Personally,
I’d argue that the sense of isolation one can feel living in a suburb makes the
additional cost of city life worthwhile. But I also realize that is a viewpoint
not shared by all.
IN
PARTICULAR, IT does not seem to be shared by the people who are supposed to be
patrolling the city streets and keeping them safe for us – the Police
Department.
For
it seems that those police officers (who by city ordinance are required to live
within the Chicago municipal limits) seem to think they’re entitled to more
money, on account of the fact that they’re being forced to live in the City of
Chicago.
The
Chicago Sun-Times reported Thursday about the negotiations now taking place between the city and the Fraternal
Order of Police on behalf of police officers.
It
seems that the police union not only wants a significant pay increase and a reduction
in the amount of money they have to contribute toward their health insurance
benefit package, they also want a $3,000 annual stipend to compensate them for
the residency issue.
IN
SHORT, THEY seem to think they are being burdened by the city that gives them
employment. Talk about an attitude that is bothersome.
It
really makes me want to respond by telling them if they despise urban life so
much, perhaps they ought not to be working for the city in any form.
Now
I realize that “residency” is an issue that all governmental units have to
confront when it comes to hiring people to actually do the work that allows
government to function and provide services for us all.
I
also realize that this is likely an early offer in contract negotiations. This
is the point where one asks for “the moon” (and the city does its best
impersonation of Ebenezer Scrooge), and then the two sides try to work toward a
middle ground that will become the eventual contract.
SO
PERHAPS I shouldn’t take it too seriously that the police are saying they want
more money if they have to live in the city.
But
it’s just the kind of attitude that makes me wonder, at times, if we need to be
protected from our police – rather than view them as an entity that will
protect us from those elements of our society that want to strong-arm us into
submission.
When
it comes to our city’s cops, we all have heard the jokes about those “cop
enclaves” on the city’s far Southwest and Northwest sides – people living as
close as they possibly can to the city limits without actually being residents
of Alsip or Norridge or some other community.
And
yes, in the interest of disclosure, I should admit that I have two uncles who
were with the Chicago police (one is now retired, while the other is deceased) who
when they were working lived near Midway Airport and in the Mount Greenwood
neighborhood – both on the city’s fringes).
IT’S
JUST THAT this is one issue where I don’t have a problem accepting the view
that a city employee ought to live in the city he (or she) works in.
I
know some suburbs don’t have strict residency requirements (and in an odd
quirk, I know of at least two suburban cops who live in Chicago) because they
think they need to reach out to a larger pool of employees than their residents
could ever provide.
But
that is different in Chicago, which is capable of attracting people who view
the place as offering so much in opportunities that cannot be matched
elsewhere.
So
as for those cops who think they ought to be paid more to live in Chicago,
personally I’d rather see us pay them off to get lost. We’d be better off
without them if they can't appreciate the perks of living in the Second City!
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment