What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Cops: No Snarky Nor Positive Title

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kepler said:
Everything below one's ability to comprehend is stupid. Everything above is pretentious.
Click to expand...

You think your insight is above my comprehension. Oh honey you need to hang out with stoners more often. :D ;) Actually that might be the perfect crowd for you!

Maybe I will get completely baked tonight and reread this part of the thread and see if it hits home :D

But now...back to the cops! (not Cops)

edit: Ugh...I just noticed no emoticons. Everything I posted was supposed to have one to signify all of this was total snark. Seriously this new setup blows.
 
Last edited:
Handyman said:
You think your insight is above my comprehension. Oh honey you need to hang out with stoners more often.
Click to expand...

People who have no trouble slotting themselves in beauty will fight to the death against slotting themselves in intelligence.

You're no Cary Grant, my friend. It's not a crime; few are. Hush now.
 
Kepler said:
People who have no trouble slotting themselves in beauty will fight to the death against slotting themselves in intelligence.

You're no Cary Grant, my friend. It's not a crime; few are. Hush now.
Click to expand...

Cary Grant? You know every time I feel I am old you post something like that and make me like a teenager again. (insert snark emoticon here since this new barebones vbulletin can bite me)

:rolleyes:
 
Handyman said:
That isnt a new idea...that is just being pretentious :D

Cops is no different than the Iron Chef used to be. It is a stupid show of little to no value, there is o greater meaning behind it...except that large quantities of people watch stupid stuff ;)
Click to expand...

Leave Iron Chef alone. The American version sucked, but the original Japanese version was awesome.
 
Handyman said:
Cary Grant? You know every time I feel I am old you post something like that and make me like a teenager again.
Click to expand...

I was going to go with John Barrymore.

ea468a0636648999220d228c37cbfe3e--actor-john-john-barrymore.jpg
 
Handyman said:
Yes it must have a police force...it doesnt say it has to be this police force. As long as they hire other officers to replace the MPS they arent violating the charter by dissolving the MPS. That is why that point isnt brought up more.

That is why this is going to be a slow moving process. They need something in place with a minimal number of officers as soon as they dissolve the current brand.
Click to expand...

So you think that if you have a big group of unionized employees working for you that you don't like, and you really don't like their union agent, that you can just magically wave your hand and tell them they are all fired and you get to go out and hire a brand new group of people to come in and perform some or all of the same duties and they're not in the union anymore and they're not represented by the union agent you don't like, and all is good? That's how you think labor law works?

I think there are a lot of employers out there that will be really curious to see if you're right.

If the City of Minneapolis just decides to disband its police force and farm it out to someone else to do (after they amend their Charter) they can do that. They'll have to negotiate the effects of that with the cops, but it can be done.

However, if the City of Minneapolis decides to keep operating a police force, just not the current police force, and they think they're just going to let go all the current cops and face no recourse, my response to them is good luck. The City will find themselves with a newly named law enforcement group made up of the same cops who are in the current group. But hey, it'll have a new name.

Everyone's darling is Camden, NJ. That's probably the first, and almost certainly the last, anyone will ever write that. Camden dissolved their police force and magically turned their city into utopia.

But what really happened in Camden?

Camden had something like 220 cops. They were dirty (it's New Jersey, so I shouldn't have to type that, but I did.)

According to current urban legend, they fired all the old cops and hired all new cops and solved all their problems. What really happened is that Camden fired their 220 cops and told them they'd have to reapply for their jobs with the newly named county department. Something like 155 of them did, and were immediately rehired. About 65 chose not to apply for the new force, for reasons that aren't clear to me.

Camden then went out and doubled the size of the new force bringing it up to more than 400 officers.

So yeah, they ended up with 400 cops, 250 of them were brand new and were presumably not corrupt (I only say presumably because, New Jersey). But did they do that by really getting rid of the old force and hiring a new force? Not really. 70% of the old force came to work for the new force, and who knows, if the rest had chosen to apply that percentage might have been even higher. The way they got a new force, essentially, was by doubling the size of the force itself.

We all know, based upon conversations everyone had with Rube, that adding more cops is not the answer, although apparently in the utopia known as Camden, NJ, it is.

Is that your plan for Minneapolis?
 
SJHovey said:
So you think that if you have a big group of unionized employees working for you that you don't like, and you really don't like their union agent, that you can just magically wave your hand and tell them they are all fired and you get to go out and hire a brand new group of people to come in and perform some or all of the same duties and they're not in the union anymore and they're not represented by the union agent you don't like, and all is good? That's how you think labor law works?

I think there are a lot of employers out there that will be really curious to see if you're right.

If the City of Minneapolis just decides to disband its police force and farm it out to someone else to do (after they amend their Charter) they can do that. They'll have to negotiate the effects of that with the cops, but it can be done.
Click to expand...

Worked when Saint Ronnie fired the air traffic controllers.
 
rufus said:
Worked when Saint Ronnie fired the air traffic controllers.
Click to expand...

That's not even close to the same thing. The air traffic controllers were out on strike and Reagan ordered them back to work because of national interests. When they refused to come back, they were engaged in an illegal strike and he was free to fire them.

If these cops decided to go on strike because everyone is saying mean things about them, in Minnesota at least that would be an illegal strike because cops are considered essential workers and are not allowed to strike. At that point the City would be free to fire them all.

My guess is that the union won't put the cops out on strike and fall into that trap, but who knows.
 
rufus said:
Worked when Saint Ronnie fired the air traffic controllers.
Click to expand...

The air traffic controllers were illegally striking, and were offered more than one chance to return. Firing them -- regardless of whether or not you agree with the tactic -- was legal. Firing the entire Minneapolis Police Department is not practical, and short of verifiable misconduct on the part of everyone fired (although for the sworn officers there is probably good cause to fire at least half of them right now) against the rules both sides agreed upon.

Strange that 1981 saw two of the more famous strikes in labor history and the outcomes could not have been further apart. The air traffic controllers' strike was one of the most ill-informed, ill-timed and disastrous strikes ever, as it resulted in the nearly the entire membership losing their jobs and very few ever working in the industry again. On the other end of the spectrum was the Major League Baseball players's strike. It was actually timed perfectly, the players were as well-prepared as any group of strikers in any strike I have ever studied, was highly principled (it created far more wealth for players to come, not the ones striking) and was as successful a strike as it could be in terms of the dollars it created for current and (especially) future members.
 
SJHovey said:
My guess is that the union won't put the cops out on strike and fall into that trap, but who knows.
Click to expand...

The city would love it if their union was that stupid. Maybe the 5h!t-for-brains who runs it is just that stupid. He seems like the kind of idiot for whom phony bluster and tough talk impresses both his members and him, so I guess you never know.

I am not well versed in Minnesota's public sector collective bargaining statutes, so I don't know what kind of mutually agreed upon dispute resolution they utilize if the parties can't reach an agreement. But if I was the City Of Minneapolis I might be thinking of taking as hard a line in bargaining with that union as possible, as the citizens would likely back up the strategy. Instead of walking away from negotiations for now, I might want them at the table in a weakened state.

There is obviously going to be some sort of a police department operating within the city limits of Minneapolis, and it will eventually be unionized, so why not find a way to bring the current union to its knees and negotiate a contract that might actually give the city sufficient oversight to get rid of bad actors and put in place the reforms needed?
 
WeAreNDHockey said:
The city would love it if their union was that stupid. Maybe the 5h!t-for-brains who runs it is just that stupid. He seems like the kind of idiot for whom phony bluster and tough talk impresses both his members and him, so I guess you never know.

I am not well versed in Minnesota's public sector collective bargaining statutes, so I don't know what kind of mutually agreed upon dispute resolution they utilize if the parties can't reach an agreement. But if I was the City Of Minneapolis I might be thinking of taking as hard a line in bargaining with that union as possible, as the citizens would likely back up the strategy. Instead of walking away from negotiations for now, I might want them at the table in a weakened state.

There is obviously going to be some sort of a police department operating within the city limits of Minneapolis, and it will eventually be unionized, so why not find a way to bring the current union to its knees and negotiate a contract that might actually give the city sufficient oversight to get rid of bad actors and put in place the reforms needed?
Click to expand...

I believe the contract expired in December, and they've been negotiating ever since. You can find a copy online, I'm sure.

As I wrote earlier, Minnesota has "interest arbitration" for essential employees who are not allowed to strike. Thus, if the City takes an unreasonably hard line against the union, the union will simply request interest arbitration and let an arbitrator decide.

Now, that is not without some risk for the union as well. You never know what an arbitrator may conclude. However, most of the arbitrators assigned in Minnesota come out of either the labor ranks or academia, so they've typically been a little more pro-union. How that will work with cops in today's world is anyone's guess.
 
SJHovey said:
However, most of the arbitrators assigned in Minnesota come out of either the labor ranks or academia, so they've typically been a little more pro-union. How that will work with cops in today's world is anyone's guess.
Click to expand...

One would think that but I'm not sure it's true. The ILR school at Cornell is one of the feeders for the people who make those decisions, and when I was there at least it was divided right down the middle between pro-labor and Randian Moron.
 
Kepler said:
One would think that but I'm not sure it's true. The ILR school at Cornell is one of the feeders for the people who make those decisions, and when I was there at least it was divided right down the middle between pro-labor and Randian Moron.
Click to expand...

Yep. Both sides need con$ultant$.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top