Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Without taking sides I must say the Levittown 8th precinct building is a dinky little outpost tucked back off N. Wantagh Ave. Most residents do not even know it's there and it sees little activity except for a front desk and a place for patrol officers to use the potty and check messages.
It is cheaper to pay OT than to hire more cops...so if he can cut desk/staff spots and not hire that is where mangano might save money...paying OT is a short fix if staffing is low...the CPOP coverage is what I do not understand to save money?
Good point. IIRC, didn't we do the whole hiring spree thing in the middle of Suozzi's admin? Look how that worked out for us. Costs ballooned anyway. Maybe we should hire a ton more officers when the new Tier 6 pension reform is established by Cuomo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taz Crazy
Just got word from some nassau cops that 4 precincts are closing today. the 1st, the 5th, 6th and the 8th.
crime will spread.
How are you coming to the false conclusion that "crime will spread"? (I'm a little surprised the 5th precinct is being changed though).. And they're not necessarily closing them.
“Keeping residents safe is my number one priority,” said Mangano. “This plan keeps all 177 patrols cars in their current neighborhoods, assigns more cops to POP
How are you coming to the false conclusion that "crime will spread"? (I'm a little surprised the 5th precinct is being changed though).. And they're not necessarily closing them.
“Keeping residents safe is my number one priority,” said Mangano. “This plan keeps all 177 patrols cars in their current neighborhoods, assigns more cops to POP
It is cheaper to pay OT than to hire more cops...so if he can cut desk/staff spots and not hire that is where mangano might save money...paying OT is a short fix if staffing is low...the CPOP coverage is what I do not understand to save money?
As a short term solution, it is cheaper to pay overtime than to hire -- but not forever. The problem with Mangano's approach is that the anticipated reassignment of personnel won't happen the way he envisions. The dissolution/restructuring/resizing thing has happened many times in the past in various dimensions. What usually happens is that many of the personnel who have jobs that are eliminated elect to retire rather than change. That results in fewer people going to the street...and more overtime than anticipated being paid. I've seen it happen many times throughout the years. It's political smoke and mirrors and never works out the way it's presented.
As far as the POP personnel, there won't be savings there. The role that POP plays in the precincts is incredibly important and something the department depends on to accomplish a host of policing functions. As I've stated before, there are certain jobs that must be done and whatever cops are available will have to do those jobs -- whatever the cost is.
Are your feelings hurt because I wouldn't respond to your demands for times, dates, places and people in the other thread? Grow up.
If you'd read these threads more carefully and not get caught up in your own biases, you'd see that the common theme in all of them is that the individual cops are making too much money. Post after post cites some cop making 150K. Bottom line is that straight salary without overtime is nowhere near that. They're making that kind of money because there is a certain level of staffing that is necessary to provide police service. ( The department currently has 40% fewer cops than it did 40 years ago.) The only way to accomplish that is throught the use of overtime.
Hire more cops and there is less overtime. Same amount of money spent. But more people to do the work. Strange how your bias doesn't allow you to understand that simple concept.
As I said in that thread, I'm asking to understand it and through your countless defense of cops not once did you state what they do (way to deflect though). So why are you surprised nobody understands why they're there?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdcnret
As far as the POP personnel, there won't be savings there. The role that POP plays in the precincts is incredibly important and something the department depends on to accomplish a host of policing functions. As I've stated before, there are certain jobs that must be done and whatever cops are available will have to do those jobs -- whatever the cost is.
and still don't... continued vagueness. Is it possible to say so little with so much?
"Grow up" - as in actually responding to honest questions as opposed to looking down your nose on everyone when challenged?
And you didn't mention anything about pensions. Where is that in relation to OT and what the public pays out? Because, through my intense bias, I hear people in other professions take advantage of that too.
As I said in that thread, I'm asking to understand it and through your countless defense of cops not once did you state what they do (way to deflect though). So why are you surprised nobody understands why they're there?
and still don't... continued vagueness. Is it possible to say so little with so much?
"Grow up" - as in actually responding to honest questions as opposed to looking down your nose on everyone when challenged?
And you didn't mention anything about pensions. Where is that in relation to OT and what the public pays out? Because, through my intense bias, I hear people in other professions take advantage of that too.
Your comment about pensions is "vague". What exactly are you referring to, since I never raised that issue? (Perhaps you're one of those who is all hot and bothered over public sector pensions, hence a question that has no relevance to anything I posted. That, I believe, is what you'd call a bias.) Do take note that I said that OT is a short term solution to staffing. What you don't seem to grasp is that the issue of which is more cost-effective, OT or hiring, does not have a simple or straightforward answer. There are many variables depending upon the situation.
Apparently you won't be satisfied until you get absolutely every detail on every statement that I make. Sorry, skippy, but that's not gonna happen. I don't feel compelled to provide chapter and verse to back up everything I say in these forums. The people who do the most challenging (you included) have already made up their minds and really don't want to hear anything that doesn't support their ill-informed conclusions.
Or Magnano will just hire another D'amato relative for a 100k+ job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Autoracer9
Such greedy bastards bet you sombodys going to get a raise.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I hope I don't regret this.
