Philadelphia cops demanding a 5% "accountability bonus pay" for wearing Body Cams.

[Gaidax]

It's a fair demand. It's also only 5%, it's not like they want reality show salary there.

[Mihalik]

As long as it's only punishing the police department in a way that doesn't take money away from the innocent/good cops then it's fine.

That's not how that works.

If you apply that argument it would basically become impossible to sue the government or any company or private entity that has employees or shareholders.

[Elegiac]

It's a fair demand. It's also only 5%, it's not like they want reality show salary there.

"Accountability pay" isn't a fair demand. The pay you get for doing the job is the accountability pay.

[Mihalik]

It's a fair demand. It's also only 5%, it's not like they want reality show salary there.

Wait, how is it "fair" to demand a pay raise just to not break the law while enforcing the law?

If the argument is "We need a 5% raise because our salaries are low" that's a wildly different thing than "I want a 5% pay raise, if I am at risk of being exposed when I break the law". The problem is with the implication of the condition.

[Elegiac]

Wait, how is it "fair" to demand a pay raise just to not break the law while enforcing the law?

If the argument is "We need a 5% raise because our salaries are low" that's a wildly different thing than "I want a 5% pay raise, if I am at risk of being exposed when I break the law". The problem is with the implication of the condition.

Coercion is okay when the police do it tho. /s

[Gaidax]

"Accountability pay" isn't a fair demand. The pay you get for doing the job is the accountability pay.

Job requirements changed, it's fine that workers unionize and demand changes in salary as a result.

I think with all your cray cray police hate rage you forget they are as much of employees as anyone here and it's their right to demand changes as well as any workers can do.

For the record, I think cams on every vest is how it should be. It is, however, only fair to recognize it's an intrusive change on their personal privacy, they are people not robots. The intrusion is necessary, but it's only fair they get something out of it too - hence worker rights to negotiate employment terms as a union.

Given all above - 5% is a fair ask.

[s_bushido]

The intrusion is necessary, but it's only fair they get something out of it too - hence worker rights to negotiate employment terms as a union.

A joke. Right?

The "intrusion" is them losing their ability to violate other people's rights, through the authority and power of their position, without it at least being on record. "What they get out of it" is the peace of mind of knowing that if some shit does go sideways, and they weren't the instigators, that's on the record too.

[segara82]

Job requirements changed, it's fine that workers unionize and demand changes in salary as a result.

I think with all your cray cray police hate rage you forget they are as much of employees as anyone here and it's their right to demand changes as well as any workers can do.

For the record, I think cams on every vest is how it should be. It is, however, only fair to recognize it's an intrusive change on their personal privacy, they are people not robots. The intrusion is necessary, but it's only fair they get something out of it too - hence worker rights to negotiate employment terms as a union.

Given all above - 5% is a fair ask.

And, to further emphasize: the average salary for a police officer in the US is only $53,906.
So the lower-level guys and gals you meet on the streets are getting less.
For a job where getting shot (at) and such is a daily risk.
I think somebody in the union thought that this 'accountability pay' argument would serve as a good excuse to get a bonus to the lower paid ranks.

[Gaidax]

I think somebody in the union thought that this 'accountability pay' argument would serve as a good excuse to get a bonus to the lower paid ranks.

I think it's mostly what any normal half-decent union would do if employer would suddenly come out with demand to record employees during their shift. Heck 5%, wow, that's pretty damn tame.

If my employer would come to us and tell me "whelp we gonna record you personally now at work" - 5% would not cut it. As a matter of fact - there would be an uproar, I can't even imagine that actually happening.

So in context of normal employer/employee relationship - 5% is fair, it's not like they said "fuck you we ain't doing it", 5% is a small price to pay for such a requirement imo.

[gondrin]

I think it's mostly what any normal half-decent union would do if employer would suddenly come out with demand to record employees during their shift. Heck 5%, wow, that's pretty damn tame.

If my employer would come to us and tell me "whelp we gonna record you personally now at work" - 5% would not cut it. As a matter of fact - there would be an uproar, I can't even imagine that actually happening.

So in context of normal employer/employee relationship - 5% is fair, it's not like they said "fuck you we ain't doing it", 5% is a small price to pay for such a requirement imo.

Well, for one, most businesses do record what employees are doing except in the restroom. Usually if you use a company computer, car, phone or any door that has a keycard to enter, you are more then likely being recorded at that moment by keystrokes or otherwise. This also includes security cameras and the like. They usually have this printed in some sort of handbook that every employee gets. You have no right to privacy other then the restroom while you are at work(for the most part). Same with police. While they are on the job, if they are to wear a body cam, they get no right to privacy as long as they are on duty.

So no, it isn't a small price to pay as wearing body cams should be standard. It would be different if they were asked to wear them while not on duty.

[Elegiac]

And, to further emphasize: the average salary for a police officer in the US is only $53,906.
So the lower-level guys and gals you meet on the streets are getting less.
For a job where getting shot (at) and such is a daily risk.

Being a cop is nowhere near one of the deadliest professions in this country; it's not even in the top ten.

It is, however, only fair to recognize it's an intrusive change on their personal privacy

Y'all keep insisting this, and it really just demonstrates that none of you have worked retail or any other public service position in this country. Rofl.

The idea of cops demanding additional pay because they don't want to be recorded on the job is laughable because even wearing a body camera comes nowhere near close to the level of intrusiveness of many lower paid positions that don't have the benefit of inflated pensions or Qualified Immunity.

"They're a union so they have the right" means fuck all because police unions specifically are not representative of worker interests by definition.

[segara82]

Being a cop is nowhere near one of the deadliest professions in this country; it's not even in the top ten.

I did not claim it is the deadliest job, just that the job entails risks others do not. Law enforcement agencies reported that 89 officers died (48 feloniously, 41 accidently) and 56,034 officers were assaulted while performing their duties in 2019. The rate of officer assaults in 2019 was 11.8 per 100 sworn officers.
For those that want more data:
https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2019
Not the deadliest, but one of the riskiest.

Now if you want to say that they should be held to a higher standard, i would agree and support you 100%.
Better and longer training, psychological counseling, delegating work they are not suited for to other agencies ... now that would be grand.
Sadly, as some officers have pointed out, they get called to do work previously done by others. Hell, Dallas Police Chief David Brown stated in 2016:
"What we're doing, what we're trying to accomplish here is above challenging. It is -- we're asking cops to do too much in this country. We are. We're just asking us to do too much," Chief Brown said.

"Every societal failure, we put it off on the cops to solve. Not enough mental health funding. Let the cop handle it. Not enough drug addiction funding. Let's give it to the cops. Here in Dallas, we've got a loose dog problem. Let's have the cops chase loose dogs. You know, schools fail. Give it to the cops. 70% of the African-American community is being raised by single women. Let's give it to the cops to solve that, as well. That's too much to ask," a stressed Brown said.

"Policing was never meant to solve all of those problems," Brown said to reporters. "I just ask for other parts of our democracy, along with the free press, to help us. To help us and not put that burden all on law enforcement to resolve. So, again, I'm just being pretty honest with you. You know, I have raw feelings about all of what we do. And don't ask me if you don't want the answer."

[Elegiac]

I did not claim it is the deadliest job, just that the job entails risks others do not. Law enforcement agencies reported that 89 officers died (48 feloniously, 41 accidently) and 56,034 officers were assaulted while performing their duties in 2019. The rate of officer assaults in 2019 was 11.8 per 100 sworn officers.
For those that want more data:
https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2019
Not the deadliest, but one of the riskiest.

Wow, those sure are some big sounding numbers until you contextualize them and realise it's about 124% more dangerous to be a *groundskeeper* in the US than a cop.

And by the way - admitting "the police have too many responsibilities" is not an argument for paying them more. It's an argument for defunding police departments and putting that money towards other services.

[segara82]

Wow, those sure are some big sounding numbers until you contextualize them and realise it's about 124% more dangerous to be a *groundskeeper* in the US than a cop.

And by the way - admitting "the police have too many responsibilities" is not an argument for paying them more. It's an argument for defunding police departments and putting that money towards other services.

124% more dangerous? Don't you mean 24% more dangerous? 14/100.000 (LEO) compared to 17,4/100.000 (Groundskeepers) is an increase BY 24 percent.

And boy, that second half ... please give me your bosses number. According to your argument he should increase your workload without any payraise or other compensation.

[Santti]

And boy, that second half ... please give me your bosses number. According to your argument he should increase your workload without any payraise or other compensation.

He is right though. The US police have too many responsibilities. And I'm not sure the additional body cam increases their work load much at all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RtnQ2GqBeg

You can't put all societal ills on the cops to solve. It isn't about more funding to help them train for all of it. It's about taking some of that responsibilities away from them that they obviously can't (and shouldn't) handle, and redistributing them more evenly. Maybe even creating new jobs on the side.

[Elegiac]

124% more dangerous? Don't you mean 24% more dangerous? 14/100.000 (LEO) compared to 17,4/100.000 (Groundskeepers) is an increase BY 24 percent.

14 x 1.24 is 17, hun.

And boy, that second half ... please give me your bosses number. According to your argument he should increase your workload without any payraise or other compensation.

That's the thing though, I'm not recommending their workload be increased. I'm recommending their responsibilities be carved off and given to other services who actually merit a pay increase.

[Shadowferal]

And the homicide rate continue to trend higher in Philadelphia. After 500 murders last year one would think differently.

[Elegiac]

And the homicide rate continue to trend higher in Philadelphia. After 500 murders last year one would think differently.

If I was as bad at my job as police are at theirs, I'd certainly be fired.

[Shadowferal]

If I was as bad at my job as police are at theirs, I'd certainly be fired.

You can't blame the police for leadership.

[Elegiac]

You can't blame the police for leadership.

This is literally the Nuremberg defense.