Quote:
Originally Posted by DblBarrelJ
We're non union, but it sounds about right...
My issue is, having never been involved in a police union, I have no idea how adversarial the relationship between union leaders and police commanders is.
Again, I'm surprised. I incorrectly believed that all large agencies are organized. My understanding of the relationship was second hand, and dated by a few decades now, but I did get to hear quite a bit about grievances and such from my cop friends back in the day.
Basically in SoCal, everything was handled a grievance. But if the brass though a rank-and-file cop was abusing the grievance process they would end up being career sidetracked into a dead-end (never get promoted, be cut out of the "good" shifts, and left off of the OT gravy train). But some of the things that went on, particularly with the lack of accountability (taping over names and badge numbers), and the OT gravy train, were obviously a matter of tacit cooperation between the union and command.
Quote:
...I can't recall where at the moment but I remember MissileDog not too long ago reporting attending some type of rally/protest/gathering and having two vastly different experiences with two different law enforcement agencies that share the same jurisdiction.
I try to remind the Occupy kids of this all the time. Especially with all the "mutual aid" (which is a correct, while being heavily ironic use of the term to us) that agencies in SoCal practice, we could witness any number of agencies involved in enabling our rights and/or suppressing an action. People that try to lump "the police" into one monolithic organization, and claim they
never act to enable our rights to assemble and speak... these people are paranoid delusional and are basically refusing to learn of reality.