Question:Are City Policemen/Firemen exempt from living in the city while in the Citys' employ? In the Sunday Times Union there was an article about the new Fire Dept. hires with no mention if they were City residents.
Question:Are City Policemen/Firemen exempt from living in the city while in the Citys' employ? In the Sunday Times Union there was an article about the new Fire Dept. hires with no mention if they were City residents.
Years ago there used to be a requirement, but I believe it has been lifted or at the very most you must be a resident "at the time of hire".
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
Years ago there used to be a requirement, but I believe it has been lifted or at the very most you must be a resident "at the time of hire".
I don't know about fire, but I read not to long ago that cops are required to live in the city the first 6 years. Not sure if that's totally right though.
"I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked, dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix,"
I don't know about fire, but I read not to long ago that cops are required to live in the city the first 6 years. Not sure if that's totally right though.
6 years...i think you are correct as i seem to remember that number
6 years...i think you are correct as i seem to remember that number
I think firefighters don't have the requirement... I know of one who retired years ago and didn't spend more than a year as a city resident.
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
I also don't know about fire, but I think the police who don't live IN the city during maybe their first 5 years lose something like a holiday or something, not a great loss.
And of course we ALL know what a LIAR McTHIEF is, states he wants his department heads to live IN the city (which means they would be paying city taes and their children would be associating with city kids and city schools; well, OK, the dept heads get lavish pay they can send their kids to private schools).
So we know how McTHIEF is a big hypocrite and a big wuss because he REFUSED to make the police chief live IN the city. The chief claimed he would crsh at his mother's house on the days he works. Has there been an audit of any sort to insure that he is indeed "sleeping" at his mother's house every work day? And what about when his kids may have a school function that he attends, can we guess that the mayor allows him to submit for mileage to drie to his Saratoga Co home to attend functions of his children?
The news reports what the polices are verbally stated, but the news needs to put spies out there and follow these employees around when the employees, such as the cop, claim they will sleep at someone's house IN the city.
Optimists close their eyes and pretend problems are non existent. Better to have open eyes, see the truths, acknowledge the negatives, and speak up for the people rather than the politicos and their rich cronies.
Question:Are City Policemen/Firemen exempt from living in the city while in the Citys' employ? In the Sunday Times Union there was an article about the new Fire Dept. hires with no mention if they were City residents.
police officers are not city employees.....they are an LLC security firm with a contract....
I think the fire dept is something like that too.....
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
police officers are not city employees.....they are an LLC security firm with a contract....
I think the fire dept is something like that too.....
You are correct....that is what makes me so confused as to why they have so much power over us with negotiations.
Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid - John Wayne
TIP TO NEW VISITORS TO THIS FORUM - To improve your blogging pleasure it is recommended to ignore (Through editing your prefere) the posts of the following bloggers - DemocraticVoiceofReason, Scotsgod08 and Smoking Bananas. They continually go off topic, do not provide facts and make irrational remarks. If you do not believe me, this can be proven by their reputation scores or by a sampling of their posts.
You are correct....that is what makes me so confused as to why they have so much power over us with negotiations.
if one works for GE, GE cannot demand where you live....they don't care as long as you show up to work. One doesn't care because one has a job and a union
are the police departments too big to fail.....I betcha the government overwhelmingly says 'YES'.....
it may be law enforcement but it's also like trying to get a good and trustworthy housekeeper that's not an 'illegal alien'
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
however if your boss was Naomi Campbell you wouldn't want to be her housekeeper...
Quoted Text
Naomi Campbell Is Accused of Assaulting Housekeeper Sign In to E-Mail This Printer-Friendly Reprints Save Article
By COLIN MOYNIHAN Published: March 31, 2006 The model Naomi Campbell found herself smiling at a horde of photographers yesterday — not from a red carpet or a catwalk, but from the Midtown North police station after she was charged with assaulting her housekeeper with a telephone.
Jeff Christensen/Associated Press Naomi Campbell left the Midtown North police station after being charged with attacking her housekeeper with a cellphone. The assault occurred about 8:30 a.m. at Ms. Campbell's apartment on Park Avenue, the police said, adding that the housekeeper, Ana Scolavino, 41, was struck in the back of the head by the telephone. She was taken to Lenox Hill Hospital, where she received four staples for a gash, according to the Manhattan district attorney's office.
Ms. Campbell, 35, was taken to the station house, and more than 100 reporters, photographers and television camera operators quickly gathered outside. Ms. Campbell left the station just after 4 p.m., wearing jeans, a black baseball cap, sunglasses and a white fur poncho. She grinned as news photographers alongside paparazzi rapidly clicked their shutters, some shouting her name.
It was not the first time Ms. Campbell had been accused of injuring an employee with a telephone. In 1998, she was arrested by the police in Toronto and charged with assaulting an assistant. Her lawyer in that case said the accusation was false and had been made by a disgruntled employee who was about to be fired. Ms. Campbell pleaded guilty in 2000 in that case, and her record was cleared in exchange for her expressing remorse, under an agreement with the prosecution.
Last evening, Ms. Campbell was arraigned downtown in the Criminal Court Building about two hours after she arrived, much more quickly than is considered usual.
During the arraignment, in front of Judge Richard M. Weinberg, an assistant district attorney, Elina Kreditor, said that Ms. Campbell was preparing for an appearance on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" when she became angry because she could not find a pair of jeans.
"She accused the complaining witness of stealing the jeans," Ms. Kreditor told the judge. "As the complaining witness was walking down the stairs she threw a cellphone at her head." Ms. Kreditor asked that Ms. Campbell surrender her passport and put up $3,500 in bail.
David Breitbart, a lawyer for Ms. Campbell, said she was not guilty and termed the bail request "unsightly" and "an insult." He then asked the judge to let her fly to South Africa today to participate in a charity event involving Nelson Mandela.
Judge Weinberg granted his request and ordered that Ms. Campbell be released on her own recognizance. She walked out onto Centre Street, once again wading past a sea of clamoring news and entertainment reporters, before departing in a black car. Her next court appearance was scheduled for June 27.
After the proceeding, Mr. Breitbart said that Ms. Scolavino knew "she was in the process of being fired" and "made some kind of allegation against Naomi."
Attempts to reach Ms. Scolavino at her residence in Brooklyn were unsuccessful last night.
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
I believe that ALL public employees should live within the community that they serve. All teachers, administrators and support staff should live in the school district that they work in. All police and all fire in the municipality in which they are employed. All municipal workers in the municipality in which they are employed. All county workers in the the county in which they are employed.
Oh -- all state legislators an federal legislators should live in their district. Some just maintain a mailing and voting address in the state -- the law doesn't members of the U.S. House to actually live in their districts. It is my understanding that the two Democrats running for the House - 1 in the district to our north and 1 in the district to our south actually live in NYC and maintain "weekend getaways" in the districts in which they are running. Many NY State Legislators actually live in Florida or, even, Puerto Rico and only maintain a mailing and voter registration address in New York state.
George Amedore & Christian Klueg for NYS Senate 2016 Pete Vroman for State Assembly 2016[/size][/color]
"For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest that is sleeping in the unplowed ground." Lyndon Baines Johnson
do you hear yourself....'serve'.....serve at our pleasure or their pleasure, because living here isn't the only issue....
SHOW ME THE $$$ TRAIL!!!!
Yes, I hear myself. Most of our public employees work very hard and do SERVE the community. I reiterate that they should be legally compelled to live in the community that employs them.
George Amedore & Christian Klueg for NYS Senate 2016 Pete Vroman for State Assembly 2016[/size][/color]
"For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest that is sleeping in the unplowed ground." Lyndon Baines Johnson
if one works for GE, GE cannot demand where you live....they don't care as long as you show up to work. One doesn't care because one has a job and a union
are the police departments too big to fail.....I betcha the government overwhelmingly says 'YES'.....
it may be law enforcement but it's also like trying to get a good and trustworthy housekeeper that's not an 'illegal alien'
But GE is a private company. Government employees are different because as taxpayers WE are the ones paying them. We can CHOOSE not to buy things made by GE and any company. if we don't like their policies, their employment practices, etc.
However there is something to clarify in that. GE and many companies get tax subsidies. That may not cause us to want to require them to live a certain area because it depends where they are getting tax exemptions Of course, we know that Imelt gets richer of the financially struggling homeowners in the city of Schenectady and off the Rotterdam homeowners, although Rotterdam homeowners are going to tend to be higher income (even senior citizens, many in Rotterdam have high incomes as proven by lack of eligibility for STAR enhanced) surely Imelt gets higher compensation because GE gets bigger profits because he was able to weasel the city, town, and county to make the homeowners pay the taxes of GE. But surely that happens in other locations in the country. So it's difficult when it's a company
And even also, a foreign company may make something that is sold in the U.S. but they don't iive IN the U.S.
There are also the companies long in the U.S. that move out of the country to save taxes.
So it's difficult for private companies, other than we can choose NOT to purchase their products. We cannot choose not to pay taxes (unless we want our home seized and we work to hard to have our homes, pay our mortgages, spend money to fix up our homes and gain equity.
Now there are the people on welfare, paid for by taxes. Is it interesting that we get the names and incomes of employees who actually work for the money they get but if people are on welfare we do not get to know their names (and they get cash benefits, rental assistance, food stamps, WIC, child care, HEAP, phones, Cadillac health insurance with no premium cost, no co-pay, no deductibles, no requirements to get referrals, no mandates for getting a second opinion, no requirements for money saving mail order, etc. and all this collectively can provide an equivalent cash value of upwards of $50,000 but there is no "see through NY" website for that.
Why are average low level clerks on the seethrough NY website who make $30,000 and have no policy ability, they took tests to get the job, they are not patronage jobs. Why are their names posted on that site both active employees and retired people? If the website said "Clerk, Department of EnCon, salary $32,500" vs Mary Jones, Clerk, etc."
But certainly people who are elected, appointed politically, policy makers in agencies, and all local people sitting on committees that impact our lives, eefinitely, knowing their finances is important, and where is the financial disclosure? These types of people file ethics forms, but why are those forms so private, who decides whether the public can review information. It's just like the governor lives with his girlfriend and because thy aren't married, we are not entitled to know her finances which obviously help the gov.
Optimists close their eyes and pretend problems are non existent. Better to have open eyes, see the truths, acknowledge the negatives, and speak up for the people rather than the politicos and their rich cronies.
Logged
