The only way you can fix it is if someone stands up to the unions in the next collective bargaining session. They are not going to concede anything now. The question is, when the time comes, will Davis and Lynch have the cojones to stand up to the union and do what's best for the city, not what's best for crooked cops?

P.S. That goes for every other spoiled union in the city, not just police.

I'm not sure there needs to be a better system of monitoring individuals when they're out injured, I think the problem lies more with those in charge that don't appear to be doing their jobs effectively or applying the criteria correctly.

However, the the comments that suggest these individuals refuse to come back to work makes no sense. Anyone, including any government employee, is subject to removal if they fail to follow or comply with a direct order.

We all know there has to be a formal process in place to remove these as you called them, "scam officers" if in fact they are out without cause. However, instead of addressing each case individually you continue to put them all in the same category. You point fingers at the officers out on injury but fail to point fingers at the officials that continue to do nothing in regards to resolving this issue. Is everyone out of step but the city officials?

These officers didn't put themselves out on leave! It appears to me that the powers that be are too busy playing political games to address not only this but other important issues.

Marion, I agree that city officials could have done a better job monitoring the situation. They could have spearheaded contract reform that included a stronger medical approach. For instance, the Boston Police Dept. doesn't allow officers on 111F to do anything except to go to therapy and doctor's appointments if they are injured in the line of duty. They can't even pick up grocery bags. Also, the BPD has hired private investigators to take photos of 111F cheats. When caught, they are fired. Just the thought that someone might be following you is enough incentive to stay indoors, don't you think? Lowell has let this get out of hand. 111F is now part of police culture.

Believe me, none of the city employees are going to be sorry to see people abusing the system caught. We bear the results of less available manning, our safety is on the line first and foremost. None of us like to be brought down by a few bad apples. If employees blow off their medical obligations to the city, which is paying their salary, then we should go after them. If they don't have to report to work they need to be trying to get back to work.

Don't paint city workers and unions with a wide brush, Joe Friday (By the way this is not a collective bargaining issue, its a state law). There are takers and abusers in all walks of life. Its just my opinon, but the tax free thing doesn't change whether you really can or can't work or are in pain. The law was put in place for a reason, for those who are legitimately disabled. People legitimately injured in the line of duty deserve better than unwarranted criticism. I think the headline should read: City Targets Injury Leave Abusers. Maybe the Sun won't stick its neck out for fear of a libel lawsuit, so it chooses to generalize and unfairly puts all city public safety employees under the gun. I'll bet it doesn't hurt to sell a few more papers either.

Also Jim I think using the term Psycho retirement is unfair. What would you say to the guys from New York with PTSD after the Trade Center? Do you think what they go through is worth saving on income tax? Public safety workers see a lot of bad stuff out there and there is a stigma attached to mental illness as it is. There are legitimate stress injuries. No cop wants to shoot someone and no fireman wants to pick up a burned kid's body, but they do their jobs when called upon. Be careful how you portray people. Try be professional and keep the hits above the belt, regardless of how you feel about one individual.

Smokey, my patience has worn thin on being politically correct over the abuse of 111F and the taxpayers' trust. These 111F cases have nothing to do with 9/11. To even suggest that is to diminish the sacrifice of the brave heroes who perished that day.

I wanted to point out a serious error in yesterdays article concerning 111F leave. The statment that "Public-safety workers must stay out on leave until their doctors determine they are fully recovered" is inaccurate, since M.G.L. chapter 41, section 111F clearly states that
"no such leave shall be granted for any period after such police officer or fire fighter has been retired or pensioned in accordance with law or for any period after a physician designated by the board or officer authorized to appoint police officers or fire fighters in such city, town or district determines that such incapacity no longer exists". Therefore, according to the law, it is the city physician (or another physican appointed by the city) who is actually responsible for deciding if the employee's incapacity still exist, and not the employees physician as stated in the article. This distinction is important to note because the city has always had the right to have employees examined by the city phyician (or another designated physician) to see if the incapacity still existed or not. If the employee's physician claims an employee is incapacitated, but the city designated physician says otherwise, then the employee is no longer entitled to 111F benfits according to the law. The fact that the city has not choosen to exercise this right has had more to do with politics being allowed to influence 111F decisions instead of qualified medical physicians.

Jim,

My comment related to 9-11 at the end of my post had nothing to do with 111F abuse, which I think I made my point clearly on first. Nothing would please me more to see abusers caught. Those who abuse the system endager it for those who really need it. If someone isn't getting the job done managing it they need to be called on it too. Go back and read my comments again.

My complaint had to do with your use of term "psycho" diabilty alone. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder is real and your characterization shows a lack of education on the topic, which bears much stigma, especially in the world of emergency services. Your comments diminish the real stress emergency workers endure sugesting that mental illness issues are somehow an abuse on the system. I think its a cheap shot. You want to call someone a faker, go ahead, but instead you worded it just carefully enough to be suggestive without being direct. All I ask if that you don't call it a psycho diability. I never suggested a parallel between Lowell workers and New York City. This isn't even in the same universe, never mind the same ballpark. And believe me this isn't about political correctness. I'm not the PC type.

I'm asking you to be fair as journalist, not mislead the public into thinking all workers are abusers of the system and more importantly that mental health issues can't be a legitimate disability caused by the job. You have a problem with one individual, but the way you choose to discuss it calls everyone into question. Don't twist my words, I'd hate to think you were a hack. I'm inclined to think you want to draw attention away from my other comments by focusing only on what I wrote as an aside. I worked at ground zero, I'm not one to make light of the sacrifices that day.

My question to you is what really bothers you? That people abuse the system or that disabled workers don't have to pay taxes and everyone else does? To me they are separate issues. I bet if the managers do their job preventing abuse you'd probably still be angry with the tax free part.

Smokey,I am upset by two things: one, the management (or municipal administrators) fail to monitor the system on a regular basis after establishing policies; and two, that workers take advantage of the lack of oversight and abuse it. Right now, the system in Lowell breeds a culture of abuse. It's an entitlement. As for my psycho comment, it was not meant to offend anyone who has mental disabilities. Stress-related problems are real, especially for officers and firefighters who end up witnessing horrific events. However, when an officer has never been in those types of situation, and games the system to act like he can't do the job because of nervous syndrome issues, I have to question that. I guess my frustration over the lack of accountability get my dander up. And you made several good points that I overlooked.

Hey Jim,

I appreciate the follow up. (By the way this blogging is getting addicting already.) I took exception with only one term. I believe that in order to bring real progress on issues journalists need to stay as high above board as possible. This means no name calling and as many facts as you can bring to bear on the accused.

Everyone has a right to be angry but letting it get the best of you might lead to questions on your motivations, which I think are in the right place, your editorial points nailed it. Fundamentally the same things make everyone mad and as a whole, there is much common ground. I agree improper managment might be the biggest problem in government (I get to see it firsthand sometimes), but as much as we want, it can't all be run like the private sector because of the nature of some of the responsibilities and services local government need to provide. That can lead to abuses a misplaced sense of entitlement. Some people learn every nuance and try to take advantage of the situation, but so do corporations and private citizens. It happens in all walks of life. The guys who ran Enron abused trust as badly as public employees trying to get something for nothing. We all end up paying for it either way. I wish everyone in government was really altrustic and believed it was a way to help others and make a fair living by doing something significant, but it just isn't the case. It was a harsh reality for me to learn.

The thing I think a lot of public sector workers object to in the Sun's stories is general characterizations. (I know this is a whole other issue) Some people in the public take what they read at face value without any critical thinking on the issue afterward (see: backtalk comments). Others may not know the history of labor and how laws and contracts came to be what they are today. We know the facts as much as you do, if it only takes a little more hard work on your side to be more specific and point out individual abuse we would appreciate it. Labor can be in a tough position sometimes having to defend the worst of our members. I don't doubt we aren't much help when you guys come looking for a quote, but the dedicated workers tend to be caught in the middle between management and the abusers and invariably we come out looking bad either way.

Its kind of like the saying guns don't kill people people kill people (I'm not an NRA member BTW). Go after the abusers and the weaknesses in the system not all the people and the entire system that largely works well. If we get to the central facts of the issue change comes quickly and is harder to impede.

Smokey, I think we're all intelligent and mature enough to understand that criticizing teachers or police abuses in general doesn't mean we think every single member is an abuser. Jim and others speak in generalities because to get into point by point descriptions and disclaimers would waste too much time and too much print. I think everyone gets the intent behind Jim's statements, except for the overly sensitive public workers who can't take any criticism at all.

Instead of being upset at Jim or those of us who criticize the abusers, how about if they reserve their anger for their own. What a novel concept that would be. Police officers policing themselves, weeding out the cheats and crooks so that the majority who do things the right way dont' have to by guilty by association. Same goes for the overly sensitive teachers.

Joe,

I wish you were right that everyone was intelligent and mature enough, but when you work in the public sector everything is up for discussion, your job, your salary, your reputation. Some of that comes with the territory, but some doesn't. Since you think we are spoiled (and thin skinned) what exactly would you take away from us?

How do you suggest we police ourselves? We don't have any means to do so. Its no secret who is screwing the system here. The tools of discipline aren't ours to use. It's management's job to manage. We can be angry all we want, but it doesn't do us much good.

I want specifics and details in my news stories. Its not too much work. Its their job to get the facts right. There isn't an excuse for speaking in generalities and I hardly think disclaimers are necessary. Believe me the Sun has plenty of trouble filling space some days. My point was: criticize the abusers, be specific and thorough, not the system and the job we depend on.

Smokey, stop filling your pipe with mind-altering union contracts that protect mediocrity and the less productive workers. Sure, there is such a thing as union pride. It usually begins the first year on thejob. After that, union leadership and veteran union members who work by the clock, and the rules, take over. They create a culture. Abuses are rampant and for the most part protected in secrecy clauses like Civil Service and other negotiated agreements that people in the private sector don't have. IN the private sector, you are expected to acheive results and be productive or you hit the road. Municipal contracts don't allow for any accountability whatsoever. Do you think department heads do annual reviews on their employees? Please, we'd have to negotiate into the contract what a "review" is and then fight over every question on the form. It's absurd. When police officers can test positive for the use of cocaine and retain their jobs, then go to lead protection operations for drug rings. you know the system is corrupt. When perfectly healthy cops can "game" a back injury, or hand injury, and stay off the job fro 4 plus years, you know something is wrong. The union's attorneys are wrong and so is manaagement's. Both look the other way. It's when the press starts scrutinizing the affairs of government that this crap is exposed, and not the other way around. Thank the LOrd (can I say that?) for The Sun.

What I would take away Smokey are the protections that allow system abusers to continue to receiver their salaries. What you could do about it is demand your union supports those of you (again, the majority) who do not steal from taxpayers instead of protecting the cheats.

Perhaps if the public heard more police officers speak out against fellow officers collecting tax free money while building houses and doing other work a "real" injury wouldn't permit, then we might have more faith in the system.

How's this for a novel concept. Next time you see a fellow officer doing something his "disability" shouldn't allow, how about you report him. Or better yet, grab a camera and take a picture for evidence that might help get him or her fired and off the payroll so a competent replacement can be hired.

The facts. Just the facts.

Mind altering, mediocre, work by the clock, rampant abuse, corrupt system and words in "quotes" just to make sure we get the sarcasm. Good to see you guys rise above the name calling.

I'm glad to know when there's an bad accident the cops coming to control traffic, catch the drunk driver, investigate the crime scene and testify against the offender and the firemen rushing to cut the victim out of the wreckage, provide first aid and put out the fire are mediocre, but the private company EMT with lousy or no benefits, making 10 bucks an hour, working almost 70 hours a week to pay his bills, with minimal training is going to bust his rear to save my life because he's not in a union and so his company can make a buck.

Fortunately union workers have a say in their job conditions, such as not letting the work week be increased without compensation. I think it just annoys those who don't have any part at the table in their own job description. Its not as easy to measure productivity in the public sector as the private where the bottom line is profit. How do you measure profit in government? You can't measure the dollar cost of crime prevented or fires that are put out. How do you put a dollar value on the person who didn't die or the home that wasn't robbed? Crime has much more to do with the state of the economy that anything. Do you you think you should cut the cops pay the year the murder rate goes up? They didn't do the killing.

For teachers you can measure test scores and graduation rates, but school is nothing more than glorified day care for some parents. If you have a low income population, that doesn't speak the language, with kids who are worried about being hungry or their personal safety, education won't be the highest priority in their day. You will effectively drive teachers to wealthier communities with better students by linking everything to student performance. Somebody has to do the tough job of teaching the more difficult kids. The community reflects its make up, you can't blame the teachers for all the problems.

Can you build measureables into contracts?, absolutely, but the reason there are so few is because there is so much debate (like most occupations) over how you do it and over what works best and what doesn't. Job performance is not a simple as increasing the bottom line of a company, something few people who have never worked in government realize. You can make the system more efficient though.

I'd be the first to say there isn't much love for civil service just about anywhere, but its what we have to work with under the law. Last I checked the law can be changed by elected officials whenever they choose(I suppose that goes for 111F too), but most new solutions cost money somewhere. I'd rather see higher minimum qualifications and better testing evaluations for hiring but the state won't spend the money on it, and the city doesn't have the resources to do their own. So we get civil service. The one positive about civil service to me, is that at least a test score is used. If you can't get the high mark you shouldn't have the job. Its not the only thing that should determine who gets a job or promotion, but it beats patronage, favoritism and politics. If job performance and reviews could be guaranteed objective, I'd have no problem with those being included in the whole process either. Unfortunately personal politics plays into that too. If there was a magic pill system that would fix everything, I'm sure we'd all take it.

I do think there are checks in the system and a disciplinary process in place, IF it is utilized correctly. I can't emphasize enough that management needs to be stronger and really manage, not arbitrarily, but consistently and fairly. (They can't let anger get the best of them either) If you think who the person is doesn't matter in enforcing the rules, you are crazy. Once you go down that path its tough for the bosses to control anything. When consistency is a problem, discipline breaks down. If you find out the bosses don't care, a lot of people don't bother and its hard to blame them.

On top of all that, in our ever litigious society I think some of it is fear of a lawsuit or long drawn out embarrasing legal battle, which both sides lawyers make out well in, but no one else does and not much else happens.

Unions, which essentialy are nothing more than the vote of the majority of workers, don't defend the undefendable. I've seen members turned down on grievances by the body multiple times, because they didn't follow the rules they should and there isn't anything to fight for. It is not the union's place to investigate abuse however, because we then expose ourselves to the liability where we don't have the right to do it by our rules. Though I would agree, it is absolutely in our best interests to police ourselves.

Jim, I agree the media's place is to keep everyone else honest, without it this country wouldn't be what it is, the most open society in the world. And yes you can say thank the lord, just don't recite a specific denominations prayer in government session.

My question to you is, if this stuff is so rampant and not a few isolated cases, where is the 26 part series on all the people out on injury?

This is about the medical establishment trying to fix everything with a pill. Psychiatrists are no longer trained to do therapy. Instead they charge $150 for a 15 minute appointment that is focused on medication management. WBR LeoP