News >> Browse Articles >> Law Enforcement News
Union Files Complaint Against Chief Who Made Off-Duty Arrest
The Times-Tribune
April 19, 2011
On that day, Chief Duffy said he was not scheduled to work but decided to check on citizen complaints about possible drug activity in a part of West Scranton.
While driving through the area, he arrested a man who had an outstanding bench warrant issued by Lackawanna County Court. The chief also searched the man and allegedly found he possessed a marijuana joint and drug paraphernalia, leading to the man’s arrest on drug charges.
Sgt. Martin acknowledged that the chief is “morally and legally obligated” to act if he sees a crime happen and to make an arrest if necessary.
But, the union president said the chief, as member of management, should not actively root out crime or randomly patrol neighborhoods while off duty because it violates union agreements that protect rank-and-file officers’ employment. The union is concerned city administrators will have more leverage to lay off police officers because “Chief Duffy will step in” and do the work, Sgt. Martin said.
“It’s a perception and it leads to that,” he said. “We’re threatened with layoffs.”
The union is asking an agreement be drawn up about the chief making the arrests.
Chief Duffy said he will not stop patrolling neighborhoods or making arrests if he receives reports from citizens, whether on or off-duty, because of the complaint.
“It’s not like I am getting the information and keeping it to myself and playing hero,” the chief said. “I will continue to do this. I’m a public servant.”
Contact the writer: smcconnell@timesshamrock.comThe arrest in question
On March 20, while not on duty, Scranton Police Chief Dan Duffy decided to take a drive through West Scranton, following up on complaints about drug activity. He saw a man he had arrested before walking on Division Street, according to arrest papers. Chief Duffy ran his name, confirmed there was a bench warrant issued for his arrest, and pulled him over. “I consider myself always on duty,” Chief Duffy said at the time.
Anonymous
about 2 years ago
you guys are making the union look bad. a cop is a cop is a cop. get real.
K_Ringo
about 2 years ago
10 Comments
In my opinion, the Chief is never off-duty......
Maybe they should'a called in "Dwight?"
kclark1206
about 2 years ago
80 Comments
This is the exact reason that we (lPublic safety) have been getting lumped into the same catagory as teamster unions of old when it comes to republicans blasting unions. This does not even begin to make sense. Shame on the PA bargaining unit.
Deputy_Carter
about 2 years ago
74 Comments
I'm not in any union thank goodness but would it be right if someone from the board was in need of LE and I was the only one close enough, but since I was off duty...suddenly I remembered that I may have left my stove on so I can't help at this time. Oh how it may be different if this drug peddler was selling the board member's juvenile son or daughter! I can almost bet that certain union decisions have made while "off duty" but weren't final till on the clock. So I suppose even thinking about union things out of work would be the same as taking action as the Chief did. Thumbs up Chief Duffy and keep on being the Public Servant you swore to be!
a280d
about 2 years ago
14 Comments
As my wife would say when I'm about to do something bone headed.
SERIOUSLY!
captam
about 2 years ago
6 Comments
LOL LOL LOL LOL.............sorry let me compose myself..........LOL LOL LOL ........sorry....
This is a union that is supposed to protect and serve..........LOL LOL LOL................
LAWMANTUKES
about 2 years ago
6558 Comments
HUGE BUMP..!! pcekpr962
And as many will agree, this union must have hidden motives as to be so brasin towards the chief for simply doing what is expected of anyone of us, who comes across a similar situation. This does no doubt cast a foolish looking image, upon the union and the Officers involved. I think that it is a simple case of "bad blood" between the chief and the union. It looks too obvious not to be.
VROB
about 2 years ago
208 Comments
Iam sure the union can find something better to fight for being in law snforcement is not a job its a lifestyle
if you do something worng off-duty your still a cop. just like my dept a Lt or above can not respond to a fight unless it an officer is involed
Bury
about 2 years ago
1344 Comments
Silly union ...
CBPD607
about 2 years ago
262 Comments
Police Unions are already misunderstood enough by the public. Thanks for the black eye.
beeguy
about 2 years ago
466 Comments
Any union that forbids a sworn officer from making an arrest just because he isn't a member of the union needs to be put out to pasture. Taking it a step farther, praise to the chief for stopping a crime in progress. I don't know about there but here in Indiana a sworn officer has jurisdiction 24/7 and with few exceptions, anywhere in the state. We don't make a habit of petty arrest in other jurisdictions but I have arrested criminals in other counties, off duty, when I was the county sheriff of a different county when a serious crime was taking place. Good job chief and to the union, get a real job. If a union is needed, get one that has a little common sense and doesn't dictate that every officer has to be a member and play by their rules. We are cops, union or not, and the public needs us to act so.
RPDS54
about 2 years ago
96 Comments
I have worked for three local agencies during my career and participated in the unions. My Sheriff and both Chiefs of Police were salaried and technically on-duty/on-call 24/7 (as was all upper command staff). My guess is Scranton PD is no different. I suppose if Scranton PD has a policy which forbids any kind of off-duty action, and the Chief has disciplined others for violating that policy, then the union might have a point. Unfortunately I suspect that is not the case and the union is wasting their time and resources over something very stupid.
PETE114
about 2 years ago
1396 Comments
Wonder who released this story? Maybe the Chief who has been fighting with the union about other things more important than this story?
Mtarte
about 2 years ago
112 Comments
What stupidity. This just gives those that think public employee unions shouldn't exist more ammo for their arguments. A cop is a cop is a cop, whether rookie or chief and once you take the oath, you have a duty to act, on-duty or off, in accordance with that oath and state laws. What would the headlines read if the chief had ignored the incident and what would the POA be yelling about in that instance? What a moronic and wrong-headed lawsuit.
swatj10
about 2 years ago
760 Comments
Since when is it acrime for a off duty cop to do what he was sworn to do. I do support unions myself however, in this incident the union is lacking in what I call COMMON SENSE!!!!!! Way to take down the scum of society Chief