News   Jun 21, 2024
 4.4K     6 
News   Jun 21, 2024
 1.7K     3 
News   Jun 21, 2024
 1.9K     1 

Why do police have to stand at construction sites?

i remember there was a good column by John Barber in the Globe a while back on this very topic, last year sometime.. the only part still available without paying for the column is....


Strong arm of the law reaches into two-tier system
JOHN BARBER

jbarber@globeandmail.com

E-mail John Barber | Read Bio| Latest Columns
Toronto is such a safe city every pothole merits police protection. There is no maintenance so trivial nor event so anodyne it does not require at least one uniformed police constable to stand around uselessly, looking bored. Next thing you know, "paid-duty" police will be serving ice cream to tourists. It's a great advertisement for the city.
 
A police officer is required at city road construction sites because it is required under provincial law. The city of Toronto has no control over this rule.
Yeah, I wasn't sure if it was a city or provincial law. Either way it seemed like overkill to me.


i remember there was a good column by John Barber in the Globe a while back on this very topic, last year sometime.. the only part still available without paying for the column is....


Strong arm of the law reaches into two-tier system
JOHN BARBER

jbarber@globeandmail.com

E-mail John Barber | Read Bio| Latest Columns
Toronto is such a safe city every pothole merits police protection. There is no maintenance so trivial nor event so anodyne it does not require at least one uniformed police constable to stand around uselessly, looking bored. Next thing you know, "paid-duty" police will be serving ice cream to tourists. It's a great advertisement for the city.
Do you remember off hand the gist of the article?

Anyways, here is the link.
 
Last edited:
You can get the text of the article free through the Toronto Public Library website. All you need is a library card number (which is also free). Just click on Magazines and Newspapers/Newspaper List/Enter title begins with as "Globe and Mail" and you can read articles dating back 30 years. The GUI isn't the greatest but it works and its free!

Here is the text that I cut and past from the TPL website:

Strong arm of the law reaches into two-tier system
John Barber. The Globe and Mail. Toronto, Ont.: Sep 3, 2008. pg. A.11

Toronto is such a safe city every pothole merits police protection. There is no maintenance so trivial nor event so anodyne it does not require at least one uniformed police constable to stand around uselessly, looking bored. Next thing you know, "paid-duty" police will be serving ice cream to tourists. It's a great advertisement for the city.

But at $62.50 an hour, minimum, it's an expensive one - and growing more so all the time. Five years ago, various groups, companies and city departments paid off-duty police officers $12-million to provide mandated security in circumstances deemed unworthy of the attention of on-duty police officers. This year they will be paying more than double that.

People complain about rent-a-cops patrolling Chinatown, but the actual market is controlled by real cops performing comparatively minor duties. Provincial statutes and city bylaws protect their monopoly, individual unit commanders decide who must pay them and when, and the police union decides unilaterally how much they charge. "Paid duty" is a tidy little business.

An insensitive, anti-union, free-market observer might even call it a racket, in view of the fact there are so many qualified companies and individuals willing to guard potholes at a fraction of the price the Toronto Police Association charges for the service.

And if the duties are more than trivial, in which case they legitimately require the attendance of uniformed police officers, what's with the invoices?

A liberal can only rankle at the emergence of a two-tier policing system, in which some services are funded from the tax base and others outsourced, with no clear and consistent distinction between the two.

Whatever else it may be, paid duty remains mysterious. A report on the subject from Police Chief Bill Blair, requested by his board and forwarded on to city hall's executive committee for yesterday's meeting, did little to clear it up - other than to demonstrate that "the criteria used to determine whether on-duty or paid-duty personnel will be utilized at specific events" are shockingly arbitrary and contingent.

"Nobody could tell us very clearly how it began," said police board chair Alok Mukherjee, recalling the discussion Chief Blair's opaque report inspired. "The service says it is because of bylaws that require police supervision. The city says the police required us to write those bylaws."

In 2007, according to the chief's report, city departments and agencies spent $1.3-million for freelance policing of public works. Private companies pay the largest share, but non-profit community groups do not escape.

If a local unit commander decides your bake sale needs security, you have no choice but to pay. He or she will decide how much security you need, and the union will dictate the cost.

One of the biggest mysteries is how the union earned the right to set the rates, which range to $80 an hour for a staff sergeant and require a minimum three-hour shift in all cases. The police board asked the chief to return with a better explanation of that and other issues.

The chief is no stranger to the matter, having reformed the paid-duty system while serving as a staff superintendent. The problem at the time was that certain officers, especially those stationed downtown, were dominating an essentially unregulated business.

He made it fair for police, instituting a paid-duty office to distribute the opportunities more equitably, but nobody has paid much attention to the needs of the "clients," as the police describe their often-unwilling benefactors.

Their cause is hopeless, no matter how many more reports come out.
 
Yeah, that really does almost seem like a racket. This needs to be reigned in, esp. if there are 3rd party well-trained rent-a-guard companies willing to step in.

$65/hr is ludicrous for standing around a sewer.
 
The police also help prevent environmental activists from vandalising construction equipment and materials.
 
Yeah, that really does almost seem like a racket. This needs to be reigned in, esp. if there are 3rd party well-trained rent-a-guard companies willing to step in.

$65/hr is ludicrous for standing around a sewer.

not bad eh? :D a buddy of mine made close to $50,000 just from pay duty and its all cash! He's a young guy who bought a Corvette from the cash he made.

Have you ever noticed cops are usually happy standing there with a big smile on. They're thinking about what they can do with the money as minutes go by. :)


Now, look into how much traffic officers get paid for attending their court dates (for 15min or so). It'll make you consider a career in Policing. Police constables can easily make over $70,000/yr with the best benefits out there.
 
Last edited:
why not just hire a security guard for it then? Only a police officer standing on guard can stop vandalism?
 
Q: "Why do police have to stand at construction sites?"

A: "There usually is no place for them to sit"
 
In regards to pay duty officers there are an important service to any major construction company. My company personally uses them all day, all over the place for numerous jobs. They are not needed for every job within Toronto but required for anywhere conjestion and volume are factors to both the public and/or the workers safety. Having that authority figure in uniform is much stronger presence then a typical labourer with a vest on.

As for the wage, it not an outstanding amount when you really think about it. These cops do this outside their regular duties meaning these are overtime hours therefore requiring higher wage. This amount is paid by the private contractors who hire them. You can say that this does filter through to the taxpayer but come on, it is the cost of doing business. You do not complain about other trades highered by the contractor, even though they can be paid for doing little to no work as well. Additionally, their hourly wage is rather modest when compared to the hourly rate of most trade subcontractors.

I hope this provides some clarification on the matter.
 
The police service also makes money from paid duties, from a 15% admin fee, this helps offset regular operating costs to the service that are normally paid for by taxpayers.

If a local unit commander decides your bake sale needs security, you have no choice but to pay. He or she will decide how much security you need,

That seems fishy, I doubt they can make an organization hire paid duties unless required by law, (such as a traffic disruption), and a local bake sale certainly wouldn't qualify.
 
Last edited:
As for the wage, it not an outstanding amount when you really think about it. These cops do this outside their regular duties meaning these are overtime hours therefore requiring higher wage. This amount is paid by the private contractors who hire them. You can say that this does filter through to the taxpayer but come on, it is the cost of doing business. You do not complain about other trades highered by the contractor, even though they can be paid for doing little to no work as well. Additionally, their hourly wage is rather modest when compared to the hourly rate of most trade subcontractors.

I hope this provides some clarification on the matter.
So basically, you're saying:

"Hey, it's OK, because other high-paid workers sometimes work almost as little as they do."

I guess you don't realize how ludicrous that sounds.

And quite frankly, I don't care if these are pseudo-"overtime" hours for those policemen. I'm sure others would be glad to step in to get hours at "time", but they can't because of how the system is set up.
 
RE: Why do police have to stand at construction sites?

a lack of chairs?
 
As for the admin fee, this is also billed directly to the contractor as it pays for the office staff that cordinates where and when the pay duty officers work.

As for my original point, I was saying that this hourly amount is not that ludicrous if you think about it. They are supplying a body plus a vehicle, fuel, downtime (since they are not working potential overtime on their cases). which you have to keep in mind when charging $62/h. I can assure you that my crews have no issues with this amount and appreciate their services as the average labourer finds directing busy areas very hectic especially in rush hour.

The problem is you are comparing it to paying a teenager to work the counter at a Tim Hortons.
 

Back
Top