Rebuilding Place in the Urban Space

"A community’s physical form, rather than its land uses, is its most intrinsic and enduring characteristic." [Katz, EPA] This blog focuses on place and placemaking and all that makes it work--historic preservation, urban design, transportation, asset-based community development, arts & cultural development, commercial district revitalization, tourism & destination development, and quality of life advocacy--along with doses of civic engagement and good governance watchdogging.

Thursday, May 28, 2020

How to incentivize better police conduct: pay settlements out of police officer pension funds

Yes, police officers and other emergency workers put their lives at risk. This is often used as a justification for particularly generous pensions and retirement policies ("Amid Funding Shortfall, Lawmakers OK Pension Boost for Cops, Firefighters," New Jersey Spotlight; "Frosting on an already-sweet pension deal," Orange County Register)

In the previous post, "Where is the risk management approach to police misconduct and regularized killings of citizens?," I forgot to mention my idea on how to "better align incentives for optimal police officer conduct" by making police officer pension funds responsible for paying out settlements for police misconduct, and concomitantly reducing pension payouts as required.

Granted, that comes at the expense of already retired officers, but then again, what better way to align incentives?

Then again, in the heat of the moment, a police officer isn't likely to think about his pension or the pensions of fellow and retired officers.

OTOH, police unions would likely agree to significant changes in training.

For example, in the UK, police officers have to get special training and ongoing certification in order to carry a gun, and it is a much more difficult and involved process compared to US police training requirements. From the wikipedia entry on Authorized Firearms Officers:
Candidates are required to gain approval from their superiors before embarking on a series of interviews, psychological and physical fitness tests, medical examinations and assessment days, before permission to commence firearms training is given. There is no guarantee of success; candidates can be returned to their previous role at any point in training if they do not meet the required standard.

Once authorised, AFOs must pass regular refresher training and retests in order to maintain their authorisation. Failure to meet the required standards can result in the officer having their firearms authorisation revoked. Health or fitness problems can also result in temporary or permanent suspension from firearms duties.

Imagine if US police officers had similar requirements. Although, like with the recent incident in Minneapolis, and past incidents in New York City, Baltimore, and others, people can be killed by use of force other than a gun.

Labels: , , , ,

2 Comments:

At 8:35 AM, Anonymous Alex B. said...

Before you pay settlements from pension funds, you need to change the doctrine about settlements in the first place. The Supreme Court's absurd interpretation of qualified immunity means that police rarely are held accountable in civil court:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/05/george-floyd-supreme-court-police-qualified-immunity.html

 
At 2:18 PM, Blogger Richard Layman said...

I did not know this. Thanks.

qualified immunity leads to impunity...

 

Post a Comment

<< Home