clearly at the feet of Mayor Mitch Landrieu and NOPD Superintendent Ronal Serpas. They were both forewarned.
In February 2011, the Fraternal Order of Police issued the first hue and cry about the NOPD manpower crisis. For three years, in every news story and interview possible, we have repeated the mantra….”Manpower….Manpower…Manpower”. We have advocated the repeal of the domicile ordinance and we have opposed the tattoo policy. We have asked that the focus be turned to retention and the recruitment of fully trained, post certified lateral police officers.
In February 2011 there were 1415 commissioned New Orleans police officers.
Today, there are 1135 sworn officers – counting from Superintendent down to Field Recruit. Over 100 of those are unable to perform their duties due to serious injury, long-term illness or administrative reassignment.