——— ‘u‘—jn_ _ A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF FORMAL DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES OF POLICE DEPARTMENTS OPERATING UNDER AND IN THE ABSENCE OF CIVIL SERVICE Thesis for the Degree of M .. S .. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY RONALD HOUSTON ROGERS 1967 A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF FORMAL DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES OF POLICE DEPARTMENTS OPERATING UNDER AND IN THE ABSENCE OF CIVIL SERVICE BY Ronald Houston Rogers AN ABSTRACT OF A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Police Administration and Public Safety 1967 Approved ABSTRACT A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF FORMAL DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES OF POLICE DEPARTMENTS OPERATING UNDER AND IN THE ABSENCE OF CIVIL SERVICE by Ronald Houston Rogers This thesis deals with the formal disciplinary pro- cedures of medium-sized police departments operating under the jurisdiction of a Civil Service system and outside such a system. The purpose of this research was to determine if the formal disciplinary procedures of the police departments operating in the absence of Civil Service are more consis- tent with principles of discipline identified from the lit- erature reviewed on the subject, than are the formal dis— ciplinary procedures of the departments operating under Civil Service. The literature pertaining to the subject of disci- pline in the fields of police administration, business and industry, personnel administration, and the military ser- vice was reviewed focusing upon the theoretical aspects of discipline. Principles considered basic to any disciplinary procedures were identified from the review of the literature and are presented. A field study was conducted in which the chief ad- ministrators of four Michigan police departments were Ronald Houston Rogers interviewed to ascertain what formal disciplinary pro- cedures are followed by their departments. The information gathered in these interviews, using an interview guide based on the principles of dis- cipline which were identified, attempted to determine how the departments are organized with respect to the disciplinary process; what policies and procedures are followed; and, what limitations are imposed upon the au- thority and discretion of the chief administrator. The existing differences between the Civil Ser- vice departments and the Non-Civil Service departments were identified and the procedures of both groups were evaluated in terms of their consistency with the princi- ples of discipline. It was found that the lack of quan- titative data prevented a more precise evaluation, and that a more sophisticated methodoloqy than that used in this study should be employed. It was also concluded that any future study of this type should involve a larger sample from the concerned population. A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF FORMAL DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES OF POLICE DEPARTMENTS OPERATING UNDER AND IN THE ABSENCE OF CIVIL SERVICE BY Ronald Houston Rogers A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Police Administration and Public Safety 1967 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my gratitude and apprecia- tion to the following persons: To my wife, Faye, for her moral support and patience during the time it took to complete this phase of my educa- tion. To my mother, for the faith she has in both her sons. To my late father, Lonnie W. Rogers, and my late uncle, Harry H. Rogers, both former police officers, for instilling in me a desire to achieve competence in this field. To Chief of Police James J. Robinson, and former Police Comissioner George E. McNally, of the City of Mobile, Alabama, for encouraging me to complete my formal education, and for their trust and friendship. To Professor Frank D. Day, my thesis advisor, for his constructive criticism of this effort, and to the other members of the committee for their helpful suggestions. To the chiefs of the police departments in the State of Michigan who took the time to provide information for this study. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLE DGDENT S O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 LIST OF CHARTS O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 LIST OF APPENDICES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Chapter I. THE PROBLEM AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED The Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Definitions of Terms Used . . . . . . . Organization of the Remainder of the Thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . . Police Administration Literature . . . Discipline in Business and Industry . . Personnel Administration Literature . . Military Discipline . . . . . . . . . . III. IDENTIFICATION OF PRINCIPLES FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF DISCIPLINE . . . . . Principles for Evaluation of Procedures IV. COMPARISON OF THE FORMAL DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES OF FOUR MICHIGAN POLICE DEPARTMENTS O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Me thOdo logy O O O O O O O O I O O O O 0 Departments Operating Under Civil Service . . . . . . . . . . . . Non-Civil Service Departments . . . . . Procedural Differences . . . . . . . . iii Page ii vi 23 26 33 36 37 4O 40 42 51 60 Chapter V. Summary . Evaluation of Procedures Conclusions Recommendations BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDICES SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS iv Page 63 63 64 66 68 70 74 Table LIST TABLE OF ORGANIZATION, TABLE OF ORGANIZATION, TABLE OF ORGANIZATION, TABLE OF ORGANIZATION, OF CHARTS Page Police Department A . . 44 Police Department B . . 49 Police Department C . . 53 Police Department D . . 58 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page A INTERVIEW GUIDE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 B CIVIL SERVICE FOR FIRE AND POLICE DEPARTMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 C RULES OF THE DIVISION OF POLICE . . . . . . . 96 D GENERAL RULES 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 12 5 E RULES AND REGULATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 vi CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED One of the most important functions of the chief administrator of a police department is to administer dis- cipline. It is generally agreed that "every police de- partment has a direct and nontransferable responsibility for enforcing pr0per conduct by its members."1 Inasmuch as there is no way to insure that each individual police officer will, at all times, behave properly and perform to the best of his ability, it is necessary that proce- dures be established and used by the police administrator in fulfilling this particular responsibility. Misconduct by members of a police department, re- gardless of the degree of visibility of that misconduct, limits the effectiveness of that department as agency of social control and public service. The illegal or improper actions of a few officers which receive wide notoriety tends to reflect unfavorably upon the entire department. It may be pointed out that the ultimate solution to dis- ciplinary problems does not lie in elaborate disciplinary procedures, but that an organized approach to the problem "designed to provide the necessary authority for the 1The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society. A Report by the PresdIentTE CommisEIon on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967), p. 115. 2 supervisor, with due regard for the rights of the indivi- dual officer, is a goal worth seeking."2 I. THE PROBLEM Statement of the problem. It was the purpose of this study (1) to review the existing literature on the subject of discipline; (2) to identify from the review of the literature principles which should be used to estab— lish guidelines for the administration of formal disci- plinary procedures; (3) to compare the formal disciplinary procedures of police department Operating under the juris- diction of a civil service system with the procedures of departments operating in the absence of such a system; and, (4) to evaluate the formal disciplinary procedures of the departments studied in terms of the principles identified from the literature. Importance of the study. It is noted that many of our municipal police organizations are subject to the jurisdiction of an independent civil service commission or board in personnel matters. Under such systems some of the decisions of a chief departmental administrator are subject to review by an authority outside the 2Bruce C. Young, "An Evaluation of the Formal Disciplinary Procedures of Three Metropolitan Police De- partments With a Recommended Procedure Guide" (unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1963). P. l. 3 organizational framework of the department. Some depart- ments, however, retain complete control over all personnel matters within the department, including discipline. This study provides information regarding the for- mal disciplinary procedures followed by departments opera- ting under the jurisdiction of a civil service system; and, departments Operating in the absence of such juris- diction. The basic principles of discipline supported by authorities in the fields of business and industry, per- sonnel administration, and military service, as well as police administration, are identified. The study then identifies the formal procedures of police departments under both categories, which are either consistent or in- consistent with these principles. In the final analysis, the value of this study will be determined by the extent to which the principles offered in Chapter III are followed in the future by police administrators as guidelines in the administration of discipline. Limitations of the study. It is recognized that informal disciplinary procedures may exist in the depart- Inents studied, as well as in the administration of dis- cipline in other fields._ This thesis limits itself to study of the formal procedures only, bearing in mind that the informal practices may have an effect upon the formal procedures. The field study was confined to four police de- partments in the state of Michigan and its findings and conclusions do not necessarily hold for all departments, even in similar circumstances. With respect to those police departments Operating under Civil Service, this study does not attempt to deter- mine if the formal procedures which they follow are wholly consistent with Civil Service law. It is concerned only with the actual practices. II. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED To provide a better understanding of the thesis, several general terms are Operationally defined at this point. These definitions are not referenced as they are combinations of ideas incorporating the views of the author. Civil service. A legally constituted system of procedures governing personnel matters in governmental agencies under its jurisdiction, and which has the power to invalidate the personnel actions of a departmental ad- ministrator, or chief municipal administrator. Discipline. The process, either positive or nega— tive in nature, by which conformity to authoritative norms, is sought. Discretion. The degree of flexibility which an administrator or supervisor has in his choice of actions in dealing with a situation within the sc0pe of his re- sponsibility. Formal disciplinary procedures. For the purposes of this study, those measures for the administration of discipline which are clearly set forth in either rules or policy. Morale. A sense of common purpose and degree of dedication on the part of each employee. III. ORGANIZATION OF THE REMAINDER OF THE THESIS Chapter II, Review of the Literature, discusses the literature pertaining to the subject of discipline in the field of police administration, business and industry, the military service, and personnel administration. Chapter III, Identification of Principles for the Administration of Discipline, presents and explains the principles abstracted from the literature which should serve as guidelines for the administration of formal dis- ciplinary procedures in any size police department. Chapter IV, Comparison of the Formal Disciplinary Procedures of Four Michigan Police Departments, describes the formal disciplinary procedures of the departments studied, and identifies the differences between the pro- cedures of the departments under civil service, and those not under civil service. Chapter V, Summary and Conclusions, analyzes and evaluates the procedures of the departments studied in terms of the principles model offered in Chapter III. A summary of the study, develOpment of the conclusions, and recommendations also appear in this chapter. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The literature which directs itself to a discussion of discipline is generally concerned with the examination of formal rules of conduct and sanctions for the violation of these rules. This review of the literature, however, will deal with the more theoretical aspects of discipline and discuss some of the principles which should be con- sidered in develOping formal procedures for the adminis- tration of discipline in police organizations. I. POLICE ADMINISTRATION LITERATURE O. W. Wilson, until recently Superintendent of the Chicago, Illinois, Police Department, discusses dis— cipline as function of command in his book Police Adminis- tration. He points out that it is a function which must be exercised in order to develop a police organization which responds positively to direction and control.3 Accordingly, Wilson's approach to discipline is positive rather than negative. He regards it as "a form of training and an important constructive leadership tool for elimi- znating weakness and preventing their development."4 The 3O. W. Wilson, Police Administration (New York: thGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1963), p. 173. 41bid. department which is undisciplined is, in his view, one which is lacking in training. The responsibility for this organizational weakness lies not only in the short- comings of the formal training program, but upon the failure of superior officers to require their subordinates to observe formal departmental procedural guidelines and rules of conduct.5 He indicates that discipline, as a control and direction tool, is intended "primarily for the weak and deficient, although it affects all members of the force because all are potentially subject to it."6 Wilson distinguishes between discipline and pun- ishment. He feels that properly administered discipline results in voluntary conformity to department rules and regulations. Punishment, however, is a sanction which must be applied when conformity is not forthcoming. Wilson's concept of the relation of discipline, training and punishment is summed up in his statement: "The best disciplined forces are the best trained and therefore the least punished."7 Wilson makes the Observation that "members of an undisciplined force lack esprit d3 corps; they suffer from a damaged morale and have a lackadaisical attitude Ibid. Ibid. 7Ibid. toward their work, their supervisors, their department, 8 and the public." In the final analysis he places the responsibility for the state of discipline within a depart- ment upon the supervising officers. He identifies three primary responsibilities of an immediate superior officer in the administration of discipline. (1) to discover the weakness, deficiency, failure, or overt act of a subordinate that indicates the need for corrective action; (2) to analyze all the factors involved in order to decide the most suitable actions; and (3) to initiate and, in most instances, carry out the disciplinary action.9 In order for subordinates to understand what is expected of them, Wilson indicates that supervision must "provide their subordinates with clear and concise in- 10 structions." Further, it is the supervisor's respon- sibility to see that all disciplinary action of a serious nature should be recorded.11 Wilson states that the final review of disciplinary action should be retained within framework of the depart- ment itself in the office of the chief.12 Clifford Scott, writing in Leadership for the Police Supervisor, comments that there are few words which have been more generally misunderstood and misused than 81bid. 91bid., p. 174. lOIbid., p. 176. llIbid. 12Ibid., p. 174. 10 the word "discipline."l3 He points out that the root of the word means pp_teach but that its careless use has made it virtually synonomous with some type of punitive action.l4 Scott goes on to discuss the relationship between the dis- cipline of a police department and the level of morale, 15 in terms of cause and effect. He regards the clear trans- mission of orders as essential in avoiding misunderstandings which may necessitate disciplinary action.16 Gocke also commented upon the relationship between morale and discipline. The purpose of building morale is to make the men more efficient, to create a discipline that is vol- untary and enthusiastic rather than enforced, and to stimulate their minds and wills toward desired ends. Morale work is calculated to bring out, encourage, and develop the best there is in the men. It aims to stimulate and assist the weak, direct the strong, cor- rect the erring, educate the uninformed, and further encourage the successful. It brings enjoyment to work and pride in accomplishment. Morale work is designed to take the men's thoughts away from their troubles. It is not intended to reform offenders, though it frequently does so. Its primary purpose is to strike at any possible source of inefficiency and disorder, and thereby prevent conditions that result in a state of mind wherein the individual is willing to commit Offenses against the rules and regulations of the department.17 13Clifford L. Scott and Bill Garrett, Leadership For The Police Supervisor, (Springfield: Charles C Thomas, 1960). p. 50. 14 Ibid. lsIbid., p. 52. 16Ibid., p. 53. 17B. W. Gocke, "Morale in a Police Department," Journal 9£_Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, 36:216, September-October, 1945. 11 G. Douglas Gourley, in an article dealing with discipline in police administration, also discusses the positive and negative forms of discipline. He comments that positive discipline is possible only when the objec- tives of an organization or group, and the procedures for attaining the objectives are known to all personnel con- cerned.18 He feels that if a police organization fails to supply its members with current c0pies of rules and regulations which clearly define the rules of conduct, methods of procedure, and the authority of various ranks, problems of discipline are inevitable.19 "Whatever authority is considered desirable to give to each level of supervison should be established in "20 writing and made known to all. Bruce Smith, Jr., in the revised edition of his father's book Police Systems in the United States recog- nizes that the control which any administrative head is able to exercise is determined by his power to discipline "the members of the rank and file." He goes on to point out that the mere existence of such powers is usually sufficient for its support of the executive's authority 18G. Douglas Gourley, "Police Discipline," Journal pf Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, 19 Ibid., p. 87. 2oIbid.. pp.98-99 12 and for this reason the powers are rarely used. However, he states that this rationale does not obtain in the case of police service. The very nature of the work--the large powers entrusted to police, the fact that they often operate alone and far from supervision, and the corrosive influence of almost continuous association with crim- inals and delinquents--tends to make infractions of disciplinary rules a matter of more frequent occur- rence and of more serious moment. Hence the disci- plinary powers of the police administrator need to be kept in good working order because there is likely to be frequent need for their exercise.21 Smith goes on to discuss the limitations which civil service regulations impose upon the executive dis- cretion of the police administrator in disciplinary matters. "Either by law or by regulation, the police ad- ministrator is told in no uncertain terms that he cannot take major disciplinary action with decision and vigor."22 Citing a number of studies which indicated a high percentage of offending policemen who have been reinstated repeatedly after being dismissed in a disciplinary action, Smith regards the disciplinary methods of most city forces as grossily inadequate to meet the special requirements of police work. His views on the matter are best summa- rized in his statement: "a sound discipline will probably 2J'Bruce Smith, Jr., Police Systems in the United States. (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1960), p. 136. 22 Ibid. 13 contribute more to the solution of our municipal police problems than any other single recourse now available."23 A most interesting discussion of discipline in the literature within the field of police administration is found in Police Personnel Management by A. C. Germann.24 Germann expresses the thought that "the most delicate internal problem facing the police executive is that of discipline."25 He points out that some of the lesser of- fenses are not viewed favorably by most police adminis- tration but at the same time they often react to such con- duct by covering up or glossing over it.26 Germann regards the primary objective of disci- pline in a police department as an aid "to the officer in knowing his duty and performing it with the same care- ful obedience as in the military."27 He cautions, how- ever, against the detrimental effect of a discipline which is overly strict and rigid in nature, upon both the police and the public.28 23Ibid., p. 138. 24A. C. Germann, Police Personnel Management. (Springfield: Charles C Thomas, 1963), pp. 164-174. 251bid., p. 164. 26Ibid. 27Ibid., p. 165. 281bid. 14 He also discusses both the positive and negative approach to discipline. The positive approach is achieved by what he terms development of "the intellect"--through education, training, and instruction.29 Negative disci- pline is achieved through the control of "the will", by the techniques of admonitions and punishment.30 He suc- cinctly points out that the negative approach is the one most easily understood by some administrators. The role of the supervisor is regarded by Germann 31 These are the as the key to effective discipline. decision-makers in the choice of either positive or neg- ative measures, with the negative being recommended as the last resort after all positive discipline has failed.32 Germann discusses the use of trial boards as part of formal departmental disciplinary procedures. He recom- mends its use in order "to relieve the chief of police of some of the onus for disciplinary action, and provides protection against ill-advised peremptory disciplinary "33 decisions. Bruce Young implies that this procedure 291bid. 30Ibid. 3lIbid., p. 169. 32Ibid., p. 170. 33Ibid. 15 suggests that the chief who utilizes a trial board pro- cedure "is unwilling to personally and solely accept the responsibility for his action and cannot be depended upon to act with judgment and consideration."34 However, Germann recommends that trial board recommendation be just that--recommendation, with the final decision on the action to be taken residing in the Chief of Police.35 An internal investigation unit with the assigned task of investigating all complaints made against members of the department is recommended also by Germann.36 The polygraph, or "lie detector" is also recom- mended for use in disciplinary investigation, but only by a trained polygraph examiner.37 It is noted that both the internal investigation unit and the polygraph can serve the best interests of 38 both the legitimate complainant and the accused. The text Municipal Police Administration, pub- lished by the International City Manager's Association, also recognizes the positive and negative approach 34Young, pp. git., p. 9. 35Germann, pp. gip., p. 171. 361bid. 37£E£§° 38 Ibid. 16 39 It regards the primary aim of discipline to discipline. as "a change in the attitude and action of the individual officer whose work has not been in conformance with depart- ment standards, so that he performs as he should."40 Other purposes of discipline are: to serve as a deterrent to potential offenders; and, to bring about a public aware- ness that all members of the department are expected to conform.41 In the administration of discipline, in order that these purposes be accomplished, speedy, positive, and just disciplinary action must be taken. It is felt that "two principal deterrents to dereliction are swift- "42 It is recommended that ness and certainty of action. any disciplinary action requiring more than a minor rep- rimand be recorded by some type of memorandum which should include: (1) The situation calling for an interview with the employee; (2) specific reasons for the interview; (3) summary of employee's statement or explanation; (4) summary of supervisor's statement; and (5) mutual 39International City Manager's Association. Municipal ZPolice Administration. (Chicago: International City Manager's AssocfitTon, 1961), P. 167. 4OIbid. 4lIbid. 42 Ibid. l7 understanding of what employee and supervisor will do to improve performance or prevent a recurrence with an understanding of future disciplinary action if the employee fails to correct.43 The text goes on to recommend that the employee concerned be required to read the memorandum and sign a statement acknowledging that he has read it and under- stands it.44 Municipal Police Administration also discusses the problem encountered in the jurisdiction of various types of bodies or agencies which exercise review power over a police department's disciplinary actions. It points out that in spite of the faults of many of these agencies, some administrators and reviewing commissions or agencies, have effected "a balance between complete administration efficiency and the complete protection of the individual against disciplinary action."45 A contrasting view of the effect of Civil Service on disciplinary procedures in police administration was expressed by Raymond Fosdick in his book American Police Systems. Civil service laws and regulations have gone to extreme lengths in the United States in safeguarding policemen against unjust disciplinary action. In 43Ibid., pp. 167-168. 44Ibid., p. 168 4SIbid., p. 169. 18 some cities the civil service system itself assumes sole responsibility; in others, the commission have the right to review the action of the police adminis- trative authority, and may order reinstatement in case of dismissals, or lesser penalties than those imposed. In most police departments when disciplinary action is taken, charges must be preferred in writing and the case submitted for trial. The trial may be conducted along the lines of a criminal proceeding as in New York with due regard for legal rules of evidence and all the technicalties of regular court procedure, or it may be a more or less formal method observed by an administrative officer in enforcing discipline. The various practices that are employed differ from city to city, and there is no standardized arrangement.46 Fosdick goes on to discuss the limitations of Civil Service: In its application to a police department civil service has serious limitations. In the endeavor to guard against abuse of authority, it frequently is carried to such extremes that rigidity takes the place of flexibility in administration, and initiative in effecting essential changes in personnel is crippled or destroyed. Too often, as we have already seen, in connection with the chiefs of police, civil ser- vice is a bulwark for neglect and incompetence, and one of the prime causes of departmental disorganization. Too often does the attempt to protect the force against the capricious play of politics compromise the prin- ciple of responsible leadership, so that in trying to nullify the effects of incompetence and favoritism, we nullify capacity and intelligence too.47 Fosdick comments that if most businessmen at- tempted to Operate under such limitations, they would be "foredoomed to failure from the start."48 46Raymond B. Fosdick, American Police Systems. (New York: The Century Company, 1920), pp. 281-282. 47Ibid., p. 284. 481bid., p. 285. 19 In his book Police Planning, Wilson also comments upon the effect of Civil Service on formal police disci- plinary procedures: When evidence is discovered of lax discipline, a review of the disciplinary machinery and the procedures used in dealing with disciplinary cases may reveal the cause. When lax discipline is found in spite of the fact that the police chief has requisite disci- plinary authority, the blame is his. Recommendations should then be made to strengthen discipline. When the police chief lacks essential authority, the blame rests with the device that has deprived him of his natural and necessary power. This device is found outside the police department, usually in the form of a civil-service charter provision or law.49 The police chief should have sufficient authority to "remove policemen from service, subject to the direction of the administrative head of the city."50 The police chief should have a clear cut prior understanding with his supervisor regarding: (l) matters that may require pre-action consul- tation and approval; (2) action that the chief may take without prior clearance but on which a report is desired; and (3) other matters on which no report is desired.51 Dr. John Kenney, in his book Police Management Planning, regards discipline as a mental attitude. This jparticular definition is positively oriented and implies 'that it goes beyond the scope of "an arbitrary enforcement 49O. W. Wilson, Police Planning. (Springfield: Charles (3 Thomas, 1962), p. 227. SOIbid. SlIbid. 20 of rules and regulations laid down by authority."52 He goes on to point out that conditions in the police ser- vice in general necessitates a practical application of discipline which is most suitable for the weakest and more inefficient as O. W. Wilson pointed out.53 However, Dr. Kenney answers in the affirmative the question: Is it possible for a police department to establish a positive approach to discipline? Citing G. Douglas Gourley, he proposes a code of ethics for the police which he feels would standardize the rules gov- erning the official conduct of police Officers.54 In the absence of such a code, uniform disciplinary policies of a department could still be approached positively.55 Dr. Kenney expresses the opinion that these policies should place most of the responsibility for disciplinary actions upon immediate supervisors with only the more serious situations referred to the upper echelon.56 Kenney emphasizes that the "corrective measures taken should be regarded generally as an action "to further train officers in the department."57 52John P. Kenney, Police Management Planning. (Springfield: Charles (2 Thomas, 1959), p. 79. 53 Ibid., p. 70. 54Ibid SSIbid. 561bid. 57Ibid., p. 71. 21 Dr. Kenney also recognizes the problem of referring disciplinary action to a Civil Service Commission for an 58 appeal hearing as a major one. With regard to procedure, he recommends that: In initiating any type of disciplinary proceeding, it is fundamental that the accused should be informed in writing of the charge against him. Stenographic records should be made of the proceedings. Opinions supporting the guilt or innocence of the accused of- ficer should be included.59 The only reference to discipline made by V. A. Leonard, in Police Organization and Management, concerns the recording of all disciplinary actions concerning an officer in his personnel record.60 In his study, Bruce Young, evaluated the formal disciplinary procedures of three metropolitan police de- partments. He discusses at length the importance of good supervision in maintaining discipline. The general responsibility of a supervisor con- cerning discipline is to maintain orderly conduct among his subordinates and to apply disciplinary measures which will eliminate conditions interfering with efficiency, insure cooperation, and protect the rights of the group. To accomplish this his goals are: (l) to foster a feeling of mutual respect between himself and his organization; (2) to keep his officers satisfied while at the same time having them conduct themselves in accordance with the established rules 58Ibid., p. 70. 591bid., pp. 72-73. 60V. A. Leonard, Police Organization and Manage- ment. (Brooklyn: The Foundation Press, 1964), p. 136. 22 of conduct; and (3) to train the police officers within his control to perform their duties efficiently.61 Young lists eleven principles which he feels should serve as guides to achieve these goals. They are: 1. Make instructions simple and understandable. 2. The supervisor must know and follow the rules. 3. The principles of organization must be known and followed. 4. Take prompt action on disciplinary violations. 5. Investigate before acting. 6. Permit the accused officer an opportunity to present his side before any decision is made. 7. Decide what action to take. 8. Inform the offender of the disciplinary action taken or recommended. 9. Keep records of all formal and informal disci- plinary actions taken. 10. Follow established disciplinary procedures. 11. Disciplinary actions of the chief or superin- tendent should not be subject to review other than for dismissal from the service.62 Rex R. Andrews of the Burbank, California Police Department, in a paper presented at an institute for po- lice supervisors at Los Angeles State College listed some steps which he felt a line supervisor should follow in 61Young, pp. cit., p. 38. 62Young, pp. cit., pp. 38-50. 23 deciding what corrective measures, if any, were required in disciplinary problems. Briefly, they are concerned with four major questions. 1. Are all the necessary facts known to the supervisor? 2. Does the supervisor actually consider these facts before deciding upon the disciplinary measure? 3. Is the corrective measure administered in the prOper manner? 4. Is the disciplinary action followed up?63 II. DISCIPLINE IN BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY In the study of the literature concerning disci- pline in business and industry, there exists a relation- ship which parallels that of the public service executive and a Civil Service Commission. This parallel is the labor-management relationship, wherein the authority of the employer has been limited. The basic difference be- tween the two relationships is that in business the limi- tations on the employer's authority is by agreement through a negotiated contract with a union. In his book, Employee Discipline, Lawrence Stessin provides an inter- esting and informative study of this limitation of exec- utive authority. Considerable emphasis is placed upon 63Rex R. Andrews, "A Discipline Check List," Readings ip Police Supervision. (Los Angeles: Los Angeles State College Foundation, 1963) 24 the role of an independent arbiter in determining if the exercise of authority by management in applying discipline was prOper. Stessin's description of the arbitration pro- cess leads one to believe that there is considerable sim- ilarity between the labor management relationship and that of police administrator and a civil service commission. In another book, The Practice pp Personnel and Industrial Relations, Stessin identifies some administrative principles of discipline. The first is equal treatment, meaning that one set of standards applies to all employees. The second principal identified applies the "rule of reason." Determining "what is fair" leaves much to the discretion of the supervisor invoking the disciplinary process as Stessin indicates. A third principle involves 64 the timing of the disciplinary action. As Stessin puts it: Correction should take place soon after the act, but not when the manager is upset, angry, or in a "boiling mood." There are few Offenses so serious that discipline cannot wait for investigation of facts and cooling off of heads. This does not mean that the worker should not be put on notice that what he has done is wrong and that he might be punished.65 64Lawrence Stessin, Employee Discipline. (Washington: BNA Incorporated, 1960). 65Lawrence Stessin, The Practice pg Personnel and Industrial Relations, A Casebook. (New York: Pitman Publishing Corporation, 1964), p. 71. 25 Lawrence Appley in his book, Management ip Action, also emphasizes that one of the basic principles of disci- pline involves letting employees know what is expected of them.66 In The Principles pi Organization, James Mooney states that the discipline which is achieved in accordance with principles which are known to the organization is more likely to be effective than the discipline which is dependent upon the strength of the leader and the rules he sets forth.67 Orme W. Phelps in his book, Discipline and Dis- charge ip the Unionized Firm, states that procedure in administering discipline is of paramount importance "be- cause the machinery of enforcement is in the hands of management, with the latter acting in the capacity of "68 both prosecutor and judge. He views a correct pro- cedure as one which assumes that the employee is innocent until proven guilty, and which permits him every oppor- tunity to defend himself.69 66Lawrence A. Appley, Management ip_Action. (New York: Stratford Press, Inc., 1956), pp. 120-122. 67James D. Mooney, The Principles pi Organization. (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1947), p. 177. 68Orme Wheelock Phelps, Discipline and Discharge ip the Unionized Firm. (Berkeley: University of Cali- fornia Press, 1959), p. 141. 69 Ibid., p. 141. 26 Pfiffner and Sherwood, in their text Administra- tive Opganization, state that the kind of discipline which one finds in a military bootcamp has limited use- fulness in a free civilian society. They suggest that a different manner of motivating peOple to the accomplish- ment of organization goals is in order. They envision a system or procedures in which PeOple will become more sensitive to the effect of their behavior on their fellow men, and this will help to ameliorate and minimize the individual's sub- ordination to large—scale organization as a stan- dardizing enemy of human dignity.70 III. PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION LITERATURE In the fourth edition of Public Personnel Admin- istration, 0. Glenn Stahl devotes a chapter to the sub- ject of discipline.71 The forms of disciplinary action, their significance and the responsibility of the public service executive for discipline and some of the limi- tations placed on him by civil service, are discussed 72 at length. Stahl states that "disciplinary control is effective only if it is firmly, promptly, and consistently 73 exercised." He feels that this is most effectively 70John M. Pfiffner and Frank P. Sherwood, Admin- istration Organization. (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice- Hall, Inc., 1966), pp. 202-203. 710. Glenn Stahl, Public Personnel Administration. (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1956), Pp. 451-460. 72 Ibid 0 731bid., pp. 456-458. 27 exercised when the original disciplinary authority is vested in one executive.74 Accordingly, he should possess 75 The "authority commensurate with responsibility." limitations upon his discretion should be defined by a minimum of basic legal provisions in order to guard "against arbitrary procedure and punishment without just cause being duly shown."76 Pigors and Myers, in Personnel Administration, exphasize that most employees want to perform in the manner which is expected of them. The conditioning of family and school life develops considerable self-discipline and this majority of employees will not break rules or fail to accept instruction if the basic conditions con- ducive to good discipline are present in their organiza- 77 The focus of corrective disciplinary procedures tion. is upon those few who do not conform. If a disciplinary policy with sufficient and clearly defined penalties, is not formulated and implemented, this small group can "spread dissatisfaction and poor conduct throughout the organization."78 74Ibid. 7SIbid., p. 460. 76Ibid. 77Paul Pigors and Charles A. Myers, Personnel Administration. (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1961), p. 199. 78 Ibid. 28 In order to provide a framework which is conducive to the develOpment of self-discipline and deal with the troublesome minority, Pigors and Myers recommend a policy which includes: 1. A clear and reasonable list of plant rules, with uniform penalties for their violation. 2. Instruction of all employees in what is ex- pected of them, in terms of both observance of plant rules and established standards of job performance. 3. A procedure for telling employees how well they are meeting job standards and rules of conduct. 4. Careful investigation of the background and circumstances of each case before taking disciplinary action, which apparent breaches of conduct or expected performance do occur. 5. Prompt, consistent application of disciplinary measures by the employee's immediate superior, when quilty has clearly been established.79 Pigors and Myers devote the remainder of their chapter on discipline and discharge to a discussion of the procedures to be followed by those who are responsible for the handling of disciplinary problems. Considerable emphasis is placed upon the responsibility of supervisors to inform the employees of disciplinary policies, and an objective assessment of situations requiring the invo- cation of disciplinary action before applying corrective 0 O 80 or punitive measures. 79Ibid., pp. 199-200. 80Ibid., pp. 200-211. 29 Ordway Tead held that "good discipline is essen- tial for the orderly conduct of any organization where any considerable number of people are working together."81 He then poses two questions: What is "good" discipline; and, how can it best be achieved? He views the desired end result of discipline to be, in part: ....general and willing adherence to a certain minimum of reasonable rules or regulations which are necessary to assure promptness and regularity in attendance....freedom from gross insubordination to the reasonable requests of designated leaders.... avoidance of conduct which involves hazard to life and limb of fellow employees as well as to the pro- perty of the company.82 Tead comments on two widely different attitudes toward discipline which he describes as autocratic and democratic. The basic approach of the autocratic was founded in the motive of fear in controlling behavior with punishment as the primary device for transgressions.83 He enumerates some of the shortcomings of the autocratic 81Ordway Tead, "The New Discipline," Readings ip_ Personnel Administration, ed. Paul Pigors and Charles A. Myers, (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1952), p. 355. BZIbid. 83Ibid., p. 356. 30 Briefly they are: l. The desires of those commanded are never considered. 2. The sole appeal is to the fear motive thereby excluding any other motives which may produce better results. 3. Constant supervision is required because an attitude developes which encourages those commanded to "get away with" anything they can in the absence of the commander. This autocratic approach relies upon influence and power sources which lie outside the group in order to influence the group's behavior. The potential of the sources of power which lie within the group are in large part disregarded.85 The democratic or "new discipline" which Tead refers to, concerns itself with the motives of group approval, individual creativity, and a desire for im- proved status. "It aims to capitalize on those inner forces <3f thought and emotion which spontaneously give rise to individual application, group loyalty, and rea- sonable subordination of individual will to group achievement."86 In answer to his own question--what is good discipline?-—Tead answers this by: 84Ibid., p. 350. 851bid., p. 356. 86Ibid., pp. 337-358. 31 ....that orderly conduct of affairs by the members of an organization who adhere to its necessary regu- lations because they desire to cooperate harmonously in forwarding the ends which the group has in now and willingly recognize that to do this their own wishes must be brought into reasonable unison with the requirements of the group in action.87 Tead suggests that such discipline "is achieved "88 The remainder only by conscious educational effort. of the chapter provides an excellent discussion of pro- cedures which are most likely to do this. These pro- cedures require that management systematize the activities of the organization/taking care to assure "that all reg- ulations adopted are (a) as explicit as possible; (b) as few and simple as possible; (c) as clear as possible as 89 to penalties." These rules should be applied to indi- vidual cases consistantly and fairly with agreed procedures 90 utilized. The success of the "new discipline" approach is dependent not on a "new attitude" alone, "but upon specific procedures for adopting, interpreting, and applying . . 91 rules and orders in a cooperative way." 87ipig., pp. 359-360. 88ipig., p. 360. 89ipig., p. 361. goIbid. 91_—_—- Ibid., p. 362. 32 Keith Davis, in discussing disciplinary policies, emphasizes that consistency of action is the key to the whole problem. Research has shown that employees are more secure when they are able to predict how management will react to breaches of discipline, whether committed by themselves or by others. For themselves, employees want to know what they can or cannot do without having to ask like children. For others, they want the assurance that treatment will be equal under equal circumstances and that no one is likely to get either a better deal or a raw deal.92 In Governmental Manpower for Tomorrow's Cities, a report of the Municipal Manpower Commission, the pro- blem of discipline is discussed briefly. Dismissal and disciplinary procedures should be established and made known to all personnel. Respon- sibility for their application should be vested in department headsé subject to final review by the chief executive. Discipline as an integral element of management "should not be subject to control by an independent com- missioner or by political influences."94 The lack of flexibility in a personnel system, as is often the case under the independent Civil Service Commission, has forced 92Keith Davis, "Steps Towards A More Flexible Disciplinary Policy," Personnel. 38:55, May-June, 1961. 3Municipal Manpower Commission, Governmental Manpower for Tomorrow's Cities. (New York?’ McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1962)7’p. ll. 94 Ibid., p. 106. 33 some managers into developing their skills "in outwitting the rules."95 IV . MILITARY DISCIPLINE Arthur H. Miller in his book Leadership, empha- sized the necessity of prOper instructions in securing good discipline. When I find a man failing to comply with orders (said an officer), before criticizing him blindly for his failure, I look into the character of the instruction he has received. More than once I have found that an individual, who was supposedly failing to comply with instructions, had in fact done all or more than might have been expected when the nature of the instructions was taken into consideration. We should find out how the other fellow saw the sit- uation. He may honestly have seen it very differently from another.9 Miller goes on to recommend that the simplicity of the language used in instruction is of basic importance.97 William E. Hocking in Morale and Its Enemies, regards discipline as an important ingredient in the mental unity of an army. It involves the loss of personal free- 98 doms in order to achieve this unity. Hocking also 95Ibid., p. 67. 96Arthur H. Miller, Leadership. (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1920), pp. 138-139. 97Ibid. 98William E. Hocking, Morale and Its Enemies. (Yale University Press, 1943), pp. 118-119. 34 discusses the arbitrary stress which is placed upon per- forming certain tasks a certain way if for no other rea- son than to develop the conditioned acceptance of action based solely on an arbitrary criteria which may be in- volved in carrying out common purposes.99 However, he does recognize that all conduct is not governed by this theory and comments that "....the habit which is formed by an act of series of acts depends on the motive of the 100 act more than on the external shape of it." The Psychologyp£_Military Leadership by L. A. Pennington, Romeyn B. Hough, Jr., and H. W. Case, dis— cusses the role of discipline in a military organization. Discipline is recognized as an absolute necessity in any organized society with the codes of conduct, both formal and informal, providing for the "greater good of society."101 According to this text, the early use of disci- pline was concerned with the instruction of soldiers in the various skills necessary to enable a military unit to function effectively in combat. The actions of soldiers in performing such tasks as loading and firing weapons 991bid., pp. 119—120. lOOIbid., pp. 124-125. 101L. A. Pennington, Romeyn B. Hough, Jr., and H. W. Case, The Ps cholo pi Military Leadership. (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1943), p. 127. 35 which were bulky or cumberson required rigid and precise movements in order to produce effective firepower.102 With the develOpment of weapons which were easier to Operate after the War Between The States, discipline took on a different dimension. The initiative required of an individual soldier, acting as a part of a group seeking to achieve a common goal, required a change in the character of discipline.103 But the modern as well as the earlier concepts of discipline in the military regarded unquestioning obedience to orders as essential. Asking why an order is given is not compatible with military discipline.104 This book echoes O. W. Wilson's views regarding the positive and negative aspects of discipline, with punishment as a negative aspect. The author points out that the organization which is well-disciplined requires few punitive actions.105 1°21b16., pp. 128-129. 103Ibid., p. 132. 10411616. losIbid. CHAPTER III IDENTIFICATION OF PRINCIPLES FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF DISCIPLINE In order to evaluate the formal disciplinary pro- cedures of the departments selected for study, the cri- teria for evaluation must be identified. It is primarily for this reason that a set of principles have been ab- stracted from the review of the literature in Chapter II and are presented in this chapter. A secondary purpose for offering this set of principles is that they can be used by police administrators in reviewing and improving their own disciplinary procedures. These principles do not concern themselves with the substance of the rules of conduct governing the in- dividual behavior of police personnel. Neither do they concern themselves with the requirements of highly so- phisticated organizational structures and procedures. These principles are concerned with the fundamental con- siderations which should serve as basic guidelines in the administration of formal disciplinary procedures. It is felt that the review of the literature pre- sented in Chapter II from which these principles are abstracted, substantially supports these principles. 37 I. PRINCIPLES FOR EVALUATION OF PROCEDURES 1. Communication a. Each member of the department should be fur- nished with a COpy of all departmental rules and directives. b. Each member of the department should be in- structed in terms of what is expected of them in the ob- servation of the rules and directives in a clear and understandable manner. 2. Organization a. Each member of the department should know and understand the organization of the department regarding the chain of command. b. The formal disciplinary procedures should be made known to all personnel. 3. Action a. After either observation of an infraction by a supervisor or upon receipt of a complaint regarding misconduct from outside the department, prompt action regarding the case should be initiated in which: (1) A thorough and objective investigation is made as soon as possible after knowledge Of a complaint or allegation. (2) The accused officer is permitted to 38 present his side of the issue before any final decision is made. (3) The accused officer is advised as to the disposition of the issue, citing the reasons for the disciplinary action taken or recommended, or exoneration from the charges made. 4. Record a. Records of all disciplinary actions should be kept. b. Statistics of departmental disciplinary action should be kept and published. 5. Consistenpy a. Those formal procedures which have been es- tablished for the administration of discipline should be used exclusively. 6. Authority a. The decision of the chief administrator should not be subject to review by any authority outside the department, except for dismissal from the department. Regardless of the size of a police department or the need for elaborate and complex machinery to administer discipline, these principles should obtain. 39 Adherence to these principles would constitute an organized approach to the problem of administering discipline. It would be a step toward the goal to which Young referred, the balance between the regard for indi- vidual rights, and preservation of necessary authority of supervisors and administrators.106 106Young, pp. cit., p. 1. CHAPTER IV COMPARISON OF THE FORMAL DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES OF FOUR MICHIGAN POLICE DEPARTMENTS This chapter concerns the field research conducted in connection with this study. It is divided into four sections: Section I, which discusses the methodology used; Section II, which contains the empirical data ob- tained from departments operating under Civil Service; Section III, which contains the empirical data obtained from departments not operating under Civil Service; and, Section IV, which identifies the procedural differences between the departments described in Sections II and III. I. METHODOLOGY The empirical studies described in Sections II and III were conducted through personal interviews in four police departments within the state of Michigan. The population of the cities selected is in the 25,000—- 50,000 range. The police departments of two of the cities Operate under the provision of Public Act 78, Public Acts of 1935. The other two cities do not. The police admin- istrators interviewed all occupied positions at the top management level who were familiar with the disciplinary procedures of their respective departments. 41 The purpose of this field research was to deter- mine if the formal disciplinary procedures followed by the selected police departments were consistent with the principles presented in Chapter III. The author conducted all of the interviews using an interview guide which was based upon the principles 107 presented in Chapter II. The author did not ask the questions in the quide verbatim; but instead phrased his questions in keeping with the degree of rapport established and developed as the interview progressed. The guide itself was constructed in such a way as to enable the author to ascertain: 1. How each department is organized with respect to the disciplinary process? 2. What policies and procedures are followed in formal disciplinary actions? 3. What limitations are imposed upon the authority and discretion of the chief administrator? The administrator interviewed was encouraged to do most of the talking. The interview guide enabled the author to direct the interview into those areas in which he desired information. Once the author felt that suffi- cient rapport was established, he asked the administrator 107Appendix A. 42 if he minded the author taking notes. No discernible effect upon the free flow of conversation was noted during any of the interviews conducted when the author commenced to take notes. Each administrator was asked to provide a specific case which required invocation of the Department's disci- plinary procedures. All but one was able to do this. The information gathered was organized in such a way as to provide a comprehensive picture of the formal disciplinary procedures followed by each department. After these procedureS°have been described, they are com- pared to identify the existing differences between Civil Service and Non-Civil Service departments. II. DEPARTMENTS OPERATING UNDER CIVIL SERVICE The two Michigan police departments operating under Civil Service jurisdiction were selected from a list of six cities within the 25,000--50,000 population range furnished by the Michigan Law Enforcement Officers Training Council. These departments Operate under the 108 provision of Act 78, Public Acts of 1935. This par- ticular piece of legislation has been the subject of con- siderable controversy since its passage.109 108Appendix B. 109For a detailed study of Act 78, see The Sa inaw Study of Public Acts of 1935, by A. C. Germann, Michigan State Ufiiversity, Augfigt, 1957. 43 Police department "A". Police Department "A" provides police service for a city of approximately 40,000. It is staffed by 108 sworn officers and 14 civilian employees. Disciplinapy organization. The department is organized as seen in Chart 1. A Police and Fire Commission is responsible for the control and management of the De- partment;110 for the adoption of rules and regulations for the organization of the Department; and has appointive and removal authority over all members of the Department, subject to the provisions of the city charter and Act 78; and sits as a trial board in disciplinary cases. Its five members are appointed by the Mayor who is the chief administrative officer of the city. The Chief of Police is the executive head of the Department.111 Under present circumstances the Captain in command of the Uniform Division is second in command of the Department. While there are seven Lieutenants in the Department it is noted that the first significant reference to disciplinary duties of supervisors to be found in the Rules, refers to the responsibility of the Sergeant.112 110Appendix C. Chapter 1., Section I. lllIbid., Chapter II., Section I. 112Ibid., Chapter IV., Section VI. 44 mmusmmmz UGO mpnmflwz_ IJ smmusm OGHGHMHBT. smousm mGOADMOHGOEEOUfi. OOHDMOHMHDCOUH 0cm OHOOOm ZOHmH>HQ MUH>mmm I a smmusm m.cmEOB ammusm mawsm>5o T T a ammusm OOH>A ‘ smmusm soflummflpmm>sH HOGHEHHU n ZOHmH>HD m>HBUMBMQ fiDMOHDM UHMMMHBW h mcoflumnmmo NI 2m Hausa m eooumam phase Em Mlzd h cooumHm pcoomm as AISE Ha cooumHm umnflm mDMOHSm EHOMHGD L ZOHmH>HQ EmomHZD (J r) .MUHQOm m0 mmHmU ZOHmmHSZOU MMHm QZ< MUHAOm e usmsunmmmm OOflHom ZOHfidNHz¢Umo m0 mqmda H BMde L 45 Disciplinary procedures. The Rules and Regulations of the Department were first adopted November 2, 1931. They are currently issued to members of the Department, with amendments, in mimeographed form. These Rules and Regulations are reviewed with new members of the Depart- ment but no special provisions are made to provide for additional instructions or interpretations except as each individual officer requests such instruction. If a Sergeant observes a subordinate in violation of the General Rules in Chapter XVIII, or the 65 offenses listed in Chapter XIX, he advises the officer that he is in violation and then notifies the Lieutenant. A written report is submitted to the Lieutenant who deter- mines if the offense is serious enough to forward to the Captain. There are no specific guidelines for determining the "seriousness" of the offense in this regard. If it is decided to forward the report to the Captain, it is at this level that the formal charge is made and trans- mitted to the Chief of Police. The accused officer is furnished with a copy of the charge and is permitted to present his side of the issue at any level of the process. The Chief of Police may impose a suspension upon any member of the Department for a period not exceeding fifteen days without a hearing before the Police and 46 Fire Commission. However, this does not preclude an appeal to the Civil Service Commission established by Act 78 under the provisions of Sections 1 and 2 of Act 78.113 The Civil Service Commission has the authority to reverse the actions of both the Chief of Police and the Police and Fire Commission. In the event a citizen files a complaint against an officer, he is notified and requested to make a de- tailed report on the matter. Usually the complaint is made to a Division Commander and from there on it is handled in the same manner as a charge by a supervisor. All disciplinary actions requiring a hearing or in which the officer accepts the penalty are recorded in the officer's personal file. No provisions are made for keeping statistics of Departmental actions however. An example of how the procedures of Department "A" Operate was cited by the administrator interviewed. This case stemmed from the ill-advised and improper actions of a group of police officers in the use of tear gas during a gambling raid on a residence. In this instance the ranking officer in the group, a lieutenant, was held re- sponsible. The captains in command of the patrol and detective divisions made the investigation after a citizen complained and the lieutenant was formally charged under 113Appendix B. 47 the provisions of Chapter XIX of the Rules of the Division of Police with failure to make an official report to su- perior officers. He was suspended for 11 days without pay and forfeited all regular Off days for a period of six months (totaling 48 days), and lost all of his accu- mulated furlough time. At the time of the incident the lieutenant was on probationary status, having been promoted only a few weeks previous to this incident. The Police and Fire Commission attempted to extend his probationary status in addition to the suspension and loss of leave days and furlough. This attempted extension of his probationary status was the only aspect of the action of the Police and Fire Commission which the lieutenant appealed to the Civil Service Commission. In this case the Civil Service Commission reversed the ruling of the Police and Fire Commission regarding his probationary status and ordered that he be given permanent status when he completed his regular probationary period. The administrator interviewed indicated that the only exception made in invoking the formal disciplinary procedures were those cases in which an officer failed to appear in court.114 No reason was given for this exception, nor was an alternative method of discipline indicated. 114Ibid., Chapter XIX., Section I (61)- 48 Police department "B". Police Department "B" provides police service for a city of approximately 27,000 people. It is staffed by 35 sworn officers and 4 civilian employees. Disciplinapy organization. The Department is organized as illustrated in Chart 2. The chief admin- istrative officer of the city government is the city manager. The Chief of Police answers directly to him. The present Chief took command of the Department in May, 1967 and is in the process of reorganizing the Department. Under the previous Chief, the administration of formal discipline was confined to preferring charges against an officer under a set of Rules and Regulations first written in 1937. Only one COpy of these Rules and Regulations was available and the author was unable to obtain a copy. The present Chief regards the system which he inherited as totally inadequate. No records were kept except in cases which required a hearing and in the Chief's opinion the system was one in which the approach to discipline was completely negative. Since taking command of the Department he has instituted an pp ppp board of inquiry composed of the Captain and two Lieu- tenants to conduct investigations into serious disciplinary charges. This board makes recommendations to the Chief regarding disciplinary action. 49 cmfiaouummwg 1 p H unmamusmequu.o.o cooumem psmflz smfiaonumm m F J h.umm w fl umpmo 4 1 W - . unmamusmequu.o .o .umam coonuopmm1 _ NA 4 .uumm a l.umm a .umw>:H usmflz .mumm m .umO>:H hmo fl pawsmusmflqll.o .uumm H mmaflcm>5b H .U smmusm O>euomuma L mumumuomm GOHmH>flQ Houumm swEHOHpmm m fl .63 H fivflpmob Va unmcmuflmflqll.0 .U GooumHm awn _ mafiaflus .uumm ah AOHODQOUW L MOHSU i m usmfiuummmn mOflaom ZOHEGNHZdUmo ho mamfla N 8&430 fl :mannumm N fl ammusm Oflmmmus waumao ma J #GMEOUDOHAII.O .U smmusm Ouoomm L 50 Disciplinary procedures. The Chief was the first to point out that for all practical purposes formal pro- cedures for administering discipline in his Department are nearly non-existent. He is in the process of re- writing the Rules and Regulations and during the interim he issues special orders dealing with the conduct of mem- bers of the Department. He expressed considerable concern over the limi- tations imposed upon his discretion by the Act 78 Civil Service Commission which is empowered to reverse any disciplinary decision he may make under present conditions. Presently the authority to discipline possessed by middle- management supervisors is not clearly defined and clear cut choices of action on their part do not exist. In the event of citizens complaint against a member of the Department or if a supervisor makes any type of disciplinary charge against a subordinate, the pp ppp board of inquiry previously referred to conducts an investigation and makes recommendations to the Chief. No specific guidelines currently exist for determing what charge to make or what action to recommend. The officer is advised that a complaint has been made against him and he may or may not be required to submit a detailed statement telling his side of the issue. 51 The chief of Department "B" provided an example of the manner in which disciplinary problems are handled by citing a case in which an officer had been attempting to force his attentions upon a married woman who was a former city employee. The officer was drinking intoxi- cants in a local bar while off duty, which is a violation of Departmental rules according to the chief. He called the woman at her home from the bar and told her that he was coming over. When he hung up she in turn called po- lice headquarters and shortly thereafter this individual was apprehended by fellow officers near the woman's resi- dence. He was charged immediately with conduct unbecoming an officer and was dismissed from the Department. He requested a hearing before the Civil Service Board and hired an attorney to represent him in the matter. The Civil Service Board upheld the action of the Department in discharging him. The author was advised that other than the pro- cedures described above, no other means of discipline existed therefore they are used exclusively. III. NON-CIVIL SERVICE DEPARTMENTS The two Michigan police departments not operating under Civil Service jurisdiction, were selected arbitrarily from a list of cities within the 25,000--50,000 population 52 range which was furnished by the Michigan Law Enforcement Training Council. Police department "C". Police Department "C" is part of an integrated Police-Fire Public Safety Depart- ment serving a city with a population of approximately 40,000. The Department's personnel number 76 sworn officers and 6 civilian employees. Disciplinary organization. The chief administrator of the city government is a city manager. To aid him in personnel matters there is a local Personnel Board whose members are appointed by the City Council. By ordinance the members of the Personnel Board must be professional peOple in the community who hold managerial positions in their respective fields of endeavor. The Department of Public Safety is organized as seen in Chart 3. The Department is administered by a Director of Public Safety. The commander of the Oper- ations Division is second in command of the Department. All division commanders, platoon Lieutenants and patrol Sergeants are authorized to issue formal (written) rep- rimands, and suspend their subordinates from duty. Written into the job descriptions of supervisory positions is a provision which holds the supervisor di- rectly responsible for the conduct of subordinates. Sanc- tions may be applied if they are derelict in their responsibility. 53 GOHMfl>HOQDm “HHSm IIIIIIIIIIII UGOEEOU mocmmumfim Ouwm. . . muoummepmm>sHv .mmmm muomfl>nmmsm HOEHOZ fl fl pcmcmusmflq r smmusm nusow m.omm Houumm. flwnmmucsao>y _ I ml mumpmu L m.umm Houummw F m 5 V HOOH H50 mummcam: IIIIII . :00 m III mum O mama fame» o; . W. n\ hug DELI wt :6 .3] ThoummflumONEHL huouommmwmw hi mxHOHO - . . . . ,/hm ucmcmusmflq Hangmumz Ouflm cflmummv ucmcmusmflq COHmH>HQ cOHmH>HQ GOHmH>HQ GOHOH>HQ mcoflummflumm>nH OHHm mcoflumnmmo moa>umm HMHOOQm r. - H. e a [upoumcflpuooo mpfla mmmumw Omsmmma HH>HU . -bmnmvmnommg moeommHo T\\ U ucwfiuummmo OOHHOA oneequ«omo mo mam¢e m BMfimU 54 Disciplinary procedures. The Department issues each member a manual of rules and regulations governing the conduct of all its members. Additions to, or changes in this manual are issued from time to time. The General Rules currently in effect are ones in which members of the Department, of all ranks, participated in formulating.115 In pre-service training and in-service training, and by means of instructions from all levels of super- vision, these General Rules are interpreted. The Director of Public Safety informed the author that several of the Public Safety Officers, a rank equivalent to that of Pa- trolman, had recently completed a 40 hour course in Super- vision. He felt that this would broaden the perspective of some of these personnel at the end of the chain of command, and would be conducive to the development of self-discipline on their part. If a supervisor observes an infraction of the General Rules by a subordinate officer, the offending officer is advised that he is in violation and summary disciplinary action may be taken by the superior officer. The observation of an infraction on the part of a Public Safety Officer by a ranking officer such as the Director of Public Safety or the Captain in command of the Oper- ations Division is normally referred to the offending 115Appendix D. Chapter V. 55 officer's immediate supervisor if it does not warrant a dismissal, demotion, or suspension exceeding fifteen days. The offending officer is always informed of the charge, in writing, and the disciplinary measure, cor- rective or punitive, which will be forthcoming. If there is a complaint against an officer by a citizen, or superivisor officer has reason to believe that behavior or performance of an officer falls under the provisions of the General Rules, an investigation is made. Normally the immediate supervisor is responsi- ble for making the investigation but the Director may appoint an pp ppp committee to conduct an inquiry. This committee is usually headed by the Director of Public Safety. The Captain of the Operations Division or a Lieutenant, and an officer of the same rank as the of- ficer under investigation comprise the remainder of the committee. In the absence of a committee, any summary dis- ciplinary action may be appealed in writing to the Di- rector through the appealing officer's commanding officer.116 Any member of the Department may make a final appeal to the Personnel Board if Departmental disciplinary action results in dismissal from the Department, a demotion in 116Ibid., Chapter V, Section V. 14. 56 rank, a suspension exceeding fifteen working days, or unless the employee has received a previous suspension within the previous six months.117 The Personnel Board may reverse the Director's decision only by unanimous action. A two-thirds vote may recommend review of the disciplinary action by the appointing authority, the city manager. An example of how Department "C" handles its disciplinary problems was provided to illustrate how its procedures operate. A complaint was made to a member of another police department regarding the conduct of a member of Department "C", who in turn contacted the Director of Department "C". A sergeant was assigned to handle the investigation. When the complainant, a young married woman, was interviewed she charged that the of- ficer in question had attempted to force his attentions upon her following a fraffic violation incident. The officer attempted to make a date with her at that time. He did not issue a citation for the traffic offense but secured her phone number under the pretense of routine procedure. He called her home later and again attempted to make a date with her. The complainant made a tape re- cording of her charge at the request of the investigating officer. 117Ibid., Chapter XIX, Section 19.3. 57 The offending officer was called in and advised that a complaint had been made against him and asked for his side of the story. He denied all of the allegations at first but after the tape recording was played he ad- mitted certain portions were true. The admissions which he made were sufficient to warrant his dismissal from the Department and no appeal was made to the Personnel Board. The Director informed the author that there had never been an appeal made to the Personnel Board to his knowledge. The only exception to the use of the established procedures indicated to the author concerned the dismissal or suspension of an officer following a finding of neg- ligence in an auto accident by the city's Accident Re- view Board. This has been used to determine disciplinary action instead of the procedures described above. Police department "D". Police Department "D" Operates in a city of approximately 32,000 peOple ac- cording to census figures. It employs 34 sworn officers and 8 civilian employees. Disciplinary organization. The Department is organized as graphically illustrated in Chart 4. The city is governed by a Mayor-Council-City Manager form of government with the City Manager as the chief admin- istrative officer. The Chief of Police answers directly 58 .OJHD mmmum fimunommm 7mmo m_ hueo e ammo 8w mmmo «1 rub I .81 1E _ _ _ .Hmo_ paw chflumamcd mammdm amasOmHOm paw HHOGHEAHW_ acme HMGHODGH Imflswm DGOEOHOO IOHm Omsmoaq HO>HHQ m _ ammusm puoomm .umm m. O0fl>nmm Humwnmficflapd _ flew E 7368 1 TLHJU «L Q. o. _< qumEm & The} JEJ E E HOHDGOU Hmeflaa Houumm usmamonomsm mstme SMOHD Buses m coaummflumm>cH Hmumsmw _ _ fiusmeq_ GOHmH>HQ Houpmm OOEOB OOH Om mmHmU; Q uzmfiuummma OOHHOQ ZOHfidNHZ¢UmO m0 mqmdB v Hmdmu 1| smmnsm O>HDOODOQ 59 to him. All disciplinary actions other than oral rep- rimands must be approved by the Chief befOre being imposed. The responsibilities of supervisory officers and commanding officers are clearly defined, among them the maintenance 118 of discipline. Disciplinary procedures. Each member of the Department is furnished with a Manual which describes in detail what is expected in the way of personal conduct; duty requirements; duties and responsibilities of the various ranks; the Departmental organization; and the functional responsibilities of each division of the Department. This Manual is in the process of being re- vised and put into a loose-leaf form in order to more easily update amendments, changes, and specific instruc- tions regarding orders. If a supervisor observes misconduct covered by the Manual he makes a recommendation concerning the matter if he feels that the offense warrants a written reprimand, suspension, forfeiture of pay, or dismissal. If there is a charge made against an officer by either a superior or a citizen which in the Chief's Opinion requires more facts, the commanders of the Patrol Division and the Detective 118Appendix C. Duties and Responsibilities of the Ranks and Departmental Organization. 60 Division are assigned to make an investigation and make a written report to the Chief. The officer involved is always informed of a charge or complaint made against him. If an officer feels he has been unfairly treated he may appeal to the City Manager and then to a committee composed of the Mayor, the City Attorney, and the Chief of Police. Either of these levels of appeal may reverse the Chief's decision. The Chief indicated to the author that such ap— peals were rare and in fact could not recall when the last one was made. Even further, he stated that it was rare that a disciplinary problem ever reached his level and could not cite any Specific case. While all disci- plinary actions are noted in each officer's personal file, no statistics have been kept regarding the number of times formal procedures have been invoked. Based on this information the author must conclude that: (1) some other means are used to maintain discipline; or, (2) there are no discipline problems in this department. IV. PROCEDURAL DIFFERENCES Based upon the information received from the Chiefs who were interviewed it appears that the differ- ences which exist between the formal disciplinary pro- cedures of police departments under Civil Service and 61 those not under Civil Service, are differences in degree rather than in kind including a significant degree of difference in the limitations on the authority or dis- cretion of the chief administrator in disciplinary actions. For example, all of the departments studied make some effort to communicate to their members what is expected in terms of performance and conduct. Some may be more effective in their efforts than others. All of them, even Department B, which is in the midst of reorganization under a new chief, do provide some in- formation regarding behavior. As previously stated the most significant dif- ference which can be identified in comparing the two systems, Civil Service and Non-Civil Service, is the difference in the amount of authority which the Chief of Police has and the discretion he may exercise within that authority. Those Chiefs which Operate under the jurisdication of Act 78 may exercise only that authority SflhiCh a Civil Service Commission will permit if disci- pilinary actions are appealed to the Commission. In reality only the Civil Service Commission itself has enithority in matters of dismissal, suspension or other punitive disciplinary procedures. This is the case in Departments A and B. Departments C and D are permitted 62 substantially more discretion within the framework of city government. The Chief's decision may be appealed but the power to reverse it is limited. In the cases of C and D, the body which hears the appeal is either appointed by the city government or composed of members of the city government, as in the case of Department D in which the Chief sits on the appeal board. These appellate bodies are made up of individuals who are responsibile to the city government for their decisions. The system under which A and B must operate finds their Chiefs responsible for the administration of their respective departments, but with limited au- thority to fulfill his responsibility. This situation, in theory, reduces the Chiefs to the status of "recom- menders" rather than executives. The authority of the Chiefs of Departments C and D is also limited but in a different degree. CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS I. SUMMARY There can be little doubt that the problem of discipline is one which police administrators must con- tend with. As a governmental administrator responsible for police service he has both a duty and an opportunity to make use of the resource of personnel in ways which will in the most humane and efficient manner carry out those programs and policies necessary to permit the activities of the community to proceed in an orderly and safe manner. Discipline as a necessary aspect of personnel management cannot be ignored. Neither can it be viewed in its negative aspect alone. Large police departments such as those evaluated by Bruce Young in his study have developed elaborate systems and procedures for adminis- tering discipline. Very little has been done to identify the problems of small police departments such as the ones described in this study. The departments studied herein do have some for- mal procedures for administering discipline. Some pro- cedures are more sophisticated than others, but they are better than no system at all. 64 II. EVALUATION OF PROCEDURES The principles of discipline identified in Chapter III serve as the criteria for evaluation of the disciplinary procedures of the departments studied. 1. Communication. All four departments studied do pro- vide their personnel with c0pies of Rules and Regulations governing their performance and conduct. Some of these may be dated but at least they are furnished. Some are more comprehensive than others but in general the depart- ment's procedures are consistent with the communication principle. 2. Organization. All four departments have provided their personnel with some information regarding the organization of the department, specifically the chain of command. Department A (a Civil Service department), and Department C, (a Non-Civil Service department) pro- vide specific information concerning the formal disci- plinary procedures of the Departments whereas Departments B and D do not. 3. Action. In all four departments if an infraction is observed or a complaint is received some action is initiated in which some type of investigation may be made and the accused officer is permitted to present 65 his side of the issue before a final decision is rendered. Neither the promptness of the action initiated nor the objectivity of the investigation were amendable to assessment through the research technique used by the author. The only fact which could be identified was that some investigation was made in some instances. 4. Record. All four departments studied advised the author that all disciplinary actions, including investi- gations in which the accused officer was exonerated, are recorded in his personal file, however, none of the departments keep any statistics regarding disciplinary actions. 5. Consistenpy. With the exceptions indicated by De- partments A and C, the Chiefs interviewed indicated that the established formal procedures were used exclusively. If this be true then all of the departments studied do adhere to the consistency principle. 6. Authority. All disciplinary actions of Departments A and B are subject to review by an authority outside both the Department and the city government. The actions of the Chief of Department C is subject to review only if the action involves dismissal, demotion, a suSpension in excess of fifteen days, or a second suspension within 66 a six month period. The reviewing body in this case is not totally outside the framework of the city government being appointed by the city council. All decisions of the Chief of Department D are subject to review by the City Manager and/or a board composes of the Mayor, the City Attorney, and the Chief himself. So while all his decisions are subject to re- view, he is permitted to participate in their review. III . CONCLUSIONS After careful analysis of the data gathered in the field research which appears in Chapter IV, the author is of the opinion that in terms of the principles of discipline which served as criteria for the evalua- tion of the formal disciplinary procedures of police departments Operating under civil service and those Operating in its absence, the only differences which exist are differences in degree rather than of kind. In order to evaluate the procedures of the de- partments studied in terms of degree would require a more sophisticated instrument than the interview technique used by this author. This technique relies solely upon the information which the administrator interviewed permitted the author to obtain. 67 Additional conclusions. There are some incon- sistencies between the existing formal disciplinary pro- cedures of the departments studied, and the principles advocated by the authorities in Chapter II, Review of the Literature. For example, as previously noted, none of the departments studied keep any statistics on disci- plinary action. It is very difficult to evaluate a de- partment's discipline in terms of Wilson's statement: "The best disciplined forces are the best trained and therefore the least punished."119 The departments studied simply do not compile data on any types of punitive actions. Some observations. While authorities cited in the literature reviewed in Chapter II speak of a positive approach to discipline, and its relationship to morale, the interviews conducted in the field research produced only one reference to positive discipline, or better yet, self-discipline. This occurred in the interview with the Director of Department B in which he told of putting his lowest ranking officers through a supervisory course and he hOped a positive attitude towards discipline would be the result. A by-product of the interviews conducted which is not included in Chapter IV, is that the departments 119Wilson, Police Administration pp. cit., p. 173. 68 studied are of a size that permits everyone to know each member of the department personally. It would appear that such an informal relationship could cover all levels of rank and make it difficult for an objective investi- gation to be made in a disciplinary matter without per- sonal friendships or animosities entering in. IV . RECOMMENDAT IONS In view of the summary, evaluation, conclusions and observations which have been made, the following recommendations are offered. 1. Further study of the means for administering disci- pline, formal and otherwise, used by police departments which serve cities of approximately the same size as those selected for this study, should be conducted. A larger sample should be selected for study. It is felt that more than four departments should be selected, still using the variable of Civil Service. A more sophisticated instrument should be de- velOped for comparing and evaluating the two groups, and more detailed research should be conducted in order to more precisely identify variables. 2. If such a study indicates that Civil Service is in- deed an obstacle to the administration of discipline based on sound principles, the chiefs of the departments 69 affected should take steps, as a group, to have the system modified or abolished. 3. It is recommended that the chiefs of all departments of the size of those selected for this study, consider designating one or more officers within their departments as Internal Investigations Officers. These officers would not conduct disciplinary investigations of a serious nature within their own departments, but would be available on an exchange basis with other police departments of comparable size. Such an arrangement would not be overly expensive and would assure a more objective investigation in departments which are small enough to enable each mem- ber of the department to personally know every other member. This is a recommendation that could be implemented by agreement among the chiefs themselves. It is the author's belief that such a system would be considerably more palatable to the chiefs and their subordinates than such devices as civilian review boards. This procedure would be a more acceptable means of "policing the police." BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY A. BOOKS Appley, Lawrence A. Management ip Action. New York: Stratford Press, Inc., 1956. Fosdick, Raymond B. American Police Systems. New York: The Century Company, 1920. Germann, A. C. Police Personnel Management. Springfield: Charles (2 Thomas, 1963. Hocking, William E. Morale and Its Enemies. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1943. International City Manager's Association: Municipal Police Administration. Chicago: International City Man- ager's Association, 1961. Kenney, John P. Police Management Planning. Springfield: Charles C Thomas, 1959. Leonard, V. A. Police Organization and Management. Brooklyn: The Foundation Press, 1951. Miller, Arthur H. Leadership. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1920. Mooney, James D. The Principles p: Organization. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1947. Municipal Manpower Commission. Governmental Manpower for Tomorrow's Cities. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Com- pany, Inc., 1962. Pennington, L. A., Romeyn B. Hough, Jr., and H. W. Case. The Psychology p£.Military Leadership. New York: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1943. Phelps, Orme Wheelock. Discipline and Discharge ip the Unionized Firm. Berkeley: UniverSity of CaIifor- nia Press, 1959. Pfiffner, John M., and Frank P. Sherwood. Administrative Organization. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966. 72 Pigors, Paul, and Charles A. Myers. Personnel Administra- tion. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1961. Scott, Clifford L.,and Bill Garrett. Leadership For the Police Supervisor. Springfield: Charles C Thomas, 1960. Smith, Bruce. Police Systems ip the United States. Rev. Bruce Smith, Jr. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1960. Stessin, Lawrence. Employee Discipline. Washington: BNA Incorporated, 1960. . The Practice pp Personnel and Industrial Rpf lations, A Casebook. New York: Pitman Publishing Corporation, 1964. Stahl, 0. Glenn. Public Personnel Administration. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1956. Wilson, 0. W. Police Administration. New York: McGraw- Hill Book Company, Inc., 1963. . Police Planning. Springfield: Charles C Thomas, i962. B. PUBLICATIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT, LEARNED SOCIETIES AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administra- tion of Justice. The Challenge p£_Crime ipja Free Societ . Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967. C. PERIODICALS Davis, Keith. "Steps Towards a More Flexible Disciplinary Policy5"2Personne1,38:52-56, May-June, 1961. Gocke, B. W. "Morale in a Police Department," Journal pp Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Sc1ence, 36: 215-219, September-October, 1945. 73 Gourley, G. Douglas. "Police Discipline," Journal pp Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Sc1ence, 41:85-100, May-June, 1950. D. ESSAYS AND ARTICLES IN COLLECTION Andrews, Rex R. "A Discipline Check-List," Readin s ip Police Sgpervision, Los Angeles: Los Ange es State College Foundation, 1963. Tead, Ordway. "The New Discipline," Readings ip Personnel Administration. ed. Paul Pigors and Charles A. Myers. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1952. E. UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS Germann, A. C. "The Saginaw Study of Act 78, Public Acts of 1935, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 1957. Young, Bruce C. "An Evaluation of the Formal Disciplinary Procedures of Three Metropolitan Police Departments With A Recommended Procedure Guide," Unpublished Master's Thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 1963. ‘l-F”“‘ . APPENDICES APPENDIX A INTERVIEW GUIDE I. Communication A. What means are utilized to inform personnel of the Department what is expected of them. B. Are provisions made to instruct members of the Department in the observation of existing rules and policies? II. Organization A. Is there a table of organization made available to members of the Department in which the chain of command is clearly discernible? B. Are Departmental personnel informed of what for- mal disciplinary procedures are used? III. Action A. Are personnel always informed immediately of a charge or complaint made against them? B. Is an investigation made in which the accused is permitted to tell his side of the issue? IV. Record A. Are records of all disciplinary actions maintained, including statistics? V. Consistency A. Are the established procedures used exclusively? VI. Authority A. What decisions of the chief administrator are subject to review and reversal? 77 APPENDIX B ACT NO. 1g PUBLIC ACTS pp 1935, STATE pg_MICHIGAN CIVIL SERVICE FOR FIRE AND POLICE DEPARTMENTS An Act to establish and provide a Board of Civil Service Commissioners in cities, villages and municipalities hav- ing full paid members in the fire and police departments; to provide a civil service system based upon examination and investigation as to merit, efficiency and fitness for appointment, employment and promotion of all officers and men appointed in said fire and police departments and re- spective cities, villages and municipalities; to regulate the transfer, reinstatement, suspension and discharge of said officers, firemen and policemen: and to repeal all acts and parts of acts inconsistent therewith. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT: Municipal Civil Service Commission: Creation. Section 1. Within 30 days after this act shall take effect there may be created a civil service commis- sion in each city, village or municipality of any popula- tion whatsoever having a fire and/or police department, any of the members of which are full paid by said city, village or municipality. Municipal Civil Service Commissions: Members, Selection, Terms: President. Section 2. The civil service commission shall con- sist of 3 members, 1 of whom shall be appointed by the principal elected officer of the city, village or munici- pality with the approval of the legislative body; and he shall serve for a period of 6 years from the date of his appointment. The second member of the commission shall be selected by the paid members of the fire and/or police department and he shall serve for a period of 6 years from the date of his appointment. The second member of the com- mission shall be selected by the paid members of the fire and/or police department and he shall serve for a period of 4 years from the date of his appointment; a majority vote of the members of the fire and/or police department shall be necessary to select such member. The third mem- ber of the commission shall be selected by the aforesaid 80 members of the commission and he shall serve for a period of 2 years from the date of his appointment. Thereafter all appointments shall be made for a period of 6 years each; each commissioner to serve until his successor is appointed and qualified by the appointing power hereinbe- fore designated.. The 3 members of the commission shall together elect l of their number to act as president of the commis- sion, who shall serve for 1 year. Each year thereafter the commissioners shall elect 1 of their number president, the member so elected to serve 1 year. Municipal Civil Service Commissions: Qualifications, Eligie bility to Other Office or Position. Section 3. NO person shall be appointed a member of said commission who is not a citizen of the United States and who has not been a resident of said city, vil- lage or municipality for a period of 1 year and an elector of said county for a period of at least 3 years immediately preceding such appointment. No commissioner shall hold any other elective office, place or position under the United States, State of Michigan, or any city, county or other political subdivision thereof: nor shall any commissioner serve on any political committee or take any active part in the management of any political campaign. Not more than 2 of the said commissioners, at any 1 time, shall be adher- ents of the same political party. Same: Vacancies, Removal. Section 4. In event that any commissioner of said civil service commission shall cease to be a member there- of by virtue of death, removal or other cause, a new com- missioner shall be appointed to fill out the unexpired term of said commissioner within 10 days after said commissioner shall have ceased to be a member of said commission. Such appointment shall be made by the officer or body who in the first instance, appointed the commissioner who is no longer a member of the commission. The mayor or principal execu- tive officer shall at any time remove any commissioner for incompetency, dereliction of duty, malfeasance in office or any other good cause, which shall be stated in writing and made a part of the records of the commission, and a COpy of the removal shall be served on said commissioner forthwith: Provided, however, that once the mayor or principal execu- tive officer has to remove any commissioner, such removal shall be temporary only and shall be in effect for a period 81 of 10 days. If at the end of said period of 10 days the said commissioner shall fail to make answer thereto, he shall be deemed removed, otherwise the mayor shall file in the office of the clerk of the Circuit Court of said county a petition setting forth in full the reason for said removal and praying for the confirmation by said Cir- cuit Court of the action of the mayor in so removing the said commissioner. A copy of said petition, in writing, shall be served upon the commissioner so removed simulta- neously with its filing in the office of the clerk of the Circuit Court and shall have precedence on the docket of the said court and shall be heard by said court as soon as the removed commissioner shall demand. All rights hereby vested in said Circuit Court may be exercised by the judge thereof during a vacation. In event that no term of court is being held at the time of filing of said petition, and the judge thereof cannot be reached in the county wherein the petition was filed, said petition shall be heard at the next succeeding term of said Circuit Court, whether regular or special, and the commissioner so suspended shall remain suspended until a hearing is had upon the petition of the mayor. The court, or the judge thereof, in vacation, shall be rendered, shall have the right of appearing in per- son and by counsel and presenting his defense and to peti- tion the Supreme Court for a review of the decision of the Circuit Court, or the judge thereof in vacation, as in Chancery cases. In event that the mayor shall fail to file this petition in the office of the clerk of the Circuit Court, as hereinbefore provided, within 10 days after re- moval of said commissioner, such commissioner shall imme- diately resume his position as a member of the civil service commission. Same:. Clerk. Section 5. The city clerk or city recorder of any city, village or municipality under the terms of this act shall "ex officio" be clerk of the civil service commission and shall supply to the commission without extra compensa- tion all necessary clerical and stenographic services for the work of the civil service commission. Fire, Police Department Employees: Continuation In Office. Section 6. For the benefit of the public service and to prevent delay, injury, or interruption therein by reason