New Orleans Civil Service Commission Meeting 2/20/2017

IMG_0153

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.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE LETTER SUBMITTED TO THE COMMISSIONERS OF THE NEW ORLEANS CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION.

Advertisements

NOPD Disciplinary Regs

IMG_0153

On May 15, 2016, the NOPD enacted new disciplinary regulations. The effects of these disciplinary regulations have not been felt up to this point. This is because investigations resulting from dates of occurrence before May 15 have been handled under the old procedure. However, investigations resulting from alleged incidents occurring after May 15 will be handled using the new procedure.

There are two major impacts to the disciplinary system resulting from the new regulations. First, the number of repeat offenses is going to increase. Whether a sustained violation is a second or third offense will be based on the category of the offense and its proximity to other incidents in a similar category. The categories are determined by looking for a letter near the violation which will correspond to a particular penalty range.  In the past, an officer needed to commit the same violation for the violation to become a second offense.  Now, the violations could be completely unrelated and still become a second or third offense.

The second significant impact will be the way disciplinary hearings are conducted.  The bureau conducting the investigation will now make the determination of whether the investigator’s recommend a disposition stays as recommended or not in a pre-disposition conference. In the not so distant past, the investigator’s recommended disposition would be reviewed by the officer’s command to make a determination as to whether that recommended disposition stood.

For example, if an officer assigned to the Operations Bureau was investigated by PIB for a violation which was ultimately sustained, the disciplinary hearing would have been held in its entirety by a member of the Operations Bureau. Now, in those same circumstances, a pre-disposition conference would be held by PIB which would determine the final disposition of the matter and only the penalty would be decided by the Operations Bureau.  If the Operations Bureau conducts the investigation, then the Operations Bureau would conduct the pre-disposition conference and the pre-disciplinary hearing to determine the penalty.  If the officer is assigned to ISB, MSB, or the Superintendent’s staff, you can substitute ISB, MSB, or Superintendent’s Staff for Operations Bureau in the above example.

This removes one of the checks and balances that previously existed. I suspect that the results will be an increased number of sustained violations and an increased number of Civil Service appeals. Fortunately, you have the FOP Legal Defense Plan and dedicated attorneys.  If you do not have the FOP Legal Defense Plan, it is never too late to join.

For alleged violations which occurred before May 15, 2016, the old system and the old disciplinary penalty matrix should be used. For any alleged violations occurring after May 15, the new system and the new penalty matrix will be used.

I want to encourage members to call as soon as they learn about an investigation. It is better for me to be involved as early as possible. If more of these investigations end up in appeals, as I suspect, it will be better for the officer if I am involved earlier in the process.

Remember, there is no cost to the member for legal services covered by the FOP Legal Defense Plan. Also, it is important to remember that in order to qualify for the salary reimbursement option, you must be represented by an FOP attorney during the course of the investigation.

Finally, I want to recommend to FOP members that you use the app Signal for private text communications. This app is available for iOS, Android, and Chrome for desktop. It is free and is super simple to set up. No account is needed — only a phone number.  Best of all, all messages sent and received using Signal can only be read by the sender and recipient because they are encrypted end to end.

To recap, I want to encourage all members to call your FOP attorney as soon as you learn of a disciplinary investigation. If you are notified via email of a Civil Service extension hearing, that means you are an accused officer in a formal disciplinary investigation (also a good time to call).  The changes to the disciplinary regulations make it more important than ever for you take advantage of the representation available to you.

Opinions are like ________. Everybody has one.

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.

What types of disciplinary investigations should I contact my #FOP attorney about?

IMG_0153

The short answer to this question is ALL of them.  There is no investigation too simple or straightforward.  Quite often I hear “I didn’t call you because it was just a missing court case” or “I didn’t call you because it was just a BWC case.”  Unfortunately, my response is commonly “Well, one of the rules of the Salary Reimbursement Option is that you have to be represented by one of the FOP attorneys in order to qualify for the SRO.”  What is an SRO you ask?

The FOP Legal Defense Plan includes what is known as the Salary Reimbursement Option (“SRO”).  The SRO allows officers to make up for salary lost as a result of an unpaid suspension.  In New Orleans, the SRO allows officers to recover up to 5 days of suspension at $150 per day.  In other words, when you get a 1-day suspension for missing court, the FOP will pay you $150 if you choose not to file a Civil Service appeal.

Why not file a Civil Service appeal?  Well, that is the benefit of having one of the FOP attorneys on the case from the beginning.  Your FOP attorneys have been handling disciplinary actions for years.  By the end of the investigation, your FOP attorney should be able to give you a pretty good idea of your chances of success on appeal.  So, after a disciplinary hearing, you and your FOP attorney can discuss whether you are better off filing an appeal with Civil Service or submitting the disciplinary letter for the Salary Reimbursement Option.

I deal with disciplinary investigations every day.  Most officers deal with disciplinary investigations 2 or 3 times in a career.  As such, one cannot expect officers to be thoroughly familiar with the ins and outs of being an accused officer in a disciplinary investigation.  What is the legal burden?  What evidence is allowed?  When does the 60-day rule apply?  When does the 60 days begin and end?  Is the disciplinary hearing considered part of the 60 days?  How long after a disciplinary hearing can an officer expect to receive the disciplinary letter or suspension days?  When can I file a Civil Service appeal?  What is this email I received about a hearing about an extension that cannot be continued?

The answers to some of these questions change based on rulings of appellate courts in Louisiana.  The answers to other questions changes based on changes in an administration.  The point is that even if an officer is tasked with completing disciplinary investigations, there are still aspects of disciplinary investigations which are unknown.

As a member of the FOP Legal Defense Plan, an officer is entitled to representation at no cost to the officer.  We do not judge whether or not an officer deserves legal defense.  We do not judge the accused officer.  If you are a member of the FOP Legal Defense Plan and you become the accused officer or a witness officer in an internal disciplinary investigation, your legal representation is guaranteed.  We are there to protect your rights.  Calling your FOP attorney can also make you eligible for the FOP’s salary reimbursement option when you don’t have a chance on appeal.  Call, text, or email today.

File Dec 24, 11 55 40 AM

       FOP CCL2    

Powered by Como

 

 

2015 #FOP #Legal Year in Review

IMG_0153

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.

20151011_221605366_iOS

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.

File Dec 24, 11 55 40 AM

NOPD Promotions Illegal and Damaging Morale

IMG_0153

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.

#NOPD Promotion Appeals

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.

Continue reading

Formal Disciplinary Investigations (#NOPD DI-1)

IMG_1309-0Periodically, I like to take a moment to make sure people are up to speed on the status of formal disciplinary investigations for NOPD and the benefits provided by the FOP Legal Defense Plan.

The federal consent decree entered into by the City of New Orleans and the Dept. of Justice requires that complaint classification be “allegation-based” as opposed to “outcome-based.”  That has been interpreted to mean that whatever the allegation is, even if it is extraordinarily unlikely or impossible, that allegation will be investigated.  While I disagree that the consent decree requires a full, formal investigation into every allegation, the current interpretation results in that conclusion.  The end result is that every complaint, no matter how insignificant, is likely to result in a formal disciplinary investigation.

Continue reading

NOPD Reinstatements

20121202-133353.jpg

Much has been made about the number of officers resigning or retiring from the New Orleans Police Department lately.  On average, one NOPD officer resigns or retires every three days.  Manpower at the NOPD is at historic lows with current commissioned strength somewhere right above 1,120.  This is not meant to be an article discussing manpower, so I do not intend to get into the number of officers on limited duty or out injured or sick for an extended period of time.  There is a critical shortage of manpower that jeopardizes officer safety and NOPD’s ability to respond adequately to the public’s needs. At the rate NOPD is hiring, it will take a very long time to get up to the 1,575 officers that Superintendent Serpas has said he needs.

That being said, I am regularly contacted by officers who have left voluntarily indicating their desire to return to the NOPD.  It is not unusual for officers who have left to decide that the grass is not always greener on the other side of the fence.  Certainly that is not true of every officer who leaves, but officers express their desire to return on a regular basis.

The process of being reinstated has been a little confounding at times.  Civil Service Rule VI, Section 4.8 describes how reinstatement works:

(a) Any regular or probationary employee who has resigned from a position or has been terminated for reasons other than inefficiency, delinquency, or misconduct and has requested reinstatement to the same department and to any classification previously occupied, may, upon the request of the appointing authority and with the prior approval of the Personnel Director, based upon the record of the employee for satisfactory service, be reinstated to that position or any position where permanent status was previously held, within a period of three (3) years from the date of separation if a vacancy exists therein and upon the completion of a satisfactory medical examination if the separation was for medical reasons.

(b) However, if more than three years have elapsed, a former regular employee may apply for reinstatement only to the same department in the same classification as previously occupied, and subject to the following conditions:

  1. The employee returns with probationary status and must successfully complete a new working test period.
  2. The minimum qualifications and job requirements for the classification have remained essentially the same.  However, if the minimum qualifications and job requirements have been revised, then the former employee must meet the current criteria.
  3. In the event the former employee’s personnel files are no longer in existence, it shall be the individual’s responsibility to provide documentation to the Personnel Director, that he or she successfully completed the examination process and attained permanent status in the classification in question, and subsequently left the city service under honorable conditions.

In short, an employee who has left voluntarily can return within three (3) years if the appointing authority requests the reinstatement from the Personnel Director.  In the case of the NOPD, that means that the Superintendent of Police would have to request the reinstatement of the officer to Civil Service and the Personnel Director at Civil Service must approve.

Previously, that process was convoluted.  Officers seeking reinstatement would often not know who to ask or would make general inquiries and receive no response.

As more of these reinstatement requests came in, it became evident that a better system needed to be in place.  In response to this, the Superintendent has implemented the following system for reinstatement requests:

The officer seeking reinstatement can either seek the assistance of an organization such as the FOP or they can undertake the process on their own.  If the officer has any questions about how to make the request or how to explain their desire to return or the circumstances of their departure, it may be better to seek the assistance of counsel.  The FOP provides such assistance to its members (and often, former members).

The officer seeking reinstatement (or representative) should send a correspondence to the Superintendent of Police expressing the desire to be reinstated.  That correspondence can be in the form of a letter addressed to the Superintendent at NOPD Headquarters (715 S. Broad St., NOLA 70119) or an email to Superintendent Serpas (rwserpas@nola.gov).

Once the Superintendent has received the request, he will arrange a meeting during the next departmental COMSTAT.  At that meeting, the Superintendent or his representative (read other chief(s)) will meet with the officer to discuss the officer’s desire to return and circumstances of departure.  Following that meeting, the Superintendent will make a decision regarding that officer’s reinstatement or the Superintendent’s representative(s) will make a recommendation to the Chief regarding the officer’s reinstatement.

Once the Superintendent has had an opportunity to review the recommendation and any initial information, the officer’s reinstatement will be forwarded to the Management Services Bureau (Recruitment) for a review board appearance and processing (assuming the decision is ultimately favorable).

This new process was recently used and a meeting was set up for the officer immediately. That meeting has not taken place yet.  So, it remains to be seen exactly how efficient this new system will be for processing reinstatements.  However, it is a step forward compared to the old system (or lack thereof).

Hopefully, officers seeking reinstatement will find the process to be a little more efficient than it was previously.  As usual, I am available to assist officers who would like to be reinstated, as are the other FOP attorneys.  If there are any questions or comments, please feel free to send them.

This could easily have to be updated. Stay tuned.

FOP CCL2

Powered by Conduit Mobile

 

#NOPD: Over the Precipice

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.

Continue reading