Police Suggestion Punishments for Officers within PLPD

[Tilin]

Suggestion Title: Punishments for Officers within PLPD
Suggestion Description: Currently a supervisor ranked Sergeant can hand out the following:
- Notes (Which aren't really described by policy)
- Reprimands
- Suspensions (Forwarding the case to IA)

Right now, after speaking to multiple supervisors, I've pretty much concluded that reprimands aren't handed out much, as they are essentially cock blocks to a promotion, which you can get by just making a small mistake. This could be just making an inappropriate joke, because you're unable to read the room.

The suggestion part is here:

Adding or modifying the current system so that:
a) Reprimands only serve as a way to keep track of an officers record, giving written warnings access to Supervisors.
b) Notes can be added with a timer (Preferably even set by the supervisor), to expire after a certain amount of time
c) Introducing new types of punishments
d) Others.. Please provide ideas

A reprimand-like warning shouldn't hinder your progress. It will only let us keep track of what the officer has done wrong in the past. It could also help supervisors during patrols, to focus more on what the officer needs to improve on.

Why should this be added?:
- Less cases for IA
- Officers' records will actually be trackable
- Punishments being handed out more frequently, whilst making them less scary

What negatives could this have?:
- Abusing the system potentially
- Development time
- Restructuring policies to abide by these changes
- Unfair treatment

 

[tymon007]

In general PLPD takes time to grind ranks, and the purpose of CC is to have multiple people vote on the outcome instead of 1 person deciding how to punish an officer. Being an senior IA investigator Ive seen numerous different cases, and i know how much time, knowledge and common sense it takes to investigate IAs. Giving sgt+ permissions to give out any other punishments than reprimands would ruin the whole pd punishment system.

 

[Fielding]

In general PLPD takes time to grind ranks, and the purpose of CC is to have multiple people vote on the outcome instead of 1 person deciding how to punish an officer. Being an senior IA investigator Ive seen numerous different cases, and i know how much time, knowledge and common sense it takes to investigate IAs. Giving sgt+ permissions to give out any other punishments than reprimands would ruin the whole pd punishment system.

in my eyes the current system could be significantly improved, i think there are many flaws to it and we are so limited in our abilities to punish people in-game, even CC is limited in the punishments that can be given tbf.

 

[tymon007]

in my eyes the current system could be significantly improved, i think there are many flaws to it and we are so limited in our abilities to punish people in-game, even CC is limited in the punishments that can be given tbf.

Im not saying that the system does not need improvements, in IA every PSD member along with the CC is trained to know which punishment should be issued on the officer, and from what I observed the CC almost always stays with what an investigator suggested.(at least in my case)

It still does not give me any more perms on duty, but i dont feel i need them. I can reprimand someone for some things, and I can suspend the officer if necessary, Its good that more severe punishments are decided by CC.

Its also not like the IA investigators are overflooded with complaints.

The complete other thing is the types of punishments.

Comment card > reprimand > written warning > demotion > discharge

I feel a need of something more severe then comment card, and less severe than a reprimand, as it stays on profile for 30 days, and thats a lot of time for some misconduct.

Other than that I dont feel any need for a severe change in the whole system, but I understand that officers that don't usually, and daily see large amounts of misconduct feel about it.

Try to read the CC policies, theres a lot explained in them, maybe this will help you take a wider view over the situation, because the main point of them is that grinding ranks is time consuming and difficult, and the CC should take it into consideration.

Paradoxically, the idea Tillin introduced might create even more work for IA or other departaments, who would have to deal with disputes made on officers, who issued punishments, then the abuse should be punished as well. There is no way an officer couldnt easily dispute a written warning that stays on record for 3 months, and the officer investigated the case for 20 minutes, where IA investigators sometimes take more that 6 days to do things properly.

 

[tymon007]

Also, I re-read the whole suggestion, and there are two more things I would like to point out.

Records are trackable, as they show every severe infraction like a discharge or demotion, including complaint outcomes such as reprimands and WWs.

Making punishments less scary does not make sense, as there are already many officers that do not care about getting demoted or discharged, and doing so will encourage more officers to do misconduct, even less severe, as the punishments would be lighter. Severe punishments are issued in cases such as: Power abuse, criminal charges on the officer, lots of misconduct lately and doing any form of misconduct/gross misconduct clearly on purpose. This makes sense, as you still don't need to worry too much about getting demoted or discharged by doing something by accident, and those who choose to go full rampage, will recieve appropriate response from PSD.

 

[Fielding]

I do think there should be more punishable artices and more ability for supervisors or command.

Supervisors should have more abilities given the current competency of the department right now as well, being able to do more corrective action or even being trusted with more could be helpful.


Temporary Actions:

- Administrative Leave with Pay (Suspension for an IA Investigation) (SGT+)
- Mandated course - mandated use of force course, or something else where they would have to watch a video or read a few policies (SGT/SSGT+?)
- Corrective action - Field correction, talk with command, talk with PSD (CC) - id also like to see this being used more tbh

- New Officer Probation - Allow SGT+ to possibly make new player officers probationary until they can get some OR's to clear them (Say officers with less then 3 days playtime or less then 3 days as a PLPD member.) - i know this is a long stretch but its somewhat needed to have something we can do against incompetent new player officers.

Non-Adverse Actions: (CC/SGT+)

- Oral Admonishment - Would stay on record as a note and be a talking to by a supervisor, stays on record for 15 days? (SGT+)
- Informal Reprimand - A note less then a reprimand that stays on record for 30 days. (SGT+)
- Formal Reprimand - A formal notice of disapproval from a supervisor. This stays on record permanently to track officer progress. (SGT+)
- Written Warning - A written warning that stays on ones record permanently, this may effect progress in PD. (SSGT+)
- Quality Control Patrol - Allowing maybe CPL+ to send a formal request to conduct a QCP? (CPL/SGT+)
- Command Review - Allow SGT+ to put a member of their own division up for a command review/chat. (SGT+)

Adverse Actions (CC Only)

- Administrative Leave without pay - An adverse punishment given to an officer as a formal dissapproval of action. Stays on record permanently.
- Probation - An punishment/corrective action given to officers.
- Demotion - An punishment that strips an officer of rank and gives them a rank below their current.
- Dishonorable Discharge - An punishment given to dishonorable members.
- Blacklist - Often given after dishonorable discharge and varies in time. Disallows members to rejoin the department.

 

[Cal Heller]

Temporary Actions:

- Administrative Leave with Pay (Suspension for an IA Investigation) (SGT+)
- Mandated course - mandated use of force course, or something else where they would have to watch a video or read a few policies (SGT/SSGT+?)
- Corrective action - Field correction, talk with command, talk with PSD (CC) - id also like to see this being used more tbh

- New Officer Probation - Allow SGT+ to possibly make new player officers probationary until they can get some OR's to clear them (Say officers with less then 3 days playtime or less then 3 days as a PLPD member.) - i know this is a long stretch but its somewhat needed to have something we can do against incompetent new player officers.

Non-Adverse Actions: (CC/SGT+)

- Oral Admonishment - Would stay on record as a note and be a talking to by a supervisor, stays on record for 15 days? (SGT+)
- Informal Reprimand - A note less then a reprimand that stays on record for 30 days. (SGT+)
- Formal Reprimand - A formal notice of disapproval from a supervisor. This stays on record permanently to track officer progress. (SGT+)
- Written Warning - A written warning that stays on ones record permanently, this may effect progress in PD. (SSGT+)
- Quality Control Patrol - Allowing maybe CPL+ to send a formal request to conduct a QCP? (CPL/SGT+)
- Command Review - Allow SGT+ to put a member of their own division up for a command review/chat. (SGT+)

Adverse Actions (CC Only)

- Administrative Leave without pay - An adverse punishment given to an officer as a formal dissapproval of action. Stays on record permanently.
- Probation - An punishment/corrective action given to officers.
- Demotion - An punishment that strips an officer of rank and gives them a rank below their current.
- Dishonorable Discharge - An punishment given to dishonorable members.
- Blacklist - Often given after dishonorable discharge and varies in time. Disallows members to rejoin the department.

I like the idea of adjusting the less-career focused Non-Adverse Actions being given to Sgts, giving leadership the chance to Quality Control/Course Correct (as part of the job) before taking it up an entire panel of SMT. I think we should be looking at where the source of the problem is, which imo is the New Officer intake we're having, and try and stop it at the source, accepting to help others along the way. You'd think Patrol would be ontop of this. Officers are lacking basic roleplay skills at best, and are complete nightmares at worst, rather civilian or cop. Entry needs to change, Snr Officer can't be when I expect decent competency anymore.

Though, I think the deeper-level human problem is also discipline - putting mandatory training sessions to rank up is sort of a bummer, some would do it to get ahead, others lose interest fast. Great optionally, but not to be a headache.

 

[Fielding]

I like the idea of adjusting the less-career focused Non-Adverse Actions being given to Sgts, giving leadership the chance to Quality Control/Course Correct (as part of the job) before taking it up an entire panel of SMT. I think we should be looking at where the source of the problem is, which imo is the New Officer intake we're having, and try and stop it at the source, accepting to help others along the way. You'd think Patrol would be ontop of this. Officers are lacking basic roleplay skills at best, and are complete nightmares at worst, rather civilian or cop. Entry needs to change, Snr Officer can't be when I expect decent competency anymore.

Though, I think the deeper-level human problem is also discipline - putting mandatory training sessions to rank up is sort of a bummer, some would do it to get ahead, others lose interest fast. Great optionally, but not to be a headache.

Agreed. Its too bureocratic and some of the current courses/orders aren't really being done if im honest

 

[Tilin]

Also, I re-read the whole suggestion, and there are two more things I would like to point out.

Records are trackable, as they show every severe infraction like a discharge or demotion, including complaint outcomes such as reprimands and WWs.

Making punishments less scary does not make sense, as there are already many officers that do not care about getting demoted or discharged, and doing so will encourage more officers to do misconduct, even less severe, as the punishments would be lighter. Severe punishments are issued in cases such as: Power abuse, criminal charges on the officer, lots of misconduct lately and doing any form of misconduct/gross misconduct clearly on purpose. This makes sense, as you still don't need to worry too much about getting demoted or discharged by doing something by accident, and those who choose to go full rampage, will recieve appropriate response from PSD.

I don't think you understood me correctly or I worded myself poorly.

I never said give supervisors more power. I merely stated to give us more ways to punish an officer, without hindering their progress in PLPD for a whole month. I quite often get into a situation where it's such a minor thing, that I don't want to hand out a reprimand, but later on find out from other supervisors it's a common occurance with an officer.

 

[Tilin]

In addition to the stated suggestions:
Clarify with policies what those who can notes to profiles, what they're for and when they can be used

Like I said, I want to be able to hand out more punishments (not harsher, actually less harsh) such as a comment card. Not important to the officer's development, but important enough that it needs to stay on the officer's record.

 

[Sindarin]

In addition to the stated suggestions:
Clarify with policies what those who can notes to profiles, what they're for and when they can be used

Like I said, I want to be able to hand out more punishments (not harsher, actually less harsh) such as a comment card. Not important to the officer's development, but important enough that it needs to stay on the officer's record.

Comment Cards don't stay on records, the 'lowest' punishment that is generally issued that stays on there record until manually removed is a Written Warning

 

[CABRAMS]

I do think there should be more punishable artices and more ability for supervisors or command.

Supervisors should have more abilities given the current competency of the department right now as well, being able to do more corrective action or even being trusted with more could be helpful.


Temporary Actions:

- Administrative Leave with Pay (Suspension for an IA Investigation) (SGT+)
- Mandated course - mandated use of force course, or something else where they would have to watch a video or read a few policies (SGT/SSGT+?)
- Corrective action - Field correction, talk with command, talk with PSD (CC) - id also like to see this being used more tbh

- New Officer Probation - Allow SGT+ to possibly make new player officers probationary until they can get some OR's to clear them (Say officers with less then 3 days playtime or less then 3 days as a PLPD member.) - i know this is a long stretch but its somewhat needed to have something we can do against incompetent new player officers.

Non-Adverse Actions: (CC/SGT+)

- Oral Admonishment - Would stay on record as a note and be a talking to by a supervisor, stays on record for 15 days? (SGT+)
- Informal Reprimand - A note less then a reprimand that stays on record for 30 days. (SGT+)
- Formal Reprimand - A formal notice of disapproval from a supervisor. This stays on record permanently to track officer progress. (SGT+)
- Written Warning - A written warning that stays on ones record permanently, this may effect progress in PD. (SSGT+)
- Quality Control Patrol - Allowing maybe CPL+ to send a formal request to conduct a QCP? (CPL/SGT+)
- Command Review - Allow SGT+ to put a member of their own division up for a command review/chat. (SGT+)

Adverse Actions (CC Only)

- Administrative Leave without pay - An adverse punishment given to an officer as a formal dissapproval of action. Stays on record permanently.
- Probation - An punishment/corrective action given to officers.
- Demotion - An punishment that strips an officer of rank and gives them a rank below their current.
- Dishonorable Discharge - An punishment given to dishonorable members.
- Blacklist - Often given after dishonorable discharge and varies in time. Disallows members to rejoin the department.

I like the Non-Adverse Actions.

In real life (yeah I know, what is that), majority of places have a progressive system. For example, at my place of employment as follows,: it goes from an

Counseling Session, which is documented on your record, but does not affect anything
Oral Reprimand, which is still documented but rarely nothing happens or affects you in the long run
Written Reprimand, which is documented and can be used against you when you go for promotion, raises, etc..
Suspension, which is documented and can be used against you for when you go for promotion, raises, etc
Termination, which is, obviously documented, and yeah, you get the point.

In addition to that, we also do have Administrative Leave, Probation, and Demotions, which all go on the record.

Now, this doesn't mean that an serious infraction will start with a Counseling Session, it can go to any of those, depending on the severity. As well, for everything up to a Written Reprimand, the Union has made an agreement with my place of employment that it goes away after 1 year with no more disciplinary action.

Prior to my employment, I was a supervisor at a warehouse, where it was part of my responsibility to enforce the policies and issue disciplinary punishments. There needs to be a way to document each time you talk to an employee about an issue. If there isn't, the employee can say that they never were talked about the issue. I feel with, the attached above Non-Adverse Actions from Fielding, supervisors would be able to document each time they talk to an employee without affecting their career, because honestly, it's a game and no one wants to wait a month to go up in rank because of a fuck up.