285 lines
14 KiB
Plaintext
285 lines
14 KiB
Plaintext
|
July 1990
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
LATERAL ENTRY: A MOVE TOWARD THE FUTURE
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
By
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
J. Eddie Nix
|
|||
|
Lieutenant, Training Section Commander
|
|||
|
Cobb County, Georgia, Department of Police
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
One of the most frequently asked questions by police
|
|||
|
administrators is, ``How can we hire qualified, experienced
|
|||
|
personnel?'' The answer to this question may come in the form of
|
|||
|
lateral entry. In fact, one of the keys to successful recruiting
|
|||
|
in the future will be the practice of a full-scale lateral entry
|
|||
|
program. (1)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Basically, lateral entry is the ability of a police officer
|
|||
|
in one geographic location to enter employment in another area.
|
|||
|
The officer's pay at the new department is based on experience,
|
|||
|
job knowledge, and the ability to do the job. (2)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The concept of lateral entry is not new. It has existed for
|
|||
|
some 25 to 30 years. Unfortunately, however, police departments
|
|||
|
overlook the advantages of lateral entry, even though its
|
|||
|
potential to improve a department's recruiting efforts and
|
|||
|
professionalism is evident. This article discusses several of
|
|||
|
the benefits of lateral entry and some of the obstacles to
|
|||
|
implementing such programs within police departments.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
ADVANTAGES OF LATERAL ENTRY
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
For most law enforcement departments, there are four areas
|
|||
|
that benefit the most by lateral entry:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
* Recruiting
|
|||
|
* Individual mobility
|
|||
|
* Training and cost effectiveness and
|
|||
|
* Competition and educational growth.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Even though most departments will benefit from lateral entry
|
|||
|
programs, some departments may not experience advantages relating
|
|||
|
to all four of these areas.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Enhanced Recruitment
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The recruitment of qualified personnel becomes more
|
|||
|
difficult as time passes. In the past, all that was necessary
|
|||
|
was a pool of applicants. Today, this is no longer the case. In
|
|||
|
fact, in many police agencies, position vacancies outnumber the
|
|||
|
applicants.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
However, when initiated and administered properly, lateral
|
|||
|
entry could open up a new source of qualified applicants to help
|
|||
|
meet future recruiting needs. (3) Lateral entry programs attract
|
|||
|
innovative, administrative, professional and technical
|
|||
|
personnel, especially for the small department. (4) For example,
|
|||
|
many former police officers have left law enforcement because of
|
|||
|
inflexibilities, such as the lack of mobility and promotional
|
|||
|
opportunity. Yet, these officers would be desirable candidates
|
|||
|
in many police departments, if they were available for
|
|||
|
employment. Lateral entry is a way to gain access to such an
|
|||
|
untapped resource.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Individual Mobility
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Another benefit of lateral entry pertains to police officers
|
|||
|
who are currently employed in law enforcement, but would like to
|
|||
|
relocate. (5) Typically, officers desire relocation in order to
|
|||
|
move from a smaller department to a larger department, for more
|
|||
|
promotional potential, more job responsibilities or enrichment,
|
|||
|
or because of spouse relocation. All of these are valid reasons
|
|||
|
for mobility and should in no way detract from the individual
|
|||
|
seeking lateral entry.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Today, with community and corporate growth, mobility is
|
|||
|
becoming even more of a concern. One reason for this is the
|
|||
|
changing role of women. (6) Women also are thinking "careers."
|
|||
|
In fact, dual-career couples have become the rule rather than
|
|||
|
the exception in American society. (7)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Dual-career couples create problems for law enforcement.
|
|||
|
Now, a police officer with a family must consider the spouse's
|
|||
|
career opportunities in the decisionmaking process. In many
|
|||
|
cases, a spouse may have more advancement and earning potential
|
|||
|
than the law enforcement officer, and relocation may be
|
|||
|
necessary in order to advance within the organization. Often
|
|||
|
times, husbands or wives are giving up or changing professions
|
|||
|
so that their spouses can pursue their careers. (8)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In addition, officers may look toward mobility for other
|
|||
|
reasons, such as caring for ill relatives or wanting a change in
|
|||
|
climate. In today's law enforcement community, a police officer
|
|||
|
who is fully qualified and capable of performing the job should
|
|||
|
have the option of lateral relocation without fear of losing rank
|
|||
|
and/or pay.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Training and Cost Effectiveness
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Police officer training is both time consuming and
|
|||
|
expensive. It is not only costly from the view point of salary,
|
|||
|
benefits, and uniforms but also because of down-time prior to
|
|||
|
achieving patrol officer status. For this reason, lateral entry
|
|||
|
police officers provide substantial savings to police
|
|||
|
departments. In cases where the lateral entry applicant comes
|
|||
|
from within the State, the savings could be even greater. For
|
|||
|
example, in most States, individuals must meet certain basic
|
|||
|
minimum standards and must complete a prescribed training program
|
|||
|
in order to be employed anywhere in the State. (9) This is usually
|
|||
|
a one-time process and permits a certified officer to transfer.
|
|||
|
Adapting police standards and training legislation is a good
|
|||
|
first step toward lateral entry. (10)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In many areas, the Field Training Officer (FTO) Program is
|
|||
|
the second step in the training process. This is an important
|
|||
|
phase and should be required of every new officer, even the
|
|||
|
lateral entry officer. However, even if the FTO phase of the
|
|||
|
training is included, the lateral entry candidate still saves
|
|||
|
police departments both time and money.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
For example, in 1985, the Cobb County, Georgia, Police
|
|||
|
Department estimated that each new police officer costs the
|
|||
|
department between $18,000 to $20,000 before that officer can
|
|||
|
work a shift without direct supervision. Lateral entry
|
|||
|
candidates save a large portion of this cost. These savings
|
|||
|
could be better used to pay the increased salaries of lateral
|
|||
|
entry employees.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
When considering the variables of cost and time, it is easy
|
|||
|
to see that the savings realized from the lateral entry candidate
|
|||
|
can be spent on higher salaries. What the police administrator
|
|||
|
really gets from lateral entry is an experienced officer who is
|
|||
|
assimilated into the department faster. In today's fast moving
|
|||
|
world, this is very much desired.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Competition and Educational Growth
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Support for lateral entry also comes from the Nation's
|
|||
|
leadership. In 1967, the President's Commission on Law
|
|||
|
Enforcement in its Task Force Report: Police stated:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
``To improve police services, competition for all advanced
|
|||
|
positions should be opened to all qualified persons from
|
|||
|
both within and outside of the department. This would
|
|||
|
enable a department to obtain the best available talent
|
|||
|
for positions of leadership. If candidates from within
|
|||
|
an agency are unable to meet the competition from other
|
|||
|
applicants, it should be recognized that the influx of
|
|||
|
more highly qualified personnel would greatly improve the
|
|||
|
quality of the services.'' (11)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The commission's recommendations and farsightedness were
|
|||
|
optimistic that lateral entry is one of the keys to the
|
|||
|
competitive spirit needed to enhance the police profession.
|
|||
|
This prescription for the success of the police field is as
|
|||
|
valid today as it was in 1967. Lateral entry is essential to the
|
|||
|
professionalization of the police function. It also disturbs the
|
|||
|
status quo and avoids the we've-always-done-it-this-way
|
|||
|
approach. (12)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In addition, lateral entry affects positively the
|
|||
|
educational processes of the upwardly mobile department members.
|
|||
|
It helps provide fresh points of view because people with
|
|||
|
different experiences and insights introduce variety, change and
|
|||
|
innovative ideas. (13) Many officers are finding out, or will find
|
|||
|
out, that in order to keep up with the competition, they must
|
|||
|
refine skills already developed. Lateral entry also bolsters
|
|||
|
management and technical strength, as well as increases
|
|||
|
competition and productivity, by providing new talent and
|
|||
|
ability. (14) It also provides management with a better yardstick
|
|||
|
for evaluating executive performance and forces management to
|
|||
|
compare the present group with outsiders. (15) And, once police
|
|||
|
departments start using lateral entry, law enforcement executives
|
|||
|
will no longer have to accept marginal employees. Lateral entry
|
|||
|
could also help to merge effective policing concepts from various
|
|||
|
police departments, thereby raising the levels of education and
|
|||
|
training in participating departments. This creates a better
|
|||
|
understanding of law enforcement affairs. (16)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
OBSTACLES TO LATERAL ENTRY
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Despite the obvious benefits, obstacles to lateral entry
|
|||
|
still exist. (17) Police personnel at the patrol level and upper
|
|||
|
management seem to have the least resistance. And, as expected,
|
|||
|
the more established the department, the more restrictions there
|
|||
|
seem to be to the lateral entry concept.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Department Personnel
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Mid-level police administrators present the biggest
|
|||
|
obstacle. At one time, police officials believed that lateral
|
|||
|
recruiting was the equivalent of "raiding," and police chiefs
|
|||
|
even had pacts that they would not hire each other's
|
|||
|
personnel. (18) However, the resistance and obstacles to full
|
|||
|
implementation of lateral entry are not limited to department
|
|||
|
personnel. Roadblocks can arise in the form of civil service,
|
|||
|
retirement plans, maximum age limitations, and legislative
|
|||
|
restrictions.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Resistance to Change
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Change in law enforcement comes slowly, and this is the case
|
|||
|
with lateral entry. In fact, some believe that it will never
|
|||
|
reach the level that the President's Commission on Law
|
|||
|
Enforcement envisioned in 1967. To achieve this goal, all of the
|
|||
|
obstacles to lateral entry must be addressed individually and
|
|||
|
systematically. Many departments have already dealt with some of
|
|||
|
the obstacles. Obviously, eliminating the obstacles is not easy,
|
|||
|
but the result to law enforcement will be well worth the effort.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
CONCLUSION
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Acceptance of lateral entry will continue to be a long,
|
|||
|
uphill battle. However, it is imperative that those in law
|
|||
|
enforcement who support lateral entry, both academically and
|
|||
|
professionally, continue to chip away at the resistance until it
|
|||
|
is universally accepted. The future of police improvement in all
|
|||
|
jurisdictions will be handicapped if there are not forthcoming
|
|||
|
changes in the acceptance of lateral entry. (19)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Some believe that the key to the success of lateral entry is
|
|||
|
at the State and Federal level. In a real sense, this is true
|
|||
|
because through legislative reform and financial encouragements,
|
|||
|
the State and Federal Governments can do much to implement
|
|||
|
lateral entry. Some advancements in this area have been made,
|
|||
|
such as legislative reforms that contribute to the cause of
|
|||
|
lateral entry and the statewide training requirements that are
|
|||
|
recognized anywhere in a given State. But, the battle for
|
|||
|
lateral entry is not going to be won at the State and national
|
|||
|
levels. It will be won one police department at a time, and one
|
|||
|
geographic area at a time.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FOOTNOTES
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(1) W.H. Hewitt, ``Police Personnel Administration: Lateral
|
|||
|
Entry,'' Police, January February 1971, p. 13.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(2) The salary will be at a level higher than starting pay. A
|
|||
|
Stone and S. Deluca, Police Administration: An Introduction (New
|
|||
|
York: John Wiley and Sons, 1985).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(3) C. Swank and J. Conser, The Police Personnel System (New
|
|||
|
York: John Wiley and Sons, 1982).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(4) Supra note 1.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(5) P. Weston and P. Fraley, Police Personnel Management
|
|||
|
(Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1980).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(6) M.H. Sekas, ``Dual Career Couples A Corporate
|
|||
|
Challenge,'' Personnel Administrator, April 1984, pp. 37 45.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(7) Ibid, p. 37.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(8) Supra note 6, p. 40.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(9) Supra note 2, p. 293.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(10) O. Wilson and R. McLaren, Police Administration (New York:
|
|||
|
McGraw Hill Co., 1977).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(11) The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and
|
|||
|
Administration of Justice, Task Force Report: Police
|
|||
|
(Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(12) Supra note 1.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(13) Supra note 1.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(14) Supra note 1.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(15) Supra note 1.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(16) Supra note 1.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(17) W. Bopp and P. Whisenand, Police Personnel Administration
|
|||
|
(Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn Beacon, Inc., 1980).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(18) Supra note 5, p. 56.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(19) A. Cohn (Ed), The Future of Policing (Beverly Hills,
|
|||
|
California: Sage Publications, 1978).
|
|||
|
|