popular logistics

We hold police officers to high standards of conduct - not least being truthful about bad outcomes that arise from their work. Part of the bargain ought to be that, in return, the government be equally frank towards police officers - and a high level of care in training and equipping them.

As a citizen, I think it’s difficult to demand high standards of conduct from the police when their employer - the City - treats them shabbily.

When Officer John M. Kelly crashed his police car during a chase on Staten Island in 2000, thousands of officers attended his funeral, where Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani declared: “John Kelly is a hero. Nobody can take that away.”

Officer Kelly’s wife, Patricia M. Kelly, a police officer herself before retiring in 2000, has been trying for years to show that her husband’s supervisors knowingly sent him on patrol in an unsuitable car, something the department denies.

city lawyers have argued that Officer Kelly caused his own death

Her lawyers have obtained documents showing that highway officers had reported steering problems in the model and a similar one.

In stark contrast to the mayor’s words at the funeral, city lawyers have argued that Officer Kelly caused his own death by driving recklessly and failing to use his seat belt. After years of litigation, Ms. Kelly has been denied in her efforts to question all the officers who had evaluated the cars.

Officer John Kelly patrolled the north shore of Staten Island for an auto larceny unit. He won high marks for his driving skills, vehicle maintenance, career potential and general demeanor.

“Officer Kelly reserves his action until he has assessed the situation completely,” his supervisors wrote in a year-end review for 1999. “He considers all aspects and develops a sound judgment of the situation.”

Still, there was friction between the extended family and the department. Mrs. Kelly’s sister, Virginia Duffy, joined a broad federal lawsuit accusing the department of sexual harassment and retaliation. The city eventually settled those claims for about $1.85 million awarded to six current or former officers.

On the afternoon of July 17, 2000, Officer John Kelly was assigned to patrol for traffic offenders. Alone in his car, an unmarked 1999 Chevy Lumina, he called in the license plate of a passing motorcycle, learned it had been stolen and gave chase. On Gulf Avenue in the Bloomfield section, he veered into a utility pole. Officer Kelly, 31, was pronounced dead within hours.

“Firefighter’s Widow to Get Death Benefits,” The New York Times, November 23^rd:

Since her firefighter husband died of a heart attack nearly four years ago after responding to an emergency, Kathleen Shea has not received any death benefits, despite a 2003 federal law that indicated she was entitled to them.

But this week she learned that in a reversal, the Department of Justice had determined that she was entitled to benefits under the Hometown Heroes Survivors Benefits Act. The law extends federal benefits to the survivors of firefighters, police officers and other first responders who die of heart attacks or strokes while on duty.

Ms. Shea lives in Elsmere, N.Y., southwest of Albany, where her husband served as the volunteer fire chief.

The Department of Justice had denied benefits to Ms. Shea and scores of other families around the country, arguing that language in the law indicated they were ineligible because their family members died during routine activities.

But Senator Charles E. Schumer, the New York Democrat who sponsored the original legislation introduced by Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, helped Ms. Shea and other families appeal the decisions because he said responding to an emergency was “inherently nonroutine.”

So far, all four appeals have resulted in benefits for families, but nearly 40 more families still have to go through the process.

From Tina Kelley’s piece in Wednesday’s Times  , “Death Benefit is Elusive for Emergency Workers’ Families”:

In 2003, Congress passed the “Hometown Heroes Survivors Benefits Act,” expanded existing benefits  to deaths within 24 hours after “nonroutine  stressful or strenuous physical law enforcement fire suppression, rescue, hazardous material response,” etc. As Kelley points out, what does “routine” mean in these lines of work? Couldn’t an argument be made that the inherent dangers  are “just part of the job.” Senator Patrick Leahy - with Attorney Gonzales testifying in front of the Judiciary Committee last week - says that Congress meant “routine” to be typing, talking on the phone, washing a truck - not - as the Administration interprets the rule - strguggline with a suspect, assistant in medical treatment, putting out fies.

So: of the first 34 applications - all of them denied. Congress gets upset - they’ve granted 10. U.S. Representative Bob Etheridge (D-North Carolina),  said in a press release that

after three years of foot dragging by the Administration, the Hometown Heroes Survivor Benefits Act, first introduced by Etheridge in 2002, will go into effect. 

- snip -

The law …. was signed by President Bush on December 15, 2003. In June, Etheridge proposed an amendment to the U.S. Justice Department’s funding bill that would have cut funding to the Attorney General’s office until they implemented the Hometown Heroes Act. [It took them three years to write the regs. - and then only on the threat of cuts to the AG’s budget. Compare the post 9/11 legislative process  - it took less than a month to write legislation which, while it had much publicized benefits to victims and their families - but also seems to have been designed to cater to aviation interests. 

Link to Etheridge’s press release.

This is as disappointing as it is unsurprising. Let’s hope the Times lets Tina Kelley keep on this story - and not only the narrow set described by this legislation - but the general question of how well we treat military veterans, emergency workers, and their families.

It seems to me that a simple rule would be parity with Congressional benefits.