ONTARIO POLICE CHIEFS SEEKING HAMMER OVER SUSPENDED OFFICERS

Well, well, well are we perhaps seeing some cracks in the blue wall here? Granted police officers are unionized almost without fail, which generally speaks volumes about their employers whether upper police management or impotent police commissions. Last Monday's Waterloo Region Record carrys this story "Police chiefs want power to suspend pay". Apparently Ontario is the only province where police chiefs cannot by law stop paycheques to suspended officers. Personally I like that idea as I suspect there is way too much cronyism and favouritism anyways. Why do you think all the officers have a union to protect their interests in the first place? It certainly isn't any expression of faith or confidence in senior mangagement. Also innocent until proven guilty seems fair to me.

There is the rub. Once convicted of a criminal offence should an officer immediately lose their pay or as is currently, only after being sentenced to jail? If not sentenced to jail but dismissed after a hearing under the Police Act is that the time to drop the financial axe? Then of course there are the possible appeals of either a criminal conviction or of a Police Act dismissal. I would agree that right now the balance is tilted way too much in favour of officers who are in trouble. At the same time I don't believe the Police Chief, unilaterally, should be the final arbiter of an officer's livelihood.

I think what galls citizens and taxpayers is the glacial speed of the process. From charges laid, suspension to conviction to dismissal can easily be three or four years. This is far too long to keep an officer on the payroll who eventually is found guilty in criminal court. An officer only up on Police Act charges is a different matter. That I could see waiting until all avenues are exhausted before stopping his pay.