Support policies for law enforcement officers in the

United States: Compound federalism

Robert J. Dickey 1)

< 목 자 > (Contents)

Ⅰ. Introduction
Ⅱ. Approach and Methodology
Ⅲ. Examining Available Data
IV. Additional Matters for Consideration
V. Conclusion

I. Introduction

Are law enforcement officers (LEOs) properly compensated for their service to
society? Analytic discussions of governmental systems and personnel in Asia are often
based with reference to the United States, yet such a comparative model is challenging,
considering the complexities of the American Federalist system. Although a simple
analysis might be done based on a comparison of one nation’s unitary system (common
in Asia and Africa) to the national level of government in the U.S., or to a single local
government within an individual state, a more robust evaluation must consider the
extremely diverse circumstances across more than 39,000 local governments in 50 states
(National League of Cities, citing the US 2007 Census). With the nature of overlapping
governmental authorities in American federalism, a single citizen is likely to be served
by five or more governmental bodies: both vertical level governments (national, state,
local) and multiple local governments simultaneous, a compounded form of federalism.
Lacking a unified mandatory reporting system for these various governmental bodies,
there is no single reliable data-source to work from.
The problem is similar in law enforcement. A quick example demonstrates the
problem: a passenger disembarking a subway in the harbor area of New York City is
simultaneously under the jurisdiction of (and could be detained by) law enforcement
officers from the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, New York State Police Troopers,
City of New York Police, New York (City) Transit Police, and the Port Authority of
New York and New Jersey Police, all with general powers of arrest, along with the
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and a dozen or more other US agencies
with more narrowly defined fields of interest yet still general powers of arrest, as well
1) 계명대학교 사화과학대학 공공인재학부 행정학전공 조교수
as “hot pursuit” policies that would allow officers from neighboring jurisdiction to
continue their efforts when a suspect quickly moved beyond that local jurisdiction.
There were an estimated 12,575 local police departments operating in the United
States during 2007, which employed approximately 463,000 full-time sworn personnel:
roughly half of these local police departments employed fewer than 10 full-time officers,
only 5% of local police departments employed at least 100 sworn personnel (Reaves,
2010). These numbers do not include Sheriff’s departments or the various state and
federal law enforcement organizations, which, included, raise the number of policing
agencies to roughly 18,000 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, no date). In 2008, the largest
state law enforcement agency was the California Highway Patrol with 7,202 full-time
sworn personnel, followed by the New York State Police (4,847), Pennsylvania State
Police (4,458), Texas Department of Public Safety (3,529), and New Jersey State Police
(3,053) (Reaves, 2011).
Each of these American policing bodies operate more or less independently of the
others. One quick comparison of criminal laws at state and federal levels points to some
distinctions: Illinois has 421 criminal offenses listed, Virginia 495, Massachusetts 535, but
Title 18 of US Code includes over 1,000, perhaps over 3,000 offenses, depending on how
these are divided. State and local police seldom cite federal offenses, federal government
police rarely cite state law (Stuntz, 2001). Laws in each state differ at even the simplest
level: a driver may make a right turn on a red traffic signal after coming to a complete
stop, but “right on red” is not allowed in the neighboring state of Arizona. Minimum
age for drinking alcohol ranges from 18 (law on federal properties and in and some
states) to 19, 20, and 21 years of age.
Local authorities also independently determine local support and compensation policies
for their law enforcement officers, as they do for all other local government employees.
While there are some policies enacted by the Federal (national-level) government which
are nationwide in scope, most are not, and similarly, and many states have state-wide
policies though other policies do not dictate local norms. Thus, we find significant
disparities in governmental support to LEOs at both vertical (higher and lower-level
governments) and horizontal (neighboring authorities of roughly the same level)
comparisons. We should also recognize that 70% of large police agencies in the USA
are engaged in collective bargaining with their employees (Zhao and Lovrich, 1997),
although one significant study on the issue suggests that "unionization has a limited
effect on salaries and other fringe job benefits" of municipal polie (Doerner and Doerner,
2013, 675). Even the U.S. Capitol Police are paid considerably differently than other
federal police authorities operating in the District of Columbia, with different benefits as
well (GAO, 2012).
Support and compensation extends beyond the purely financial, including viable career
ladders, adequate training and equipment, and perceptions by officers that a policing
career will afford a good life (Wilson et al., p. 38). In addition to cash-equivalents, such
as insurance, educational supports, and sick/vacation leave, compensation can be
construed as more flexible or less demanding work for similar compensation or
preferable work scheduling. This study compiles information on many of the policies
affecting support to law enforcement officials across the United States which may
impact sworn officer recruitment and retention.

II. Approach and Methodology

The absence of a unitary data-source for comparative analysis removes the

possibility of standard statistical analyses as a meaningful methodology. (It must be
recognized that various studies are done despite their incomplete data and several of
those are discussed further below, with some insights from these used as part of the
overall analysis.) Recognizing these data constraints, this study is more of a field
survey, based on a critical synthesis of the literature and diverse small data collections
from various settings: thus this study does not aim to determine a comprehensive norm,
but to better outline the field of study. Vignettes (small case studies) and comparisons
from local authorities provide helpful data in this design. These sources come from
websites, published scholarly and professional reports, and information from the
governmental entities. Although an intensive study of a few jurisdictions might provide
helpful contrasts, any claim that the few communities were representative of the many
dissimilar settings across the U.S. would be misleading and erroneous for as Zhao and
Lovrich (1997), among many others, have pointed out, the continuing importance of
regional variability is largely overlooked in studies on police compensation (516).
Local governments in San Diego County, and state and federal-level law enforcement
officers also working in the same geographic area provide one demonstration of the
diverse pay rates offered to officers who might in fact be living next door to each
other. (And in fact four of my high school classmates, who still live within a few
kilometers of each other, each worked for neighboring policing agencies.) Comparing pay
on a national level is also possible, although not all authorities report, and various
non-official pay comparisons abound. These figures must be adjusted to reflect local
costs of living, and some calculations in this regard are offered. Military Police are not
included here, as they fall within the unique compensation structure of the U.S. armed
forces.

III. Examining Available Data

1. National Salary Comparisons

Various national-level surveys of police wages are available: each have problems
with data collection. As noted earlier, there are no mandatory unified reporting
requirements, thus, even the official national government surveys are incomplete. Private
studies face even greater lack of comprehensive data, but may be more current or
include jurisdictions that do not report to the national study. An additional concern,
which is less critical in local surveys, is the extreme diversity in cost of living. This
factor can be overlooked in countries such as Korea, where nationwide employers
(including unitary government) do not offer local cost of living allowances, as official
statistics indicate only moderate differences in cost of living1) (see appendix 1, despite
popular beliefs to the contrary). One broad-based U.S. comparison contrasts salary to
size of the local government population, as in Table 1 from Hickman and Reaves (2006).
A survey compiled by the police magazine The Blue Line incorporates factors for
cost of living and total pay over a career, displaying wide varieties in pay across cities
regardless of city size or location (see Appendix 2). Local press in the state of New
Jersey, however, find that police in New Jersey are the nation’s highest paid (Megerian,
2010). Megerians also points out that many police leave higher-paying and more
demanding urban jobs for the quieter suburbs or rural areas.

Table 1. Average base starting salary for entry-level officers in

local police departments across the USA, 2003
_______________________________
City Population Salary
Under 10,000 $25,834
10,000 - 49,999 $33,889
50,000 - 249,999 $38,011
250,000 or more $37,300

Data compiled by Reaves (2010) from two nationwide voluntary surveys of police
departments outlines the problem of data collection: in contrast to the data in Table 1,
in 2007, average starting salaries for entry-level local police officers ranged from $26,600
in the smallest jurisdictions to $49,500 in the largest, the overall average starting salary
for new local police officers was estimated at $40,500. Organized collective bargaining
(labor unions) are also important, as average starting salaries for sworn officers were
$10,900 (38%) higher in departments with collective bargaining than in those without it
(ibid).
Similarly, we find pay differentials based on differing agency type. Figure 1 (from
Discover Policing2)) is illustrative of the significant differences between state and local
1) Consumer Price Index of December 2014 data from the National Statistics Office website
(http://kosis.kr) indicates that when both commodities (including housing rent) and services are
included, the difference across major metropolitan areas and the various provinces is less than
2%, i.e. a low in Incheon of 108.1 to the high (Daegu) of 110.02.
2) Based on the average annual wages of all occupations in the Standard Occupational
governments, the US Postal Service, and Universities & Colleges: nearly 30%.
According to 2008 Bureau of Labor Statistics data, mean annual wages for all local
police and sheriffs’ patrol officers, at $52,480 per year, appear competitive with other
public service occupations (such as firefighters and correctional officers), but they trail
other possible professional occupations, such as physical therapists ($74,410 per year),
physical- and social-science occupations ($64,280), computer-science occupations
($74,500), and construction management ($89,770) (Wilson et. al., 2010, p.19).

Figure 1. Average Annual Salary for Patrol Officers by Agency Type

Local pay differentials are an important factor in the United States. The U.S. federal
government provides a locality pay map to augment the General Service and Law
Enforcement Officer pay scales (see Appendix 3). Similarly, Culpepper &Associates
(2009) report that 73% of businesses with operations in more than one geographic region
provide geographic pay differentials or adjust pay rates based on location. In the federal
government program, the premium to basic pay ranges from 35.15% in the San Jose -
San Francisco - Oakland region to 14.16% in the area labeled "Rest of the United
States" (not included in the other 33 Locality Areas).
Salaries are complemented with other cash compensation, such as incentives for
educational attainment at tuition support. 37% of departments, employing 72% of all
officers, offered tuition reimbursement to officers in 2007, a majority of departments
serving 10,000 or more residents offered tuition reimbursement and education incentive
Classification (SOC) System Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, May 2008.
pay to sworn personnel (Reaves, 2010). Other forms of compensation can include
exercise gyms, uniform allowances, shift-differential pay, 4-day workweeks, flexible
(“cafeteria-style” heath/medical/dental benefit programs, superior holiday/leave programs,
deferred compensation, bilingual pay, unused sick leave pay, life insurance, employee
assistance programs (psychological and marital counseling, alcoholism treatment, etc),
and physical fitness programs. Plus retirement programs which may be comparable to
other public employees, but also may allow for earlier retirements at higher benefits.
Law enforcement agencies, particularly federal agencies, also offer an availability pay
incentive called Law Enforcement Availability Pay, or LEAP, to certain officers who are
required to work unscheduled or irregular hours. Some federal agencies offer an
additional 10 to 25 percent salary increase to compensate certain law enforcement
officers required to respond to emergencies on notice. Other organizations offer another
type of premium pay called “administratively uncontrollable overtime” -- “AUO” pay
ranges from 10 to 25 percent of an employee's rate of basic pay (Yoder, 2004).
2. Regional salary comparison studies

Local governments, like the private sector, often base their salary structures through
regional parity studies based on comparable communities or agencies. Studies may be
performed by city staff, labor union staff, or paid consultants -- these studies may
greatly affect labor contract negotiations.
A salary study was prepared by the Southern States Police Benevolent Association
for Columbia North Carolina in 2013 (Rinehart, 2013). Nine comparable cities identified
by the City Council in a previous salary study for the City Manager's position were
included. Issues such as salary, paid benefits, non-cash benefits (take-home car), and
percentage of city budget directed to police services were examined. It found that not
only were Columbia police paid approximately 15% less than the average, but some
officers qualified for state financial assistance to families based on their low income! It
pointed out a 47% turnover rate for the 44 months studied, and offered a side-by-side
comparison with a very similar in-state city (Charleston).
Consultants were hired by the City-council appointed City of San Antonio Healthcare
and Retirement Benefits Task Force to perform a comparison against six major cities in
Texas that were selected: Austin, Corpus Christi, Dallas, El Paso, Fort Worth, Houston
(PFM Group, 2014). This more sophisticated study focused on total cash compensation
(inclusive of longevity and premium pay), housing costs and relative pay (from federal
analyses). San Antonio's premium pays included clothing allowance, shift differentials,
certifications, and education. Less common premiums, such as K-9 duty, helicopter
detail, and crisis/hostage negotiations, were not included in this study. Importantly,
overtime was not included, though a majority of offers received some degree of overtime
pay. Figure 2 indicates the wide variation in benefits offered.
The Town of Arlington Massachusetts organized collaboration of its human resources
& management team, labor union, and consultants to select 12 comparable in-state
communities for analysis (Human Resources Services, Inc, 2014). These municipalities
included surrounding areas as well as some of most competitive municipalities in
Massachusetts. Important points here were that the consultants specifically included
vacation as a comparison item, and they recommended the municipality establish a
compensation philosophy and a position in the market (to pay at market median, for
example) - ultimately neither recommendation was adopted by the Town Council.

Figure 2. Texas Cities Police Benefits (Regionally Adjusted)

for Police Officers with 20 Years of Service

3. Metropolitan San Diego survey

San Diego County is located in the southwestern corner of the state of California,
and the most southwesterly area of the 48 contiguous United States. As of the 2010
census, the population was 3,095,313, making it the fifth-most populous county in the
United States. The county seat is the City of San Diego, the eighth-most populous city
in the United States. The county encompasses 4,207 sq mi (10,900 km2), with an
estimated population for 2014 of 3,263,431: most live in roughly 20% of this area, the
western areas of the county nearer to the ocean, and a large miliary installation covers
uch of the the northern 20% of the county. The cities and densely-populated
unincorporated county areas in this region is collectively known as metropolitan San
Diego.
In the City of San Diego, uncompetitive wages and salary freezes after the turn of
the millenium led many police officers to seek better opportunities elsewhere, including a
lead detective with 21 years on the force who applied for a patrol officer position in the
neighboring City of Chula Vista (Wilson et. al, 2010, p. 8, citing Manolatos). Table 2
provides the current basic salary range for patrol officers (starting as recruit/cadet,
excluding Corporal and higher ranks), not including overtime or bonuses for education or
extra skills (bilingual, motorcycle, etc.) in a few law enforcement agencies operating in
the metropolitan San Diego area. Several cities, including Del Mar, Imperial Beach,
Lemon Grove, and Santee, contract for police services with the San Diego County
Sheriff's Department.

Table 2. Range of Pay for Patrol Officers in Metropolitan Area of

San Diego, based on published website information May 2015
_________________________________________________
Annual Salary
Law Enforcement Agency (no overtime)
Carlsbad Police $59,000 - $83,358
Coronado Police $52,700 - $82,812
Chula Vista Police $49,073 - $89,321
El Cajon Police $56,305 - $72,410
La Mesa Police $62,961 - $84,198
National City Police $64,006 - $81,738
San Diego (City) Police $48,000 - $76,000
San Diego (County) Sheriff $47,361 - $87,783
California Highway Patrol $53,000 - $92,640
US Marshal's Office & $48,784 - $82,820
Federal Bureau of Investigation (GL7-GS11)
US Service
Customs & Border Protection $42,862(GL5-GS11)
- $82,820

4. Transfers between police agencies

Unlike the case in unitary national police agencies, loss of Law Enforcement Officers
due to transfer to other police agencies is a significant factor in the U.S. We may
surmise that transfers within the profession indicate employee dissatisfaction with the
employer, since they remain in policing. Orrick (2008, p. 155) suggests a
“rule-of-thumb” that employees do not seek transfers merely for the sake of pay
increase if the differential is less than 20%, yet then surmises that where the poaching
rate (transfer to another police agency) is under 20%, employees are not leaving for
pay. Orrick also cites a California Peace Officers Standards and Training Council report
which found that 22.4% of the LEOs in the state had worked for more than one agency
(Ibid, p. 145). Under Orrick's premises, numerous LEOs are transferring from one police
authority to another within California due to pay disparities. In a broader survey of
police officials, Koper et al. (2001) indicate that twenty-four percent of non-retirement
officers departing from large agencies were estimated to have gone to work for other
law enforcement agencies, whereas small agency respondents estimated that about 45%
of their departing officers went on to work for other law enforcement agencies. It is
unclear whether pay and compensation are direct factors in the distinction between small
and large, but we may also consider that there are generally fewer opportunities for
advancement in smaller organizations. Similarly, Yearwood and Freeman (2004) found
that nearly half of North Carolina agencies attribute at least 70 percent of their attrition
to compensation issues driving officers to other departments or professions.
5. Turnover in general (attrition)

In any field of employment, managers view salary and benefits as the biggest
element of compensation affecting turnover. As training expenses for sworn law
enforcement officers are significantly higher than for most other public employees,
attrition is a particular concern. Annual voluntary turnover rates are regarded as
excessive when they surpass the 10-percent mark in law-enforcement or correctional
agencies, a rate considerably lower than rates for teachers, at 17 percent (Wilson et al.,
2010, citing Doerner, 1995 and Planty et al., 2008). A 2001 survey reports that 72 percent
of respondents indicated that retention constitutes a crucial policing problem (Lee, 2001).
Wareham, Smith, and Lambert (2015) found that on a national geographic basis, the
rates of resignations, voluntary separations, and total turnover were generally
statistically significantly higher in the U.S. South, compared with the rest of the United
States, whereas retirement rates were higher in the Northeast. Similarly, retirement rates
were higher in urban agencies (there are relatively fewer urban cities in the south).
A survey of 205 North Carolina sheriffs’ departments of varying size found steady
turnover (12.7 percent) and vacancy (5.5 percent) rates, with 28.6 percent of agencies
surveyed noting either a significant or slight increase in turnover rates, but with smaller
agencies suffering attrition at nearly 18%, nearly double the larger agencies in the state
(Yearwood, 2003).

IV. Additional Matters for Consideration

1. Unions & Labor Disputes

Labor unions for law enforcement officers are legal in most states, as they are for
other public servants. Strikes (refusal to work), however, are outlawed for public safety
officials (police, fire, ambulance, some others) in most states -- nine states have
granted some of their employees a limited right to strike through legislature, four other
states' courts have granted such rights, however most of these states specifically
exclude certain "essential employees," particularly police, firefighters, correctional officers
and hospital workers, or may have different and stricter provisions for safety and
security employees' strikes (Kearney and Mareschal, 2014, pp. 244-245)3). Strikes are
outlawed for all federal employees4), and they and are required to acknowledge that fact
in writing before they are hired. President Ronald Reagan fired all federal air traffic
controllers in 1981 for failing to report for work after engaging in an illegal strike.
The “Blue Flu” is a response to an inability to strike. Employees contact the
supervisor at the required time to inform that due to an “illness” they will be unable to
report to work. The most recent incident occurred in Memphis Tennessee in 2014, when
nearly 25% of all officers failed to report for scheduled duty (Payne and Presto, 2014)
after the City Council voted to eliminate the city’s 70% payment of officers’ health
insurance premiums. The police union claimed to not have organized the sickout
(organizing such a labor action would make union officials subject to criminal sanctions
and the union to civil penalties). Another measure by employees is “work to rule” --
employees refuse all additional tasks and duties which are not required by their
employment contract but they would otherwise perform, such taking their lunch breaks
precisely on time and to the full extent, and rejecting informal and formal requests for
overtime work other than in emergency situations.
2. Non-traditional forms of compensation

1) Scheduling
Many police departments operate on more flexible schedules. While there are three or
more main work shifts, such as day, evening, and night, there and the possibility that
officers can switch shifts relatively easily in many police departments to meet personal
needs, including part-time work. In many departments lunch breaks are considered "on
duty," in most cases they are paid working hours which means they can be interrupted
by service calls.
Workdays may fall in one of three types, with some departments operating under
two or more types at the same time: traditional 8 (or 9) hour shifts (5days/week), 10
(or 11) hour shifts (4days/week), and 12 hour (alternating 3&4 days/week). Shifts may
then be divided into those starting on the half-hour and those on the hour, so that not
all police are transitioning back to the station at the same time (leaving the city without
police on the streets). In the City of Seattle, officers work 4 days in a row, and then
have 2 furloughs (days off). In addition to regular furloughs (2 of every 6 days),
officers also accumulate 10 or 11 additional furlough days during the course of the year.
The officer may schedule time off using “delayed” furloughs in a manner similar to
vacation days.5)
3) Bass (2014) provides a helpful electronic tabulation of data from Kearney and Mareschal.
4) 5USC§7311
 2) Informal “fringe benefits”
It is said that an officer in uniform need never buy a cup of coffee. While many
police departments and law enforcement officers shun free food, most restaurants
welcome uniformed peace officers as an indirect security measure which not only
protects the business but also makes guests feel safe. Peace officers may also receive
unstated benefits in apartment rentals, where landlords believe that such residents not
only provide security to the complex but are also more reliable rent-payers.
3. Officers’s increasing job-safety concerns

Law enforcement officers face the growing yet constant threat that the public is as
well armed, or better armed, than the police. In 1992 18 states had laws presuming a
right to carry a concealed firearm, with exceptions for convicted felons and those with a
history of mental illness (Black and Nagin, 1998). However, “concealed carry” laws are
in constant flux, and at present 36 states will ordinarily issue a concealed weapon
permit for those who meet basic legal requirements (no state discretion) and another 6
states have no restrictions at all. In all states the sales of handgun are permitted, along
with rifles and shotguns. Although illegal, unregistered handguns can be purchased in
many municipalities as well. Fear has increasingly become a problem, along with
increasing violent activity. Not only is the unarmed peace officer largely a relic from the
past, most police today wear body armor: in 2007 75% of local police departments
required field officers to wear protective body armor at least some of the time while on
duty (Reaves, 2010). As Franko (2015) observes, current law in Ohio doesn’t allow for
compensation of psychiatric conditions such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
unless the worker has a related physical injury, yet first responders (Police, Fire,
Rescue) are often placed in situations not unlike the military. The situation is similar in
many states.
4. Outside the job

1) Compensation after-hours
Voluntary overtime for police is common. This may come in two forms: (a)
additional hours in the routine job; and (b) additional hours in special duty. Special duty
may include activity such as special events (sporting events), mandatory hired security
through the police department (e.g., street fairs, conventions), and optional security hired
through the police department. These overtime activity may pay at the regular
government overtime rate, or may be under special voluntary overtime rates.
Some (unknown) percentage of law enforcement officers take security jobs outside of
5) City of Seattle Police website:
http://www.seattle.gov/policejobs/benefits-and-salary/shift-schedule
their full-time government employment. While such employment generally requires
permission from the police department, the number of hours worked and pay-rate are
generally not supervised by the police force. As sworn officers, they are paid
considerably more than unsworn private security, even though unsworn security may
have gun licenses and limited powers of arrest. Police officers would not wear their
regular police uniform in these private security jobs, but may have special uniforms
(such as for hospital or event security) or be expected to work without uniform but
with concealed weapon and badge.
Take-home cars are another off-duty form of compensation. While this is a sort of
fringe benefit for the officers (who thus do not need to purchase a car, or put additional
wear on their personal vehicle, and may also include free unlimited fuel supply), it is
also an incidental form of police presence in the community. Indirectly, however, it also
indicates that the officer is still “on the job” though he is not being paid for this time.
The cost of a take-home car program, as Puente (2015) observes, is usually not
monitored and would be difficult to calculate.
2) Safety after hours
While almost every sworn officer carries a side-arm while on duty, far fewer carry
a weapon while off-duty. The growth of social media, however, reduces the ability of
law enforcement officers to become ordinary citizens when they leave their duty shift. In
consequence, the Federal Law Enforcement Officer’s Safety Act (LEOSA, codified as
18USC§926B and §926C) authorizes off-duty and retired law enforcement officers to
carry (and use if necessary) a weapon while outside their home jurisdiction.
5. Comparison with other public servants

Police are paramilitary organizations. As such, like with regular public servants, rank
and hierarchy is strictly defined, and promotion is based on service-time along with
merit and examinations. Weberian models of bureaucracy underline all law enforcement
organizations. Unlike regular public servants, however, discipline is more severe and
scheduling must be based on 24 hour / 365 day needs for service. Despite being paid on
different pay-scales than other “general” public servants in most governmental
authorities, as public servants, the attraction of a “safe” government job (in terms of
longevity) would still factor into recruitment. Thus, retention rates may be a
consideration. One study, based on pension funds in California, indicated that teachers
have a significantly lower retention rate than police, who are somewhat lower than
fire-fighters, all of whom have significantly lower retention rates than general public
servants (see Figure 3). This problem may be increasing. Orrick (2005) pointed to a
turnover rate of 12 percent for nurses, 13 percent for teachers, and a report from North
Carolina indicating an average turnover of 14 percent in patrol positions, with the
average tenure for a new officer at 33 months.
 Figure 3. Public Sector Turnover in California

Police and regular public servants at lower levels are paid not dissimilarly: Regular
public servants at G7 rank in the third rate (roughly 3rd year in this rank) are paid
1,660,300 Korean won per month, while Police Gyeongsa (경사) rank at third rate receive
1,652,500. Second-year staff in police at the lowest rank (순경) are paid 1,363,100 per
month; G9 staff at second year receive 1,265,200.
Police often are allowed to retire earlier than other public servants, at 20 or 25 years
of service (About.com, Discover Policing).
6. Discharge from Employment

1) Death and Disability

The U.S. Department of Justice manages the Public Safety Officers' Benefits (PSOB)
program6), which provides death and education benefits to survivors of fallen law
enforcement officers, firefighters, and other first responders, and disability benefits to
officers catastrophically disabled in the line of duty, regardless of which governmental
agency employs the officers. Benefits are considerably higher than the “Workers
Compensation” and “Death & Disability Insurance” benefits offered to regular
governmental and private sector employees under local state laws and those for federal
employees.
Police Benevolent Associations are a separate type of assistance to officers and their
families. These organizations are non-profit mutual benefit associations that may also
function as labor unions, and may also provide a tax-benefit to private citizens or
businesses who wish to support police officers. Services vary, but may include legal
assistance, disability insurance at minimal or no cost to the officers, life insurance at
minimal or no cost to officers, funeral benefits, educational grants to survivors of
officers falling in the line of duty, etc.
6) https://www.psob.gov/
 2) Involuntary Discharge
Professional malpractice has severe ramifications in law enforcement officers.
Licensed professions such as physicians, lawyers, and engineers purchase malpractice
insurance privately or through their employment, but police not only require protections
from civil lawsuits for malpractice, but also criminal defense protection as well as legal
services for internal investigations by their own department. Errors in judgement or
practice by ordinary public servants or in the private sector may lead to reprimand, but
for law enforcement officers, termination from employment and incarceration are risks
few other types of employment face as a routine risk.
6. Municipal Bankruptcies

Despite a number of recent court cases, it is yet unclear whether police and other
public servant pensions and retiree benefits (medical insurance, etc.) are preferred
liabilities and therefore protected, i.e., whether local governments must pay out agreed
amounts even while other debtors receive less than full-value, or that these benefits
may be reduced.

V. Conclusion

Support policies for law enforcement officers in the United States are extremely
diverse, to the degree that it is difficult to form firm generalizations concerning the
range and substance of policies. Factors such as the opportunity for overtime within the
police department and opportunities for professional advancement, along with
locally-determined policies on benefits such as percentage of employer-payment for
health insurance and pensions further complicate calculations, along with the fact that
there is no mandated unitary data collection on these issues across more than 18,000
different agencies employing sworn law enforcement officers..

References
About.com. (no date). Five more reasons to be a police officer. May 9 2015
http://criminologycareers.about.com/od/Work_Environment/a/Five-more-reasons-to-be-
a-police-officer.htm
Bass, K. (2014). Overview: How different states respond to public sector labor unrest.
Onlabor. May 12 2015
http://onlabor.org/2014/03/11/overview-how-differentstates-respond-to-public-sector-la
bor-unrest/
Black, D.A. & Nagin, D.S. (1998). Do right-to-carry laws deter violent crime? The
Journal of Legal Studies 27(1), 209-219.
Blue Line (The). (2004). The U.S. Police Officer Compensation Survey. The Blue Line.
May 8 2015, http://www.theblueline.com/salary1.html
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (no date). Local Police. May 12 2015
http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=71
Culpepper & Associates. (2009). Geographic Pay Differential Practices. Society for
Human Resource Management (website).
http://www.shrm.org/hrdisciplines/compensation/articles/pages/geographicpay.aspx
Discover Policing. (no date). Financial stability and benefits. May 8 2015
http://discoverpolicing.org/why_policing/?fa=financial_stability
Doerner, W.M., and Doerner, W.G. (2013). Collective bargaining and job benefits in
Florida municipal police agencies, 2000–2009. American Journal of Criminal Justice
38, 657–677.
Franko, K. (2015, March 11). Ohio Measure Would Allow Workers’ Comp for Police
PTSD. Insurance Journal. May 12 2015
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/midwest/2015/03/11/360208.htm
GAO. (2012). Capitol police: Retirement benefits, pay, duties, and attrition compared to
other federal police forces [GAO-12-58]. May 11 2015
http://www.gao.gov/assets/590/587909.pdf
Hickman, M.J., & Reaves, B.A. (2006). Local Police Departments, 2003 [NCJ 210118].
Data available online as Bureau of Justice Statistics, filename lpd03f07.csv, May 9
2015, http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1980
Human Resources Services, Inc. (2014). A compensation and benefits survey study for
the Town of Arlington, Massachusetts (Final Report). May 15 2015
http://www.arlingtonma.gov/home/showdocument?id=22343
Kearney, R.C., & Mareschal, P.M. (2014). Labor Relations in the Public Sector (5th ed.).
Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Koper C.S., Maguire E.R., & Moore G.E. (2001). Hiring and retention issues in police
agencies: Readings on the determinants of police strength, hiring and retention of
officers and the federal COPS Program [Report #NIJ 99-IJ-CX-0011]. Washington,
DC: Urban Institute Justice Policy Center. May 13 2015

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/193428.pdf
Lee, L. (2001). Peace officer recruitment and retention: Best practices. Sacramento:
Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training. May 15 2015
http://libcat.post.ca.gov/dbtw-wpd/documents/post/53936324.pdf
Megerian, C. (2010, September 19). N.J. police salaries rank highest in nation with
median pay of $90,672. New Jersey Star-Ledger. May 12 2015
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/09/nj_police_salaries_rank_highes.html
National League of Cities (no date.) Local US Governments. May 13 2015,
http://www.nlc.org/build-skills-and-networks/resources/cities-101/city-structures/local-
us-governments
Orrick, W.D. (2005). Police Turnover. The Police Chief 72(9). May 13 2015
 http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article
_id=697&issue_id=92005
Orrick, W.D. (2008). Recruitment, retention, and turnover of police personnel: Reliable,
practical, and effective solutions. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, Ltd.
Payne, E., & Presto, S. (2014, July 8). Memphis police director: "We're in crisis mode"
as sick-out grows. CNN . May 10 2015
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/08/us/memphis-police-sickout/
PFM Group. (2014). Public Safety Compensation Analysis. April 19 2015
https://www.sanantonio.gov/Portals/0/Files/budget/San%20Antonio_Public%20Safety_Co
uncil_%20Testimony%20PFM%20v3.pdf
Planty, M., Provasnik, S., Hussar, W.J., Snyder, T.D., and Kena, G. (2008). The
condition of education 2008.,Washington DC: Claitors Publishing Division. May 14
2015 http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2008031
Puente, M. (2015, March 8). Police take-home car programs a trade off; costs unknown.
The Baltimore Sun.
htttp://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/sun-investigates/bs-md-police-takehome
-cars-20150308-story.html
Reaves, B.A. (2011). Census of state and local law enforcement agencies, 2008. Bureau
of Justice Statistics. May 11 2015 from
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/csllea08.pdf
Reaves, B.A. (2010). Local Police Departments, 2007. Bureau of Justice Statistics. May 9
2015 http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/lpd07.pdf
Rinehart, K. (2013). CPD Budget and Personnel Comparison Study 2013. May 7 2015
http://columbiasc.net/depts/city-council/docs/2013/10-15/cpdbudgetpersonnelstudymedia.
pdf
Stuntz, W. (2001). The pathological politics of criminal law. Michigan Law Review 100
(3), 505-600.
Wareham, J., Smith, B., & Lambert, E.G. (2015). Rates and patterns of law enforcement
turnover: A research note. Criminal Justice Policy Review 26(4), 345–370.
Wilson, J.A., Dalton, E., Scheer, C., & Grammich, C.A. (2010). Police recruitment and
retention for the new millennium [RAND Monograph 959]. May 13 2015,
http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2010/RAND_MG959.pdf
Yearwood, D.L., & Freeman, S. (2004). Analyzing Concerns Among Police Admnistrators:
Recruitment and Retention of Police Officers in North Carolina. The Police Chief
71(3), 43–49. May 15 2015
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article
_id=253&issue_id=32004
Yearwood, D.L. (2003). Recruitment and Retention Study Series: Sworn Sheriffs'
Personnel. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Sheriffs' Education and Training Standards
Commission. May 15 2015 May 15 2015
https://www.ncdps.gov/div/gcc/PDFs/Pubs/NCCJAC/rrpolice.pdf
Yoder, E. (2004, June 28). Pay and benefits for law enforcement employees. The
Washington Post. May 14 2015
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36250-2003Feb20.html
Zhao, J., & Lovrich, N. (1997). Collective bargaining and the police. Policing: An
International Journal of Police Strategies & Management 20(3), 508-518.
APPENDIX 1. Comparison of Korea’s Local Consumer Price Index
for Commodities and Services, 2014

Local CPI
City/Province (Commodities
& Services)
Seoul 109.56
Busan 109.92
Daegu 110.02
Daejeon 106.24
Gwangju 109.03
Incheon 108.10
Ulsan 109.12
Chungcheongbuk-do 109.08
Chungcheongnam-do 108.34
Gangwon-do 108.24
Gyeonggi-do 108.66
Gyeongsangbuk-do 108.68
Gyeongsangnam-do 109.03
Jeollabuk-do 109.17
Jeollanam-do 109.09
Jeju-do 108.21
data from National Statistics Office website http://kosis.kr
 APPENDIX 2. Selections from the U.S. Police Officer Compensation Survey
from http://www.theblueline.com/salary1.html
Rank City Index Salary Range
1 Pittsburgh, PA 144 $36,501 to $55,303
2 San Bernardino, CA 141 $53,424 to $77,112
* note – San Bernardino is now facing bankruptcy, and police salaries will
probably be reduced along with other forms of compensation.
3 North Las Vegas, NV 140 $46,745 to $67,152 (a suburb of Las Vegas)
4 Henderson, NV 137 $47,986 to $70,907 (a suburb of Las Vegas)
5 Columbus, OH 133 $36,358 to $55,682
6 Austin, TX 133 $42,246 to $74,762
7 Peoria, IL 133 $38,805 to $59,046
8 Reno, NV 130 $41,739 to $57,197
9 Las Vegas, NV 133 $43,819 to $68,742
10 Warren, MI 129 $43,948 to $69,123
14 San Antonio, TX 124 $36,960 to $49,260
15 Dallas, TX 124 $41,690 to $67,879
18 Lubbock, TX 122 $41,776 to $54,895
32 Arlington, TX 113 $40,333 to $56,778
36 Pasadena, TX 112 $38,610 to $56,858
43 Laredo, TX 111 $40,914 to $54,350
46 Mesquite, TX 110 $45,084 to $57,540
50 Irving, TX 110 $42,900 to $57,492
57 Grand Prairie, TX 107 $42,401 to $54,138
59 Fort Worth, TX 106 $39,537 to $64,477
68 Corpus Christi, TX 105 $37,800 to $50,856
71 Garland, TX 104 $43,098 to $55,099
79 Brownsville, TX 104 $27,312 to $44,967
86 Beaumont, TX 102 $37,020 to $50,340
88 Amarillo, TX 102 $34,116 to $50,328
90 Houston, TX 101 $33,955 to $52,065
93 Jersey City, NJ 101 $35,380 to $74,277
96 Chandler, AZ 101 $40,521 to $57,539
98 Washington, DC 100 $39,644 to $66,411
99 San Francisco, CA 100 $57,916 to $81,589
101 Raleigh, NC 100 $31,070 to $63,065
104 Chicago, IL 99 $36,984 to $67,326
105 Bridgeport, CT 99 $37,964 to $56,378
106 Baltimore, MD 99 $35,784 to $57,983
1112 Waco, TX 98 $36,376 to $48,175
120 Memphis, TN 96 $39,369 to $46,265
121 El Paso, TX 96 $30,537 to $49,812
131 Torrance, CA 93 $55,524 to $71,544 (a suburb of Los Angeles)
132 Newark, NJ 93 $34,286 to $69,255
141 Los Angeles, CA 89 $49,152 to $73,602
142 Paterson, NJ 89 $20,125 to $60,755
143 Chula Vista, CA 89 $50,704 to $67,807 (a suburb of San Diego)
144 Greensboro, NC 89 $31,500 to $57,367

The index is based on a formula that combines pay with time off, over a 30-year
period, and then is adjusted by the local cost of living.
The index measures total compensation over a 30-year career and divides this figure by
the total hours required to earn this compensation. Included for total compensation are
base pay, longevity pay, holiday pay, shift differential pay, uniform allowance,
employer's pension contribution, employer's group insurance contribution, employer's
FICA contributions and any other compensation that all employees receive.
Cost of living is based on reasonable living expenses in the general metropolitan area,
not costs specific to the high-rent cities where the officers work.
 APPENDIX 3. General Schedule (GS) Locality Pay Map
from https:/lwww.federalpay.org/gs/locality

There are a total of 34 General Schedule Locality Areas, which were established by
the GSA's Office of Personnel Management to allow the General Schedule Payscale (and
the LEO Payscale, which also uses these localities) to be adjusted for the varying
cost-of-living across different parts of the United States.
Each Locality Area has a Locality Pay Adjustment percentage, updated yearly, which
specifies how much over the GS Base Pay government employees working within that
locality will earn. Therefore, localities with a higher cost of living have a higher
adjustment percentage then cheaper localities.
A partial listing.
GS Locality Name Adjustment
ATLANTA-SANDY SPRINGS-GAINESVILLE, GA-AL 19.29%
BOSTON-WORCESTER-MANCHESTER, MA-NH-RI-ME 24.80%
BUFFALO-NIAGARA-CATTARAUGUS, NY Buffalo, New York 16.98%
CHICAGO-NAPERVILLE-MICHIGAN CITY, IL-IN-I/VI 25.10%
DALLAS-FORT WORTH, TX 20.67%
DAYTON-SPRINGFIELD-GREENVILLE, OH 16.24%
DENVER-AURORA-BOULDER, CO 24.22%
HOUSTON-BAYTOWN-HUNTSVILLE, TX 28.71%
HUNTSVILLE-DECATUR, AL 16.02%
LOS ANGELES-LONG BEACH-RIVERSIDE, CA 27.16%
MILWAUKEE-RACINE-WAUKESHA, WI 18.10%
NEW YORK-NEWARK-BRIDGEPORT, NY -NJ-CT-PA 28.72%
PHOENIX-MESA-SCOTTSDALE, AZ 16.76%
PITTSBURGH-NEWCASTLE, PA 16.37%
RALEIGH-DURHAM-CARY, NC 17.64%
RICHMOND, VA 16.47%
SAN DIEGO-CARLSBAD-SAN MARCOS, CA 24.19%
SAN JOSE-SAN FRANCISCO-OAKLAND, CA 35.15%
STATE OF HAWAII 16.51%
WASHINGTON-BALTIMORE-NORTHERN VIRGINIA 24.22%
REST OF UNITED STATES 14.16%