Actually I think various companies and gov’t agencies have different rules and in some you earn your sick time and get paid if you don’t use it and in others you use it or lose it. This is usually stated in whatever kind of employment contract you have, or company practice which would be explained at time of hire. I think someone else commented that many companies now just lump sick and vacation together so everyone gets the same benefits, honest people and liars alike.

Tam, perhaps we do have a legitimate disagreement over the use of sick leave and who owns it. You assume I have the “common misconception”, I believe it is you. Since there is this “common misconception” (i.e. so many people believe it that it’s now COMMON), then why do you use the word “LYING” about people you otherwise know nothing about? Isn’t it possible that those officers were under the same “common misconception” that their leave, whether it is sick or other, was theirs to use?

I still fail to see what any of this has to do with BPD officers use of FMLA though. You concede it is in fact Federal law, and you also concede that they have contractual provisions for a buy out. So is your problem really with the contract and not the officers? If so, then perhaps the city should hire better negotiators? I’m standing by my disgruntled theory about you too…. “in order to garner better benefits and pay [contract?] than others similarly situated [other municipal employees?]” – sounds like someone who feels undervalued to me. Add that to your other comments about law enforcement; BPD specifically [Google: Boise Guardian/Tam said – great tool] and a revealing portrait is indeed painted. Still just a theory though 🙂

Final points: If these officers are anything like a lot of people I know, they have on many occasions gone to work “sick” just to avoid using the leave. Were they saving the leave for future catastrophic illness or just “cowboying up” so that they didn’t leave their fellow officers/department/city hanging? Who knows? Would Twin Falls go back and pay for the days the officers didn’t call in when they could have? No. So again, I believe those days are theirs. Fraz, if I separate with 10 sick days on the books, that’s 80 hours the city didn’t have to pay me to not come to work. If they don’t buy out sick leave, then that’s where they would “collect”. They either need to pay along the way, pay at the end, or just don’t offer “sick leave” (many private companies are doing just that). They can’t have their cake and eat it too (i.e. come work for us – we have this great BENEFIT – that we hope you’ll never use so we don’t have to pay you for it.)

First, to suggest that moving jobs for a $5000 bonus is somehow wrong just because these 3 are officers is absurd. Not only are they getting $5000, they’re probably getting a raise in their base salary, better benefits, a better place to live (IMHO), and the protection of a contract which they didn’t have in Twin Falls. This is not wrong; it’s the Capitalist system in action! I guarantee you there’s a reason why TFPD has lost 20% of their force to other agencies – let’s look into that if we want a real story.

Second, can someone explain to me why using all leave prior to separating from employment is wrong? I was under the assumption that once you earned leave, sick or other, it was yours to do with as you please. Obviously if they’re leaving, they won’t get to use it, so why should the city of Twin Falls get to collect the windfall? Again, those officers EARNED that time, it’s THEIRS, just like a 401k or a pension – so get off your high horses!

And finally, there’s Tam. I’ve been watching Tam’s posts for quite awhile and she’s even more anti-police than Fraz! Wow, to use the word LYING without any knowledge of the facts of this case is harsh. What makes you think any of these officers pretended to be sick? Obviously they were burning their leave. I suppose if I were to make assumptions here, it would have to be that they were in the right since the outcome was in their favor. If they were wrong or LYING, then why did the city settle? Tam automatically (and predictably) jumps to the conclusion that these three are “unethical, dishonorable, dishonest officers”. And then she disparages Boise officers for using sick leave or FMLA??? Federal Law allows husbands and wives 12 weeks for the birth of a child – so what. Tam, I’m trying to figure you out, but maybe you could help… disgruntled employee, too many tickets, relative shot by BPD, what’s the deal?? (I lean toward the first only because you seem to have a great deal of “behind the scenes” knowledge about the BPD).

This story is about a Chief who got ticked that MORE of his people were jumping ship and people are starting to look at him – the sick leave was just a weak cover story. Fraz, you of all people should be jumping up and down, happy as a clown, that we’re getting these officers. After all, aren’t you the one looking for government responsibility with our taxes? (I am!) The cost savings to the City of Boise by hiring trained and Idaho POST certified officers is HUGE! Twin Falls PD has the problem; it’s not our problem. Sorry for the long rant.

The City of Twin Falls must account for all the money coming in and all the money going out. For someone in that area who is willing to go look, there should be a paper trail. You would want to look at the record(s) showing all payments the city made, for what purpose, and to whom during the time period in question.

Use the Idaho Public Records Law to gain access to these documents. http://www2.state.id.us/ag/manuals/publicrecords.pdf will get you to the AG’s Public Records Law Manual for further information) Happy sleuthing!

In a state like Idaho, with an overwhelming amount of conservatives who tout the old “personal responsibility” clap-trap, the response is so negative to a few officers who are looking for somthing to improve their lives and to ensure they can contribute to their own future. They are doing what they should do; look for a better job than the one they’ve got.

You are the one interjecting wrongdoing. You are unfairly giving weight to an employer over the employee. What if the Chief is the bad egg here?

What is missing from this argument is the actual proof these officers took any time that wasn’t coming to them. You can “suspect” anything you want. You can “suspect” your way into a corner, which you have done here.

Simply put: the poster has no argument. None.

Without proof they did anything wrong, you have no story. You are simply guessing and that is all. You are trying to shine a spotlight on the three officers and make them look bad and you are trying to make the City of Boise Police Department out to be bad guys too all without the facts.