During training sessions for law enforcement agencies across the country, it is not difficult to spot the officers in attendance who have just worked the night shift. They rub their eyes, they yawn, and they stand in the back of the room to help keep themselves awake. They often tell the instructor flat out, “I’m sorry if it seems like I’m drowsing back there. It’s not your training, it’s just that I didn’t know about this training until yesterday, and I worked all night.”
As most of those reading this already know, this is a common occurrence for law enforcement officers. This is particularly concerning when officers are attending training in areas such as liability, de-escalation, leadership, and other critical areas of development. They should be awake, alert, and capable of retaining new information that applies directly to their work. And yet, they are often in far less than ideal mental conditions to do so.
This reality is especially troublesome since, for most law enforcement agencies, the officers who work nights are those most statistically likely to encounter higher call volumes, more critical incidents, and more high-risk encounters than any other group of officers on patrol.[1] Furthermore, in most agencies, the first-line supervisors assigned to the night shifts are typically the newest and least experienced supervisors. These are exactly the supervisors who are in the most need of training to be better equipped to face the challenges that they face as supervisors.[2]
This begs the question: Why do we do this? Why does so much of the training most needed by night shift officers and supervisors take place during the day shift hours?
Enhancing Training and Minimizing Liability
A wealth of research indicates that sleep deprivation has substantially negative impacts on an individual’s ability to learn. Sleep deprivation significantly impairs the recall of information and the learning of new information.
Sleep deprivation before or after being exposed to new information reduces the comprehension and memory of that newly learned material. Sleep deprivation also degrades the functioning of the parietal lobe, the part of the brain responsible for understanding the world around you and making sense of what you are seeing and hearing.[3] Having personnel attend training in a sleep-deprived state may sadly be a waste of training funds if the officers and supervisors in attendance are unlikely to actually learn much due to their sleep-deprived mental condition.
But what if night shift officers attended training in the evenings, either during a portion of, or a few hours before, their normal shifts? They would likely be operating in better, more rested states, and more capable of understanding, absorbing, and recalling the information and skills provided through the training.
Additionally, what is a department’s leadership communicating to night shift officers and supervisors by exclusively scheduling training during the day shift? Scheduling training on the day shift for night shift officers does not seem likely to communicate that they, their time, and their professional development matter to the department’s leadership. Denying officers their needed off-duty rest, disrupting their normal sleep patterns, and causing additional disruptions to child-care or other family life schedules does not seem to communicate that night shift personnel matter as much as the day shift or command staff in the department.
But consider the reverse situation. What if the agency’s leadership scheduled training in the evenings? I realize that this is unusual and rare, but what would it communicate to night shift personnel? First, it would signal that the command staff values night shift personnel as much as day shift personnel. Second, it would demonstrate the command staff’s commitment to the training being delivered. In summary, offering training to night shift personnel at times more convenient to them communicates: 1.) You matter to the department, and 2.) This training matters to the department.
On the rare occasions when I have had the opportunity to train officers outside of the usual 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. paradigm, I have witnessed a significant increase in officers’ unprompted participation. The night shift personnel in attendance have been far more engaged with the training, and seemed to get more out of the training, when the training was offered closer to their normal work schedule. In fact, they have frequently remarked on what a welcome change it is to attend training on something closer to their schedule, for all the reasons already discussed.
From a liability standpoint, night shift officers are often mandated to attend training which is intended, at least in part, to equip them with the information needed to perform their duties in accordance with legal mandates and best practices. Law enforcement agencies document that this training occurred and verify each officer’s attendance to ensure that they have effectively equipped their personnel with these relevant skills. This documentation is intended to effectively defend agencies in the event that they encounter a lawsuit or allegation involving a failure to properly train personnel.
But if plaintiff attorneys were to analyze these training records, how often would they find that the training was provided to sleep-deprived officers immediately after having worked an 8, 10 ½, or 12-hour shift? How much liability is incurred if the argument that the training was ineffective is articulately made in front of a judge or jury composed of individuals who intuitively understand that training exhausted officers is not a reasonable means of teaching materials in a way that will be retained and applied?
It may be time to change the way that we think about how night shift personnel are trained. To stop training night shift personnel during the day shift simply because “that’s the way we’ve always done it.” To start offering training at times designed to allow them to benefit as much as possible from what is being taught—when they are awake, alert, and more capable of learning.
About the Author
Matt Dolan, J.D.
Matt Dolan is a licensed attorney who specializes in training and advising public safety agencies in matters of legal liability, risk management and ethical leadership. His training focuses on helping agency leaders create ethically and legally sound policies and procedures as a proactive means of minimizing liability and maximizing agency effectiveness.
A member of a law enforcement family dating back three generations, he serves as both Director and an instructor with Dolan Consulting Group. He has trained thousands of law enforcement professionals over the last decade.
Disclaimer: This article is not intended to constitute legal advice on a specific case. The information herein is presented for informational purposes only. Individual legal cases should be referred to proper legal counsel.
References
[1] Joseph Clare, Michael Townsley, Daniel J. Birks, and Len Garis, “Patterns of Police, Fire, and Ambulance Calls-for-Service: Scanning the Spatio-Temporal Intersection of Emergency Service Problems,” Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice 13, no. 3 (2019): 286-299; Ellen G. Cohn, “The Prediction of Police Calls for Service: The Influence of Weather and Temporal Variables on Rape and Domestic Violence,” Journal of Environmental Psychology 13, no. 1 (1993): 71-83; Richard R. Johnson and Trisha N. Rhodes, “Urban and Small Town Comparison of Citizen Demand for Police Services,” International Journal of Police Science & Management 11, no. 1 (2009): 27-38; Michael Townsley, “Visualizing Space Time Patterns in Crime: The Hotspot Plot,” Crime Patterns and Analysis 1, no. 1 (2008): 61-74.
[2] Carol A. Archbold, Kimberly D. Hassell, and Amy J. Stichman, “Comparing Promotion Aspirations of Female and Male Police Officers,” International Journal of Police Science and Management 12, no. 2 (2010): 287-303; John Van Maanen, “Making Rank: Becoming an American Police Sergeant,” Urban Life 13, no. 2 (1984): 155-176; Thomas S. Whetstone, “Copping Out: Why Police Officers Decline to Participate in the Sergeant’s Promotional Process,” American Journal of Criminal Justice 25 (2001): 147-159.
[3] Giuseppe Curcio, Michele Ferrara, and Luigi De Gennaro, “Sleep Loss, Learning Capacity and Academic Performance,” Sleep Medicine Reviews 10, no. 5 (2006): 323-337; Pierre Maquet, “The Role of Sleep in Learning and Memory,” Science 294, no. 5544 (2001): 1048-1052; Chloe R. Newbury, Rebecca Crowley, Kathleen Rastle, and Jakke Tamminen, “Sleep Deprivation and Memory: Meta-Analytic Reviews of Studies on Sleep Deprivation Before and After Learning,” Psychological Bulletin 147, no. 11 (2021): 1215.
As we observe Father’s Day, I want to reflect on the importance of quality parenting, with a focus on our law enforcement fathers. I started my police career in 1984 in Indianapolis, and had the honor of working alongside five generations of officers: the greatest generation, baby boomers, Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z. As founder of the Development and Wellness program at Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department, I was able to interact with fathers from each generation, learn of their family experiences, and understand how important their own fathers and other male role models were to their overall happiness and development.
While we tend to think each generation had a distinct family and parenting experience unique to each era, I discovered that being a “good” father usually boils down to a few simple choices men make based on learned observation. To become a good father, modeling is paramount, and it is helpful to see both good fathers and not-so-good fathers in action to understand the extremes and settle on the best traits. From my childhood to my time with the department, I saw fathers who had no relationship with their children, fathers who doted on their kids, and fathers who were somewhere in the middle. All parenting experience is helpful to observe, as we adopt the best behaviors, discard other behaviors, and evolve into the father we will become based on those traits.
Through working with officers, I found that observation of random fathers or male role models throughout the officers’ lives was an equal or sometimes greater influence on father behavior than the officers’ relationships, or lack of, with their own fathers. I noticed some officers who experienced not-so-good parenting became not-so-good parents, while others learned from their poor experience, vowed not to make the same mistakes, and became great parents. I saw divorced fathers who were “better” fathers than fathers who lived in an unbroken home and saw their kids every day, while some divorced or separated Dads wanted no relationship with their kids.
If observing parenting traits is as influential as actual experience, what are the traits fathers should model? What separated good fathers from the not-so-good fathers usually came down to the fathers’ characters and their practice of selfless versus selfish behavior. I found that good fathers usually put family needs before their own. They invested in their families and in their children’s futures. They displayed respect for their spouses or partners. They understood the need to be present and supportive, but also the need to balance that support with accountability and with the goal of raising good citizens in a loving environment.
Good fathers understand that children tend to be emotional and will act like kids, not little adults. Good fathers set their own emotions aside and act rationally. They practice patience and don’t fly off the handle. Good fathers listen, ask uncomfortable but important questions, and don’t preach. They understand children are sponges and will model what they see– so good fathers try and set good examples. Good fathers understand they need to be part of their children’s lives. They accomplish this by managing their schedules and by being home, and more importantly, being engaged when home. Good fathers plan, but understand those plans sometimes change, remembering the famous John Lennon lyric, “life happens when you are making other plans.” Sometimes plans don’t work out–even with the best of intentions–so good fathers remain calm and flexible.
Sadly, many of the officers who poured themselves into police work in an unhealthy and over-invested way failed to recognize their limitations and show flexibility in their work. This same problem can render the same officers well short of the kind of parents they want to be at home. No amount of planning, preparation, or effort will guarantee that things won’t go sideways in the professional or personal life of a cop. The real question is: how do you respond to the uncertainty and unexpected developments? Do you muster up resolve and flexibility and perspective, or do you become emotional and inevitably make things worse?
I coached little league when my kids were young and had an officer’s kid on my team. The officer would rarely show up to his son’s games and when he did, he was in uniform and working. I noticed that he worked a lot. As we talked, he told me his story. He and his wife started dating in high school and married soon after. Their ideas about parenting were similar and their plan was to have a large family (both were from large families.) Their goal was for Mom to stay home and raise the kids while the officer worked as much as he could, so they could afford to keep Mom home. The officer worked hard, had a solid reputation and got assigned to a special task force where he could work unlimited OT.
All that OT afforded them a big house in a nice neighborhood with a large backyard, two SUVs in the driveway, and a week at the beach each summer. Within a decade of starting their lives together, they were divorced, and Mom and the kids moved in with her parents. The verdict: Irrespective of their “plans,” Dad needed to balance time at work with time at home.
I had another officer who complained about his 18-year-old daughter wanting to go to college, and how he refused to help because when he was her age his parents told him he was an adult and they kicked him out of the house. He joined the military and was proud of how he made his own way and wanted his daughter to experience similar maturation and growth. When I spoke to his daughter, she told me she loved her dad, but they didn’t really have any type of relationship. She confided that she thought he loved his motorcycles more than his kids. The officer acknowledged he had no real relationship with his parents, and he was never comfortable parenting his daughter, and as time went on, the gap between them just grew bigger and harder to navigate. He admitted his motorcycles were an excuse and an escape. He confided that he wished they had a better relationship.
I arranged for them to meet with me as an intermediary. At this meeting, the officer’s daughter provided a reasonable plan for continuing her education in a much sought-after degree program at a local university, tuition to be supplemented by a partial scholarship which would renew based on her grades. I did not take a side but made a few “gentle” suggestions. I got the officer to sit quietly while his daughter explained what her contribution would be and what she hoped her father might be able to contribute. He talked about his relationship with his parents and how that influenced his relationship with his daughter. He eventually agreed to help, and we set up a state 529 college savings plan (which offered a generous 20% state tax credit) which would cover his contribution. He even sold one of his motorcycles to help his daughter buy a used car for school. Their relationship improved tremendously from that point forward, and she later graduated with honors, got a great job, and Dad felt a part of her success story. The verdict: Dad was home but needed to be more engaged at home.
Diogenes (400 BC) was a Greek philosopher and a founder of the Cynic movement. He is credited with what we know today to be the saying, “actions speak louder than words.” Officers routinely tell me their kids are their greatest joys, or the most important things in their lives, and that they would do anything for them. What would Diogenes say about such statements? Do we really mean what we say, or do our actions belie our words?
Officers tell me their families are more important than work, yet when pushed, will admit they spend more time at work, or are still focused on work–even when they are home. Many officers have a work phone and a personal phone, and if honest would admit they spend more time using their work phone. Which phone do you truly believe is more important to your life? Be honest.
If your kids are the most important thing in your life, how do you show it?
I have a slide in my training which always earns a laugh. It is a picture of a gravestone with the chiseled words “Here lies John Doe who wished he could have worked more.” It is funny because no one dies wishing they had worked more, but some officers in class later admit they fear that they do work too much. When I started my career in the 1980s (before the Fair Labor Standards Act and overtime at time and a half) we would have done anything to work OT and earn more money. And now, with many agencies being short-handed, the opposite is the case, with some agencies now requiring mandatory OT. This makes achieving the work-life balance more challenging. How are you managing your schedule? Are you someone who works too much OT? Do you defend working off-duty and extra-duty by claiming you are doing it for your family? If you find you are only going home to change uniforms, your work-life balance needs maintenance.
When he returned from the moon Apollo 11, Astronaut Buzz Aldrin wrote about his experience. In the book “Return to Earth”, Aldrin discussed being an absentee father during the space race of the 1960’s (during which the goal was to put an American on the moon before the end of the decade.) Aldrin wrote about working long hours, multiple weeks at a time at Cape Canaveral, and flying home to Houston for short visits with his wife and kids. He spoke about trying to condense a month’s worth of parenting into a few short days or hours– never successfully, and then flying back to the cape feeling a terrible failure as a father.
Like Aldrin, in my own career, there were periods of my kids’ youth I feel I missed– and I rarely left my city, much less the planet. Each Christmas, we gather as a family and watch holiday videos of our kids when they were little. As a rule, I have always had a great memory for events, but as I watch my kids as toddlers, there are long stretches of video I don’t remember– even though I know I was usually the person with the camera filming! Was I home? Was I engaged? Or was I thinking about work or some other distraction? Was I Buzz Aldrin zipping home for short, unsatisfying visits with my kids before returning to work?
I share my own experiences to reiterate that parenting is hard, even with the best foundation. I had a good father and I observed good fathers during my lifetime, and I knew I wanted to be a good father who utilized good parenting traits, and yet being a good father and maintaining a solid work-life balance was still a challenge. There were many occasions in my career where I was climbing the department ladder and was preoccupied with work, thinking what I was engaged in at work was a top priority. I can honestly say I did a lot of important work during my career, but I know now that work was never more important than my family and my commitment to being a father.
Being a father isn’t easy and being a good father is even more of a challenge. Life is full of surprises and kids have great and immediate needs, which can be challenging and frustrating. Being a father requires patience and understanding, and above all, flexibility. There is no script that one can follow that guarantees a successful ending. There will be curveballs thrown at you and you will strike out occasionally. In the end you must decide what is most important and work towards that endeavor.
So how do we become fathers who are engaged and invested? It starts with modeling– observing how fathers behave at home and at work and adopting the behaviors we see that are effective. It continues by exhibiting selfless versus selfish behaviors and understanding that kids are kids and not small adults. We must understand work is work, and it is necessary to maintain a work-life balance and be present and invested when home. It helps to remind yourself that even the best plans go awry, and it is ok to make mistakes occasionally–but learn from those mistakes and don’t repeat them.
Being a father is one of the hardest jobs a man could experience, but it is also one that will provide the greatest joys and rewards. Nothing that comes from hard work is ever wasted. Most fathers have the best of intentions, but intentions are merely pipe dreams if they are not nurtured and acted upon. Being a good cop and a good father are not incompatible. As we approach this Father’s Day and celebrate being fathers, let us ask ourselves a very simple question as we wake each day: “What could I do today to be a better father?” And as we finish each day, ask ourselves “Did I do everything I could today to be a good father?”
Enjoy your Father’s Day, be proud of what you have accomplished, and don’t ever stop striving to do better. Happy Father’s Day!
About the Author
Capt. Brian Nanavaty (Ret.)
In 2010, Captain Brian Nanavaty created the groundbreaking Indianapolis Metro Police Department (IMPD) Office of Professional Development and Wellness (OPDW) which initiated a culture of health at IMPD and resulted in a reduction of officer disciplinary referrals by 40%. The IMPD program and Nanavaty were credited with inspiring the US Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Act of 2017.
Upon retirement in 2017, Nanavaty continued to instruct employees, executives, union officials, insurance providers and clinicians in personal and career survival for the Department of Justice, the Valor for Blue and SAFLEO programs, the FBI, and the Dolan Consulting Group. He has presented at all major conferences including IACP, ILEETA, IADLEST, NOBLE, FOP and EAPA, and was a headline presenter at the 2017 National Crime Summit. He has been featured on YouTube, Police One, and in Law and Order magazine and the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. He was additionally a police wellness consultant for the television show Law and Order SVU in 2019.
Nanavaty previously served on the FBINA Wellness Committee and the Fraternal Order of Police Safety and Wellness Committee where he designed a training portal for members and helped create an alcohol and mental health treatment and recovery network for first responders and families. Nanavaty additionally was a member of the Critical Incident Stress Management (CISM) working group for the IACP Policy Center, and the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) SME on police wellness issues.
In 2015, Nanavaty received the inaugural Destination Zero ValorAward from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund and in 2016, in addition to appearing in front of the US Congress on issues of officer wellness, he was a finalist for the prestigious International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) Officer of the Year award. In 2016, the White House sent US Attorney General Loretta Lynch to meet with Nanavaty as part of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing where Lynch stated, “Captain Nanavaty’s officer and agency wellness program in Indianapolis should be the model for law enforcement across the US.”
In 2016, Nanavaty and IMPD were awarded the BJA/COPS Microgrant for Officer Safety and Wellness and were part of the BJA/COPS Officer Safety and Wellness Group. In October 2016 IMPD was chronicled in the BJA/COPS Improving Law Enforcement Resilience publication. In 2019, Nanavaty’s work at IMPD was part of the 11 successful agency case studies summarized in the DOJ’s Report to Congress and in the NYPD Commissioner’s Officer Wellness Review.
Captain Nanavaty attended Franklin College (IN), Drew University (NJ), and the University of Virginia. He is a graduate of the 255th Session of the FBI National Academy Quantico VA. From 1994-2003 he was Adjunct Professor of Criminal Justice at Indiana and Purdue Universities.
In your community, is elementary, middle, and high school enrollment down? With the exception of a few private schools that have seen a recent influx of students, are most other schools closing or consolidating? Do you notice more retirement age citizens than in past years, and fewer young people? Is your community building age 55 and over living communities, and senior citizen facilities, more rapidly than traditional family homes and childcare centers? Is your community building as many dog parks for pets as they are playgrounds for children? If not, your community is the exception to the rule across the State of Michigan.
In recent years, U.S. Census data has shown that the long-term trend of an aging population in Michigan is likely to continue, even if some individual counties and municipalities have seen a slight uptick in population. Michigan’s population that is 55 years old and over now exceeds the population of persons 24 years old and under, and those trends are expected to continue.[1]
In June of 2023, Governor Whitmer established the Growing Michigan Together Council with the goal of addressing the challenges likely to be encountered by the state in the face of an aging population and increasing the working age population of the state.[2] In the council’s first report in December of 2023, it noted that Michigan is 49th out of 50 states in population growth and stated, “We’re losing too many of our talented young people and failing to attract others.”[3]
In April of 2024, the Michigan Center for Data and Analytics published a report on Michigan Statewide Population Projections through 2050. The report stated, “Michigan has shifted from a young, higher fertility population to an older, low fertility population. This is a challenging age structure for sustained population growth.”[4]
Aging populations are causing alarm in light of the burdens that these demographic shifts will create for those depending on accessible health care and pensions, as well as those expected to provide those services and pay into those systems.[5]The rapid aging of the Michigan population, which is set to accelerate in the coming years, will have profound impacts on our society across a multitude of different areas. Law enforcement is likely no exception.
What an Aging Population Means for Police Recruiting and Staffing
In discussing the challenges of recruiting and retention with law enforcement leaders across the country, a constant theme emerges—an apparent lack of qualified applicants in the generation of young men and women entering young adulthood. This is not unlike the challenge facing countless other public service professions and the military.
One of the key components of the challenge is the lower birth rate over recent decades, which is resulting in fewer numbers of available applicants. On top of the fact there are just fewer young people today, we must consider issues of mental health, drug addiction, obesity, and other issues that make Generation Z (those born after 1996) a particularly challenging applicant pool from which to hire individuals qualified for a career in law enforcement.
In June of 2023 in Michigan, local news reports indicated that the number of sworn law enforcement officers in the state has gone down 19% since 2001—decreasing from 23,000 to 18,500. This decrease led to one Michigan police chief describing his staffing challenges and asking, with reference to the labor shortage facing law enforcement and other employers in the area, “Where did everyone go?”[6]
At the same time, thousands of officers who joined the profession 20 or 30 years ago are becoming eligible for retirement and are doing so. Recently, the executive leadership of the Cincinnati Police Department illustrated this reality in noting that, even if recruiting efforts in the coming years were successful, the retirement cliff facing the agency could not be avoided completely.[7]
All available demographic indicators point to the reality that the ranks of law enforcement will be thinning in the years to come, barring an unethical and counter-productive lowering of hiring standards. This significant lowering of standards has occurred in some agencies and the U.S. Department of Justice advocated for it in a recent report.[8]But if agencies maintain ethically and legally defensible hiring standards, their numbers of sworn officers are very likely to become smaller in many jurisdictions.
So, does this mean that alarm bells should be ringing and that we should anticipate decades of unchecked criminal activity as so many officers retire and so few are sworn in? Not necessarily. There is another side of this population equation that is found in the shrinking numbers of young adults—the population segment statistically more likely to engage in violent crime.
In a sense, the same recruiting and staffing challenges facing law enforcement agencies may also face the criminal offenders who recruit young people to prey upon the community. If this proves to be true, it could be welcome news for police leaders committed to maintaining ethical hiring standards in the face of mounting officer vacancies.
In Michigan, these pressures to compromise ethical hiring standards have been well publicized in recent months.[9] The Detroit Metro Times recently published a story including multiple interviews with law enforcement leaders from around the State of Michigan, reporting that “With so many open positions, law enforcement officials are worried that applicants with abusive histories will slip through the cracks and land a job.”[10]
What an Aging Population Could Mean for Rates of Violent Crime
There seem to be two sides of the coin when it comes to the aging Michigan population as it relates to law enforcement. On one side, as we have discussed, is the likelihood of fewer officers—at least in many jurisdictions. On the other side, is the likelihood of fewer young people and, therefore, a smaller population of those most likely to commit violent crimes.
Across cultures and over generations, we see that the prime demographic of violent law breakers tends to be young adult and male. When sheriffs and police chiefs discuss combating violent crime, are they referring to their community’s elderly population as the perpetrators? How many task force mass arrests of violent offenders involve the mug shots of offenders in their 60s and above? For those serving long prison terms, what percentage of them committed their crimes in middle or old age?
The answers to these questions are obvious. Older people are statistically unlikely to become perpetrators of violent crime. So, as the young adult population shrinks, it would make sense to expect less violent crime. Could these demographic realities help to explain the drop in homicides and other violent crimes that we are seeing in some parts of the state—particularly in spite of the fact that so many agencies are engaging in less proactive policing than in recent years—either due to staffing shortages, political interference, or officer morale?[11]
More importantly, does an aging population indicate that law enforcement agencies in Michigan could operate with fewer sworn officers than in past years, when the population was younger and more statistically prone to engage in criminal activity?
This reality of declining numbers of law enforcement officers coinciding with broader concerns over a shrinking working age population is not unique to Michigan, although Michigan may face a greater demographic decline than other states.
Michigan’s demographic predicament means that law enforcement leaders and elected officials across the state should work to understand their jurisdiction’s changing age demographics in order to understand the operational realities that lie ahead.
Staffing Paradigm Shifts for Law Enforcement Leaders as the Population Gets Older
As law enforcement leaders seek to determine what their authorized strength should be with respect to sworn officers, simply looking to population numbers may be insufficient. How should we determine how many officers should an agency have as its authorized strength? Should it be based on the number of officers per 100,000 population? Or should agencies look for a new and more precise measure that takes into account the percentage of the population which is in the most crime-prone ages of 15 and 40?
In closing, it is important to note that this article does not propose that the need for proactive policing practices will no longer be a vital part of public safety in Michigan. There are, and will continue to be, hot spots of crime—dots on which to place cops. Violent crime is, and will sadly continue to be, an ever-present danger, particularly in communities suffering from poverty and social breakdown.
The issue is one of scale. Can a motivated, proactive police force of 300 officers do the work that was required of 400 officers generations ago due to the changes in demographic realities? Is it possible that many agencies will be tasked with doing less with less in terms of personnel resources in the years ahead as the number of violent offenders declines as a result of demographic trends?
These questions and more should be a part of the conversations that law enforcement leaders and elected officials have involving staffing and operations in light of an aging population—a development that will likely have a dramatic effect on Michigan law enforcement in the years ahead.
About the Author
Matt Dolan, J.D.
Matt Dolan is a licensed attorney who specializes in training and advising public safety agencies in matters of legal liability, risk management and ethical leadership. His training focuses on helping agency leaders create ethically and legally sound policies and procedures as a proactive means of minimizing liability and maximizing agency effectiveness.
A member of a law enforcement family dating back three generations, he serves as both Director and an instructor with Dolan Consulting Group. He has trained thousands of law enforcement professionals over the last decade.
Disclaimer: This article is not intended to constitute legal advice on a specific case. The information herein is presented for informational purposes only. Individual legal cases should be referred to proper legal counsel.
References
[1] Michigan Center for Data and Analytics, Michigan Statewide Population Projections through 2050 (Lansing, MI: Michigan Center for Data and Analytics, 2024) 14.
[4] Michigan Center for Data and Analytics, Michigan Statewide Population Projections through 2050 (Lansing, MI: Michigan Center for Data and Analytics, 2024) 3.
[8] Bureau of Justice Assistance and Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, Recruitment and Retention for the Modern Law Enforcement Agency: Revised (Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services,
In your community, is elementary, middle, and high school enrollment down? With the exception of a few private schools that have seen a recent influx of students, are schools closing and consolidating? Do you notice more retirement age citizens than in past years, and fewer young people? Is your community building 55 and over living communities and senior citizen facilities more rapidly than traditional family homes and childcare centers? Is your community building as many dog parks for pets as playgrounds for children? If not, your community is the exception to the rule across the United States.
The latest U.S. Census data showed that the share of the U.S. population that is 65 years old or over has increased by more than 33% in just 10 years.[i] Even in localities that are seeing an influx of newcomers, like Fort Worth, Texas, more residents does not necessarily mean more school age children.[ii] The same is true in Phoenix.[iii] The same is true in South Florida.[iv] The list goes on.
As for the localities that have not seen growing populations driven by newly arriving residents, the picture is even more striking. In states like Illinois, Ohio, and New York, that have not seen an influx in new residents, the school closures seem even more pronounced and this extends to cutbacks at many colleges and universities.
At the same time, aging populations are causing alarm in light of the burdens that these demographic shifts will result in for those depending on accessible health care and pensions, as well as those expected to provide those services and pay into those systems.[i]
The rapid aging of the U.S. population, which is set to accelerate in the coming years, will have profound impacts on our society across a multitude of different areas. Law enforcement is likely no exception.
What an Aging Population Means for Police Recruiting and Staffing
In discussing the challenges of recruiting and retention with law enforcement leaders across the country, a constant theme emerges—an apparent lack of qualified applicants in the generation of young men and women entering young adulthood. This is not unlike the challenge facing countless other public service professions and the military.
One of the key components of the challenge is the lower birth rate over recent decades, which is resulting in fewer numbers of available applicants—even before considering issues of mental health, drug addiction, obesity, and other issues that make Generation Z (those born in 1997 or after) a particularly challenging applicant pool.
At the same time, thousands of officers who joined the profession 20 or 30 years ago are becoming eligible for retirement and are doing so. Recently, the executive leadership of the Cincinnati Police Department illustrated this reality in noting that, even if recruiting efforts in the coming years were successful, the retirement cliff facing the agency could not be avoided.[ii]
All available demographic indicators point to the reality that the ranks of law enforcement will be thinning, barring an unethical and counter-productive lowering of standards—as has occurred in some agencies and which the Department of Justice has advocated for in a recent report.[iii]But if agencies maintain ethically and legally defensible hiring standards, their numbers of sworn officers are very likely to become smaller in many jurisdictions.
So, does this mean that alarm bells should be ringing and that we should anticipate decades of unchecked criminal activity as so many officers retire and so few are sworn in? Not necessarily. There is another side of this population equation that is found in the shrinking numbers of young adults—the population segment statistically more likely to engage in violent crime.
In a sense, the same recruiting and staffing challenges facing law enforcement agencies may face the gangs who recruit young people to prey on the community.
What an Aging Population Means for Rates of Violent Crime
There seem to be two sides of the coin when it comes to the aging U.S. population as it relates to law enforcement. On one side, as we have discussed, is the likelihood of less officers—at least in many jurisdictions. On the other side, is the likelihood of fewer young people and, therefore, a smaller population of those most likely to commit violent crimes.
Across cultures and over generations, we see that the prime demographic of violent law breakers tends to be young adult and male. When sheriffs and police chiefs discuss combating violent crime, are they referring to their community’s elderly population as the perpetrators? How many task force mass arrests of violent offenders involve the mug shots of offenders in their 60s and above? For those serving long prison terms, what percentage of them committed their crimes in middle or old age?
The answers to these questions are obvious. Older people are statistically unlikely to become perpetrators of violent crime. So, as the young adult population shrinks, it would make sense to expect less violent crime. Could these demographic realities help to explain the drop in homicides and other violent crimes that we are seeing in some cities across the country—particularly in spite of the fact that so many agencies are engaging in less proactive policing than in recent years—either due to staffing shortages, political interference, or officer morale?[iv]
In June of 2023 in Michigan, local news reports indicated that the number of sworn law enforcement officers in the state has gone down 19% since 2001—decreasing from 23,000 to 18,500. This decrease led to one Michigan police chief describing his staffing challenges and asking, with reference to the labor shortage facing law enforcement and other employers in the area, “Where did everyone go?”[v]
In October of 2023, just a few months later, the State of Michigan announced that it was devoting significant resources to an advertising campaign aimed at convincing young people and families to move to Michigan.[vi] Michigan’s efforts to turn the tide on the aging population were also put into stark terms in January of this year at the annual Detroit Policy Conference. Among those policy experts voicing concerns was former U.S. Ambassador John Rakolta Jr. Ambassador Rakolta told the audience: “The further behind we get, it will be almost impossible, at some point to catch up… By 2050, we’ll be lucky to be the same size state as we are today, and there’s just enormous implications as a result of that.”[vii]
This reality of declining law enforcement ranks coinciding with broader concerns over a shrinking working age population is not unique to Michigan, although that state may face more demographic decline than most. Michigan’s predicament is not an isolated one, and law enforcement leaders across the country should work to understand their jurisdiction’s changing age demographics in order to understand the operational realities that lie ahead.
Paradigm Shifts for Law Enforcement Leaders as the Population Gets Older
As law enforcement leaders seek to determine what their authorized strength should be with respect to sworn officers, simply looking to population numbers may be insufficient. How many officers should an agency have as its authorized strength? Should it be based on officers per 100,000 population? Or should agencies look for a new and more precise measure that takes into account the percentage of the population which is between the ages of, for instance, 15 and 30?
In closing, it is important to note that this article does not propose that the need for proactive policing practices will no longer be a vital part of public safety. There are and will continue to be hot spots of crime—dots on which to place cops. Violent crime is and will sadly continue to be an ever-present danger, particularly in communities suffering from poverty and social breakdown.
The issue is one of scale. Can a motivated, proactive police force of 300 officers do the work that was required of 400 officers generations ago due to the demographic realities? Is it possible that many agencies will be tasked with doing less with less in terms of personnel resources in the years ahead as the number of violent offenders declines as a result of demographic trends?
These questions and more should be a part of the conversations that law enforcement leaders have in the years ahead involving staffing and operations in light of an aging population—a rarely discussed topic that will likely have a dramatic effect on fighting crime.
About the Author
Matt Dolan, J.D.
Matt Dolan is a licensed attorney who specializes in training and advising public safety agencies in matters of legal liability, risk management and ethical leadership. His training focuses on helping agency leaders create ethically and legally sound policies and procedures as a proactive means of minimizing liability and maximizing agency effectiveness.
A member of a law enforcement family dating back three generations, he serves as both Director and an instructor with Dolan Consulting Group. He has trained thousands of law enforcement professionals over the last decade.
Disclaimer: This article is not intended to constitute legal advice on a specific case. The information herein is presented for informational purposes only. Individual legal cases should be referred to proper legal counsel.
[7] Bureau of Justice Assistance and Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, Recruitment and Retention for the Modern Law Enforcement Agency: Revised (Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2023) 3-4.
Over the last few years, we at Dolan Consulting Group have published an article early in the year focused on the topic of negligent hiring liability in law enforcement. We do this because the issue of negligent hiring is so fundamental to every other aspect of law enforcement operations in the near future and in the long term.
Unfortunately, year after year, the causes for concern in this area have not diminished and, in some respects, have only grown. More and more of the conversations we have with law enforcement leaders across the country involve their concerns about their agencies lowering standards in order to hire “warm bodies,” and new cautionary case studies in this area continue to emerge with disturbing regularity. Sadly, once again, it seems that an updated article on this crucial topic is necessary.
Even more striking than the negligent hiring decisions of individual agency leaders are the recommendations made by the Department of Justice in its report on “Recruitment and Retention for the Modern Law Enforcement Agency”, published in October of 2023.[i] Immediately following the report’s Introduction section, the DOJ report recommends that law enforcement agencies “modernize eligibility requirements.”[ii] This creative framing does not effectively disguise the thrust of the DOJ report’s recommendation—lower standards and find “warm bodies.”
While the authors of the DOJ report repeatedly insist that their recommendations do not amount to the lowering of hiring standards, it is hard to conceive of a reasonable explanation of how the DOJ report does not recommend precisely that—lower standards of character, competence, and integrity at a time when the law enforcement profession’s reputation must be protected from the damage incurred by those unqualified to wear a badge.
The DOJ report recommends the following:
Participants at the convening identified the usefulness and supported the development of a national standard for police hiring developed by accrediting bodies. They also recommended that agencies consider their current eligibility requirements, highlighting those that cannot be compromised, those that can be updated, and those others that should be added. Some stressed incorporating “room for redemption,” recognizing that brain function is not fully developed until early adulthood and that recruits may have made minor unwise decisions in their younger years that affect their hiring eligibility now….[iii]
Examples of potential items that participants identified for consideration include… considering adjustments around drug use to account for time passed and/or changes in law; assessing the need for spelling tests or other written examinations…reconsidering flat bars based on minor, isolated criminal offenses, especially where offenses occurred a long time ago; evaluating the importance of financial history and credit scores; and adapting physical fitness standards, such as distance running.[iv]
These statements clearly encourage lowering standards pertaining to drug abuse, criminal histories, written examinations intended to measure basic literacy and reading comprehension, and physical fitness. There is also the mention of making exceptions for incidents occurring prior to “fully developed” brain function, a timeframe which is notably undefined. According to the National Institute of Mental Health, the brain finishes developing and maturing in one’s late twenties.[v] So does this mean that law enforcement agencies should overlook criminal offenses and character issues the applicant committed throughout his or her twenties?
While there are undoubtedly agencies with eligibility requirements that should be revaluated—such as those pertaining to maximum age limits, college credit hours attained or other requirements which seem to bear little or no relationship to an applicant’s character, competence, or integrity—the eligibility items highlighted by the DOJ report send the message that now is the time to lower standards, hire “warm bodies,” and deal with the fallout later. Law enforcement leaders should follow their ethical compasses and apply common sense. They should look to their own experiences with this type of short-sighted and unethical thinking in their agencies, as well as the history of modern American policing in rejecting it.
The DOJ report comes at a time when more and more law enforcement agencies are confronted with pressures to hire officers as quickly as possible and generate recruit classes that are more diverse. Leaders will inevitably face the temptation to cut corners and ignore red flags to get “boots on the ground.” These increasing pressures may regrettably mean that those boots are not filled with qualified men and women who demonstrate the character traits and competencies necessary to successfully serve their communities. Making these short-term fixes even more appealing are their delayed consequences–bad hires may not become public safety, legal liability, or public trust disasters for months or years. Short-term thinking could motivate hiring decisions that will fill the ranks today, but make for negative headlines and lawsuits for years to come.
At this moment, the law enforcement profession, and the citizens who depend on it, need agency leaders to meet the ethical challenge of resisting the temptation to hire unqualified applicants. In the long run, these applicants have the potential to inflict tremendous damage on agencies, the profession, and the communities that these agencies serve.
The last thing that officers and citizens need now is unqualified applicants hired into the law enforcement field who will ultimately bring disrepute to the profession, rather than further the mission to protect and serve. By learning from the mistakes of the past, being wary of common hiring pitfalls and understanding the long-term impact of negligent hiring practices, agency leaders can uphold their integrity and that of the profession without contributing to the detriment of their agencies and communities.
Emphasizing Quality Over Quantity
Fortunately, in recent months, we have also seen agency leaders defending small recruit classes when they believe that quality is being preserved at the sake of quantity. In Cleveland, a December 2023 recruit class numbering just nine new officers was defended by the then-director of public safety along these lines of quality focus over quantity focus. Public Safety Director Karrie Howard told a local news outlet, “Those nine people are going to be worth, I don’t know, twenty-seven lackluster. We have nine quality superstars that graduated the academy.”[vi]
In Tulsa, facing similar recruiting and staffing challenges, the police chief told a local news outlet in November of 2023 that “I could fill an academy class if I wanted, but I would be pushing lower-quality people through, and I just won’t do that.”[vii]
These are only two examples of what is hopefully a more broadly held belief—that lowering standards and hiring officers in a way that proves negligent is not making things better, but making them immeasurably worse for departments and the communities that they serve.
A patrol captain at a sheriff’s office recently told me that his agency was authorized for 150 sworn deputies, but was currently staffed at only 125. “I begged the Sheriff,” the captain said, “Just give me five workers and we’ll be good. Please don’t give me five workers and five problems, because then we’re back to square one. I don’t need somebody hiding behind a grocery store on their phone, or pissing people off for no reason. Just give me five workers and no new problems and we’ll be good to go.”
What that captain was talking about is a very common math equation that police leaders sometimes struggle to effectively communicate to those who are understandably eager to see the number of officers increase. Hiring “minor league” problem officers leads to lost time and proactivity, as officers and sergeants put out the fires that are set in the form of demeanor complaints, sloppy report writing, and various “professional backer-upper” activities. Hiring “major league” problem officers can lead to disastrous outcomes, as appears to have been true in so many cases like the Memphis SCORPION Unit, the Baltimore Gun Trace Task Force, the Miami River Cops, and countless other tragic examples of negligent hiring over the years. As that sheriff’s office captain explained, an agency cannot afford to hire problems that get in the way of its good workers.
The Negligent Hiring “Doom Loop”
The term “doom loop” has garnered some attention in recent years as a way of describing urban decay that seems to get worse and worse, as less safety means less business and less public finances for safety, which means less business, and so on.
The credit for coining this term in reference to urban decay seems to belong to Columbia Business School professor Dr. Stijn Van Niuwerburgh. In a 2023 New York Times article, Dr. Niuwerburgh summarized what was meant by the term “doom loop.”
People with money…move out, taking their tax dollars and retail spending with them…leaving empty storefronts… Crime and grime increase. More people feel unsafe and leave… More crime, more grime, more cuts in services.[viii]
What Dr. Van Nieuwerburgh is describing is similar in many ways to the urban decay that occurred in many American cities in the 1960s and 1970s, when many cities across the country saw that the worse things got, the worse things got. The less livable a city becomes, the more difficult it is to reverse the trend. In policing, there is a strikingly similar phenomenon in terms of lowering hiring standards.
What the recent DOJ report seems to invite law enforcement leaders to engage in may prove to be a similar kind of “doom loop”. In this Negligent Hiring “Doom Loop,” law enforcement leaders justify lowering standards and cutting corners on background investigations because they are desperate to find applicants. This leads to hiring people who do not have the character, competency, and integrity to serve honorably as officers. These individuals, who should not have been hired, engage in misconduct. That misconduct lowers public trust in the agency, harms morale, and makes the agency even less attractive to qualified applicants who are all the more likely to look elsewhere for employment in the future. Now, it is once again tempting to lower standards even further since, as at the beginning of the Negligent Hiring “Doom Loop,” agency leaders are more desperate than ever to find applicants.
And the damage is not just to the community’s trust in an agency, but also to morale within the agency. Good officers don’t want to work with individuals who were clearly hired under a lower standard, and good candidates don’t want to apply to an agency where people are hired and deployed without proper vetting. This is born out of the frequency with which police union leaders have publicly cautioned against lower standards, presumably on behalf of the vast majority of their membership that believes in hiring people who are assets and not liabilities.
We would urge law enforcement leaders to fight the temptation to lower standards. This mistake may be rationalized away as a temporary fix or a necessary evil. But the available case studies demonstrate that these are rarely temporary fixes and the evil that they invite is never necessary.
About the Author
Matt Dolan, J.D.
Matt Dolan is a licensed attorney who specializes in training and advising public safety agencies in matters of legal liability, risk management and ethical leadership. His training focuses on helping agency leaders create ethically and legally sound policies and procedures as a proactive means of minimizing liability and maximizing agency effectiveness.
A member of a law enforcement family dating back three generations, he serves as both Director and Public Safety Instructor with Dolan Consulting Group.
Disclaimer: This article is not intended to constitute legal advice on a specific case. The information herein is presented for informational purposes only. Individual legal cases should be referred to proper legal counsel.
On September 28, after a much-publicized move away from a long-held unwritten dress code on the U.S. Senate floor, a bipartisan reaction resulted in the unanimous passage of a formal dress code. Over the course of the preceding days, some Senators had signaled support for allowing casual attire on the Senate floor, prompted, in large part, by Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania who argued that he was more comfortable wearing shorts and a hoodie than a suit and tie.
On September 18—just 10 days before the Senate unanimously adopted a formal dress code—the Associated Press reported on Senator Fetterman’s reaction to those critical of his casual attire: “They’re freaking out, I don’t understand it,” he said. “Like, aren’t there more important things we should be working on right now instead of, you know, that I might be dressing like a slob?”
In the end, both sides of the political divide decided that it does matter if a Senator “dresses like a slob” when casting votes that impact the functioning of the U.S. government—even if it risked his discomfort at the confines of business attire.
So, what does this story from the U.S. Senate have to do with cops? Well, for years now, I have made no secret of my concern that too many departments have opted to prioritize officer comfort, self-expression and other concerns above a professional appearance. The arguments expressed by Senator Fetterman are eerily similar to the push back I’ve received as the old-school police chief in the room concerned about what I refer to as “cops wearing their pajamas to work.”
These arguments from law enforcement officers in favor of more casual attire generally fall into the category of, as Senator Fetterman argued, “Aren’t there more important things we should be working on?” The cop version of the argument is often more like, “People don’t care what I look like, as long as I can do the job.” Or, even more important to contend with is the argument, “If I have to go hands-on with somebody, I need to be comfortable and ready to go.” Let’s address these two arguments.
“People Don’t Care What I Look Like as Long as I can Do the Job”
I often ask officers, “What did you wear to your job interview with your police department? Did you dress comfortably and casually?” Inevitably, the answer is something to the effect of “No, I wore a suit and tie” for male officers, or “No, I wore a business suit” for female officers. I always then respond by asking, “Why did you wear professional attire to your job interview? Was it because you wanted to make a good impression?” They inevitably nod yes. “So, what changed? When did you stop caring about giving a good impression by your attire?”
To put this in a different context, if you had to appear in court and the prosecutor was wearing sweatpants and a tee shirt, would you care? After all, the prosecutor has more important things to worry about than attire. Maybe their causal dress is a sign that they are so consumed with preparation for the case in which your testifying that they didn’t have time to worry about dressing professionally? Of course, that would not be your immediate impression—it would be the opposite. You would likely think, “Who is this clown? He comes to court in sweats? We are screwed.” Similarly, stories of police applicants coming to their interview in casual attire is often cited by officers illustrating the problems they encounter in finding qualified candidates with common sense these days.
The same would likely be true of a priest or pastor officiating your wedding or the funeral director overseeing the ceremony for a passed loved one. In the most important moments of our lives, the vast majority of us want to put our trust in people who look professional and trustworthy. That is precisely what members of the public want from their police.
In their time of need, citizens want to see a police officer who looks like a police officer. Your professional appearance signals to citizens that you take enough pride in your work to look the part—and if you don’t care enough to look professional, why should they expect professionalism from you in your work?
You want to be able to quickly and clearly communicate to the public, especially during times of stress and confusion, your authority and legitimacy. Beyond the increased effectiveness in verbal communication that comes with “looking the part”, there are physical dangers associated with law enforcement officers who are not clearly recognizable as such, particularly in a society filled with law-abiding citizens who are lawfully carrying firearms.
“If I Have to Go Hands On, I Need to be Comfortable and Ready to Go”
I am not arguing that every department needs to maintain the Raleigh Police Department appearance standards that I was introduced to in 1981—dress slacks, dress shoes, garrison hat, and a tie. Law enforcement leaders have to make their own decisions as to the practicality of various uniform choices. However, even within the context of reasonable disagreements about uniform details, we should all agree that an officer’s dress should make them readily identifiable as a real police officer.
But as for officer safety when having to use physical force, how does a baseball cap improve one’s defensive tactics capabilities, much less a baseball cap flipped backwards? Can someone please explain to me how wearing an untucked tee shirt makes you a better fighter? In fact, I would argue such attire makes it harder for an officer to reach his or her weapons or handcuff in a scuffle. Lastly, can someone please explain to me how wearing a clean and ironed police uniform makes it harder for you to defend yourself?
A professional uniform appearance is a critical tool for law enforcement officers to convey their professionalism and authority right out of the gate, thus often reducing the necessity of the use of force in the first place. A recent research studies conducted in California and Maine showed members of the public photographs of police officers with various types of uniform accessories. When the officers were shown wearing military style uniforms, especially BDU-style uniforms and load-bearing vests or external body armor, members of the public rated them lower in approachability, friendliness, and honesty, and higher in aggressiveness, hostility, and dishonesty.[i] Why would any law enforcement officer want to enter a police-citizen encounter with the psychological cards already stacked against him or her?
Conclusion
There are many occupations in which your appearance simply does not matter. Millions of people work remotely from their homes, or in offices where they are guaranteed to never see a customer. In these environments there is a strong argument to be made that professional attire is simply unnecessary. Similarly, when a Senator is taking phone calls, or being briefed on upcoming votes on a Sunday evening from their home office, appearance seems largely unimportant. But when a member of the Senate walks onto the floor in Capital Hill to debate, discuss, or vote on matters that will affect the lives of millions of Americans, people on both sides of the political divide justifiably view shorts and a sweatshirt as a blatant sign of disrespect. More precisely, it is a sign that my comfort is more important than any respect I may owe the task at hand or the voters that I represent.
Just as cops across the country see the short-lived mess in the Senate as an embarrassment, we should also regard it as a reminder that “looking the part” and projecting legitimacy and respect with how we dress still matters in the communities where we protect and serve.
About the Author
Harry P. Dolan is a 32-year police veteran who served as a Chief of Police since 1987. As one of the nation’s most experienced police chiefs, he brings 25 years of public safety executive experience to Dolan Consulting Group. He retired in October 2012 as Chief of Police of the Raleigh (N.C.) Police Department, an agency comprised of nearly 900 employees in America’s 42nd largest city.
Chief Dolan began his law enforcement career in 1980 as a deputy sheriff in Asheville, North Carolina and served there until early 1982, when he joined the Raleigh Police Department, where he served as a patrol officer. In 1987, he was appointed Chief of Police for the N.C. Department of Human Resources Police Department, located in Black Mountain. He served as Chief of Police in Lumberton, N.C. from 1992 until 1998, when he became Chief of Police of the Grand Rapids, Michigan Police Department. He served in that capacity for nearly ten years before becoming Chief of the Raleigh Police Department in September 2007. As Chief, he raised the bar at every organization and left each in a better position to both achieve and sustain success.
Harry Dolan has lectured throughout the United States and has trained thousands of public safety professionals in the fields of Leadership & Management, Communications Skills, and Community Policing. Past participants have consistently described Chief Dolan’s presentations as career changing, characterized by his sense of humor and unique ability to maintain participants’ interest throughout his training sessions. Chief Dolan’s demonstrated ability to connect with his clientele and deliver insightful instruction all with uncompromising principles will be of tremendous value in the private sector.
Chief Dolan’s unbridled passion to achieve service-excellence is a driving force behind Dolan Consulting Group. He is a graduate of Western Carolina University and holds a Master’s Degree in Organizational Leadership and Management from the University of North Carolina at Pembroke.
[i] Hallett, L. J. (2017). Citizen Perceptions of Minor Changes to the Police Uniform. Unpublished Master’s Thesis: University of Southern Maine; Simpson, R. (2020). Officer appearance and perceptions of the police: accoutrements as signals of intent. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 14(1), 243-257.
The shortage of qualified applicants for sworn law enforcement positions has become a crucial problem, and shows no signs of improving in the coming years.[i] Due to declining birth rates since the early 1970s, the percentage of the U.S. population that is entering the workforce continues to decline.[ii] Obesity in America is on the rise, as overall physical fitness declines, making it harder to find physically qualified candidates.[iii] Mental health and substance abuse issues have skyrocketed since 2008, making it more difficult to find psychologically qualified candidates.[iv] Our economy currently faces an unprecedented labor market trend in which employees are resigning from their jobs in massive numbers to pursue different careers with higher pay, better working conditions or a better work-family life balance.[v]As a result, law enforcement leaders are being forced to reexamine “the way we’ve always done things” in order to find solutions to this recruiting crisis without lowering standards regarding the character, competence and integrity of potential applicants.
Many law enforcement leaders are reexamining what are truly bona fide minimum requirements for selecting law enforcement officers. While mental and physical fitness and a background that demonstrates high character are undoubtedly necessary requirements for becoming a law enforcement officer, college credit requirements, age limits in the 30s and other long standing automatic disqualifiers are being debated within agencies that are struggling to find qualified applicants. It is becoming increasingly difficult to justify rejecting otherwise qualified applicants, for instance, because they happen to be 40 years old or never attended college, as officer vacancies increase.
The recruiting crisis has reached a level which calls for an open and honest reexamination of minimum qualifications to determine if each one is truly necessary, or simply a best-case-scenario preference. A mandatory requirement that applicants must be U.S. citizens (by birth or naturalization) before being hired as law enforcement officers is one of the qualifiers that law enforcement leaders and elected officials should consider reexamining.
In this article, we will review the historical link between policing and immigration, examine the characteristics of the present immigrant population in the U.S. and then examine the potential barriers to immigrants serving within law enforcement. In this discussion, however, please note that when we refer to immigrants to the U.S., we are referring to those within the borders of the U.S. legally, such as those on student visas or resident aliens (i.e., those with “green cards”), not those within the borders of our nation in direct violation of the laws of the United States. This distinction is extremely important, because we view law-abiding behavior as a non-negotiable minimum standard for working in law enforcement.
Immigrants and Policing
The modern form of policing (i.e., municipal agencies, uniformed patrol, providing around the clock service, etc.) entered American history in the 1830s, especially in the major cities of the Northeast and Midwest. For most of the first century of American law enforcement history, the profession was widely viewed as a low-status job.
Maintaining the peace in the overpopulated urban squalor of the early industrial revolution, while working alone with only a wooden club and a whistle to call for help, proved an unattractive job when compared to much higher-paying work opportunities in local factories. The job was dangerous and the pay was low. Recruiting was difficult and turnover was high—much as it is today. As a result, the majority of those individuals working as watchmen, constables, and “coppers” in American cities in the 1800s were immigrants – primarily Irish, Italian, German, Polish, Greek and Ashkenazi Jews.[i] This was the case from the period of the U.S. Civil War to World War I. Immigration to the U.S. soared during this era. Table 1 below illustrates the fluctuations in immigration over U.S. history. Immigrant labor was plentiful and cheap from the 1860s through the 1920s, so many immigrants took the jobs in policing that few wanted.
Table 1. U.S. Immigration Trend, 1850-2020
Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau
For these six decades (1860s-1920s), between 13% and 15% of the U.S. population was foreign-born. This era was followed, however, by a huge drop in immigration throughout most of the twentieth century. As a result, many Americans forgot what it was like to live in a society with immigrants occupying many needed positions in American society. Yet, over the last two decades, the percentage of foreign-born persons in the U.S. has returned to nineteenth century levels. Between one and two out of every ten persons in the U.S. today is an immigrant.
Immigrant representation within the law enforcement profession dropped off tremendously throughout most of the twentieth century, primarily because immigration itself had dropped off.[ii] Nevertheless, those who remained working in law enforcement were disproportionately the descendants of the early immigrant police officers. This is why the ethnic backgrounds of officers in the Midwest and Northeast are disproportionately those of the immigrant groups mentioned earlier—Irish, Italian, German, Polish, Greek and Ashkenazi Jews. However, because we have just come out of an 80-year period during which immigration was not nearly as common, the practice of employing immigrants in law enforcement seems rather strange to many in our era.
It should also be noted that the U.S. military has a similar history, while the military never actually dropped its practice of employing immigrants. Throughout its entire existence, from the Revolutionary War to today, there has never been a period when the U.S. military did not have foreign nationals serving within its ranks. Approximately half of the U.S. Army soldiers who served on the Great Plains during the Indian Wars (1866-1891) were immigrants serving in the Army to earn their citizenship.[iii] This practice continues today, as the U.S. military currently accepts non-citizen recruits who may qualify for citizenship, with the expectation that the individual will be granted naturalized citizenship upon earning an honorable discharge.[iv]As of 2013, 5% of new enlistments in the U.S. military were non-citizen individuals.[v] If selected non-citizens can serve under arms in the U.S. military and pass background checks for security clearances, we should consider the possibility that they can carry a weapons as police officers and complete pre-employment background checks.
Current Documented Immigrant Demographics
According to estimates from the Pew Research Center, of the 46 million foreign-born persons presently in the U.S., 45% are naturalized citizens, 27% are permanent resident aliens, and 5% are temporary residents (mostly students). The remaining 23% are unauthorized (illegal) residents. The majority of the current U.S. foreign-born population comes from Latin America (Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, and Cuba) and Asia (India, China, Philippines, Vietnam, and South Korea).[vi]
Contrary to widely held stereotypes, 73% of the documented immigrant population has the equivalent of a high school education, and 32% hold a college degree. Some even held professional credentials as doctors, lawyers, engineers, nurses or school teachers in their nation of origin.[vii]
The foreign-born population is distributed widely across the nation, but it is most concentrated in the 13 states listed in Table 2 below. These 13 states are also some of the states struggling most with finding qualified applicants to fill law enforcement officer vacancies. It is noteworthy, then, that a number of the states that are as much as 15% to 23% foreign-born, have prohibited non-citizens from consideration for employment in law enforcement. In such states, automatically disqualifying non-citizens instantly eliminates a sizable portion of the potential applicant pool.
A quick scan of Table 2 also reveals that this issue is not solely determined by the state’s political orientation. Conservative states like Texas, and liberal states like California and Hawaii, have opened the profession to qualified non-citizens. Meanwhile, liberal states like Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island join conservative states like Florida in barring non-citizens from the law enforcement profession. It seems possible, then, that the conversation around non-citizens as sworn officers may be an issue of practicality and logistics more so than liberal versus conservative politics.
Table 2. Foreign-born Concentrations and Employability in Law Enforcement
Data Sources: U.S. Census Bureau and each state’s police standards and training (POST) website.
Potential Barriers to Non-Citizen Officers
There are a number of potential barriers to employing non-citizens as law enforcement officers. First, as revealed in Table 2, are state laws. Obviously, if your state law bars non-citizens from serving as law enforcement officers, your agency cannot hire such individuals. But are these laws well-suited for today’s circumstances? If not, your chiefs’ and sheriffs’ associations are entities that could lobby for a change in the law.
Another barrier is immigrant classification. Under federal law, non-citizens must have permanent resident status, or be students with work visas, before they can be lawfully employed within the United States. This would limit law enforcement agencies to considering only individuals such as these for employment. Luckily, of the non-citizens currently in the country (legally or illegally), more than half (approximately 58%) fit this categorization for lawful employability.
The other minimum employment qualifications may also be a barrier. Can the applicant speak and read English at a proficient level? Does the applicant have the equivalent of at least a high school education? Does the applicant have a valid driver’s license? Does the applicant meet the minimum physical and mental qualifications? Can the applicant complete the physical and academic requirements of the academy? These practical issues seem like potentially insurmountable barriers, until we consider that for the last two decades, the U.S. military has been able to recruit more than 20,000 non-citizens annually who were permanent resident aliens, could pass a written and spoken English proficiency test, pass an intelligence test, pass a military physical and psychological screening and complete the rigors of basic training.[viii] Many of the individuals that successfully met the entry standards for military service may have also met the entry standards for law enforcement employment.
On the surface, it would seem that conducting a background check on a non-citizen would be another barrier. How does a local law enforcement agency check the past of someone who, until recently, lived in another country that speaks another language? Nevertheless, if the applicant has secured permanent resident status, the applicant has already provided the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services with a mountain of documentation which federal investigators have both examined and vetted. Obtaining that permanent resident application packet will provide a vast amount of information on the applicant’s background and associations.[ix] Furthermore, the U.S. military faces the same challenges when screening non-citizen service members for security clearances, yet is still able to successfully conduct these clearance investigations. This does not mean that every non-citizen legally authorized to work in the U.S. will be eligible for a background investigation thorough enough to meet your agency standards. It does mean that the categorical rejection of all non-citizens will likely exclude applicants who could withstand such a background investigation.
Finally, a lack of knowledge among eligible candidates is surely a barrier. Many people do not realize that non-citizens can serve in our military and, similarly, most people likely do not realize that non-citizens could serve as law enforcement officers without some form of proactive outreach effort. This barrier would require intentional recruiting efforts to advertise that non-citizens can also apply and educate qualified candidates on the benefits of a law enforcement career.
Conclusion
In critical professional positions—from priests to nurses to doctors—non-citizens serve an essential role in the everyday lives of Americans. If we entrust legally authorized non-citizens to serve in these roles, is it time to consider similar eligibility for service as sworn law enforcement officers in the face of an unprecedented staffing crisis?
If the U.S. military is able to attract tens of thousands of qualified, non-citizen applicants, the law enforcement profession should consider the possibility of doing so as well. Military service requires risking one’s life, submitting to strict discipline and surrendering a number of basic personal freedoms such as choice of job, place of residence, ability to see one’s family and going home after an 8-hour workday—all for low pay. If tens of thousands of qualified non-citizens are willing to serve in the U.S. military under these conditions, how many more might be willing to serve in a law enforcement career with better pay, set shifts, a choice of where to live and the ability to see their families at the end of the workday?
Recruiting qualified non-citizens is not a quick fix that will solve our law enforcement recruiting crisis, nor is raising the maximum age for applicants, waiving college credit requirements or any other change to “the way we’ve always done things”. But as law enforcement leaders look for the best possible options for staffing their agencies now and in the years ahead, it may be one of many new options that can help us weather the storm that we are facing when it comes to officer staffing.
About the Authors
Matt Dolan, J.D.
Matt Dolan is a licensed attorney who specializes in training and advising public safety agencies in matters of legal liability, risk management and ethical leadership. His training focuses on helping agency leaders create ethically and legally sound policies and procedures as a proactive means of minimizing liability and maximizing agency effectiveness.
A member of a law enforcement family dating back three generations, he serves as both Director and Public Safety Instructor with Dolan Consulting Group.
Richard R. Johnson, PhD, is a trainer and researcher with Dolan Consulting Group. He has decades of experience teaching and training on various topics associated with criminal justice, and has conducted research on a variety of topics related to crime and law enforcement. He holds a bachelor’s degree in public administration and criminal justice from the School of Public and Environmental Affairs (SPEA) at Indiana University, with a minor in social psychology. He possesses a master’s degree in criminology from Indiana State University. He earned his doctorate in criminal justice from the School of Criminal Justice at the University of Cincinnati with concentrations in policing and criminal justice administration.
Dr. Johnson has published more than 50 articles on various criminal justice topics in academic research journals, including Justice Quarterly, Crime & Delinquency, Criminal Justice & Behavior, Journal of Criminal Justice, and Police Quarterly. He has also published more than a dozen articles in law enforcement trade journals such as the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, Police Chief, Law & Order, National Sheriff, and Ohio Police Chief. His research has primarily focused on police-citizen interactions, justice system responses to domestic violence, and issues of police administration and management. Dr. Johnson retired as a full professor of criminal justice at the University of Toledo in 2016.
Prior to his academic career, Dr. Johnson served several years working within the criminal justice system. He served as a trooper with the Indiana State Police, working uniformed patrol in Northwest Indiana. He served as a criminal investigator with the Kane County State’s Attorney Office in Illinois, where he investigated domestic violence and child sexual assault cases. He served as an intensive probation officer for felony domestic violence offenders with the Illinois 16th Judicial Circuit. Dr. Johnson is also a proud military veteran having served as a military police officer with the U.S. Air Force and Air National Guard, including active duty service after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Before that, he served as an infantry soldier and field medic in the U.S. Army and Army National Guard.
[i] Travis III, Lawrence F., & Langworthy, Robert H. (2007). Policing in America: A Balance of Forces, 4th Edition. New York: Pearson; Wadman, Robert C., & Allison, William T. (2003). To Protect and to Serve: A History of Police in America, 1st Edition. New York: Pearson.
[v] Barry, Catherine N. (2013). New Americans in Our Nation’s Military: A Proud Tradition and Hopeful Future. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
[vi] Budiman, Abby (2020). Key Findings about U.S. Immigrants. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
[vii] Budiman, Abby (2020). Key Findings about U.S. Immigrants. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
[viii] Barry, Catherine N. (2013). New Americans in Our Nation’s Military: A Proud Tradition and Hopeful Future. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
[iii] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2020). National Center for Health Statistics Fast Facts: Weight Status and Size. Washington, DC: Center for Disease Control. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/obesity-overweight.htm
Over the last several years, there has been intense public attention focused on police use of force, especially lethal force. The attention has come with demands that the police exercise greater use of de-escalation techniques before implementing force. While some activists, politicians and journalists may have unrealistic expectations that de-escalation techniques will eliminate all uses of force, it is certainly true that the employment of verbal and tactical de-escalation techniques can reduce the likelihood of violence in many volatile police-citizen encounters. In addition to reducing the likelihood of violence, de-escalation techniques can also help agency leaders in communicating to the public that all reasonable precautions were taken before force was utilized.
While the Dolan Consulting Group (DCG) has been a training leader in verbal de-escalation techniques for nearly a decade, there are also important tactical de-escalation techniques for dealing with potentially violent persons. These techniques, routinely practiced by SWAT teams and patrol personnel for years, include:
Slowing down the situation to wait the individual out
Physically securing the area to contain the dangerous individual
Removing other people from the area
Maintaining a safe distance from the dangerous individual
Utilizing cover to reduce the likelihood of injury
Engaging in calm conversation with the individual
Even while applying these tactical de-escalation techniques, officers are often still at risk of injury when engaged in various operations such as trying to locate and communicate with barricaded individuals. Gathering intelligence about the situation, such as whether or not the individual is armed, what type and number of weapons are possessed, and whether or not the individual has any hostages, often involves risks to the safety of officers. If the officers are observed by the individual, and he or she reacts violently, both the officers and the barricaded individual are in danger of being harmed.
Unmanned drones are tools that may be used in such circumstances to assist officers in de-escalating the situation, while simultaneously increasing officer safety. Flying aerial drones and ground-traversing wheeled drones have been used by the military for intelligence gathering in dangerous situations for two decades now. In Iraq and Afghanistan, military personnel have used various types of drones from the command level all the way down to the platoon and squad level. Soldiers and Marines have used small drones to look around street corners and explore buildings before sending humans or canines into harm’s way.[i]As drones are so prevalent and affordable today, perhaps they should be used more often to perform functions that would otherwise put a law enforcement officer at risk.
Consider the following examples: Patrol officers from a Midwestern city police department attempted to stop a car occupied by two individuals, one of which had an active felony arrest warrant. After a short vehicle pursuit, the two individuals bailed out of the car and ran on foot through a densely populated residential district. Responding patrol officers cordoned off the block and a police canine was used to track the scent of the suspects to an abandoned house. Unsure of where within the house the suspects were hiding, the canine was sent into the dark house, followed by its handler and additional officers. One of the suspects opened fire on the dog before officers returned fire and killed the suspect. Could this scenario have gone differently if the officers had access to a tactical field drone? Could a remote-controlled drone equipped with video, audio, and maybe even low-light or thermal surveillance capabilities have been sent into the house to search for the suspects, without risking the lives of the officers or the dog? The suspect still may have fired on the drone, but could the information gathered from the recording equipment have revealed the suspects’ exact location? Undoubtedly, the financial costs associated with utilizing a drone would have been a better alternative than the risks of injury or death involved in such a pursuit.
In the Southeastern U.S., three officers arrived at a home to serve involuntary commitment papers on a 23-year-old man who had made suicidal and homicidal statements to his family and therapist. While standing in the living room of the home, the man fled from the officers and ran upstairs. After calling up the stairwell with no response, the officers proceeded up the stairwell after the man. The mentally disordered individual reappeared at the top of the steps with a handgun and began firing at the officers. The first officer up the stairs was killed, and the other two officers were wounded by the gunfire. The surviving officers, dragging their incapacitated partner with them, retreated from the house as the assailant barricaded himself in an upstairs bedroom. Additional officers and a SWAT team arrived, and a standoff ensued for many hours before the assailant took his own life. If the officers had access to a tactical patrol drone, could they have sent it up the stairs before heading up the “fatal funnel” of the stairwell themselves? Might the video camera on the drone have revealed that the man was armed? Could the drone have been used to negotiate with the assailant from a safe distance?
In a Northwestern state, officers responded to a domestic battery call. When they arrived at the apartment building, the officers met with the victim who had been beaten and choked by her boyfriend. The boyfriend, who was not believed to be armed, had fled into a wooded ravine behind the apartment complex when the officers arrived. A canine unit arrived to sniff out the suspect. As the officers fanned out and started moving into the ravine, the suspect opened fire with a gun, killing the dog and wounding one of the officers. In danger of hitting the occupied apartments on the other side of the ravine, and still unable to determine the assailant’s exact location, the officers did not return fire. They retreated, cordoned off the area, and (with the assistance of additional officers) waited the suspect out. At daybreak, the suspect surrendered to police. What if the officers had access to a tactical patrol drone before heading toward the wooded ravine? Might the officers have pinpointed the location of the suspect from the safety of cover if they had been equipped with a small aerial drone with infrared or night vision capability?
As law enforcement agencies across the nation simultaneously face personnel shortages and public demands to avoid use of force whenever possible, robotic drones appear to be useful tools to increase officer safety when dealing with violent individuals. In recent years, many law enforcement agencies have acquired small unmanned aerial systems and ground-traversing drones to enhance agency operations and improve officer and public safety. Each year, more public safety agencies are recognizing the benefits these relatively inexpensive tools can offer. Remotely piloted or driven vehicles with mounted cameras and listening devices can be used to locate, isolate and communicate with potentially dangerous individuals from a safe distance, while avoiding the necessity of placing a human or canine officer in the line of fire.
Tactical drones offer law enforcement agencies a tremendous opportunity to leverage technology in a way that enhances agency operations and improves officer and public safety. While there are numerous benefits to utilizing drones, one crucial benefit that should not be overlooked is their ability to de-escalate volatile and potentially deadly interactions between law enforcement officers and individuals they encounter in the field.
About the Author
Richard R. Johnson, Ph.D.
Richard R. Johnson, PhD, is a trainer and researcher with Dolan Consulting Group. He has decades of experience teaching and training on various topics associated with criminal justice, and has conducted research on a variety of topics related to crime and law enforcement. He holds a bachelor’s degree in public administration and criminal justice from the School of Public and Environmental Affairs (SPEA) at Indiana University, with a minor in social psychology. He possesses a master’s degree in criminology from Indiana State University. He earned his doctorate in criminal justice from the School of Criminal Justice at the University of Cincinnati with concentrations in policing and criminal justice administration.
Dr. Johnson has published more than 50 articles on various criminal justice topics in academic research journals, including Justice Quarterly, Crime & Delinquency, Criminal Justice & Behavior, Journal of Criminal Justice, and Police Quarterly. He has also published more than a dozen articles in law enforcement trade journals such as the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, Police Chief, Law & Order, National Sheriff, and Ohio Police Chief. His research has primarily focused on police-citizen interactions, justice system responses to domestic violence, and issues of police administration and management. Dr. Johnson retired as a full professor of criminal justice at the University of Toledo in 2016.
Prior to his academic career, Dr. Johnson served several years working within the criminal justice system. He served as a trooper with the Indiana State Police, working uniformed patrol in Northwest Indiana. He served as a criminal investigator with the Kane County State’s Attorney Office in Illinois, where he investigated domestic violence and child sexual assault cases. He served as an intensive probation officer for felony domestic violence offenders with the Illinois 16th Judicial Circuit. Dr. Johnson is also a proud military veteran having served as a military police officer with the U.S. Air Force and Air National Guard, including active duty service after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Before that, he served as an infantry soldier and field medic in the U.S. Army and Army National Guard.
[1] Shachtman, Noah. “Army’s Drones of the ‘Future’ Head to Iraq, Now.” Wired (June 17, 2008). Accessed: https://www.wired.com/2008/06/the-defense-sec/
The shortage of qualified applicants for sworn law enforcement positions shows no signs of improving in the coming years.[i] As many agency leaders begin to adapt to lower staffing numbers, difficult conversations are taking place around the continued viability of sworn officers performing jobs that could be done by civilians with less training and at a lower cost. But how can agencies accomplish this without triggering unnecessary risks to officer safety and public safety?
We all know that there are a variety of factors behind this staffing crisis. Public support for the police in some quarters has declined markedly, fueled by biased media coverage and exploited by some politicians and activist groups. But beneath these law enforcement-specific issues, there are more fundamental challenges that are impacting multiple sectors of the economy.
Due to declining birth rates since the 1980s, the percentage of the population that is between the ages of 21 and 40 continues to decline.[ii] Obesity in America continues to increase, as overall physical fitness declines, making it difficult to find physically qualified candidates.[iii] The prevalence of mental health issues and substance abuse has skyrocketed since 2008, making it more challenging to find psychologically qualified candidates.[iv] Finally, as is the case in multiple sectors of our economy, law enforcement agencies face an unprecedented labor market trend in which employees have resigned from their jobs in massive numbers to pursue jobs that offer better working conditions and better work-family life balance—the very things that sworn law enforcement careers often cannot offer.[v]
Through our experience assisting law enforcement agencies with their recruiting and retention efforts, we have repeatedly observed that outliers do exist: there are law enforcement agencies with strong leadership, serving communities with high levels of support for the police, that are having few difficulties filling their officer vacancies. They are recruiting and retaining their employees at a high rate. These agencies are noteworthy exceptions to the national trend, and their work should be applauded and studied by other agencies.
However, most law enforcement agencies, especially large and mid-sized urban agencies, are constantly struggling to find qualified candidates to fill their sworn officer vacancies. In previous articles, we have recommended a number of evidence-based strategies for attracting more qualified applicants.[vi] In this article, we will propose an additional measure that agencies can use to ease the pressure to fill sworn officer vacancies—increased civilianization.
The necessity for officers to respond to the day-to-day needs of their communities must take precedence. Claims that many sworn officers are performing invaluable work in administrative capacities on the day shift may be legitimate in many cases. However, these arguments seem unlikely to persuade the public as staffing numbers plummet, police presence in the field diminishes, and 911 response times climb. Law enforcement leaders should begin planning accordingly.
What is Civilianization?
Civilianization is the policy of identifying positions within the organization that do not require arrest powers and the legal capacity to use force and filling these positions with non-sworn personnel.[vii]
For generations, law enforcement agencies have employed non-sworn personnel in some capacity, especially as it relates to clerical work. Since the 1960s, however, population growth, economic recessions and the 1960-1993 rise in crime pushed many law enforcement agencies to expand the roles of civilians within law enforcement agencies.[viii]
For example, prior to the 1960s, police dispatchers, parking enforcement officers, animal control officers, crossing guards, paperwork clerks, crime lab technicians and motor pool employees were exclusively sworn officers in many agencies across the country. In some communities, the police even handled the ambulance service.[ix] Over the last six decades, these positions have transitioned to non-sworn personnel without any great decline in the quality of police services.[x] In fact, today, we commonly think of these positions as civilian positions, not sworn officer duties.
It is important to remember, however, that when such civilianization was first suggested in the 1960s, there were outcries by police executives and police unions alike that non-sworn employees were incapable of performing these tasks in a proficient manner. There was concern that civilians would not have the requisite knowledge of the geography of the city or police procedures to be effective dispatchers. Claims were made that officers and citizens would die if police officers and firefighters were replaced by civilians in the dispatch center.[xi]
Obviously, the civilianization of police-fire dispatch did not result in a widespread surge of deaths or notable decline in emergency services. If anything, the civilianization of dispatch centers improved dispatch quality while reducing its personnel costs. The same could be said for parking enforcement and animal control enforcement. Despite their greater face-to-face interaction with the public, and the ability to enforce low-level laws, the transition of these positions to civilians has not resulted in a crisis of assaults and deaths of these civilian employees.[xii]
It is likely that any present-day suggestions for further civilianization will face similar opposition. This opposition is understandable, due to the fact that change is inherently difficult and the fact that civilianization could mean more officers dealing with day-to-day patrol responsibilities that they have not been required to take on for years. But, it is only fair to put these concerns in historical perspective and keep in mind that many concerns about civilianization in the past proved to be unfounded.
What are the Benefits?
What are the benefits of greater civilianization to the law enforcement agency? The benefits include filling needed vacancies in the field with experienced officers, reducing personnel costs, and expanding the potential employee applicant pool. When positions that are currently filled by sworn personnel are filled by civilian personnel instead, it frees up sworn officers to fill vacancies in the patrol division where officers are currently needed most. Even if the department waits until a sworn officer retires from the position before converting it to a civilian position, it still prevents the creation of a new vacancy in the patrol division since an officer will not leave the street to fill the vacated administrative job.
As civilians are commonly paid a lower wage than sworn personnel, civilianization results in lower costs to the agency. But despite offering a lower wage, civilianization of some positions can actually expand the potential applicant pool. Since civilianized positions should not require the authority to use force, why would such employees need to demonstrate excellent physical fitness? Physical disqualifiers for sworn positions would not prevent someone from managing the department computer network, working dispatch, filing evidence, or examining fingerprints in a crime lab. Employees in civilian positions have greater opportunities for a normal work schedule, and less physical danger and associated stress than that experienced by sworn personnel.
All of these factors likely work together to increase the number of individuals willing to apply for a civilian position. Individuals who might be unwilling, or unqualified, to apply for a sworn officer position may be well-suited for a civilian position. This creates a larger hiring pool for these positions. Such circumstances may also impact sworn personnel in three positive ways.
First, retiring officers who are interested in transitioning to a civilian position within the department in retirement would be able to do so and stay involved with the organization without the sacrifices to physical safety and work-life balance that come with sworn field operations.
Second, some officers who have been placed on temporary light duty assignments that have become permanent due to a variety of health impairments may also be able to transition to a civilian position, adding value to the organization in a manner similar to that of retired officers.
Third, there is also the likelihood that some individuals will join the department as civilians, without an accurate understanding of what real police work is like, or not being able to see themselves as sworn officers. However, after a few years of working inside the agency and seeing police work first-hand, they may realize the job fits them and their skills. In this way, civilianization also serves as a pipeline for recruiting sworn personnel. Many agencies currently employ sworn officers who began their careers in a civilian position.
Civilianization, if done properly, clearly offers many benefits for law enforcement agencies.
What Positions Should Be Civilianized?
What positions could, or should, be filled by non-sworn staff? The main criteria is a position that does not require arrest powers and the legal capacity to use force. Across the nation today, in the majority of law enforcement agencies, dispatchers, parking enforcement officers, animal control officers, crossing guards, administrative clerks, crime lab technicians, IT network technicians and motor pool employees are non-sworn civilians.[xiii]
Is your agency falling behind the national trend by employing sworn officers in any of these positions? In this era of skyrocketing violent crime and cycles of violent civil unrest, isn’t there a greater need for these sworn personnel to be out on the street?
What additional positions might be civilianized? Some law enforcement agencies have hired civilians (often retired detectives) to conduct the background investigation portion of the recruiting process. Other agencies are beginning to civilianize most of the personnel engaged in the recruiting and selection process. Some large police departments, initially because of call volume and later because of the pandemic, utilize call centers where citizens file police reports for minor incidents over the phone. If no one responds to the scene in such cases, the question becomes, why does the person taking the report have to be a sworn officer?
Some agencies have begun utilizing civilians as investigators in their internal affairs division, taking initial statements from citizen complaints. Public relations/public information positions do not require the ability to arrest and use force. In some cases, civilians with the right public relations experience may perform these functions as well or better than the sworn personnel currently in those positions.
Regarding law enforcement agencies that employ aircraft or watercraft, why would the pilots and crew of these craft need to be sworn personnel? Since vehicle crash reports are a civil function performed by the police, can this function be assigned to trained civilians? Sworn officers could perform the initial emergency response and enforcement functions if there was evidence of a crime or traffic misdemeanor (DUI, driving while suspended, etc.), while the civilian employees could handle the traffic direction, accident investigation and completion of the report.
Is there a good reason that the administrative services branch of the department would need to employ sworn personnel? After all, do any of these positions require making an arrest or employing physical force? If not, then why would the person supervising these personnel need to be a sworn officer as well? Wouldn’t it be more fitting that the person supervising the administrative division be an individual who worked his or her way up through the ranks in that division? Such a person would have a greater understanding of the daily operations and experiences of the administrative division and its staff.
Conclusion
Each law enforcement agency will have to assess the plausibility of these civilianization options based on the particularities of their operations and staffing realities. Agency leaders will find some of the aforementioned civilianization options more plausible than others. But, for the vast majority of agencies facing sworn staffing challenges, greater civilianization should be considered as a viable option for maintaining operational effectiveness in the coming years.
We know that much of the law enforcement profession is experiencing a crisis in recruiting and retention. We know that the skyrocketing crime rates across the nation and persistent civil unrest situations require as many cops on the street as possible. We need to take a sober look at where the sworn officers have been assigned within the organization and determine which serves the greater needs of the community—a sworn officer in an administrative role at a desk, or a sworn officer backing up his or her colleagues out on the street. It is not an easy leadership decision to make—it is a decision that requires courage and fortitude. But now is the time to make these difficult decisions.
About the Authors
Matt Dolan, J.D.
Matt Dolan is a licensed attorney who specializes in training and advising public safety agencies in matters of legal liability, risk management and ethical leadership. His training focuses on helping agency leaders create ethically and legally sound policies and procedures as a proactive means of minimizing liability and maximizing agency effectiveness.
A member of a law enforcement family dating back three generations, he serves as both Director and Public Safety Instructor with Dolan Consulting Group.
Richard R. Johnson, PhD, is a trainer and researcher with Dolan Consulting Group. He has decades of experience teaching and training on various topics associated with criminal justice, and has conducted research on a variety of topics related to crime and law enforcement. He holds a bachelor’s degree in public administration and criminal justice from the School of Public and Environmental Affairs (SPEA) at Indiana University, with a minor in social psychology. He possesses a master’s degree in criminology from Indiana State University. He earned his doctorate in criminal justice from the School of Criminal Justice at the University of Cincinnati with concentrations in policing and criminal justice administration.
Dr. Johnson has published more than 50 articles on various criminal justice topics in academic research journals, including Justice Quarterly, Crime & Delinquency, Criminal Justice & Behavior, Journal of Criminal Justice, and Police Quarterly. He has also published more than a dozen articles in law enforcement trade journals such as the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, Police Chief, Law & Order, National Sheriff, and Ohio Police Chief. His research has primarily focused on police-citizen interactions, justice system responses to domestic violence, and issues of police administration and management. Dr. Johnson retired as a full professor of criminal justice at the University of Toledo in 2016.
Prior to his academic career, Dr. Johnson served several years working within the criminal justice system. He served as a trooper with the Indiana State Police, working uniformed patrol in Northwest Indiana. He served as a criminal investigator with the Kane County State’s Attorney Office in Illinois, where he investigated domestic violence and child sexual assault cases. He served as an intensive probation officer for felony domestic violence offenders with the Illinois 16th Judicial Circuit. Dr. Johnson is also a proud military veteran having served as a military police officer with the U.S. Air Force and Air National Guard, including active duty service after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Before that, he served as an infantry soldier and field medic in the U.S. Army and Army National Guard.
[iii] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2020). National Center for Health Statistics Fast Facts: Weight Status and Size. Washington, DC: Center for Disease Control. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/obesity-overweight.htm
[ix] Wilson, James Q. (1968). Varieties of Police Behavior: The Management of Law and Order in Eight Communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; Rubinstein, Jonathan (1973). City Police. New York: Hill and Wang.
[x] Maguire, E.R., Shin, Y., Zhao, J., & Hassell, K.D. (2003). Structural change in large police agencies during the 1990s. Policing: An International Journal 26(2), 251-275; King, William R., & Wilson, Jeremy M. (2014). Integrating Civilian Staff into Police Agencies. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
