www.uncivilservants.org

jayce wrote: Did anyone here have anyone close to them die on that day? Is anyone still missing from this neighborhood? Or has the magnitude of that day been lost already?

So complain all you want about line jumpers and double parkers. But don't take so callously 9/11 heroism. Its not something you should ever make light of. Those were peoples husbands and wives and children. That privilege never expires. Not ever. Not so long as the survivors are hacking up their lungs from asbestos poisoning. Not so long as bones are still being found atop neighboring buildings. Not so long as there is a great big hole in the ground where we cannot even get a memorial completed. You may not like that it is used for bagel line cutting. And thats fine. Be thankful you had the "privilege" of not being down there that day.

It's crassly invoking all that for the purpose of cutting a line for a bagel that's exactly what many of us here find so offensive. It trivializes the sacrifices of the true heroes. I can guarantee you that the firefighters suffering from chronic lung injury from their service in the aftermath of that attack are not waving it like a flag in people's faces every time they go to the bagel store.

I usually dont agree with the sentiments of jayce, but in this instance some valid points have been raised. None here seems to be advocating illegal parking whether it be city employees or regular citizens. The fact of the matter is that emergency vehicles are exempt from certain traffic rules. Many city employees are also extended parking privledges ie: Judges,teachers,court officers,traffic enforcement agents,parks dept personel,DOT in addition to postal employees, government employees, court officers,the press and even diplomats along with consulate members thats just to name a few. So if a War is to be initiated might as well be aware of some of the other abusers out there.

The union did not make that concession. The PBA and the City of New York could not reach a contract. The PBA filed with PERB that the city and the union were at an impasse. PERB is a state arbitration panel. The decisions of PERB are final. PERB made the decision that rookie salary would be cut. PERB and PERB alone is resposible for the current contract, and as a matter of fact, the next contract (which is already expired for almost three years.) I'm tired of hearing that it's the unions fault. It's not the unions fault. It's a result of binding arbitration. The city and the union had no choice.

And this has what to do with illegal parking?

Since this thread has already taken a turn, how bout this story...

Low-paid rookie cops offered credit cards Eyewitness News
(New York - WABC, March 12, 2007) - New York City police rookies surviving on a dismally low salary are now being offered a new resource to help them make ends meet: Visa credit cards.

The Municipal Credit Union introduced the Visa card this year to help New York police cadets, who make $25,100 while they are in the academy, after offering 36-month loans for the past two years, the Daily News reported in Monday's edition.
Rookie officers have to pay for everything from uniforms to books.

"We had recruits come back and ask if they could take a second loan," said Ralph Pagan, the credit union chief marketing officer.

He said the union heard cadets complaining about their financial problems, which led them to come up with the idea of credit cards.

"It's a new feature," Pagan said. He did not reveal the interest.

The Municipal Credit Union opened in the early 1900s to serve city employees as an alternative to loan sharks.

While the city provides a gun, badge and bulletproof vest, cadets are burdened with having to pay for other costly equipment expenses.

The city, the police department and the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association all agree that rookies' salaries are too low, especially given the dangers officers must face. A state arbitration panel instituted the $25,100 salary.

Until 2005, however, the starting pay for new police officers was about $36,000.

Its a fringe benefit of the job, I'm sure noone faults you for eating a free whopper while you're at work.

King without a crown wrote: Its a fringe benefit of the job, I'm sure noone faults you for eating a free whopper while you're at work.

i don't think eating a whopper is illegal, perhaps eating one for free?

fringe benefit my ass. its plain as day, its abuse of position. i understand if its part of doing the job, but parking a personal car isn't.

Smokin' Joe wrote: by "no one faults you," i think king meant "you," i.e. oiseau, not "one," as in we police officers. i think he was suggesting either that oiseau works at burger king, or that, in general, if one works at burger king, no one would fault them for eating a whopper.

i'm not sure what b.k.'s policies are about feeding employees, but i would like to hear from some of our posters in blue what the deal is: do they get free meals at tom's and terrace and elsewhere?

He was implying that Oiseau works at BK, and saying that illegally parking as a cop is akin to BK employees eating free Whoppers. I'm not sure whether they're technically allowed to or not, or whether KWAC's statement was assuming that they are or not. The ethical implications of the analogy are totally different depending on whether BK employees are allowed to eat the food for free or whether the management considers it stealing.

Smokin' Joe wrote: [quote=Carnivore][quote=King without a crown]Its a fringe benefit of the job, I'm sure noone faults you for eating a free whopper while you're at work.

Wrong. It's illegal, and not a "fringe benefit of the job." They are allowed to double park in an emergency in the line of duty, but not just for their convenience. It is corrupt, an abuse of their authority and an abuse of the public trust. Although using their position to illegally park may be less blatant and outrageous, it is along the same continuum as taking a bribe (which a corrupt cop might also dismiss as "a fringe benefit of the job").

by "no one faults you," i think king meant "you," i.e. oiseau, not "one," as in we police officers. i think he was suggesting either that oiseau works at burger king, or that, in general, if one works at burger king, no one would fault them for eating a whopper.


i'm not sure what b.k.'s policies are about feeding employees, but i would like to hear from some of our posters in blue what the deal is: do they get free meals at tom's and terrace and elsewhere?

Well, I never wore blue, but I did once proudly wear red. Yes, that's right, I used to work at a Roy Rogers. And I can assure you that not only did we get to cut in line for a roast beef sandwich, we quite often got it for free.

Not with "jus", however. We had to pay if we wanted it "au jus".

King without a crown wrote: I think all of the double parked vehicles on alternate side of the street parking days should get ticketed too.

I couldn't agree more. But it should be once a week per side.

King without a crown wrote: I think all of the double parked vehicles on alternate side of the street parking days should get ticketed too.

I agree.

so let's recap:

we've had the 9/11 excuse
the 'poor pay' excuse
and now the 'other people do it' excuse

what's your next defense of double parking cops?

Carnivore wrote: [quote=King without a crown]I think all of the double parked vehicles on alternate side of the street parking days should get ticketed too.

I couldn't agree more. But it should be once a week per side.

I agree with once a week per side (it works fine in PS), but disagree about the ticketing - IF the car leaves an address or phone number in the windshield so they're not parking someone in.
If they just park and disappear, a charming workaround becomes a big pain in the ass.
Is this burning issue ready for a thread of it's own?