Promotion interview question. What do you think?

[JB2245]

I just got out of my first of three days of assessment center excercises. Today was the oral interview excercise. We were given five lengthy questions that had to do with issues about community policing and officers taking gratuities. One of the scenario questions involved a bar/restaurant owner who states that several officers used to come into his restaurant on duty to eat and that they would even come off duty to frequent the bar. The owner would give the officers a discount on their meals and drinks. Another bar/restaurant down the street opened recently and the officers stopped coming to his restarant on and off duty and started frequenting the other bar/restaurant. The owner is concerned that his bar/restarant is not getting the attention that it once did by the officers and he expresses his concern to you and asked how he could get the officers to come back to his establishment. What do you tell the owner? How do you handle it with the officers?

My answer was basicly that I would advise the owner that the officers are not to accept gratuities and if they did so, they were wrong (per department general orders). I also stated that I would advise the owner that I would advise the officers that they are not to accept gratuities per the general orders and that they could eventually fall down the "slippery slope" of corruption (I then gave a brief synopsis of the slippery slope theory). I then advised that if there were any more instances of officers accepting gratuities, I would take progressive discipline action and hold the officer accountable for their actions.

Then one of the assessors asked me if I would tell the officers about the owners concerns. I stated that I would because they are violating the general orders and that I would re instruct them about not accepting gratuities. I also stated that now the owner expects something in return from the officers for him not charging them full price for their meals/drinks and that it could lead the officers down the slippery slope.

My question is, what do you think she was getting at when she asked that question? Do you think I gave a proper response? Perhaps the "right answer" would be not to advise the officers about the owners statements to me? Feedback is welcomed

[KapsFB]

If the other/new place is a Hooters, tell the old place's owner he's screwed.

Just kidding (maybe). I think your answers were pretty sound and prudent. It's possible you could've responded that you would not 'specifically' advise the officers of the old owner's concerns but make the case of accepting gratuities a generic reminder of department policy regarding them. Have your staff read, review, discuss, and possibly test on the policy/general order.

The assessor's only concern I can think of may be that by outing the owner to the officers, the officers may respond in a negative manner toward him. Like NEVER go back; be slow to respond to calls there, etc. I'm just thinking out loud (in writing?) and may not know what the heck I'm talking about. That would be nothing new....

Sounds like you gave a proper response. Don't think too much about it. EVERY single time I ever participated in one of these things, I walk away thinking I responded badly or coulda, shoulda responded differently.

[JB2245]

The assessor's only concern I can think of may be that by outing the owner to the officers, the officers may respond in a negative manner toward him. Like NEVER go back; be slow to respond to calls there, etc. I'm just thinking out loud (in writing?) and may not know what the heck I'm talking about. That would be nothing new....

Sounds like you gave a proper response. Don't think too much about it. EVERY single time I ever participated in one of these things, I walk away thinking I responded badly or coulda, shoulda responded

Yeah, that's kind of what I was thinking after I had an opportunity to think about her question. Maybe a better answer would have been to inform them on the general orders which talk about not accepting gratuities without letting them know that you have actual knowlege of them doing so. I guess there's more than one way to answer the question.

[L-1]

A few things stand out about the scenario they gave you.

1. The restaurant owner is trying to buy extra police protection by offering discounts, which will cause more cops to frequent the place. Obviously, this is improper. I would thank him for his kindness, remind him that the department does not allow officers to take discounted meals (assuming this is your policy), and politely suggest that it is inappropriate for him to continue to offer them.

2. The way the scenario is worded suggests the owner somehow believes he is "entitled" to have a certain number of officers patronizing his restaurant, both on and off duty. Clearly this is something you do not want to get sucked into. I would tell him that the department cannot dictate where its officers eat, that dining is a competative market and perhaps he should do a little checking and find out why people find other restaurants more preferrable to his.

3. Most departrments have a no gratuity rule. But, when it comes to free or discounted meals, you and I both know that more than a few cops tend to be mooches and will ignore the policy. So, if none of the cops will eat there anymore, this signified something is wrong. It could be something as simple as the food being bad, or your officers suspect there is illegal activity going on, or the owner is asking improper favors of them (run a license plate, bounce a customer who has done nothing wrong, etc.) I would discretely find out why officers refuse to eat there anymore. Based on their response, I would take appropriate action, if any was warranted. Assuming nothing serious was discovered, as a matter of form, I oould put out a briefing bulletin reminding all personnel of the no discounted meal policy.

[Yankee_1]

They want you to give the answer that is supported by general orders. basically throw the book at the officers at the assesment centers even if you would do something completely different in the real world. I bombed my first one because I answered it like it is actually handled at work not the way the general orders say to.