LAPD Disclaimer

  • Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the monitor has approved them. We encourage you to express your opinions about current events through respectful and insightful discussion. The Department reserves the right to refuse to post those comments that contain inappropriate language and/or material. Additionally, hyper-links or E-mail addresses will not be posted. To report or help us solve a crime go to lapdonline.org. To commend an employee or report employee misconduct - click here.

LAPD Photos

  • www.flickr.com
    This is a Flickr badge showing public photos from lapdblog. Make your own badge here.

Translate


  • Disclaimer: The LAPDonline.orgĀ® website has made reasonable efforts to provide an accurate translation. However, no automated or computerized translation is perfect and is not intended to replace human or traditional translation methods. The official text is the English version of the LAPDonline.orgĀ® website. If any questions arise concerning the accuracy of the information presented by the translated version of the website, please refer to the English edition of the website, which is the official version.

Become a Fan

LAPD Blog RSS Feed

« Tow Trucks Will Once Again Be Regulated | Main | Police Seek Communities Help To Combat Spike in Property Crime »

February 16, 2007

Comments

There are so many resources going into recruiting these days... Why is LAPD having such a hard time recruiting good candidates.. and im not talking about some of the trash they've been recruiting recently... I'm currently a training officer and i've had some very unsat p1's lately. Some that have had some pretty serious drug usage, prior gang associations, and some that were very good at lying, thus passing the polygraph pretty easily. Why is there such a difference on how many recruits the LASD have hired compared to the LAPD??? Last year, LASD hired 1000 new officers. How many did the LAPD hire? Try 450, and on top of that we had 350 leave the department, so we gained a net of 100 officers. Now why is LASD hiring so many more good qualified recruits? Number 1, how about more MONEY. Everyone knows that we dont get paid enough. Number 1, how about their complaint process... Everyone knows that the LASD is not nearly as political as the LAPD. So there you have it. If the LAPD wants me to continue to train former gang members and hard core drug users to become our future, then let them continue to do what they do. Now if they want a change, let's look at what the LASD is doing right, so that we can emulate them in their recruiting efforts...

Instead of giving the neew recruits an extra $5000.00 bonus, just so many of them could leave the LAPD right after the completion of their probation for better paying departments. How about if we used some of that money for our current Officers?

Let me tell you, I've got this new P-1 who's completely un-sat. I agree with 15yr p-3 and 1BnMarine. Give current officers a bonus to retain them and quit hiring any idiot off the street. Some people aren't cut out to be cops, I don't care how short handed we are. I'd rather work an L car than work with some of these guys. Raise the pay, get rid of the recruit signing bonus, and be more selective with the hiring process. With the money you save, you can pay the current Officers more money to stay and put up with the conditions we currently have.

You wanna know why LAPD can't hire good people? Look no forther than the city Medical Services Division. They DQ solid applicants in psych and on their physicals for non issues. That division needs to be totally re-staffed from the top down with competent people. Then and only then you will see the current recruitment problem / crisis go away.

The sheriff's hire more, because they can hire starting at 18 yrs old. They can put the younger hires in the jails. LAPD recruits have to be 21 yrs old at time of hire, in order to carry a gun.

Here's what I believe to be a significant problem with the hiring process. The City of Los Angeles is responsible for the hiring of police officers rather than the Police Department making the decisions as to who to and not to hire. The professionals who know what it takes to make a good police officer, rather than civilians (non-police officers) in the Personnel Div, should be making the call. If you look at numerous other LE agencies, both large and small, who are free from the headaches that are common place with the LAPD, you'll find that the police department's sworn personnel are making the hiring decision rather than civilians in the city/county HR and personnel divisions.

There are police officers with years of experience and success who have tried to lateral to the LAPD but have been DQ'd for trivial reasons by the Personnel Div such as a one-time written reprimand for tardiness despite a 3 inch stack of commendations and awards. The City will not even conduct a background investigation to get the entire picture of the applicant and his established record as a police officer and his character. They simply DQ without any further questions. Yet as you can see from p3-15 yrs, the City seems to think that former drug users, gang members/associates, and individuals with prior arrests will make good police officer candidates. Many of these officers who are attempting to lateral are willing to give up better retirements, much higher pay/benefits, specialty assignments, work schedules, and sometimes rank not just to be a police officer, as they already have that, but to be a member of "what was once" a great organization (let's face it, it's not the same LAPD of the days of Reed and Malloy). These individuals are willing to give these things up for all of the "right" reasons while your former gang members, crooks, and drug users are in it solely for the J-O-B. In addition, there would be a significant costs savings to the City in regards to training and retention as these are individuals that have shown that they can perform as compitent police officers vs the unknown with non-lateral candidates.

Oh well, if the hiring practices won't change, neither will the headaches and quality of candidates. It's just that simple.

Each of you made excellent points with respect to recruitment and retaining the officers we currently have on the Department. However, I thought you would like to know that Los Angeles is not the only major city to experience recruitment problems. It was reported in the 24-7 Cop2Cop News that NYPD experienced a 42% increase in resignations in 2006. 867 and 902 officers resigned from the NYPD in 2005 and 2006, surprisingly these numbers do not include officers that retired.

Lt...
I think a big reason behind the manpower problem on the NYPD is the lousy pay, not people being disqualified for nonsensical reasons. If the LAPD were calling the shots, these problems would not exist because as Jeff said these pin head civilians who probabaly don't even like cops are calling all the shots and until that changes, the problem will only get worse until the city is an unsafe place to live.

I applied to be an LAPD reserve three years ago, completing the entire process but ultimately getting DQ'd in Background. I was a really gung-ho applicant; I scored 100% on my oral, ran at CAP every week, and volunteered on the side. The reason I was DQ'd was basically that I had shown past immaturity and that I didn't take full responsibility for my actions. As an LA resident, I've since experienced rudeness by LAPD officers and a total lack of follow up on a hit-and-run report I filed, yet I remain an admirer of the department but saddened at my cummuliative experiences with it.

After being rejected by LAPD, I put myself through the LASD reserve academy and found that three of my classmates (in a class of 15) had similar stories. Each of them has since gone on to be an outstanding reserve in their respective patrol stations (in fact, the top four people in my class, including the honor recruit and myself, were all one-time LAPD applicants). For my part, I expect go to 10-8 in tan and green soon. I'm proud of my own progress, but saddened that the immaturity I evidenced when I was younger was something I learned to come to terms with in the academy--a learning experience which LAPD denied me but LASD granted me. In my admittedly selfish view, I wish the Personnel Department had greater faith in the transformational capacity of the academy experience.

My point in all this is that there are people who wanted to serve LAPD and who were turned away, and who are going to other departments to serve well there. LASD is having recruiting success not just because they can hire at 18, and not just because they pull a lot of people out of Lancaster and Palmdale, but because they're seen as the logical alternative to people who have had negative experiences with the LAPD--often because they were DQ'd, like me, or because they're not happy with LAPD service in their neighborhood.

So, what can LAPD do? In my view (which as someone *turned away* by LAPD is, admittedly, not worth very much), I think LAPD and the Personnel Department need to have more faith in their academy. Be more willing to wash people out for not meeting the standards, rather than wash them out before giving them a shot. In my case, my past immaturity was only evidenced because I had worked, volunteered and interned a lot in school; so while I got washed out, you are every day accepting applicants who have zero work experience, and thus spotless records. Well, they're spotless because they've made less mistakes, taken less risks and, ultimately, will have a steeper learning curve and add less value on the streets. Integrity and capacity, which are permanent, are what should count; immaturity and cockiness are temporary things that can be washed away through the training, discipline and humbling experiences that an academy provides. Beyond that, officers must realize that they are not just ambassadors of the department to the public, but also to prospective fellow officers. Frankly, I don't know how you can make officers into better recruiting posters, but the fact is that the best deputies in my class were people who either LAPD rejected--or who had rejected LAPD.

I applied to be an LAPD reserve three years ago, completing the entire process but ultimately getting DQ'd in Background. I was a really gung-ho applicant; I scored 100% on my oral, ran at CAP every week, and volunteered on the side. The reason I was DQ'd was basically that I had shown past immaturity and that I didn't take full responsibility for my actions. As an LA resident, I've since experienced rudeness by LAPD officers and a total lack of follow up on a hit-and-run report I filed, yet I remain an admirer of the department but saddened at my cummuliative experiences with it.

After being rejected by LAPD, I put myself through the LASD reserve academy and found that three of my classmates (in a class of 15) had similar stories. Each of them has since gone on to be an outstanding reserve in their respective patrol stations (in fact, the top four people in my class, including the honor recruit and myself, were all one-time LAPD applicants). For my part, I expect go to 10-8 in tan and green soon. I'm proud of my own progress, but saddened that the immaturity I evidenced when I was younger was something I learned to come to terms with in the academy--a learning experience which LAPD denied me but LASD granted me. In my admittedly selfish view, I wish the Personnel Department had greater faith in the transformational capacity of the academy experience.

My point in all this is that there are people who wanted to serve LAPD and who were turned away, and who are going to other departments to serve well there. LASD is having recruiting success not just because they can hire at 18, and not just because they pull a lot of people out of Lancaster and Palmdale, but because they're seen as the logical alternative to people who have had negative experiences with the LAPD--often because they were DQ'd, like me, or because they're not happy with LAPD service in their neighborhood.

So, what can LAPD do? In my view (which as someone *turned away* by LAPD is, admittedly, not worth very much), I think LAPD and the Personnel Department need to have more faith in their academy. Be more willing to wash people out for not meeting the standards, rather than wash them out before giving them a shot. In my case, my past immaturity was only evidenced because I had worked, volunteered and interned a lot in school; so while I got washed out, you are every day accepting applicants who have zero work experience, and thus spotless records. Well, they're spotless because they've made less mistakes, taken less risks and, ultimately, will have a steeper learning curve and add less value on the streets. Integrity and capacity, which are permanent, are what should count; immaturity and cockiness are temporary things that can be washed away through the training, discipline and humbling experiences that an academy provides. Beyond that, officers must realize that they are not just ambassadors of the department to the public, but also to prospective fellow officers. Frankly, I don't know how you can make officers into better recruiting posters, but the fact is that the best deputies in my class were people who either LAPD rejected--or who had rejected LAPD.

My brother was Dq'd for petty stuff and my brother-in-law was Dq'd in the oral phych and not given any reason why. My brother in law has to pay for an independent psych eval before the LAPD will even consider looking at him again. My brother has gone on to the LASD and is already serving up at Wayside. My brother in law is also in the process with LASD and will most likely get picked up. Here are two good candidates that LAPD threw away for BS. Now they're allowing recruits will past narco use and have old gang ties...what a joke. My brother got DQ'd for mooning someone when he was a kid. The department saw that as "indescent exposure" even though he just mooned his friends. What a joke. I'm training the current crap coming out of our academy and it really pisses me off when LAPD throws away good candidates. I know we're short cops, but maybe we shouldn't let civilians handle our hiring.

I was DQ'd 15 years ago because of a late car payment. I was a 23 y/o vet with a 103 score. Two months later I was hired by another agency where the background investigator laughed when I told them why I was DQ'd by LAPD. I have since been pretty successful at the other agency. I still can't believe LA passed me over.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Chief Charlie Beck

Text-A-Tip

WebTip


Nixle


April 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      

iWATCH