I recently had one of the most rewarding experiences of my career—an experience I have enjoyed scores of times over the years: attending the graduation ceremony of a law enforcement academy class. The pageantry, the proud graduates, and the equally proud family members and friends come together to create an occasion that, for most career peace officers, remains one of the most meaningful and memorable moments of professional life.
Yet amid the celebration, I always find myself asking the same question: How many of these new officers, if any, will eventually “crash and burn” and become troubled employees?
We all hope the answer is none. Unfortunately, experience tells us otherwise. Despite rigorous hiring standards and comprehensive training, some new officers will encounter personal or professional difficulties that ultimately lead to their departure from the profession. Careful selection processes and quality training can certainly reduce those numbers, but no system is perfect. Some individuals, despite everyone’s best efforts, will fail.
This lingering reality has prompted considerable self-reflection throughout my career. I have often wondered whether there was something more I could have done to save one of the many officers who struggled under my command. More than once, I wished I could simply take an employee “behind the woodshed” and have an honest, fatherly conversation that might redirect a failing career. Of course, modern personnel policies, disciplinary procedures, workers’ compensation issues, legal considerations, and labor agreements often make such candid conversations difficult—or even impossible—once matters have progressed to a certain point.
Looking back, I recognize occasions when the relationship between an employee and the agency deteriorated into an adversarial struggle. Distrust replaced communication. Poor decisions were defended with weak rationalizations. Union representatives, attorneys, questionable medical claims, and increasingly contemptuous attitudes often deepened the divide until meaningful dialogue became nearly impossible.
That reflection led me to consider a different approach—a reset.
I have come to believe that, in certain situations, there may be an opportunity for a command officer to genuinely “talk some sense” into a young and immature employee before it is too late. Those two characteristics—youth and immaturity—are often common factors in the types of situations discussed here.
The approach I envision is unconventional: an “outside-the-normal” conversation focused entirely on the employee’s career rather than the disciplinary process. For clarity, I have organized these thoughts in outline form.
Overture to the Troubled Employee
The initial contact should be simple and personal. The command officer should personally invite the employee to an informal meeting focused solely on the employee’s career trajectory—not on pending disciplinary matters, litigation, or administrative investigations.
The employee should be informed that he or she is welcome to bring union, legal, or medical representatives, as well as family members. However, these individuals should attend only as observers to hear what the command officer has to say.
The employee should also be assured that there is no expectation to respond. In fact, remaining completely silent throughout the discussion is perfectly acceptable. The objective is not to obtain admissions or statements but rather to reach someone who may simply need a candid, sincere conversation from an experienced leader.
The Likely Perspective of the Employee’s Representatives
Resistance should be expected.
By this stage, the employee has often entered a negative pipeline that includes sympathetic coworkers (who may themselves be relatively young and inexperienced), a union representative who has embraced the employee’s position, an attorney whose involvement naturally expands as disputes continue, and sometimes a psychological counselor—often retained through legal counsel—who recommends little or no communication with supervisors.
The command officer should simply remind the employee that nothing is lost by listening. The decision to participate belongs entirely to the employee.
Family members, on the other hand, may view the meeting very differently. They were present when the badge was pinned on their loved one’s uniform, and they are often eager to support any sincere effort that could preserve a valued career.
The Likely Perspective of the Agency’s Legal Representative
Agency counsel may also discourage such a meeting.
Public attorneys often recommend that no conversations occur outside the formal disciplinary or legal process. In many situations, that advice is both prudent and appropriate. However, a blanket prohibition against additional communication may not always serve the broader interests of either the agency or the employee.
Command officers should recognize that attorneys are legal advisors—not decision-makers. Their advice deserves careful consideration, but command decisions ultimately belong to command officers.
An appropriate question to ask is this: What is the downside of making one sincere effort to save an employee’s career? If the effort fails, the agency simply proceeds with the existing disciplinary process. If it succeeds, both the employee and the organization benefit.
Should critics argue that such an extraordinary effort reflects bad faith or an improper motive, a simple response is appropriate: Who can reasonably criticize an honest effort to help someone preserve a worthwhile career?
Points for the Command Officer to Emphasize
- Keep the discussion focused. Make it clear from the outset that the meeting is not a forum for discussing pending disciplinary matters, investigations, grievances, or litigation.
- Appeal to the employee’s original aspirations. Remind the employee of the hopes, dreams, and commitment that existed when entering the profession, and express a sincere desire to help restore both professional standing and future opportunity.
- Provide realistic encouragement. If accurate, explain that based upon current information, the employee may be able to survive the disciplinary process and rebuild credibility within the agency. Be candid about likely discipline and acknowledge that rebuilding trust will require time and effort.
- Encourage broader perspective. Suggest that the employee seek guidance from experienced, respected individuals outside the immediate circle of supportive peers. Well-intentioned friends sometimes reinforce poor judgment rather than challenge it. Encourage conversations with people who possess greater life and professional experience.
- Avoid criticizing others. Do not disparage attorneys, union representatives, supervisors, or anyone attending the meeting. Instead, encourage the employee to take ownership of his or her own future and personal decisions.
- Discuss the lasting impact of leaving the profession. Explain that the emotional pain associated with involuntarily leaving law enforcement often never fully disappears. Encourage thoughtful reflection before allowing temporary circumstances to permanently end a career.
- Encourage a practical family assessment. Suggest that the employee and family prepare a comparison spreadsheet evaluating the immediate and long-term consequences of leaving the profession, including salary, retirement benefits, healthcare, career satisfaction, and other tangible and intangible factors. Remind them that many former officers would gladly return if given the opportunity and that law enforcement offers professional rewards and benefits that few careers can match.
Documentation and Discovery
The command officer should document the meeting, including who initiated it, who attended, its stated purpose, and its general nature.
This documentation should not be created to strengthen the agency’s disciplinary case. Rather, it should demonstrate that the meeting was undertaken solely as a good-faith effort to assist an employee in restoring his or her career and professional standing. That purpose should also be clearly communicated at the beginning of the meeting.
Is It a Wise Strategy?
I honestly do not know.
I have never attempted this approach to the extent described here, although informal interventions by respected peers occasionally occur with positive results. Unfortunately, those individuals are not always available, and those opportunities do not always present themselves.
If there is such a thing as reincarnation, and I return once again as a command officer, I intend to give this approach a try.
Ultimately, it seems to me that any sincere effort to save a career—provided it carries no significant downside—is an effort worth making.
* * * * * * *
Keith Bushey retired from the Los Angeles Police Department as a commander, from the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department as a deputy chief, and from the United States Marine Corps Reserve as a colonel. Other law enforcement experience includes having served as a Los Angeles County deputy sheriff, a State of California deputy game warden, and as the Marshal of San Bernardino County. He is an instructor emeritus for the FBI Law Enforcement Executive Development Association and has lectured and written extensively in the areas of leadership, management and ethics. He is now affiliated with Embassy Consulting Services. His entire eight booklet Leadership Series is in the public domain and may be downloaded without cost from KeithBushey.com. He may be contacted at KDBS255@AOL.COM