Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: Qualified applicants

  1. #1

    Qualified applicants

    One big issue I've heard relayed about the LE field is recruiting and retaining qualified applicants. If that's so much the case, why are qualified applicants being turned away?

    I myself have been applying all over the place as of late, and have had some luck but no full job yet. Granted I've got a few things in my past some years back that don't look great, but have gotten rather far into a few departments' hiring processes. My own frustrations over not yet being hired aside, I've had contact with other applicants who have been turned away for unspecified or bogus reasons.

    The main department where I reside has been struggling for near ten years now to fill a 100 slot vacancy created by a hiring initiative some time back. Last I knew, they've only gotten maybe half due to continuous retirees and officers going elsewhere. But when it comes to recruiting, they've turned away what I would've considered good applicants. We're a heavily military town, and numerous veterans have applied and been turned away for things as minor as tattoos. Even a former co-worker and good friend of mine couldn't get hired despite having put himself through the academy to aid his likelihood of being hired.

    I was actually contacted by a member of the command staff for the department whom I know through my prior involvement with the Explorer post. There was a moderate amount of effort to track me down apparently, so I applied but got shut down after not passing their psych eval. Due to their policy, I'm not privy to the results but I suspect the shrink at their utilized "assessment mill" didn't care for my answer to a question pertaining to getting violent. Basically I conveyed I knew I had the capacity to get violent after experiences in my defensive tactics class in college. Guess I didn't fit their desired psych profile for the department, but oh well.

    But then I see some of the people who get through who either later quit, get dropped for various reasons, or are too PC for their own good. It's as if the departments are more interested in "feel good" officers as opposed to solid, capable ones.

    I grant it could be argued my assessment of what constitutes a qualified applicant could be questionable, but given my significant interest in the field plus my education through various outlets I would argue I have a moderate grasp on the concept.
    “Conspiracy theories are just spoiler alerts these days.”

  2. #2
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Midwest
    The short answer is the disparity between what those of us in operational level positions consider to be good or "qualified" applicants differs greatly from what upper management considers to be "good applicants."

    Common sense, decisiveness, conditioning, and many of the other considerations that make a good cop are often not the demographics sought after by management. "Diversity" is a big catchphrase in recruiting nowadays. A buddy of mine works for a department that has a Minority Recruiting section but no regular Recruiting unit. I know that some of our management looks at decisive proactive young officers as liabilities rather than assets. They would rather have a touchy feely officer that is more likely to back down (de-escalate) even when action is required. Fewer complaints and lawsuits that way.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by HCountyGuy View Post
    One big issue I've heard relayed about the LE field is recruiting and retaining qualified applicants. If that's so much the case, why are qualified applicants being turned away?

    .
    A few years ago, I sat on my department's hiring board for about six weeks. When I was asked to do it, I was pretty much ready to do anything other than answer another domestic or work another crash as my zone at the time was virtually a smorgasbord for both of those types of calls.

    Careful what you wish for......

    Anyway, I always wondered where the applicants were too. Here was my experience in hiring....and keep in mind that nothing was sacred as far as backgrounds on the applicants: I had access to 147 files and got to read about all sorts of nefariousness in these folk's backgrounds.

    Things that surprised me.......

    Typically, we lost 70 percent of applicants at the PT phase. The mile and 1/2 run waxed a loooooot of people. I am not sure if they just didn't train for it or the average person can't run a 1.5 mile in fifteen minutes and change. I was never a runner and I was able to pass this test multiple times for two different agencies. Yes, I had to train for it but it didn't take a year of training....more like a month's worth to get where I needed to get.

    Drug use. Whoa is there some drug use. A huge percentage admitted to drug use in the past. And not just homegrown Mary Jane out in the back forty.....but coke, speed, etc. Lots of Ritalin and prescription stuff.....lots.

    Drama. We actually had one guy who admitted to being the "cover man" at the back door while his buddy shot up the front of the house over dope or a girl or something like that. Same dude also admitted to sort of running over his girlfriend with a SUV......yeah.....that kind of drama.

    So what you had left was like one or two guys that had no criminal past, no drug use, former military, college degrees......good, solid applicants.......who didn't get selected for some reason or another. I had picked out like two or three solid applicants out of almost 150 and none of them were selected. I was never told why and err on the side of caution that they got better offers elsewhere and not that we had a "diversity" goal to reach in this class. Read into that what you will.

    And yes, the department's ideal candidate is one that is passive and anything but a hard charger. Touchy feely is smiled upon where a good show of force is fretted over.

    Psych evals are, in my opinion, a lousy way of getting into one's head. I have a degree in Psychology and most of those test are easily defeated if one knows how to answer the questions. I sailed through all of mine and I remember years later arresting one of the Psychologists that "tested" me. He had a unique name and I instantly called him out on it and he admitted that he was the "psych" guy that determined yes or no to applicants. No I don't remember the charge but it was some sort of warrant that made my eyebrow go up.

    Here is the thing about law enforcement now: Feelings rule. PC rules. Putting on a good "show" rules.

    There is little focus on hunting down good sheepdogs. Sheepdogs don't make good social workers. Sheepdogs cause headaches and after actions. Sheepdogs, particularly if they are under your chain of command, can cause you to miss that next rung on the career ladder.

    Good luck with the job hunt. Not all departments are like this but I would guess to say that most are. Hopefully I am wrong.

  4. #4
    Member Gadfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Texas

    Qualified applicants

    Just keep plugging away. I applied at probably 20 places before I got picked up. After two years and lots of testing, interviews, PT, Pshych, polygraphs, etc. I was getting frustrated, embarrassed and burnt out.

    Keep trying. It was worth it.

    One place, Texas DPS (state trooper) called me in for a final interview. They told me they had over 2100 applicants. After all testing and evals I was ranked 72 out of 2100. But they were only hiring 50. "Please, try again next year"... Then Pasadena Tx police gave me a job offer. I gave notice at my job, and announced to family and friends I was hired. About a week later, I got the call. The Polce were going to hire 15 officers. City council cut the budget to 10. I was 13 on the list. I got cut due to budget.

    Conroe Tx. After all the testing, there was a 3 way tie for the job. Myself and two others were to report to city hall for the city council approved tie breaker. We went in and were handed a deck of cards. Draw cards. High card gets the job. I drew a 6... No job for me...

    It took time, but eventually I got the job.

    Keep hammering away. Keep copies of everything you fill out ever. Make sure your answered are consistent and don't vary between departments or applications.
    Last edited by Gadfly; 09-16-2016 at 06:59 AM.
    “A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that.” - Shane

  5. #5
    Member Luke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Alabama
    So if you were super squeaky clean but smoked some marijuana back and high school and admitted to it your a no go? Even if your record was clean, never even talked to a police officer let alone been in trouble?
    i used to wannabe

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Luke View Post
    So if you were super squeaky clean but smoked some marijuana back and high school and admitted to it your a no go? Even if your record was clean, never even talked to a police officer let alone been in trouble?
    No, not at all.

    Even the hard stuff is not a disqualifier now. We had to lower the standards to hire people.

    Back in the mid 90s, I admitted to trying grass and it almost got me disqualified from my first agency. Enough time had passed and I was mid 20s with a wife and responsibilities. That is probably the only reason I was given a "go" as I also had a bachelor's degree and a solid work history.

    Once in the academy, they burned a disc to let my class of cadets smell the odor of burning marijuana. I made some remark about how it was close but not exact and every other cadet turned to me and asked "You've tried it?"

    Flash forward to modern day and it would be one that hasn't tried anything and the others turning and saying "You haven't tried it?"

    Hallucinogens, if memory serves, are the only "no-go" now. YMMV

  7. #7
    Tag for later will post my experience...
    VDMSR.com
    Chief Developer for V Development Group
    Everything I post I do so as a private individual who is not representing any company or organization.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Luke View Post
    So if you were super squeaky clean but smoked some marijuana back and high school and admitted to it your a no go? Even if your record was clean, never even talked to a police officer let alone been in trouble?
    Lol. Smoking weed in NOT a disqualifier...at all. As mentioned, I admitted to it back in 94-95 and they almost had a stroke. However, if you did heavier stuff, like cocaine etc you will be disqualified, in NC anyway, because possessing any amount is a felony. Some applicants aren't truthful on the backgrounds about their drug use and they usually get hung up for lying eiher by a thorough background or a polygraph. Lying is a disqualifier...usually. Hiring someone as a token employee is an issue. Having the same racial makeup as the populace you police is the latest dribble the liberals are throwing around in the media. I know youve all seen/read it. Its complete BS. Hire the person that can do the job. Period.

    With society in a continual downward spiral I suspect that the standards will be lowered so they can fill positions. Filling positions with people who barely pass and get hired now is a huge part of the problem with LE anyway. Our last few boot rookies (straight out of BLET, aka the academy) have either failed FTO or quit on their own a few weeks in. I guess they watched too much Law and Order and had become delusional about what being a LEO is really like.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by KeeFus View Post
    With society in a continual downward spiral I suspect that the standards will be lowered so they can fill positions. Filling positions with people who barely pass and get hired now is a huge part of the problem with LE anyway. Our last few boot rookies (straight out of BLET, aka the academy) have either failed FTO or quit on their own a few weeks in. I guess they watched too much Law and Order and had become delusional about what being a LEO is really like.
    Oh don't suspect. It's happening.

    And yes, FTO phase is usually where make or break time occurs. Not always but usually.

    A good FTO can cause people to become self aware that they not only don't have what it takes to keep themselves from getting hurt or killed but will probably cause someone else to get hurt. Usually, self awareness is easier on the department and the powers that be due to having to document so well why Tom or Jane can't cut it on the streets.

    Not that it is a particularly hard job but there are some types that just aren't cut out for it. Like a candidate I had when on the boards.....

    I asked some standard question that had to do with conflict and the candidate replied "Sir, I'm really not good with confrontations. I usually go out of my way to avoid confrontations of any kind. I typically fall apart when dealing with conflict and would rather be in a cubicle somewhere doing data entry or fixing computers."

    When told that conflict resolution was a pretty significant part of LE and patrol, this person asked if we had any openings in the IT department. I kid you not.

  10. #10
    I make hiring decisions; therefore, I get to see all of the applications. I'll discuss our actual process, but to get into the process, you have to have filled out the application correctly and completely. If you can't fill out the application correctly and completely, it's telling. For example, if you state you have X number years of experience, but X number years of experience aren't documented on your application, you're done right there. The instructions state to attach additional sheets as necessary. If I am having to supervise your work product before you are even interviewed, we don't need you. Also, if you put something on your application that needs explaining, you had better attach an explanation.

    As to our hiring process, you can BS me during a formal interview; so, I don't do them. Applicants must meet with a panel of deputies and supervisors. It's a fairly informal chat, and it's a two-way thing. We expect the applicant to interview us as well. If after that chat all parties want to continue, the applicant does a ride along with a patrol shift. If all is good, we do a background and psych.

    At some point in the process, I ask them to explain reasonable articulable suspicion, to explain probable cause, and I give a scenario and ask them how they would handle it. The scenario has multiple acceptable responses. Fail the quiz, you can't work here.

    Having our personnel involved in the decision making has been very successful. They are invested in the hire and want to see the people do well. It also weeds out many personality conflicts.
    I had an ER nurse in a class. I noticed she kept taking all head shots. Her response when asked why, "'I've seen too many people who have been shot in the chest putting up a fight in the ER." Point taken.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •