Cop gets fired after 3 strikes within 4 years

[rock jock]

Doesn't that cut both ways?

Yes, it does. Only I hear it from Internet cops everytime someone so much as questions a single incident in LE.

Go back to cop bashing.... It'll make you feel good about yourself....

There you go, pull out the old "cop-bashing" mantra anytime someone presents you with facts you can't dispute.

 

[Guns_and_Labs]

Let's say you get arrested for DV (that is, assuming your buddies don't sweep it under the rug or convince your spouse to drop the charges). At least you get to go through a review process and remain on the job (probably still with your gun). If that happened to me, my boss could walk in the next day and fire me right off the bat, no discussion, no appeal.

As was mentioned, let's compare apples to apples. In private sector employment, at least in CA, it's legally employment at will. That is, you can be fired for no reason whatsoever. But, you can easily appeal that you were fired for a reason, and that reason is "protected". I have worked for a company that fired a guy about the same time as the guy was handed his second TRO, hopefully to get him to quit beating his wife (who worked at the same company). He filed for wrongful discharge, and won.

On the other hand, police officers are not private sector employees. Most are best described as civil service. But they (and some firefighters) are the glaring exception to the employment safety of civil service. They can, explicitly, be terminated for offenses that no other civil servant can be.

Sure, they have a hearing process -- so does every one else, whether it be the civil service review board or the unemployment commission. The fact is that they can and are fired for less.

 

[Vernal45]

Welcome back Centac. Did a Coffee can search keep you away for a while?

 

[rock jock]

But, you can easily appeal that you were fired for a reason, and that reason is "protected".

That is simply not true. I think if you check that idea nationwide you'll find that it is extremely difficult to find legal grounds for getting a job back. Exceptions are those explicitly stated in the law, e.g., race, color, creed, gender, national orgin, vet status, and in some places, sexual orientation. Other than those, you are SOL 99.99% of the time.

The point remains, police officers are civil servents and, as such, are in fact afforded much more in the way of job protection than the average private sector person. I am not convinced that police officers face a "higher standard" legally speaking, and certainly not w/regard to job protection. Now, compared to the dregs they deal with on a daily basis, yes, they face a higher standard than those scum, but I think its safe to say that every law-abiding responsible citizen does also.

My own company policy lists as a reason for displinary action and or dismissal under Code of Conduct "Commission of a crime or other conduct that damages the image or reputation of the company." Period. End of story. No one in the company I currently work for has ever been dinged for this, but at my last company a guy got a DUI and was out the door the next week. No Board of Review. No union rep to help him out.

 

[Guns_and_Labs]

My own company policy lists as a reason for displinary action and or dismissal under Code of Conduct "Commission of a crime or other conduct that damages the image or reputation of the company." Period. End of story.

Texas is indeed a long way from California. That reason for dismissal is untenable in California.

I think if you check that idea nationwide you'll find that it is extremely difficult to find legal grounds for getting a job back.

First, I agree with you that "getting the job back" is not likely. It's getting a settlement and neutral reference.

Second, I do check the idea nationwide. I did the high risk terminations for a previous company (our HR department was a bit skittish), with nationwide and international operations. Some of these were real sleazoids, DV, hate crimes, definitely a danger to society. But unless they actually did the crime onsite, they frequently won on appeal. Pity we didn't have operations in Texas, I guess.

 

[rock jock]

I actually like the fact that employers have that kind of power. I don't want to work with pond scum anymore than they want to pay them.

 

[Coronach]

Elmer, it's already been pointed out that sanctions for DUI in the private sector can very well include termination-without the benefit of administrative review boards or union intervention extended to cops. And that the threshhold for 'getting caught' is lower in the private sector than among law enforcement.

Can, but rarely do. Like Elmer, I know many people with jobs like Rock Jock stated that have convictions for DUI or DV, and some have felonies. This is because the decision to fire rests solely with the employer (As well it should), and is thus dependant upon their discretion and vigilance. The vast, overwhelming majority of the time someone can be criminally charged and ajudicated without the employer even knowing, and for your average job they don't have a team of background investigators running updated checks on current employees. Show up for work and no one is the wiser. There are, of course, exceptions to this rule, but they're that- exceptions.

As to the civil service review/appeal process for public sector employees, that is true. However, most unionized jobs have similar processes (though perhaps with less 'teeth'). The point remains, however, and is valid, but is no more valid for cops than for any other civil service employee. In fact, it remains less so, perforce, because of the Lautenburg Amendment. No cop can have a DV conviction on his record, period, because he cannot carry a gun. AFAIK, there is no relief from disability for this. Furthermore, as Guns_and_labs pointed out, there are several other offenses that negate civil service protection.

As to Vernal45's list of cases, note the common thread in all of them: the charges were dismissed. This happens quite a bit in DV cases (for cops and non cops) because it is often a case of "he said, she said" with ambiguous physical evidence, and victims often fail to follow through with the cases in any event. Had those cases resulted in convictions, those officers would have to have been terminated. Now, if there is evidence of prosecutorial wrongdoing in going light on the officers as offenders, there might be a point to be made. Most of the time the opposite is true- the prosecutors go harder because the chief prosecutor likes his cushy job and elections are rarely far off.

Mike

 

[rock jock]

There are, of course, exceptions to this rule, but they're that- exceptions.

Mike, either you and I have totally opposite experiences or there are some pretty big geographical differences between us.

I have been in the private sector long enough to know that no one can keep a DV or DUI conviction, or any felony, secret for very long. Dosen't happen. Anything more than a speeding ticket will come out one way or another. Anything as serious as a DUI WILL result at a minimum in a talking to, and very possibly in dismissal. The ONLY exceptions I know are self-employed.

I work in a city of 100,000+ and can tell you the dirty laundry of most of the lawyers in town, all the politicians, the doctors, etc. When it comes to my own profession, I practically know the names of everyone's pet.

There was a local engineer who was busted for cocaine possession two years ago and lost his job shortly thereafter. Everyone knew about his situation days after the event and when he committed suicide, we knew the next day.

 

[Coronach]

Coke possession is a felony. I fully expect that this would be much more of a problem than a misdemenor DUI or DV. Likewise, any criminal conviction, especially felony convictions, can make it more difficult to obtain a job, as running criminal history checks prior to employment is fairly common. What is much less common are criminal history checks run after someone is employed. Can it happen? Sure. Can a conviction be used as grounds for a dismissal? Sure. It generally does not happen, though, in my experience. I know (and have arrested) plenty of people who work white collar jobs who have some entertaining criminal histories. They continue to be gainfully employed.

Mike

 

[Guns_and_Labs]

I know (and have arrested) plenty of people who work white collar jobs who have some entertaining criminal histories. They continue to be gainfully employed.

Along those lines, I know an accountant that has one felony conviction for embezzlement and one for fraud (witness for the prosecution, so I think it was dropped to a misdemeanor) -- and I'm told there's a DUI somewhere in there... still working as the general manager in the tourism industry. Handles all their money. Handles the time share sales operation, too, I think.

Not in Texas, though.

 

[rock jock]

Well, I would say that "those people" tend to be pretty well known in their circles for their checkered past. Very few reputable companies will employ them.

I would also say that one needs to carefully define "white collar." Even collection agecies fall into that category these days.

Handles the time share sales operation, too, I think.

Exactly my point.