Toronto cops make mad loot writing tickets. Still think the system isn't corrupt?

[AK-47]

Fuck law school, I'm gonna become a cop

 

[kenjo67]

True, but I am good I haven't been involved in this hobby is almost a year.

If this is true then your like a fat kid in a candy store on a diet. good luck

 

[viking1965]

Rylan, Viking. I won't argur I broke the law but my point is when a LEO is constantly complaining of beign under paid and over worked and the courts are constantly saying they are log jammed and you have police officers wrting tickets and RECOMMENDING they go to court to fight the ticket and you have 2 officers who are doublign their pay checks due to court dates.. then yes... something is wrong.

So if people (like yourself) would just admit that they did wrong and pay the fine, then we don't have this problem!!!!!

My view is that the courts aren't jammed up with bogus tickets, but with people who think they're above the law.

 

[viking1965]

I think the word "corrupt" takes it too far but there is plainly a conflict of interest here, one that should be eliminated.

If an officer can increase his salary by writing a bogus ticket that winds up requiring court time that at the very least leads to a temptation to write bogus tickets.

Officers perhaps should be paid a flat monthly fee for court time that on average winds up being fair compensation for the time they spend there, but does not in any way depend on the actual number of tickets they write.

An officer can also very seriously risk losing his job (and pension) by habitually writing bogus tickets.

Not worth the risk IMHO.

 

[AK-47]

SO if people (like yourself) would just admit that they did wrong and pay the fine, then we don't have this problem!!!!!

My view is that the courts arent jammed up with bogus tickets, but with people who think they're above the law.

I think you're missing the point, cops are public servants not self-servants. Their job is to keep the city safe, not to make themselves as wealthy as possible at the taxpayers expense.

 

[viking1965]

I think you're missing the point, cops are public servants not self-servants. Their job is to keep the city safe, not to make themselves as wealthy as possible at the taxpayers expense.

I agree.

My point is that assuming that the original ticket is legitimate (and I haven't seen any fact-based argument against that, only rhetoric) the officer only has the opportunity to make the "court stipend" if the offender chooses to challenge it. Would you propse that the officer not get reimbursed for his time spent?

 

[fuji]

My point is that assuming that the original ticket is legitimate (and I haven't seen any fact-based argument against that, only rhetoric) the officer only has the opportunity to make the "court stipend" if the offender chooses to challenge it. Would you propse that the officer not get reimbursed for his time spent?

I would propose that the officer not be reimbursed in any way that depends on the number of tickets written or charges laid. That is plainly a conflict of interest.

I note that I am paid salary and while I normally work a 37.5 hour week now and then I am called on to work more, and I am not paid any extra for the overtime--that was understood to be part of the job when I took it, and my salary is high enough that I feel it's fair.

What should happen is the city should review how much money was spent on court time in the past few years, which types of jobs led to that court time, and then pay the same total out as a lump sum but not tied to any actual tickets.

Officers would get more than they used to in some months, less in others, but the same net pay oveall and the conflict of interest would be gone.

 

[AK-47]

I agree.

My point is that assuming that the original ticket is legitimate (and I haven't seen any fact-based argument against that, only rhetoric) the officer only has the opportunity to make the "court stipend" if the offender chooses to challenge it. Would you propse that the officer not get reimbursed for his time spent?

The govt needs a healthy balance of enforcing the law while limiting what a cop can make in overtime. Otherwise we're gonna have half the police force making over $100K and Toronto cant afford that

 

[viking1965]

I would propose that the officer not be reimbursed in any way that depends on the number of tickets written or charges laid. That is plainly a conflict of interest.

I note that I am paid salary and while I normally work a 37.5 hour week now and then I am called on to work more, and I am not paid any extra for the overtime--that was understood to be part of the job when I took it, and my salary is high enough that I feel it's fair.

What should happen is the city should review how much money was spent on court time in the past few years, which types of jobs led to that court time, and then pay the same total out as a lump sum but not tied to any actual tickets.

Officers would get more than they used to in some months, less in others, but the same net pay oveall and the conflict of interest would be gone.

Fuji,

I obviously don't know how much you're paid but I, like you, am an "Exempt" employee. This status is typically reserved for management level types who are more highly compensated. I image you have hourly employees who are entitle to overtime pay.

Police officers are not "Exempt", and as such, in line with their contract (whether you like the details of it, or not) are entitled to overtime pay when reasonably necessary. The idea behind the "court stipend" is that the officer should attend court on an "off day" so as not to effect the duty roster and leave some precinct/sector "uncovered". Obviously it's fair the he be compensated for this time.

I would also presume, Fuji, that your extra efforts (like mine) are "recognized" at year end in the form of a bonus. Police officers do not have the benefit of such "merit" compensation.

 

[viking1965]

The govt needs a healthy balance of enforcing the law while limiting what a cop can make in overtime. Otherwise we're gonna have half the police force making over $100K and Toronto cant afford that

If the officer is actually spending the time doing the task he is being paid for, then why the opposition to paying him for it?

Appearing in court is something that's part of doing his job. Should he not be compensated for that time? Why should we limit how much he can make as long as he is legitimately working for that amount?

If he was putting in for "court time" but spending the day at Dunkin Donuts (Tim Horton's), then you might have an argument.

 

[viking1965]

I would propose that the officer not be reimbursed in any way that depends on the number of tickets written or charges laid. That is plainly a conflict of interest.

He doesen't. He gets reimbursed by the number of hours he spends working. If the number of hours goes up (court time) because people choose to argue what are ostensibly legitimate violations, where's the conflict of interest?

 

[rama putri]

One of my closest friends, since childhood, is a Metro cop and tells me stories about cops who 'max' the system. They get away with it precisely due to Rylans logic - you break a traffic law, you get a ticket. Tboy would be happy with that logic. So these cops don't exercise much discretion and write up as much as they can. But unlike the Plano PIG, they're quite smart about it and know how much is enough and how much is 'within' reason. So much so we have people like Rylan and tboy blindly defending them, even as my buddy laughs at at their naïveté.

 

[viking1965]

One of my closest friends, since childhood, is a Metro cop and tells me stories about cops who 'max' the system. They get away with it precisely due to Rylans logic - you break a traffic law, you get a ticket. Tboy would be happy with that logic. So these cops don't exercise much discretion and write up as much as they can. But unlike the Plano PIG, they're quite smart about it and know how much is enough and how much is 'within' reason. So much so we have people like Rylan and tboy blindly defending them, even as my buddy laughs at at their naïveté.

So your buddy writes "bogus" tickets on purpose with the assumption that people will be more likely to challenge them and he'll therefore get more "court time"?

If so, that would make this "individual" corrupt, but not "the system" as originally proposed.

 

[kenjo67]

So your buddy writes "bogus" tickets on purpose with the assumption that people will be more likely to challenge them and he'll therefore get more "court time"?

If so, that would make this "individual" corrupt, but not "the system" as originally proposed.

Would vikings position changd if it were jaywalking tickets rather than traffic tickets? Jay walking is against the law too you know. Its all about discretion but the more i read I'm beginning to think Viking = LEO, but one who enjoys the hobby too much. you do realize that both hobbyist and our counterparts are breaking the law right? maybe you should turn yourself in and go to court and fight it.

 

[AK-47]

If the officer is actually spending the time doing the task he is being paid for, then why the opposition to paying him for it?

Appearing in court is something that's part of doing his job. Should he not be compensated for that time? Why should we limit how much he can make as long as he is legitimately working for that amount?

If he was putting in for "court time" but spending the day at Dunkin Donuts (Tim Horton's), then you might have an argument.

Are you stupid Viking???
Re-read what I wrote, I never said cops shouldnt be paid for OT or any other work, I'm merely saying it should be capped (or limited)

Why is this so hard for people to comprehend??!!

 

[seaniam]

I would propose that the officer not be reimbursed in any way that depends on the number of tickets written or charges laid. That is plainly a conflict of interest.

I note that I am paid salary and while I normally work a 37.5 hour week now and then I am called on to work more, and I am not paid any extra for the overtime--that was understood to be part of the job when I took it, and my salary is high enough that I feel it's fair.

What should happen is the city should review how much money was spent on court time in the past few years, which types of jobs led to that court time, and then pay the same total out as a lump sum but not tied to any actual tickets.

Officers would get more than they used to in some months, less in others, but the same net pay oveall and the conflict of interest would be gone.

Actually I think people are getting a little bent out of shape on a non issue. It is not parking tickets that causes the overtime, it's all the other 700,000 charges laid each year. In fact I would bet you that the officer that topped the list most likely was involved in a large case involving non traffic charges. In a situation like that is it really fair to cap an officer on a complex case, doesn't that setup a dangerous precedent that might encourage people not to get involve directly?

The article is very vague on that matter, in fact all it does is try to say that since 85% of the charges laid in the City of Toronto are traffic related and as such tries to suck you in to believing that the particular officer was writing tickets at an alarming rate.

The article goes on to say that most there is a trend in cops making more than 100,000. Well everyone forgets that this reporting law was made many years and the average salary for a 1st class LEO has been raised several times to the point that it is not that hard to reach the reporting number. Add more senior LEOS to the equation and you get an even bigger problem.

I don't have a problem with LEO getting this kind of income. They have dangerous and often thankless jobs. I sooner see them get the money than some of the useless dickheads we have on City Council.

Law enforcement is not the area we need to cut the City budget with.



sean

 

[Rylan]

One of my closest friends, since childhood, is a Metro cop and tells me stories about cops who 'max' the system. They get away with it precisely due to Rylans logic - you break a traffic law, you get a ticket. Tboy would be happy with that logic. So these cops don't exercise much discretion and write up as much as they can. But unlike the Plano PIG, they're quite smart about it and know how much is enough and how much is 'within' reason. So much so we have people like Rylan and tboy blindly defending them, even as my buddy laughs at at their naïveté.

I didn't say it was right or wrong. I said the system allows for it and the people break the law. I agree that the system needs to change, but blaming the cops is not going to change a thing.

The cops are not writting bogus tickets, they are legit. They are follow a fucked up system. Should they use their moral judgement? Of course, but please get mad at the everyone, system, cops and law breakers, or get mad at no one.

Make it equal at least, no?

 

[addicted2whiskey]

Agreed. More power to the cops. They're doing nothing wrong. Once again the City's administration has failed us!

I wonder how the RCMP's Collective Bargaining Agreement addresses the matter of paid overtime for court appearances on "off days". In fairness, one would think it would be even more lucrative given that the RCMP is presently facing a severe staff shortage.

 

[viking1965]

Would vikings position changd if it were jaywalking tickets rather than traffic tickets? Jay walking is against the law too you know. Its all about discretion but the more i read I'm beginning to think Viking = LEO, but one who enjoys the hobby too much. you do realize that both hobbyist and our counterparts are breaking the law right? maybe you should turn yourself in and go to court and fight it.

Disclaimer: My late father was a career NYPD officer.

I realize completely that I and the vast majority of others on this board are breaking the law. None of that is relevant to this discussion of police officers getting paid for their time spent working.

I'm not questioning anyone's "decision" to break the law. I'm just saying that if your decision to break the law, and subsequently challenge the charge, as is your right, results in a LEO getting paid for the time he spends in court; then who has created the expense? I submit that it is the offender rather than the officer. If no one broke the law, or if those cited just paid their fines instead of "challenging" in hopes of getting it dropped or reduced on a "technicality", then the cop wouldn't have to go to court.

If it was determined that one or more officers were writing volumes of "spurious" or "unjustified" tickets, or even a "disproportionate number" of jaywalking tickets, then I would share your concern, but that hasn't been shown to be the case.

 

[enduser1]

Cops don't write laws. Cops enforce them. Do you have any idea how many hundreds of millions of dollars the city of Toronto made off of those tickets? The cops are definetly not corrupt. The legal system that uses cops as armed tax collectors is the problem.

EU