Friday, January 13, 2012

Off-duty police employment deserves greater vetting

A story from the Austin Statesman published January 5 reminded Grits of a research project I conceived awhile back, but put on the back shelf because of a lack of resources and manpower (Oh, how I miss having interns!). The Statesman story opened:
Federal and local authorities are looking into the off-duty employment of several Austin police officers who were paid cash by a wealthy Mexican man to watch over his daughter while she attends college, the American-Statesman has learned.

Two officers have left the Austin Police Department in the past month since the inquiry started, and others who may have also worked on the private security assignment have been questioned.

Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo confirmed Wednesday that the department recently learned of allegations concerning one officer and "immediately launched criminal and administrative investigations." He declined to describe the nature of the allegations or disclose who alerted the department, citing the ongoing inquiry.
Acevedo also would not say how many officers have since been investigated or questioned.

"Anytime we investigate incidents, you are much better off as an organization to start with a very broad view to ensure that we don't miss anything," Acevedo said.

Sgt. Wayne Vincent, president of the Austin police union, said "less than 10" officers had their duties restricted in recent weeks after the department initially learned about outside employment concerns.
We won't know more about this case until the department releases more detail, but over the years Grits has observed that, when police corruption arises, there is sometimes a nexus of money changing hands surrounding either approved, off-duty employment or separate small businesses owned and operated by officers, who as a group are a remarkably entrepreneurial bunch. You'd be surprised how many veteran police officers have one or more small business registered in their names in addition to their day jobs, including a disproportionate share of officers with significant disciplinary records..

At one point a few years back while I was unemployed for quite a few months on end, your correspondent seriously considered taking up a major research project aimed at exactly these sorts of off-duty employment issues at Austin PD. The idea was to get all the approval forms for off-duty employment under open records for some period  of time, say a year, and to simultaneously take the complete list of Austin police officers and run their names at area courthouses and the Secretary of State to identify all sole proprietorships, business partnerships or Texas corporations registered under their names.

Once you've created a database of businesses owned by officers and those which employ off-duty cops, the larger task becomes systematically vetting the businesses to look for discrepancies, improprieties, litigation, government contracts, shady associations, etc.. It would be a monstrously large undertaking for a force the size of Austin PD - almost worthy of a book-length project - and in the end I decided Grits didn't have the resources to take it on as a one-man show, choosing to focus on other, more attainable priorities.

But I've always thought that the extracurricular moneymaking activities of law enforcement deserve more focused attention because often, when you look closely, as in this case, it can become a point of vulnerability for the department in many, perhaps too many, respects.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm grateful for cops willing to risk their lives for a meager wage starting in the 40k range to provide public safety. Fuck you scott for questioning a cop who has a side job to help make ends meet for his/her family.

Gritsforbreakfast said...

Austin cops get paid a lot more than that, 9:41, and while dangerous, their jobs are far less dangerous than other common government jobs, like say, garbage collectors, who die on the job at around twice the rate of cops. (See the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, e.g., which found that in 2009, "refuse and recyclable materials collectors" died on the job at a rate of 26.5 per 100,000, compared to 12.9 for "Police and Sheriff's patrol officers.") But please, don't let reality get in the way of your opinion.

Most cops commit no misconduct on side jobs, but to say side jobs shouldn't be vetted or even questioned (according to you) results in lax oversight and incidents like the one described in the Statesman story.

A Texas PO said...

Wow. I can't even work a few hours a week and McD's without getting approval, in writing, from my chief and the judge's panel. With all the off-duty cops I've seen pulling part-times, I'd be curious as to what a study on that would find.

Anonymous said...

Pay then a livable wage with plenty of overtime available,and prohibit extra jobs.

This isn't a problem with the FBI, because they get paid well.

The Comedian said...

There would probably be fewer injuries and deaths among both police and civilians if cops were well rested rather than strung out from working extra jobs and (some) using stimulants to stay awake and alert while on duty.

Anonymous said...

can tell you about a dps officer that patrolled a section of i-10 laden w oilfield trucks. One prominent company habitually had trucks that were not meeting regulation and were not safe to be on the road. This DPS office regularly cited this company for failing to meet dot regs. 2 years later he is working a side job paying more than his full time job as the "SAFETY INSPECTOR" for the company he regularly ticketed as a trooper. Miraculously the company didn't receive a single ticket for the next 3 consecutive years. But if you got behind one of the same trucks that were out of compliance worse than before the trooper went to work for the company. Go figure that one out.

Anonymous said...

I think one would find a correlation between off duty jobs and the gypsy cop syndrome. Some small rural cities are an entirely reserve force while the officers are pimped out to metropolitan businesses, which is illegal. Usually, someone in the administration runs these operations collecting 35-40 bucks an hour per officer while paying these officers 10 bucks an hour each. This is a very common (and illegal) practice. A good indicator is a city with a small population, say 1000 people, and 20-40 "volunteer" officers. Then correlate that information with the DPS private security registration website. (Most of these officers never step foot in whatever appointed jurisdiction they're appointed to.). One could identify several government sponsored security operations throughout the state.

Anonymous said...

I wish Texas would outlaw police working extra jobs. They we would all get the torches and pitch forks and go down to our local government elected officials and demand decent wages.

Anonymous said...

Completely agree that extra jobs for police are just an invitation to abuse and corruption. If they don't like it they should quit and get a private sector job. They'll have to give up working under Civil Service, cushy retirements that are better than most private sector jobs, have to pay full price for meals, rent and all the other privileges that 'MasterBadge' can buy. It's also high tine to rein in the abuses of collective bargaining for police unions.

DEWEY said...

Hay, GRITS, they have to pay for their new pickup trucks and all of the antennas on them some how !!

Anonymous said...

You haven't even scratched the surface. Across the state small PDs, sheriff's, and constable offices appoint cops who aren't paid or supervised by the appointing agency, but are paid and answer to private employers. For a cop to work private security they are required to be a full time police officer, but TCLEOSE does not enforce the rules. Result is private police forces who don't answer to the citizens. Try to complain on them and the sheriff says "they don't work for me." Complain to the employer and they say "take it up with the sheriff" and then have one of their "officers" escort you off the property.

Anonymous said...

This has been a growing epidemic among law enforcement. Law enforcement is paid a decent wage, especially when factoring in overtime and all the perks that go with the job.
What is occurring in law enforcement is comporable to legislators being allowed to participate in inside trading of the stock market.
Both need to stop.
Corruption is like lying... if you can justify lying or engaging in corruption for one reason than you will pretty much lie or act corruptly for any reason.
THIS IS VERY DANGEROUS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT CONSIDERING THAT THE DRUG DEALING BUSINESS HAS SO MUCH MONEY TO THROW AT COPS WHO AREN'T ON THE UP AND UP.

Anonymous said...

Citizens need to take a serious look at reducing the civil service benefits to police and firemen. The bad actors are too well protected.

Anonymous said...

05:30
"The officers are pimped out." I like your phrase - "pimped out".

Anonymous said...

@ 9:02...........

many law enforcement agencies do not pay cash for overtime but rather compensatory time off under provisions of the FLSA. Big difference there.

Under the FLSA, law enforcement agencies are not required to compensate for overtime unless that agency employs 5 or more full-time
officers.

The FLSA provides for an exemption that officers may be paid overtime on a "work period" and not your common 40 hour a week basis found in private industry. Its called the 7k exemption.

So when you say "law enforcement is paid a decent wage, especially when factoring in overtime and all the perks that go with the job,"
you are off of the mark.

Anonymous said...

@ 1:59.....

Is it possible the retired trooper implemented a safety oprogram for the trucking company, management bought into it and the company now complies with the rules and regulations of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Adminstration?

Anonymous said...

@ 12:45.....

not all agencies are civil service. The city must have a population of 10,000 or more and the adoption of the civil service chpater under Texas LGC 143 must be approved by the voters of that city.

And not all cities over 10,000population in Texas are civil service.

Don Dickson said...

In 2011 the Legislature enabled Colonel McCraw at DPS to implement one of his more "outside the box" ideas, which was to add "structural overtime" to DPS officers' work schedules. Most officers are now working and getting paid for about one hour of overtime per day. The plan isn't perfect, but it has raised officers' compensation and has reduced secondary employment without the need to eliminate officers' right to engage in secondary employment. McCraw first suggested this program long before coming to DPS from the Governor's office, and I have to give him credit for being the first person at DPS since the enactment of the Fair Labor Standards Act who was willing to offer novel ideas to address these issues.

Anonymous said...

@ 6:57,

Where did you derive the notion that the officer was retired?