Tpd chief resigns

Status
Not open for further replies.

Freqed

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
1,385
Location
Broken Arrow
Chief Palmer gave his resignation today only after the Tulsa World reported that the Mayor had asked him too. Interim chief to be named, why bother just go ahead and give it all to the Sheriff.
Also Just heard on RMA-2F that the Union hads rejected the 5.2% pay cut.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Messages
267
Location
KRCE
Too bad they cant come to some sort of an agreement like Miami, FL did where they form a combined agency. In times of budget crunches it kinda makes since. JM2C
 

UTLNOK

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
64
Location
74115
As for the Chief's resignation, I've said it before, I'll say it again...WE'RE NOT MISSING MUCH.

As for the lay offs \ pay cuts (TPD), I say lay them off, maybe that will get rid of some of these hot-headed "go gitters"...(I will leave it at that, lest I get myself in trouble.)

TFD - HIRE MORE ! ! ! ! ! ! !, at least they're out there...making an honest living.

As for the budget cuts in general, I say whats the use, the government (city, state, & federal) has mismanaged "squandered" "OUR" money away for years, "WE" should just take the money and have a great big pizza party...

Mmmmmm...pizza
 

Freqed

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
1,385
Location
Broken Arrow
As for the lay offs \ pay cuts (TPD), I say lay them off, maybe that will get rid of some of these hot-headed "go gitters"...(I will leave it at that, lest I get myself in trouble.)
Unfortunately it's a union layoff and goes in order of seniority so if a Hot Head is not in the line of seniority he won't be let go. You lose more good people than bad (generally) in a union layoff.
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2004
Messages
1,217
Location
Tulsa
Becomes clearer every day why Queen Kathy bailed, she knew what the situation was and didn't want to deal with the looming crisis. There is a lot of bloat in TPD, why does an agency with 800 personnel need a 800 vehicle fleet along with the required radios and computers and BTW the software license for each MDT computer isn't cheap.

Taylor spent money were it shouldn't have been spent, BOK Center, ballfield, new city hall, etc. now we are paying $40K per month to keep the utilities on in the old city hall and BTW were are the buyer's that were ready to purchase it and build a hotel?
 

KD5WLX

Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2003
Messages
273
Location
Tulsa
Regarding layoffs (and union contracts in general) that's the root of one of the problems. Once an agency (or company) gets top-heavy with supervisors (but still union - at some places the supervisors are non-union - not sure where that point is in TFD or TPD) you can't get an effective cut.

The higher ups have their 20 years in, so if you try to lay them off, they retire instead (and still get a sizable percentage of their pay). Plus the union says the newest guy goes first. Hypothetical numbers follow: If you have a captain at 80k at 30 years, a major at 60k and 25 years, an LT at 50k and 20 years and 3 beat cops (varying experience) making 35-45k but all under retirement cutoff. If you are a non-union company, you "RIF" from the top down and save 190k, then promote one of the other 3. But if you're union, first, you can't pink slip the brass - even if you could, they still "make" at least 1/2 in their retirement, so you only saved 70k. Fire 3 brass and you can pay 2 beat cops. Besides, the bottom up layoff means instead you lay off all 3 "workers" and only save 120k in wages.

In the union case, the three from the bottom saves "more" than all 3 from the top because of the pension situation, but in the non-union world, the top down makes more sense. Unfortunately, the contracts won't let you do it that way. Even if you "bust" the union, those that are retirement eligible will just do so, and under the "old" contract. Law says you have to honor that contract (and rightly so - the "mistake" was letting it go that far in the first place - if you can't afford, or don't need supervisors, don't promote them in the first place if you can't trim them back later).

That was KT's mistake (and probably the two prior mayors before her). Strong Chiefs in both departments, and strong unions, coupled with weak mayors and good economies made it easy for the depts. and unions to push raises and promotions along with cushy pensions. Then the economy goes south, and there is no way to "make good" on the contracts without bankrupting the organization. In this case it's the city, but this basic problem is what is dragging down GM and Chrysler, too. The only way to "correct" it is to never let it happen, or to file bankruptcy (which lets a judge re-write all the contracts based on "current assets" - which royally screws the pensioners (and they don't deserve that - remember they were beat cops and smoke eaters who "made it" up the ladder of success!

And you don't even want to see what happens when a city declares bankruptcy.
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2004
Messages
1,217
Location
Tulsa
Let's see, I had previously posted opining about TPD and TCSO merging, Palmer said no. Palmer gone, TCSO Captain (on leave) now running TPD. Tonight TCSO running calls in Tulsa city limits. I would say this is phase one of TCSO/TPD merger.

Under state law the County Sheriff is the top law enforcement officer in the county. I was just getting used to the blue uniforms!

Jay: Thanks for the invite. RDF
 
Last edited:

UTLNOK

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
64
Location
74115
Regarding layoffs (and union contracts in general) that's the root of one of the problems. Once an agency (or company) gets top-heavy with supervisors (but still union - at some places the supervisors are non-union - not sure where that point is in TFD or TPD) you can't get an effective cut.

The higher ups have their 20 years in, so if you try to lay them off, they retire instead (and still get a sizable percentage of their pay). Plus the union says the newest guy goes first. Hypothetical numbers follow: If you have a captain at 80k at 30 years, a major at 60k and 25 years, an LT at 50k and 20 years and 3 beat cops (varying experience) making 35-45k but all under retirement cutoff. If you are a non-union company, you "RIF" from the top down and save 190k, then promote one of the other 3. But if you're union, first, you can't pink slip the brass - even if you could, they still "make" at least 1/2 in their retirement, so you only saved 70k. Fire 3 brass and you can pay 2 beat cops. Besides, the bottom up layoff means instead you lay off all 3 "workers" and only save 120k in wages.

In the union case, the three from the bottom saves "more" than all 3 from the top because of the pension situation, but in the non-union world, the top down makes more sense. Unfortunately, the contracts won't let you do it that way. Even if you "bust" the union, those that are retirement eligible will just do so, and under the "old" contract. Law says you have to honor that contract (and rightly so - the "mistake" was letting it go that far in the first place - if you can't afford, or don't need supervisors, don't promote them in the first place if you can't trim them back later).

That was KT's mistake (and probably the two prior mayors before her). Strong Chiefs in both departments, and strong unions, coupled with weak mayors and good economies made it easy for the depts. and unions to push raises and promotions along with cushy pensions. Then the economy goes south, and there is no way to "make good" on the contracts without bankrupting the organization. In this case it's the city, but this basic problem is what is dragging down GM and Chrysler, too. The only way to "correct" it is to never let it happen, or to file bankruptcy (which lets a judge re-write all the contracts based on "current assets" - which royally screws the pensioners (and they don't deserve that - remember they were beat cops and smoke eaters who "made it" up the ladder of success!

And you don't even want to see what happens when a city declares bankruptcy.
"the ladder of success"...is that what they call it?..seems more like "the ladder of greed and corruption"...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top