MOONLIGHTING COPS: CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Will an officer working in uniform enforce ‘house rules’ or the law on his extra job?

By Trey Rusk

The holiday season is upon us. To most people that means shopping, family and celebrating their religious beliefs. To a lot of cops it means working extra jobs.

Extra jobs come in many forms. There is the regular extra job which is worked weekly such as a bank or hard goods retailer. Then there are the seasonal extra jobs such as corporate Christmas parties where the rented location insists that a police officer be hired if alcohol is served. Bars and restaurants also hire extra police presence during the holidays in an effort to stop theft and rowdy drunken behavior.

Who are the uniformed police really working for? If the business is paying them, then they are working for the business. However, I believe that they are really working for themselves and a conflict of interest may be present. Example: 30 years ago I worked for a municipal P.D. The pay wasn’t adequate. In fact, extra job money was factored into family expenses. I worked security in exchange for an apartment and had a regular extra job on weekends at a skating rink. The difference between my family having a nice Christmas or a poor Christmas hinged upon the extra job money.

Let’s remember, that the extra job officer is wearing a uniform issued by a government agency and with that uniform comes the power of a sworn police officer. On duty or off duty the powers of arrest are genuine and have been purchased.

Some say that the way to prevent a conflict of interest is to have the business or individual pay the government entity directly so that the officer is in fact working for the city or county while providing security. This should eliminate any conflict of interest and thus allows the officer to make unbiased arrest decisions. I believe this just launders the money and may protect the government if a lawsuit is filed but the conflict of interest may remain.

If I were a business contracting with the city for security on a daily basis it usually figures into the equation that there is a primary officer making the schedule. In my experience I have found that the same officers work the extra job each week to the point that if an officer goes on vacation then the other officers assigned to this extra job step up and cover the shift.

Here comes the conflict.

Officer Doe is working a club with a contract with the city to provide officers for security seven days a week from 6pm to 3am. On Friday morning at 2am the owner and manager have an argument and emerge from the office yelling at each other. Officer Doe observes that both of them are drunk. Does Officer Doe arrest them for being employees intoxicated on the licensed premises? A charge that if filed may result not only criminal charges but administrative charges that probably would result in the suspension or cancellation of the alcoholic beverage permit.

I would hope that Officer Doe did his job without consideration to his extra job, but the fact remains that if Officer Doe does his job he may not only be putting his extra job at risk but also the extra jobs of the rest of the officers on the city contract. In fact, this may be a heavier burden on Officer Doe than just losing an individual extra job for himself.

I believe most officers would make the right decision. However, a nice family Christmas may be the deciding factor.

(Trey Rusk is a retired Texas state police agency lieutenant.)