MOTIVATION
Author: Gary Maratta
During the early 80s, I was promoted to Sergeant and transferred to one of our nine districts. My district was on the city’s east side and was very busy, handling many felony calls and active drug activity.
My first squad consisted of 12 officers and myself, and we had a daily constant strength requirement of 1 Sergeant and five officers. Whenever I was on leave, we had to have one person designated as the Officer-in-Charge (OIC) and five officers to maintain our constant. These OICs had to fulfill my directions and maintain the integrity of the squad during my absence. Due to different leave schedules, I had two permanent officers serving in this capacity.
When I assumed the squad, the senior officers were assigned to a specific post car. The remaining officers (less senior ones) were floaters and filled in for them when they were on leave. These officers were also on loan to the two other squads if a vacancy occurred, and we had an extra officer that day. As a result, the junior officers were usually loaned out first. However, a 28-day report was required every month regarding the squad’s productivity outlining any arrests. Vehicle stops to include citations issued and even the number of cab checks. During my first month, I had to review daily activity reports from officers who did not complete the end-of-day statistics. This only happened once because tabulating everything took me a few hours.
From that point forward, I directed my OICs to loan out any officer who did not complete their monthly statistics (list posted in my office). I had a particular officer, Officer A, who only did the minimum amount of work and repeatedly asked other officers or myself how to handle his calls for service. I and other OICs directed this officer to make decisions independently without asking for assistance. Officer A also had to be loaned out because he failed to complete his monthly stats. The result for him was also the removal from his assigned car and made a floater.
I continued to document his performance, and during the semi-annual evaluation, I only rated Officer A as average, which did not go over well with him. The evaluation’s main point was his lack of decision-making on calls. Up to this point, he always received an above-average performance rating. I encouraged him to make decisions and not to rely on others.
Over time, he started to come around and repeatedly performed at the above level of performance and many times showed signs of excellence. He was rewarded by getting his post-car back at this point in his career. Eventually, he was recognized by the detective division and was selected to work in our Homicide Unit, a highly prestigious unit. I believe the officer completed a 180-degree turn and performed at total capacity. I was very proud of his accomplishments.
Author: Gary Maratta > Brief Law Enforcement Related CV
- Retired City of Baltimore, Maryland Police Lieutenant
- Bachelor’s Degree in Law Enforcement Administration
- Master’s Degree in Criminal Justice
