HIGH RISK ?

[valleygirl]

Where is Cal when you need him? Torpedo needs some help with his case. lol

Cal, I know you have a comment.....we have had this discussion before.

There are many that feel that only security should receive the high risk and there are those of us that go behind the gate on a daily basis that feel that we should also receive high risk. With the list of people that Lance placed on this subject, there should be more that just what is listed there. Their union (medical & psych) got them their high risk. The rest of us are screwed with our union.

This issue will not be settled here. Whether we receive high risk or not is decided in Tallahassee by the legislature. All we have is support from those who feel that non uniformed staff should receive this type of retirement to help us with this issue.

I respect your position, but do not agree with you, Torpedo.

Sorry for the jab, Cal. I could not help myself. I am just surprised that you haven't commented yet. I respect your position, too. Will you forgive me? ;D

[calculus]

As long as I have been in this job and as outspoken as I am, I can take it as well as I dish it out. I would however like to clarify....

I am not against everyone who works inside getting "special risk" retirement. What I am against is the notion that you DESERVE "special risk" retirement simply because you work inside the prison.

Yes, Vocational Instructors supervise inmates, yes LPNs deal with inmates "who could attack them", yes Maintenance workers supervise inmates, but ONLY security is required by policy and law to forcibly control inmates using coercive physical force if necessary.

I do not understand how the legislature can think that a RN should get Special Risk and an LPN not, and for many of the other categories, I cannot for the life of me imagine how they meet the statutory requirement for special risk, in fact, I don't think I have EVER seen a "Nutritionist" or a "Dietitian" step foot inside a prison, except maybe on a tour.

If you want to boil my argument against other classes getting special risk, it comes to this, you don't DESERVE special risk because you work around inmates, you DESERVE special risk because the work you do around inmates contains hazards that normal employees do not have to regularly deal with.

For example, if you are an Electrical Vocational Instructor, and you teach inmates this trade, illustrate what makes your job teaching inmates MORE dangerous than teaching normal people on the street.

In your illustrations, you cannot use the blanket statement "inmates are dangerous" because people on the street are just as dangerous, and as an added bonus, people are the street are more likely to be drug users, alcoholics, or have other untreated mental illnesses. Inmates are less likely to be under the influence of drugs and alcohol (not saying they can't be), and in most cases inmates with mental problems are identified and undergoing treatment.

A valid, but still not entirely convincing argument would be that as a supervisor of inmates, you have to maintain strict control over restricted tools, you have to recognize inmate manipulation tactics, and some of the VERY specific skills that you would need working in a correctional environment.

Cal.

[Tazz]

Well said Cal. I agree.

[marvinhill]

Cal, you made a good point. In the maintenance shop, a tool is called a screwdriver, in the fence, it is a shank...Now how to convince people that an inmate will use a screwdriver as a shank in the maintenance, AC, or whatever shop is the point we need to convey.

[sfcwoodret]

High risk retirement will be an issue with DOC for years to come.The legislators in Tally won't go to some of these institutions and see what some of these people do, so they won't approve it.

[blackbelt]

Can someone out there make some sense of this situation. A roof is going to be put on a building and a Correctional Officer is going to be put on loan to do the job. Is this not a MAINTENANCE ISSUE of replacing a roof on a building and why does a High Risk employee need to be put on loan to accomplish this? Tool accountability falls under the tool control officers job and if they can not trust a maintenance man with his tools then they need to find someone else.

1.) Why cut out maintenance jobs to only have High Risk Employees on loan that get higher pay, make the security shift short and high risk pay on site?
2.) Why not go ahead and pay the Maintenance men the High Risk they are the ones using the tools while the HIGH RISK employees watches.

REALLY MAKES NO SENSE TO ME! BY THE WAY HIS WIFE WORKS IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING ON ANOTHER SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT JOB! ANOTHER CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BEING A TYPIST! LETS NOT FORGET THE OFFICER THAT IS GOING TO BE ON LOAN HAS ALREADY QUIT THE SAME INSTITUTION 3 TIMES OH YEH 3 TIMES AND HAS CAME BACK! BY THE WAY THIS IS HAPPENING AT APALACHEE CORRECTIONAL IN SNEADS!

[Indian Outlaw]

HIGH RISK....... What most of you don't realize is that this does not necessarily have to be aproved as a legislative bill but CAN be introduced or addressed to legislature if it is INCLUDED IN THE GOVERNORS "BUDGET REQUEST" TO THE LEGISLATURE. Now when you speak of ACI........ this is, and has been the most unethically ( not to mention all of the corruption) run prison in the state. Now Washington CI. has the potential to take that away from ACI since the trash has been dumped over there. THIS IS WHERE THE PHRASE "HIGH RISK" TAKES ON A NEW MEANING. High risk is not just about retirement benefits.... it's about EVERYONE WHO HAS DIRECT CONTACT WITH INMATES IS IN A HIGH RISK ENVIORNMENT AND SHOULD NOT BE EXCLUDED FROM THIS "BENEFIT". WE NEED TO PURGE THE RANKS OF THE ADMINISTRATORS WHO CONTRIBUTE AND ADD TO THE MEANING OF WHAT HIGH RISK REEEEEEALLLY MEANS. I WISH THEY WOULD GIVE IT TO ALL DESERVING PEOPLE INSIDE THE FENCE. YA'LL BE SAFE

[screwielewie]

Jul 6, 2008 16:21:47 GMT -5 blackbelt said:

Can someone out there make some sense of this situation. A roof is going to be put on a building and a Correctional Officer is going to be put on loan to do the job. Is this not a MAINTENANCE ISSUE of replacing a roof on a building and why does a High Risk employee need to be put on loan to accomplish this? Tool accountability falls under the tool control officers job and if they can not trust a maintenance man with his tools then they need to find someone else.

1.) Why cut out maintenance jobs to only have High Risk Employees on loan that get higher pay, make the security shift short and high risk pay on site?
2.) Why not go ahead and pay the Maintenance men the High Risk they are the ones using the tools while the HIGH RISK employees watches.

REALLY MAKES NO SENSE TO ME! BY THE WAY HIS WIFE WORKS IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING ON ANOTHER SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT JOB! ANOTHER CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BEING A TYPIST! LETS NOT FORGET THE OFFICER THAT IS GOING TO BE ON LOAN HAS ALREADY QUIT THE SAME INSTITUTION 3 TIMES OH YEH 3 TIMES AND HAS CAME BACK! BY THE WAY THIS IS HAPPENING AT APALACHEE CORRECTIONAL IN SNEADS!

Nicely put

Where I work, Tool Control and inside Maintenance is a special assignment as is Maint tool control, Center Gate, Tower, Education, Recruitment Officer Fence Maintenance Warehouse too All these positions are not on any post chart and if institutions continue to have so many special assignments someone needs to get vigorous and push for these to be added to the post chart so that regular posts do not get shorted. At present the dorms and other security posts get pulled for these special positions created by the Colonel. Now the administration need to do the rest of the paperwork or just delete these special posts either way security will be improved. who needs a recruitment CO when no one is hiring anyway?

[northerngirl]

Most recruitment positions are Sergeants now and are deemed "special assignment" by the powers that be....

[potbelly]

I'm sorta new but Ithought that everyone inside got it.

[brucifer]

Jan 15, 2010 11:15:24 GMT -5 potbelly said:

I'm sorta new but Ithought that everyone inside got it.

Well, as you read, you now know not everyone gets the high risk. Everyone should get it, if inside the fence, no matter what!!! Some list reasons and or conditions which they believe are correct in denying the benefit. I believe the mission statement and all the other rhetoric pertains to all staff. As someone pointed out, any Security Officer not working under a specific Post Order should not be high risk. Post Orders are only for Correctional Officers.

[potbelly]

Thats really a shame....... ....... has anyone ever really tried to start a campaign to help everyone get (HIGH RISK) retirement?

[Sassy]

Here we go again! ;D

[potbelly]

Sassy................. I sure hope that you are not one of those that would be affected by a reduction in HIGH RISK RETIREMENT BENEFITS........................ but at least you do have a job.THINK POSITIVE.
YA'LL BE SAFE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[screwielewie]

To my Senators and Representatives

I am a faithful employee of the State of Florida. The job that our Highway Patrol and Correctional Officers do is paramount to the protection of the citizens of the State of Florida. Over the last 4 years we have received NO pay increases while we have been under constant attack for our pay and benefits. The cost of living has risen 15% or more during this same time. Now there is a proposal to take our High risk retirement away and turn all of us into welfare recipients. Consider this Under the new proposals when an employee retires with 70% of salary that employee will be giving more than 50% back just to pay for insurance alone. There is a possibility that the employees will NOT accept these cuts What would you do when have 100 Thousand inmates and no one reporting to work to watch them? The Black eye that Florida would receive from that could not ever be erased. I propose that instead of cutting our retirements or placing higher demands on our service length's Florida needs to Implement a INCOME Tax. Almost all states in the United States do this already. Either find a way to increase sales taxes or start an income tax program at 3% The employees need to be supported. As it stands now we all feel like we have been stabbed in the back, not by inmates but by our elected officials. Please consider some plans other than hurting the high risk Public safety employees of our state.