The Buffalo News
BUFFALO, N.Y. — The high cost of off-duty time for sick or injured police officers simply can’t be overlooked in the tight fiscal times faced by City Hall. Compensation for those injured in a hazardous profession certainly is warranted, as a moral duty as well as a legal one. But there’s also a duty to police the police, and eliminate abuses.
Taxpayers ultimately foot the bill for “injured-on-duty” police officers, and there is evidence enough for compensation policy changes. That burden falls largely on the State Legislature, which does not have a strong record -- or, for that matter, much of a record at all -- of bucking public-employee unions. But that may be needed, if there are to be changes in a compensation system that can pay an officer more to stay home than to work, and makes it more attractive for those who can’t do even light-duty jobs to collect a tax-free paycheck than to apply voluntarily for lower disability payments.
There’s a way to end this, or at least curb what reportedly has become a large-scale practice by some Buffalo police officers. That involves action by state lawmakers, but it also means City Hall has to work even harder to make sure that the injured-on-duty status, or IOD, isn’t being abused. To be sure, this is a tall order.
Consider a recent article by News staff reporter Lou Michel, citing the rapid increase in IOD cases and in the dollars paid by the city from the levels of just five years ago -- from $5.7 million for salaries then to $7.3 million a couple of years ago to $10 million last year.
Mayor Byron W. Brown, through various declarations during his administration -- vows to combat the problem, to launch investigations, to crack down on abuses -- has acknowledged the situation fully, but it is clearly going to take even more of a push.
The city may not want to wait for the State Legislature to step up and make the necessary wholesale changes to end a practice in which police officers here or elsewhere can “shop around” doctors every couple of years for six months or more of leave at a time, and wind up with an effective pay increase of 40 percent or more. When Social Security, Medicare or income taxes don’t have to be paid, that can happen. For officers legitimately on leave, that’s helpful. For some who reportedly have gone golfing or pursued a hobby or second career, that’s an abuse of the system and, ultimately, of those who truly need the extra time and the extra help.
Indeed, the administration should try changing the rules by reaching contractual agreement that, if a police officer is out as injured on duty for 12 months without the ability to return to full duty, that police officer must switch over to the state disability system. It’s absurd to rely on people to voluntarily harm themselves financially.
Next, or in the meantime, the city should provide more comprehensive training -- the Emergency Vehicle Operating Course, to name one -- so that officers can be fully equipped to handle increasing duties and risks. In other words, give officers more ability to avoid injuries.
An often-cited union rationale for higher rates of injury leaves involves the transition made here, prior to this administration, to one-officer police cars. But that complaint isn’t fully supported by the experiences of cities with larger populations and higher crime rates, such as those in south Florida, that have used one-officer patrol cars for years.
Injured-on-duty claims have been a heavy burden for the third-poorest city in the nation, and state and local politicians in a position to do something about it have to act to limit both the injuries to officers and the wounds to the city budget.
Copyright 2010 The Buffalo News