As of June 1996, the total number of full-time state and local officers with arrest powers was 663,535 - an increase of 59,000 officers since 1992. Civilian support staff employment increased during the four-year period by 21,000 to reach 258,443. 

There were 25 sworn and 10 non-sworn state and local law enforcement agency employees per 10,000 U.S. residents in 1996, compared to 24 sworn and 9 non-sworn personnel in 1992. 

In 1996, 18,769 state and local law enforcement agencies employed at least one full-time or part-time officer with general arrest powers. Seventy agencies employed 1,000 or more full-time sworn officers, including 41 local police agencies, 15 state police agencies, 12 sheriffs' departments and two special police agencies (the New York City public school system, with 2,899 sworn officers, and the Port Authority of New York-New Jersey, 1,350 officers). 

Sixty-four percent of the state and local law enforcement officers in 1996 were uniformed personnel whose regularly assigned duties included responding to calls for service, compared to 59 percent in 1993. Another 15 percent of the full-time sworn officers were assigned to investigative duties in 1996. 

Other officers performed administrative work or were involved in training or technical support. Eight percent of full-time officers were performing jail-related duties, and 3 percent were doing court work, such as process serving or court security. 

State and local law enforcement agencies in California had 103,967 full-time employees, sworn and non-sworn, in 1996, more than any other state. New York was second with 88,348, followed by Texas (73,112), Florida (60,808) and Illinois (50,255). Vermont had the fewest (1,336), followed by North Dakota (1,537), Alaska (1,884), and Wyoming (2,149). 

Robert T. Scully, executive director of the National Association of Police Organizations (NAPO), told the panel that mandating Social Security participation would have a "dramatic and negative impact on the recruitment and retention of 

Other public sector representatives told the 

Currently, only 24 percent of state and local public safety personnel pay Social Security taxes and are covered by the system. California, Ohio, Texas, Massachusetts, Illinois, Colorado, and Louisiana account for 75 percent of the non-covered public employees. Inclusion of these personnel in the system would reduce the Social Security shortfall by only 10 percent, according to a study by the General Accounting Office. 

Today, many public safety agencies permit retirement as young as age 50. Full Social Security benefits do not vest until 65. Reduced benefits are available at age 62. 

The Social Security Act was passed in 1935. In 1950, Congress altered the law to allow certain public employees to participate in the plan. In 1983, Congress legislated that public employees then participating in the system could not withdraw and mandated participation in Medicare. By 1991, all public sector employees who were not covered by a retirement plan were required to pay Social Security tax and join the plan. 

The jail officers complain that inmates are permitted to have pornographic pictures in their cells, shout vulgar comments to the officers, and have been known to masturbate in the officers' presence. The jailers claim that the county has ignored their complaints about the inmates' behavior. Likewise, the officers assert that jail discipline rules are not severe enough for sexually oriented misbehavior. For example, some violations of institution regulations cause loss of accumulated 

King County officials denied that jail rules are not being enforced, and noted that legal rules on inmate rights restrict what they can do. For example, inmates are permitted to purchase Playboy through the jail commissary. 

Federal equal employment law holds employers responsible for not only what their employees do but also what their customers do. A county prosecutor, who is representing the jail in the case, told the Seattle Times that jails have less control over their "customers" than a restaurant. "We didn't ask to have them _ we can't exactly boot them out." 

The suit is scheduled to go to trial next year. 

Arndt was the first detective to arrive at the Ramsey home on December 26, 1996. The child's father found the body of JonBenet hours later in the basement. The detective, who is still assigned as a sex crimes investigator, claims in the suit that false stories in the media reported that she disturbed 

The murder case remains unsolved. Koby is scheduled to retire this month. 

Teacher pay in the U.S. 

One possible comparison is to K-12 teachers. Teachers constitute the single largest group of public employees. While the education requirements for a teaching position are often higher than for a police officer position, both jobs demand dedicated public servants who are required to exercise their sound professional judgment across a myriad of circumstances. Each group is subject to close public scrutiny and is held to a high level of accountability. 

Recently, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), AFL-CIO, released a 

Table One displays the average teacher salary by state. In addition, the state ranking is shown. The data is the annual salary excluding the value of fringe benefits. Most teachers are employed on a nine or ten month contract. In many jurisdictions teachers' salaries are paid in part from state funds. Only a few states provide pay supplements to public safety personnel, leaving the bulk of funding the responsibility of local government. 

Connecticut ranks the highest in average salary while South Dakota comes in at the bottom. Because of the wide variance in compensation paid teachers, only the top 17 states pay salaries above the average. In other words, teachers in two-thirds of the states earn below the national average. 

The data is instructive for public safety personnel as it indicates the relative allocation of pay between law enforcement and education. 

Cases of interest 

Supreme Court update 

Three cases of potential interest are seeking review. Childress v. City of Richmond, Virginia, No. 97-1723, is an appeal of an unsuccessful "hostile work environment" case. Several white male police officers contend that a supervisor's disparaging comments about female and black officers created a hostile work environment actionable by them under federal fair employment law. Lower courts held for the city, finding that the officers lack standing to pursue the claim. Vingi v. State of Rhode Island, No. 97-1887, seeks review of allegations concerning sex discrimination in admission to the state police training academy. Finally, Taylor v. City of Ponca City, Oklahoma, No. 97-1887, is challenging a determination of the process due a police officer who was discharged from the position. Review decisions are expected before the end of the current term of the Supreme Court. 

HELD: The evidence reflects that Meek was a civil service employee with a property interest in his job. As a consequence, he was entitled to due process of law before that property interest was taken away. The Supreme Court has ruled that due process normally requires a pre-deprivation hearing followed by a post-deprivation hearing. In Meek's case, he received notice that a pre-deprivation hearing would be held, but rather than appearing, he chose to respond to the charges in writing. Meek argues that had he participated in the pre-deprivation hearing to save his employment, he would have effectively waived his Fifth Amendment right not to testify in the criminal trial on the charges then pending against him. Meek asserts his foremost concern at the time was the criminal charges and that attendance at the pre-deprivation hearing would have jeopardized the criminal trial. The due process clause does not require a pre-termination hearing in every case. Instead, the right to such a hearing is generally waived when an employee fails to accept the offer of a hearing. By electing to respond in writing to the charges, Meek waived his right to such a hearing. Similarly, he was not placed in a precarious position of losing his Fifth Amendment right relative to the criminal trial. A pre-deprivation hearing need not be elaborate. Generally, an employee is entitled to oral or written notice of the charges against him, an explanation of the employer's evidence, and a chance to tell his side of the story. Meek was provided all three and chose not to accept the procedure. Similarly, he was affordopriate post-deprivation hearing led an apprg. The collective bargaining 

HELD: The Supreme Court has consistently stated that the FLSA should be applied liberally in favor of employees. The FLSA provides that preliminary and postliminary activities to the principle activity are not compensable unless the activities are an integral and indispensable part of the principle activity. In virtually every case that has considered the question of off the clock caring of police dogs, the work has been held to constitute compensable time under the FLSA. The reasoning of these rulings requires the finding in this case that employers should compensate dog handlers for the off the clock time they spend in caring for the animals. The dogs are essential pieces of equipment that assist the officers in the efficient enforcement of the laws. The off the clock caring for the dogs is integral and indispensable to the principle activities of the deputies, and the work is performed for the county's benefit. Under the FLSA regulations, however, dog care activities do not have to be compensated at the same rate of pay as law enforcement activities. If different rates of pay are used, the employer may, pursuant to an agreement or understanding with the employees, pay for overtime hours at a special rate. In this case, however, no such agreement had previously been reached between the county and the deputies. Consequently, the deputies are eligible for overtime compensation based on their normal rate of pay. The stipend they receive under the collective bargaining agreement can serve as a credit against any award 

HELD: Under Louisiana law, the civil service commission has the duty to decide independently from the facts presented whether the appointing authority has good and lawful cause to take the disciplinary action and whether the punishment is commensurate with the dereliction. The two officers argue that the commission's decision was unreasonable because it failed to conclusively hold that the officers were lying. Rather, the commission's decisions stated that it was "not inclined to question the credibility of the supervisors." A close reading of the commission's report, however, does find that it made specific factual findings. These factual statements clearly indicate that the commission made a credibility call in favor of the supervisors and against the two patrol officers. The statements of the commission can reasonably be construed as finding that the two officers were lying. The officers indicated they had secured a building where an alarm had sounded without actually having checked the building out. Unquestionably, such conduct impairs the orderly operation of the police department. Discipline affirmed. [Sholes v. New Orleans Department of Police, 707 So.2d 1055 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1998)] 

HELD: Mathes asserts that the use of the results of the polygraph examination against him was unlawful. Nebraska has long held that the results of a polygraph examination are not admissible as evidence in criminal cases. Additionally, state statute bars the mandatory use of the polygraph except by those engaged in public law enforcement. This statute, however, does not specifically make the results of a polygraph examination admissible in any proceeding. Under 

HELD: An employee's conduct is considered to be concerted activity when s/he acts 

HELD: The Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board's (PLRB) jurisdiction includes the determination of whether an employer's alleged failure to comply with a grievance arbitration award constitutes an unfair labor practice. The PLRB determines whether a grievance arbitration award exists and whether the appeal process was exhausted. The PLRB examines the evidence to determine whether the employer failed to comply with the grievance arbitration award. The PLRB does not review the merits of the award. In this case, the grievance award exists and the appeals were exhausted. The sole issue remaining is whether there was compliance with the award. There is simply no evidence to support the union's contention that the PLRB reviewed the merits of the grievance arbitration award. The PLRB found that consistent with the collective bargaining agreement, the employer issued a directive requiring the 48-hour notice as a pre-condition to using personal days. The union failed to present evidence establishing the employer's non-compliance with the award. Rejection of unfair labor practice charge affirmed. [Wage and Policy Committee of the Wilkins Township Police Department v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, 707 A.2d 1202 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1998)]