I made the point of cops filling in with OT for holidays because you brought up the point of part time cops(post 51).How soon we forget.
Are Canadian police paid too much?
- Thread starter George The Curious
- Start date
Yet they are not part timers, just taking on overtime. In past threads, we put to bed the idea that cops take home oodles of cash on Pay Duty, when in fact proportionately it's quite small, averaging out to about ~$600 per officer annually.I made the point of cops filling in with OT for holidays because you brought up the point of part time cops(post 51).How soon we forget.
A 1st class constable working at the Toronto Police Service makes $86k/yr, and their salary is set to increase year over year, so very soon the vast majority of the force will be on the Sunshine List after 4 years on the job. Not too shabby.
http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/careers/uni_benefits.php
http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/careers/uni_benefits.php
You can't do a direct comparison of Canadian police salaries to American Police salaires. There is way too much variance.
The New Jersey State police pays $108,847.13 to a fully trained officer.
http://www.state.nj.us/njsp/recruit/salary.html
Meanwhile, you have some hick town deputy in some backwoods earning half that.
Another thing you need to look at is the level of corruption. Some American police forces have huge problems with officers on the take because they don't earn enough. Some large police forces in the U.S. fire an officer a week for things like robbery, extortion, trafficking, etc.
The New Jersey State police pays $108,847.13 to a fully trained officer.
http://www.state.nj.us/njsp/recruit/salary.html
Meanwhile, you have some hick town deputy in some backwoods earning half that.
Another thing you need to look at is the level of corruption. Some American police forces have huge problems with officers on the take because they don't earn enough. Some large police forces in the U.S. fire an officer a week for things like robbery, extortion, trafficking, etc.
Just what it sounds like....for an easier comparison our poorest arent as poor as the poorest in India, Philipines, Africa etc. Drastic times often require drastic/desperate measures. On another note you need to stop blaming inanimate objects for societies ills and start focusing on the "why" and holding individual action accountable. Only then can we begin to make meaningful progress.Say what?
Policing is easier up here as the proliferation of guns in the US is over the top. You can assume that almost every response will involve arms, until proven wrong. Thank goodness here is not quite then same, the potential is still there.
Well, consider how may people apply for the job and how many make it to their fourth year? Even at $86K it would take how many years to reach $100K with 4% increase each year, remember inflation this year was ~1%, much lower than the 100 year average of ~3%. I wonder how many of the ~4,200 constables are 1st class.A 1st class constable working at the Toronto Police Service makes $86k/yr, and their salary is set to increase year over year, so very soon the vast majority of the force will be on the Sunshine List after 4 years on the job. Not too shabby.
http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/careers/uni_benefits.php
Say what?
Policing is easier up here as the proliferation of guns in the US is over the top. You can assume that almost every response will involve arms, until proven wrong. Thank goodness here is not quite then same, the potential is still there.
Except that we were comparing the US, remember your term southern neighbours, and Canada and not ever mentioned Africa, India or the Philippines. Let at least stay close to home. What inanimate objects are being claimed by me for society's problems?Just what it sounds like....for an easier comparison our poorest arent as poor as the poorest in India, Philipines, Africa etc. Drastic times often require drastic/desperate measures. On another note you need to stop blaming inanimate objects for societies ills and start focusing on the "why" and holding individual action accountable. Only then can we begin to make meaningful progress.
Thank you interesting.According to a letter from OPP Supt. Rick Philbin to reeves and mayors, as of Jan. 1, 2014, OPP constables will get a pay hike — from $87,240 to $94,702. A sergeant goes from $98,093 to $106,483. Heck, the detachment clerk goes from $55,439 to a cool $60,181.
http://www.torontosun.com/2013/06/04/opp-scores-an-85-pay-hike-on-jan-1
An RCMP constable’s salary is $79,308 – behind the national median of $83,483 and trailing the top Canadian constable's salary of $87,880.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mountie-pay-below-other-police-report-says-1.1249373
True. But on the other hand although there indeed are rural parts of New Jersey. You probably couldn't convince a Massachusetts or New Hampshire State Police Trooper to transfer to New Jersey come Hell or high water. That even though the starting wage for a Massachusetts State Police Trooper is between $47,286.96 and $59,238.72 annually plus health and life insurance benefits, a stipend for equipment and uniforms and tuition assistance to accredited universities. In New Hampshire between $43,242 and $61,774 if you had not been promoted.You can't do a direct comparison of Canadian police salaries to American Police salaires. There is way too much variance.
The New Jersey State police pays $108,847.13 to a fully trained officer.
You might want to check the marriage and medical stats and compare it to the other occupations, before you call it 'sweet'.There is a definite costBeing a cop in Canada is a damn sweet job. It's that simple.
The jobs are different. For example while a patrol constable in east overshoe Ontario really doesn't professionally need a university degree, a homicide investigator would likely find one of real benefit likewise a higher level supervisor, and a someone in criminal investigative analysis/criminal profiling very much needs a specialized university degree, indeed likely a masters or even a doctorate.Talk about efficient training. They will do anything including extending education requirements to justify the elevated pay. In another 10 years, police will require as much education as lawyers, and make just as much, probably more. A new generation of aristocrats with guns.
My only issue with police/fire salaries is when they talk of retention pay. Toronto paid this so London had to? Fuck that, if you want to make Toronto pay, go to Toronto. Have fun living in your 4000 sq ft house on the edge of town on Toronto pay in Toronto.The article mentioned in the OP is also almost 4 years old, so I imagine the numbers in the article are even more out of whack when compared to the US numbers thrown around here.
all money-makers have bad marriage stats though, no? Can't imagine Bay street lawyers or bankers having good marriage stats. They are so perfect for divorcing them.You might want to check the marriage and medical stats and compare it to the other occupations, before you call it 'sweet'.There is a definite cost
I don't know how many times your claim that all you need is a HS diploma or the equivalent to become a cop is made on TERB. Nothing could more wrong That's the minimum to 'APPLY', not that you will get accepted or succeed in your training and first year of probation on the job. We had the college curriculum posted and the expectation that you get 85% to pass it. It's not for a slacker. Even if you do pass, you still have to pass the psychological evaluation. Even if you get 100% on the practical and the written parts, if they see something in you that doesn't fit, you're out. The percentage of high school grads and even just police college grads on the TPS is falling every year. The percentage of university educated officer is conversely on the rise.All you need is a HS diploma and 2 years of police foundations. Yet in the other some of the other professions you listed you need an undergrad, some experience requirements in the field and finally a professional certification. Definitely overpaid.
all money-makers have bad marriage stats though, no? Can't imagine Bay street lawyers or bankers having good marriage stats. They are so perfect for divorcing them.
Actually doctors are almost worse than anyone, ranking 5th out of 39, when it comes to marriage breakdown, bankers and lawyers rank 25th and 26th. First responder ranked 30th. Now these are only divorces and the numbers are skewed by the fact that some may been divorced already and them remarried when asked for their status.
The real problem is the medical downfalls. Why do you think police are so hard to insure against medical problems and disabilities through normal channels. I know there are some insurance industry members on TERB, they might be able to put some details on that point.
A pretty clear summary of the plus and minuses for private and public police.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Police
In Great Britain, the police function was historically performed by private watchmen (existing from 1500 on), thief-takers, and so on. The former were funded by private individuals and organizations and the latter by privately funded rewards for catching criminals, who would then be compelled to return stolen property or pay restitution.
In 1737, George II began paying some London and Middlesex watchmen with tax moneys, beginning the shift to government control. In 1750, Henry Fielding began organizing a force of quasi-professional constables. The Macdaniel affair added further impetus for a publicly salaried police force that did not depend on rewards. Nonetheless, In 1828, there were privately financed police units in no fewer than 45 parishes within a 10-mile radius of London.
Perceived advantages[edit]
There is evidence that private police can provide services more cheaply than public police. The cost of San Francisco's private patrol specials is $25–30/hour, compared to $58/hour for an off-duty police officer.[14] In Reminderville, Corporate Security outbid the Summit County Sheriff Department's offer to charge the community $180,000 per year for 45-minute response time emergency response service by offering a $90,000 contract for twice as many patrol cars and a 6-minute response time.[15]
There are the usual public choice issues involved that can thwart public sector reform, such as the fact that citizens realize their individual votes have little chance of affecting the outcome. As Bruce L. Benson notes, "Many people are very concerned about what the government is doing for (or to) them, but they rationally choose not to invest in information about candidates or to vote because they recognize that the costs of doing so exceed the benefits."
Another advantage cited by Benson is that private police would have a contractual responsibility to protect their customers.[16] In Warren v. District of Columbia, the court found that public police have no such responsibility.[17] Thus, they cannot be sued if they fail to respond to calls for help, for instance.
James F. Pastor addresses such disadvantages by analyzing a number of substantive legal and public policy issues which directly or indirectly relate to the provision of security services. These can be demonstrated by the logic of alternative or supplemental service providers. This is illustrated by the concept of "para-police." Para-police is another name for private police officers. Many public safety agencies use auxiliary police officers, who are part-time sworn police officers. Some also use reserve police officers, who are hired on an "as needed" basis, with limited police powers. These officers are typically called to duty for special details or events. In contrast to auxiliary and reserve officers, private policing is a relatively new and growing phenomenon.
There are several key distinctions between these options. Briefly, the distinctions relate to the level of police powers associated with the officer, the training levels required for each officer, the funding sources for the service provision, and the contractual and liability exposures related to each supplemental arrangement. Each alternative or supplemental service has its own strengths and weaknesses. The use of private police, however, has particular appeal because property or business owners can directly contract for public safety services, thereby providing welcome relief for municipal budgets. Finally, private police functions can be flexible, depending upon the financial, organizational, political, and situational circumstances of the client.[18]
Perceived disadvantages[edit]
Problems within the industry include the possibility of criminals setting up their own firms, misuse of surveillance devices, the proliferation of weapons, and strained relationships between the public and private police.[19]
Under anarcho-capitalism, taxpayers would not be forced to fund police services; these transactions would be voluntary. One argument against such a policy is that it would disadvantage the poor, who could not afford to spend much money on police. Thus, some more moderate libertarians favor issuing police vouchers to each citizen, granting them a certain amount of money to hire a private police company of their choice at taxpayer expense.
Murray Rothbard notes, "police service is not 'free'; it is paid for by the taxpayer, and the taxpayer is very often the poor person himself. He may very well be paying more in taxes for police now than he would in fees to private, and far more efficient, police companies. Furthermore, the police companies would be tapping a mass market; with the economies of such a larger-scale market, police protection would undoubtedly be much cheaper."[20]
Public police, by contrast, are limited in size by the political jurisdiction; although some local public police forces already contract with national private firms for specialty services, such as maintenance of communications equipment, for which it would not be economical for them to hire a full-time government employee.[21]
Ultimately, some people see the potential for a “dual system” of policing—one for the wealthy and one for the poor—and others see the provision of private security as the primary protective resource in contemporary America.[22]
In Florida, Critical Intervention Services patrols neighborhoods and has used lethal force before.[23] They have limited power, like other private security agencies in the state, regulated by Florida Statute 493.[24]
In Great Britain, the police function was historically performed by private watchmen (existing from 1500 on), thief-takers, and so on. The former were funded by private individuals and organizations and the latter by privately funded rewards for catching criminals, who would then be compelled to return stolen property or pay restitution.
In 1737, George II began paying some London and Middlesex watchmen with tax moneys, beginning the shift to government control. In 1750, Henry Fielding began organizing a force of quasi-professional constables. The Macdaniel affair added further impetus for a publicly salaried police force that did not depend on rewards. Nonetheless, In 1828, there were privately financed police units in no fewer than 45 parishes within a 10-mile radius of London.
Perceived advantages[edit]
There is evidence that private police can provide services more cheaply than public police. The cost of San Francisco's private patrol specials is $25–30/hour, compared to $58/hour for an off-duty police officer.[14] In Reminderville, Corporate Security outbid the Summit County Sheriff Department's offer to charge the community $180,000 per year for 45-minute response time emergency response service by offering a $90,000 contract for twice as many patrol cars and a 6-minute response time.[15]
There are the usual public choice issues involved that can thwart public sector reform, such as the fact that citizens realize their individual votes have little chance of affecting the outcome. As Bruce L. Benson notes, "Many people are very concerned about what the government is doing for (or to) them, but they rationally choose not to invest in information about candidates or to vote because they recognize that the costs of doing so exceed the benefits."
Another advantage cited by Benson is that private police would have a contractual responsibility to protect their customers.[16] In Warren v. District of Columbia, the court found that public police have no such responsibility.[17] Thus, they cannot be sued if they fail to respond to calls for help, for instance.
James F. Pastor addresses such disadvantages by analyzing a number of substantive legal and public policy issues which directly or indirectly relate to the provision of security services. These can be demonstrated by the logic of alternative or supplemental service providers. This is illustrated by the concept of "para-police." Para-police is another name for private police officers. Many public safety agencies use auxiliary police officers, who are part-time sworn police officers. Some also use reserve police officers, who are hired on an "as needed" basis, with limited police powers. These officers are typically called to duty for special details or events. In contrast to auxiliary and reserve officers, private policing is a relatively new and growing phenomenon.
There are several key distinctions between these options. Briefly, the distinctions relate to the level of police powers associated with the officer, the training levels required for each officer, the funding sources for the service provision, and the contractual and liability exposures related to each supplemental arrangement. Each alternative or supplemental service has its own strengths and weaknesses. The use of private police, however, has particular appeal because property or business owners can directly contract for public safety services, thereby providing welcome relief for municipal budgets. Finally, private police functions can be flexible, depending upon the financial, organizational, political, and situational circumstances of the client.[18]
Perceived disadvantages[edit]
Problems within the industry include the possibility of criminals setting up their own firms, misuse of surveillance devices, the proliferation of weapons, and strained relationships between the public and private police.[19]
Under anarcho-capitalism, taxpayers would not be forced to fund police services; these transactions would be voluntary. One argument against such a policy is that it would disadvantage the poor, who could not afford to spend much money on police. Thus, some more moderate libertarians favor issuing police vouchers to each citizen, granting them a certain amount of money to hire a private police company of their choice at taxpayer expense.
Murray Rothbard notes, "police service is not 'free'; it is paid for by the taxpayer, and the taxpayer is very often the poor person himself. He may very well be paying more in taxes for police now than he would in fees to private, and far more efficient, police companies. Furthermore, the police companies would be tapping a mass market; with the economies of such a larger-scale market, police protection would undoubtedly be much cheaper."[20]
Public police, by contrast, are limited in size by the political jurisdiction; although some local public police forces already contract with national private firms for specialty services, such as maintenance of communications equipment, for which it would not be economical for them to hire a full-time government employee.[21]
Ultimately, some people see the potential for a “dual system” of policing—one for the wealthy and one for the poor—and others see the provision of private security as the primary protective resource in contemporary America.[22]
In Florida, Critical Intervention Services patrols neighborhoods and has used lethal force before.[23] They have limited power, like other private security agencies in the state, regulated by Florida Statute 493.[24]
We need to compare police salaries in Canada to those of other highly advanced, relatively honest societies such as Denmark Finland Sweden Norway etc. NOT the corrupt US. I don't mind my police being paid among the highest in the world if they r among the best in the world. I have family and friend in the force and they r amazingly honest hard working and caring people. I have met many of their friends and am constantly amazed at how professional the most of them r.
MOST of them? I would be amazed if some of them were NOT professional at all times given the money they raking in.I have met many of their friends and am constantly amazed at how professional the most of them r.
The thing I don't understand about retention pay, is who cares, lots of people want these jobs. I don't mind paying cops fairly well, but I think it has little to do with corruption. If you paid them 65K top scale it would be fine, plus perhaps a premium for cost of living in Toronto.My only issue with police/fire salaries is when they talk of retention pay. Toronto paid this so London had to? Fuck that, if you want to make Toronto pay, go to Toronto. Have fun living in your 4000 sq ft house on the edge of town on Toronto pay in Toronto.The article mentioned in the OP is also almost 4 years old, so I imagine the numbers in the article are even more out of whack when compared to the US numbers thrown around here.
