Employee Performance Evaluation Police Department: Fill & Download for Free

It was a charge against another police officer.Roger (not his real name) was a sergeant when I was hired, and one of the most natural emergent leaders I’ve ever met. Take away the badges and rank insignia, and everyone would still look to Roger to be in charge. It was just his natural role in life. Like any good leader, he constantly looked out for his people. He seemed to know something was bothering you before you knew what it was.Our executive types did not like Roger. He garnered loyalty that they craved and were unable to obtain. It was very clear that he would never rise above the rank of sergeant, not that this bothered him.One of our captains got word that a junior officer on the graveyard (overnight) shift was falling asleep on the job. The captain ordered Roger to fire the officer, or at least persuade him to resign. Roger sought out the officer, and learned that he had a small ranch with livestock. When the officer was hired, he was on day or evening shift, and could manage the chores. On graveyard, he didn’t have time to do his chores and get enough sleep, and he was falling asleep in his car. He said this would not be a problem if he could get back to days or evenings, but he had been transferred in a random shuffle of patrol cops that had taken place a few months before (we later went to a system where we bid for shifts by seniority).Roger saw this problem as having a simple solution. He went to the evening shift sergeants and polled them to see if any had someone who would be willing to move to graveyard. One officer said he would do it. Roger had the two officers trade shifts. Problem solved.The captain was livid that Roger hadn’t fired the cop. Roger tried to explain that his solution preserved resources (the problem cop was otherwise a good performer), but the captain saw Roger’s actions as a form of betrayal and disloyalty. He believed his subordinates should do as they were told, even if it was bad for the troops and the department. Loyalty was everything. The captain told Roger, “I’ll break your back.”The captain put Roger on “special evaluations,” meaning he would have a quarterly performance review, like a probationary employee. It’s a typical first step in “package building,” where the brass try to document and spin everything an employee does wrong or can be couched as wrong, at the same time ignoring anything they might be doing right. The result is a “package” that can be used to discipline or fire the employee. This was a common practice at the police department.While all this was going on, Roger was having some personal problems in his life. He had made a major purchase toward opening a business, and the debt on the purchase was draining him. The business wasn’t making nearly enough money to cover the debt, and the assets were on the verge of being repossessed.Within a month or two, Roger had all he could take, and took a voluntary demotion to police officer. The sergeant who inherited Officer Roger wasn’t too pleased, as the troops on that team naturally looked to Roger for direction, rather than to the team sergeant. This wasn’t anything Roger orchestrated. It was just the natural order of things.One night, Roger assisted with an accident investigation where the driver at fault was a man of about 20 years. He was extremely drunk and extremely obnoxious. He cursed and resisted Roger at every opportunity, made frequent threats and generally behaved like an asshole. Roger had to take him to the hospital to have his blood drawn for alcohol content analysis.Roger lost his temper. While the prisoner was handcuffed, Roger hit him, with his fist, three times. Now, this was clearly wrong, and Roger would have been the first one to tell anyone so. He immediately called for a relief and for a supervisor. He didn’t wait for the prisoner to make a complaint.He probably should have. When the prisoner sobered up, he refused to make a complaint. He said Roger was the most patient and professional police officer he had ever encountered, and that he (the prisoner) deserved what he got.The police department’s response was to charge Roger with three counts of attempted murder, one for each punch. I should note here that Roger wasn’t an accomplished martial artist or boxer. His punches caused no injuries to the prisoner. Roger was, of course, fired.Roger was eventually able to get the charges dismissed, as the police department was about the only entity interested in prosecuting Roger. However, he became unemployable, and he had to withdraw his retirement account to pay for his legal defense, which voided his pension. He was a senior NCO in the Air National Guard, and they suspended him until the charges were resolved. After they were dismissed, they made him a full-time Air Guardsman, and then he got a job with the TSA. Roger got colon cancer a few years ago. It killed him within a year. I attended his funeral. There were only three of us there from the police department, and the other two had been fellow Air Guardsmen as well.Not all police departments are like this, but too many of them are personality-driven, rewarding loyalty instead of accomplishment. Where this happens, it requires a change in organizational culture to fix, and that takes both a lot of time and a powerful, ethical leader who is willing to brave the storm.

Typically, there are performance criteria established for the position which are similar to those for any other position:does he fulfill the duties described in the position descriptiondoes he abide by established department rules, regulations, general orders, SOPs, etc.does he work and play well with others (maintain good working relationships with co-workers, superiors, and those under his supervision)does he maintain positive relationships with other agencies, the public, etc.There will be other elements, but those are the most common ones.The most common denominator in police (and other public employee) performance evaluations is that the ratings are inevitably inflated. Everywhere I’ve worked, most people are rated above average, if not outstanding, which is a statistical impossibility. At the same time, anyone with a “fully successful” or “meets expectations” are generally understood to be people who should be fired. There are several reasons for this. For one thing, a lot of supervisors haven’t been trained to adequately evaluate employees. Some of them (I have been told this more than once) believe that an employee will “work up” to an evaluation he didn’t earn. Others just don’t want to be the bad guy. This makes life difficult for those of us trying to give an honest evaluation without harming our people when they compete for assignments and promotions. (I f—-ing HATED evaluations. I’d spend at least two weeks on 6 - 10 subordinates trying to balance honesty with no harm. I’d be willing to go to a pass/fail system for all its lack of utility.)

This is absolutely true, it's been going on for many years, and I'm sure it will continue for a long time.In the US, police departments are funded by cities, towns, counties and States. Elected officials in each of these Government units control the hiring, funding (salaries and benefits) and, directly and indirectly, the ethics/expected behaviors, of the officers.Which offences and law violations officers are expected to focus on, are decided by those higher up in the chain of command. Police testify in court very frequently, and they are well aware that perjury or inconsistency in their testimony puts their livelihood at risk. They are also dependent upon fellow officers to provide backup, so there are very strong motivating factors to do whatever is expected to keep their jobs and to remain safe.Elected and appointed officials, including prosecutors and Judges, face various pressures to solve crimes, to obtain convictions, to produce revenue, and to be reelected. Wealthy contributors to political campaigns, owners of large businesses whose tax payments contribute thousands of dollars to local government etc, are less likely to be arrested for crimes, the decision to arrest being at the officer's discretion, than less powerful individuals are.Salaries and educational requirements for police vary greatly in the US; from around $30,000 to $90,000 per year. Qualifications vary too, from no training at all to advanced degrees.Police do see people at their worst, and they can develop a distorted viewpoint of their fellow citizens and even family members, based upon feeling and being threatened by others continually, similar to PTSD experienced by soldiers in combat situations.This feeling of us vs the enemy, us being the police and them being everyone else, also contributes to corruption. Many police officers are former military veterans.They deal with violent and unpredictable people, those under the influence of drugs and alcohol, and the mentally ill. They face pressure to bring in revenue, (traffic violations), make arrests (court fees and fines), and to not disrupt or disturb the status quo (arresting elected officials, fellow officers), because doing so risks both their own, and their co-workers, current and future employment as well as their health insurance and their pensions.My ex husband (#2,) was a police officer. His father was a police lieutenant, his step brother was an officer. While most police hiring is purported to be through civil service examination, in reality, and especially in small and poorly funded departments, hiring is mostly based upon who you know than upon ethics or education. After all, who's willing to invest $100,000 for a degree in law enforcement to obtain a job that pays $30,000 per year? While civil service examinations are usually administered and scored “fairly”, actual job offers are often based upon “interview results”, where officer Smith's son and Officer Jone's nephew score much higher than the top twenty candidates scored on the exam.So, police practices, such as knowing how to beat a suspect without causing bruising (place a phone book over the area to be beaten), are passed along from officer to officer.They become members of a big club, current and former officers. They carry badges to identify themselves to other offers, they have FOP (Fraternal Order of Police) emblems on their vehicles, and they protect each other. An officer is pulled over for speeding; he flashes his badge and no ticket is issued. Why? It's an expected courtesy to fellow officers.He beats his wife or children? How can his fellow officers arrest him, when he's got family members and friends working for the police department, who will lie for him?Remember, police officers testify, continually, under oath, so any verified act of perjury opens the door for anyone and everyone previously convicted when that officer testified, to appeal their conviction. Any officer found to have committed perjury, would create an expense and financial liability that most police departments, prosecutors offices and local Court systems don't want to encounter. Thus, the tendency to protect police corruption is not limited to fellow officers, it's supported by all who might be affected.Police departments with larger budgets, who can afford to pay officers more, attract better educated and more professional officers than those that pay almost poverty wages.Higher wages and greater levels of education help decrease cronyism and lead to the removal of bad cops. But it's a slow and inefficient process, since so many police departments are poorly funded.Police are armed. They have the power to arrest people, and in many situations it's their word against another's; and they are more likely to be believed by a judge, despite the presumption of innocence we're granted by law. An officer earning $15 an hour is going to be much more inclined to pocket a cash bribe or to have sex with a suspect or a criminal, than one who earns $90,000 per year. Psychologically, people who feel their renumeration is inadequate, may be more motivated to satisfy their desire for power through misuse of their authority. Sex, money and power are strong motivators for much human behavior.Not many police departments can afford to hire people qualified to investigate and prosecute white collar crimes. Many departments are overly focused on generating revenue. Traffic and parking violation fines produce income. Housing prisoners costs money, so there are 'prisoner work crews', who pick up roadside trash, care for the animals at the county animal shelter, and who provide virtually free labor for the local governments where they're incarcerated. (They're being trained in job skills for when their sentences are served). Money does influence and motivate much behavior.There's a very entrenched system for defining criminal behavior, laws allow killing another to be an excusable traffic offense, or a prosecutable murder, or even merely a civil offense if it's medical malpractice.There's an extremely entrenched system for financing court systems, police departments and schools, that's based upon local property tax revenue, which ensures that lower income areas are served by less educated and not as well trained, and therefore more easily corruptable, police officers, teachers, schools and medical services.The ubiquitous presence of cameras is probably having a positive effect on decreasing corruption; but as long as there are corrupt individuals working in law enforcement, and especially in higher positions, any individual police officer may have no way of knowing if his report about a fellow officer abusing a suspect or using excessive force, or planting evidence or accepting a bribe will lead to any disciplinary action against the corrupt officer, or to poor or entirely false job performance evaluations in their own personal employee file, or be the cause of their own dismissal from their job.