Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Internal Lawsuits, by cops against employers

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Internal Lawsuits, by cops against employers

    Wow, I am looking at an attorney's ad in my Los Angeles Police Protective League (union) newspaper. One attorney has worked in four cases, involving POLICE OFFICERS suing LAPD/LA City, and reached settlements totalling $18 MILLION!

    Cases vary from discrimination by Black/Hispanic captains against a white sergeant, to a female Hispanic detective being demoted after her surgery by both female and male Hispanic bosses, to recruits not being properly recycled after injuries received in training, to a firearms instructor being threatened with transfer; if he did not get back to work after knee surgery, sooner, as ordered by his lieutenant against doctor's orders. I love it, especially, when I see the names of some of the bosses involved.

    The penalty for these bosses making bad decisions, like discriminating, practicing medicine w/o a license, and just general idiocy? PROMOTION! So glad I left that place ten years ago.

    What's up in YOUR workplace - any coworkers made millionaires? And the offending supervisors/command officers, what became of them?
    "You're never fully dressed without a smile."

    Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

    Three things I know for sure: (1) No bad deed goes unrewarded, (2) No good deed goes unpunished, and (3) It is entirely possible to push the most devoted, loyal and caring person beyond the point where they no longer give a 5h!t.

  • #2
    No millionaires, but the cost of living's a lot lower here.

    One of my agency's administrators settled for $550K after retireing for "stress" and suing the chief for harrassment. The chief put the city in an untenable position when he destroyed his notes of discussions with the plaintiff. The chief subsquently resigned, moved out of state, and was hired as chief for a smaller department.

    That chief's successor cost the city $375K when the judge ruled the city had violated equal pay laws by staring a female lateral at a lower salary than males with similar experience and training. The chief remained in office and retired last month.

    Comment


    • #3
      Anything about suing for not being allowed sound suppressors for patrol rifles..?
      Now go home and get your shine box!

      Comment


      • #4
        We had two brothers who were poster boys for sexual harassment lawsuits. One was a Sergeant and the other was a Deputy Chief. We lost count as to the number of sustained sexual harassment claims made against them and for some reason they just seemed to be bullet proof and were never disciplined. It got to the point that we used to joke that you had to have at least three sustained sexual harassment claims in order to qualify for Deputy Chief.

        The Sergeant was in charge of our FTOs and began hitting on one of our married rookie female officers who was fresh out of the academy. She turned to her peers for advice. Knowing of the two brother's history, rank and lack of discipline for prior acts, they warned her not to report the matter for fear of career retaliation from both of them. Fearing that if she stayed and remained silent, the Sergeant would continue hitting on her and if she stayed and complained, the Sergeant and Deputy Chief would retaliate, the woman realized her brief career was now over. She retained counsel who put her off on stress leave and filed a lawsuit against the Sergeant and department for sexual harassment. In doing so, he deposed her coworkers and pointed out that their statements warning her not to complain because of the past, unpunished histories of the brothers, established that the department was aware of ongoing sexual harassment and did nothing to stop it. She settled for a tax free 50% disability retirement, $1 Million in cash and her attorney fees.

        In the mean time, The Deputy Chief finally committed a whole laundry list of sins that broke the camel's back and caused the department to take action to fire him. He had not yet reached retirement age, so when you are young and they want to fire you, there are only two honorable ways out - you either eat your gun or you go for a disability retirement. He filed a workers comp claim on a questionable injury, which was enough to bring a halt to the disciplinary action against him (California law won't allow you to discipline a cop while they are out on worker's comp.)

        Although negligible, the injury in question appeared to be legitimate, so an agreement was negotiated where the Deputy Chief would take a Disability Retirement and the disciplinary action against him would be dropped. Cops are allowed up to one year of paid leave credit (4800 time) for a work related injury, so the Deputy Chief began to burn that time off before retirement kicked in. However, right in the middle of his 4800 time, the statute of limitations expired for pursuing all the disciplinary action against him. It was like a faith healer had laid hands on the Deputy Chief. Much to the annoyance of the department, the Deputy Chief's physician declared him fit for duty and he announced he was withdrawing his retirement request and returning to work.

        Going too far is half the pleasure of not getting anywhere

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by CCCSD View Post
          Anything about suing for not being allowed sound suppressors for patrol rifles..?
          What about suing because you got promoted and are no longer authorized a rifle?
          I make my living on Irish welfare.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by reils49 View Post

            What about suing because you got promoted and are no longer authorized a rifle?
            That's never made any sense to me. Used to be that every cop who made sergeant, or detective, out of LAPD SWAT could no longer be trusted with a 1911 or an AR. At least they keep their 1911's these days.
            "You're never fully dressed without a smile."

            Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

            Three things I know for sure: (1) No bad deed goes unrewarded, (2) No good deed goes unpunished, and (3) It is entirely possible to push the most devoted, loyal and caring person beyond the point where they no longer give a 5h!t.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Kieth M. View Post

              That's never made any sense to me. Used to be that every cop who made sergeant, or detective, out of LAPD SWAT could no longer be trusted with a 1911 or an AR. At least they keep their 1911's these days.
              It doesn't make sense to me either. The rationale is that sergeants/investigators are not the first responders to an incident, and therefore don't need rifles. Now, that may be true, as a matter of what the manual section describing each members job responsibility says.

              But in reality it's not that simple. I can site numerous examples, recent examples, from my own agency where this idea has proven false. If we look outside our ranks it only becomes more and more obvious that we should have long guns more accessible.

              Its like the Alan Jackson song Here in the Real World. "Cowboys don't cry. And heroes don't die".

              I guess the silver lining is we are better than when I started.
              I make my living on Irish welfare.

              Comment


              • #8
                Great topic of discussion. The one thing that surprised me the most over my 25 year career was how unfit whackos are not just tolerated, but that they promote and thrive n LE organizations.

                Like L-1's example- how good people often leave not because they aren't capable, but because they read the writing on the wall and see the odds are stacked against them, and realize the low dirty truth is that no one will give a damn if they complain.

                Weak and feckless upper management is a big part of the problem. Little people with power who see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear. Their #1 priority- above all else- is protecting the power structure. And they'll be damned if some servile little peon is going to threaten their position on it.

                Looking back, it wasn't the bad guys out there who nearly ended my career on a couple of occasions. It was the bosses.
                For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.

                -HL Mencken

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by reils49 View Post

                  It doesn't make sense to me either. The rationale is that sergeants/investigators are not the first responders to an incident, and therefore don't need rifles. Now, that may be true, as a matter of what the manual section describing each members job responsibility says.

                  But in reality it's not that simple. I can site numerous examples, recent examples, from my own agency where this idea has proven false. If we look outside our ranks it only becomes more and more obvious that we should have long guns more accessible.

                  Its like the Alan Jackson song Here in the Real World. "Cowboys don't cry. And heroes don't die".

                  I guess the silver lining is we are better than when I started.
                  While not exactly the same rationalization ....it is exactly why ALL Federal Bureau of Prisons personnel are considered Law Enforcement Officers since they ALL can be utilized as Correctional Officers in an emergency

                  Originally posted by Ratatatat View Post

                  Looking back, it wasn't the bad guys out there who nearly ended my career on a couple of occasions. It was the bosses.
                  30 yrs working in a prison system and I NEVER had problems with prisoners that caused me worry.

                  I could always lock them in a cell and walk away from them..................didn't have that option with other staff.
                  Last edited by Iowa #1603; 08-19-2017, 09:46 AM.
                  Since some people need to be told by notes in crayon .......Don't PM me with without prior permission. If you can't discuss the situation in the open forum ----it must not be that important

                  My new word for the day is FOCUS, when someone irritates you tell them to FOCUS

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Ratatatat View Post
                    Great topic of discussion. The one thing that surprised me the most over my 25 year career was how unfit whackos are not just tolerated, but that they promote and thrive n LE organizations.

                    Like L-1's example- how good people often leave not because they aren't capable, but because they read the writing on the wall and see the odds are stacked against them, and realize the low dirty truth is that no one will give a damn if they complain.

                    Weak and feckless upper management is a big part of the problem. Little people with power who see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear. Their #1 priority- above all else- is protecting the power structure. And they'll be damned if some servile little peon is going to threaten their position on it.
                    I am SOOO biting my tongue right now.

                    But... If I *did* decide to post some of the stories, I'd be typing until my fingers bled.
                    You can trust just about every officer you work with to risk their life to save yours, but don't ever leave your lunch in the breakroom refrigerator.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Curt5811 View Post

                      But... If I *did* decide to post some of the stories, I'd be typing until my fingers bled.
                      ANY of us with any time on can do that
                      Since some people need to be told by notes in crayon .......Don't PM me with without prior permission. If you can't discuss the situation in the open forum ----it must not be that important

                      My new word for the day is FOCUS, when someone irritates you tell them to FOCUS

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I could write a book as well. I'm sure my experiences are not unique.

                        Some takeaways:

                        Psych(o) testing only catches the low hanging fruit when it comes to the mentals, mostly those who aren't smart enough to mask their issues or aren't smart enough to correctly answer the same question over and over, phrased differently. Wackos with above-average IQs can usually glide past a couple of personality tests and fifteen minutes with the doctor without much trouble.

                        Certain traits fit the mold perfectly and are even valued. Aggression. Power. Taking Control. Bullying. Even violence. They are often what attracted the person to the profession in the first place.

                        When true colors do show themselves, and they always do, the system breaks down. Supervisors are often afraid to confront the problem. Brave supervisors who do attempt are often rebuked by the joke that is HR. Tensions build and production suffers. Morale plummets. The most common solution is transfer or promotion, with the thought process being maybe new people or new responsibilities will resolve the problem. What seems like an equitable, universal solution though ultimately only makes things worse.

                        Why? Because now the lunatic is emboldened that he got away with all his BS. And if he is given power as a result, well, now he's really emboldened.

                        Now that he has power, the carnage only worsens, but the organizational response is indifference, at best. Why? Because the number one goal of those in charge today is they are in charge tomorrow. All decisions are based on that premise, and any threat to the hierarchy is a threat to their position on it.

                        Things don't improve over time; they only worsen. Good people leave, but no effort (other than maybe token inquiry) is put into asking why. Others stay, and when they begin to complain, upper management lets it be known that any formal referrals would impact careers. Yeah, not theirs! The only solution at this point is roll the dice and stuff the truth down their GD throats with formal complaints and lawsuits, because otherwise they'll just keep ignoring it, hoping the problem will either magically go away or the peons will learn to accept getting peed on by their psycho boss.

                        In the end, careers are destroyed. Professional reputations suffer and agencies get negative headlines. Often the taxpayers get fleeced with jackpot settlements paid to the aggrieved. But when the dust settles, ultimately who is still there? The psycho who caused it all....
                        Last edited by Ratatatat; 08-20-2017, 10:31 AM.
                        For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.

                        -HL Mencken

                        Comment

                        MR300x250 Tablet

                        Collapse

                        What's Going On

                        Collapse

                        There are currently 4244 users online. 203 members and 4041 guests.

                        Most users ever online was 26,947 at 07:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

                        Welcome Ad

                        Collapse
                        Working...
                        X