Hacker News Reader

Comment by jdjd6 | Hacker News Reader

It really boggles my mind how desperate people are to try and include and blame the police for everything.

>sales people ready to make a call any way their customer (police) wants it made.

You really believe people signed up for a dangerous amd thankless job with high liability and low pay so they can feverishly conspire to have this guy arrested?

Edit: This place is becoming reddit. Someone posting links which dont substantiate their statements gets upvoted, meanwhile my replies questioning this get hit by a downvote brigade.

View on HN

Just fyi - Police are generally quite well paid for the area they live in. For example, in Alameda (the county I live in) it's common for police to make over $450,000 a year[1].

Also, while police to have a more-dangerous-than-average job[2] (and face unique risks - they are probably the most likely profession to die of a gunshot on the job), there are much more dangerous jobs[3].

So if you have been excusing police because you think they are accepting poverty for danger, I'd ask you to consider that Police are more like extremely well paid garbage collectors[4].

[1] https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/2019/alameda-coun...

[2] https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/police-2018.htm

[3] https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/logging/default.html

[4] https://qz.com/410585/garbage-collectors-are-more-likely-to-...

Where in source [1] does it show that it's common for police to make over $450k a year?

The 'Avg Total pay & benefits' sorted by title has Chief Information Officer/Registrar of Voters as the entry into that level of remuneration. Police specific above that you only have the Sherrif, which is an elected official.

Police pay for the vast majority of roles is significantly below $450k.

That's a good critique! Looking at historical data it seems like "commonly above $300,000" would be more accurate. It's worth saying that listed police salaries are far below these numbers and the officers get there through overtime and other extra payments. Thus the use of 'common' instead of average because you have to look back at what people were actually paid.

Edit: I can no longer edit my original post so this will have to do.

https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/search/?a=alameda...

How are supervisors and elected officials making 300k (after all benefits considered) in an area with a high cost of living equal to "police commonly make above 300k"?

Second, it would be absurd to account for extra income to say they make what you're saying. That's like saying a cashier at walmart works three jobs to make an average of 70k a year, so cashiers at walmart commonly make 70k a year.

> Second, it would be absurd to account for extra income to say they make what you're saying.

Except it's extra income that they make by being a police officer. A business that hires an off-duty police officer for security isn't hiring them because they're a big burly-looking dude; they're being hired because they are a police officer. An off-duty officer will typically wear their police uniform while working "off duty", and can take actions which an ordinary civilian could not (like conducting arrests).

> it would be absurd to account for extra income to say they make what you're saying.

It's not what I say they make, it's what the public records say they make. You can go look yourself.

For example, from my first link, Sergeant Stuart Eugene Barnes made $125,380.76 in salary and $172,330.17 in overtime. I think it fair to say that's compensation from their job as a police officer.

Oakland officers seem to be able to significantly rack up the overtime these days.

https://oaklandnorth.net/2021/04/28/oakland-police-overtime-...

Kind of makes sense though, most officers start there then move to a safer place once they get enough experience. Remember seeing billboards advertising $80k starting salary 10+ years ago while driving through town.

I can't remember which department, but I remember the local SF/Bay news many years ago talking about some supervisor at that department somehow making $1.5 million the year before (or something insane like that.) They explained how it was all possible, which to me seemed like he had just been with them for so long, he knew exactly the optimal way to play the system and exploit all the loopholes in it.

As for your second part, I guess it would seem unlikely for some positions, but I know a doctor who made like 3x his base salary each year through all sorts of absolutely legal, ethical, and hospital-sanctioned means. Taking every single weekend he could on call (even offering to "relieve" other doctors who had been assigned that weekend) for example allowed him to make much more than you would ever think possible.

Many of these tricks are not secret. They are commonly known and coordinated among emergency service personnel. They cooperate to take vacation, etc. in ways that will maximize the overtime of coworkers. That overtime can then be recycled into time-and-a-half leave that will reciprocate into the maximum overtime for the first party.

An administration that squashes all overtime faces extreme wrath. They can be cutting employees' take home in half. I and plenty of others have seen people lose their houses or suffer other financial crumbles when the expectation of built-in pay far beyond their published salaries were cut off. You can argue that it is foolish to depend on such extra pay and I would agree. But when that significant extra has been their reality for all 10 years of their employment with the department, you can see how they would just plan it into their future finances.

It sounds like what's common is that your police do a lot of overtime: https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/2019/alameda-coun...

From your source (for the rank of Sergeant):

    Regular pay: $139,197.60

    Overtime pay: $160,477.73

    Other pay: $13,292.65

    Total pay: $312,967.98

    Benefits: $127,240.58

    Total pay & benefits: $440,208.56

Based on Alameda county, here's some "living wage" stats: https://livingwage.mit.edu/counties/06001

The way I interpret that is that they're paid with the idea that they'll have two kids or a Sergeant is a "Manager" (Management $124,884, from the living wage source). I'm curious what the reason for overtime is, but I suspect that it's staffing requirements.

Debating pay to danger ratios is a pretty fruitless effort. People don't get paid for danger.

See: https://militarypay.defense.gov/Pay/Special-and-Incentive-Pa....

TLDR: "Service members will receive $7.50 for each day they are on duty in an IDP area up to the maximum monthly rate of $225."

Moreover, I was a 4 year Corporal living in the barracks with the equivalent of two deployments under my belt raking in about $20k a year.

To my knowledge, this is a fairly standard rate. Side note, we used to crack all kinds of jokes around, "I guess I earned my 7.50 today."

I think what people do get paid on frequently is the availability of people who can and will do the job. A limited and capable talent pool will always make more, especially when demand is high.

With $450,000 as yearly pay i should give up being a software developer. Alameda even has a violent crime rate of half the US average.

https://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Alameda-California.htm...

I do wonder if the pay negatively affects the confrontations that the individual officer will risk, e.g. let a suspect escape due to not having good enough backup.

That's because he's probably lying/exaggerating. I highly doubt your average officer makes anywhere near that. I don't make over 200k as an experienced developer, either.

People are terrible with nuance. OP did a good job at contextualizing danger of policing, without claiming it's "safe", as you'd see on reddit, but I'm guessing something is getting lost here.

I'm very sceptical someone is in the multiple sixes of figures without serious responsibility and credentials. In my area officers make similar (lower) pay than tech jobs, and every area I've seen is similar. So people on reddit will be complaining about officers making 80k-100k out west, when in reality that's just marginally better than bartenders.

So yeah, they're making like 60k-100k, or more out west. Here in the midwest it's more like 40k-80k. This compares to developer jobs I've seen, but it's not apples to apples. Cops end up years behind in pay, but end up with better benefits. So they'll be at 70k 3-10 years in, instead of 0-5 in.

In either case there's other tiers and roles, was assuming grunts. There might be other cases where "super grunt" jobs exist, and get paid very well. Just like with engineers it seems like the way to advance is increased specialization and moving to management.

You can spin your wheels at low level engineering jobs for decades if you want, too. Usually, people also have to move towards leadership roles to advance in engineering...

So I digress, but I guess it's fair to say police officer is of similar value as engineer in terms of job perks... but engineer is considered a good job.

I looked at your link and I dont see any police making over 450K a year. In fact, I dont see any making over 100k a year except supervisors and elected officials.

I think you're conflating issues with the institution of policing within the United States with the behavior of individual police officers. Without getting into the politics or philosophy of the comportment or purpose of a police force, there are some things in situations like this that are fact:

1. Police officers (and more importantly, prosecutors) are incentivized to make arrests and have those arrests stick.

2. It's a well understood psychological phenomenon that individuals are much more lenient of their own actions. They call this attribution theory in psychology [1].

3. While policing is a risky job, it comes with privileged treatment, powers, and trust that a common citizen does not have. As such, and as public servants, we hold those with these powers to a higher degree of responsibility and behavior than those without such powers. To hold police accountable, we need a minimum level of oversight and control. Historically, this has either not happened or been circumvented by way of police unions establishing ill-advised contracts with the local governments they work with. [2]

I'll agree on points that individual police officers aren't evil, but I'd need a lot of convincing to believe that many policing organizations within the United States are not being held accountable to an acceptable level; nor are they being trained in ways that encourage appropriate interactions with the public they serve.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_(psychology)

[2]: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti...

1. What are those incentives you mention?

2. That applies to everyone, not just police.

3. This is a fallacy due to media portrayal. If you are late to your job what happens? Probably nothing or you get asked not to do it again. The same mistakes you make, police officer will get investigated by internal affairs and punished over.

This is equally a fallacy - "if you are late to your job" "will get investigated by internal affairs". No, they won't. But they will be protected by one of the strongest unions in the country, if not the strongest.

Policing is also a lot less risky a job than is commonly perceived.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com