I know also...

 

Still doesn't mean it's right. In Indiana it's not like this, in fact you'll have deputies run for Sheriff against the sitting Sheriff and not lose their jobs.

 

I agree 100% it is not right.

Never understood why a sheriff has to be elected or even a corner. They should be hired. By whom, not sure but it shouldn't be left up to the voting public. This leaves opportunities for unqualified people to fill the offices. As for the Campbell County Sheriff, he is a disciplined person and wants that out of his personnel. Yeah he is a great person but as sheriff that nice guy doesn't always work. I voted for him because of the person he is and the integrity he will bring to the job. "Kissing babies and shaking hands" works during elections but when you win the rubber hits the road. As for the personnel if they are good at what they do than they should have nothing to worry about.

I think the law needs to change to require severance packages when new elected Sheriff's terminate current employees.

 

Something like 5K for every year of service with that department and full family medical benefits for one year.

 

I respect the right of the new Sheriff to choose his own people but at the same time the current set up is not fair to officers and their families.

I think the law needs to change to require severance packages when new elected Sheriff's terminate current employees. Something like 5K for every year of service with that department and full family medical benefits for one year. I respect the right of the new Sheriff to choose his own people but at the same time the current set up is not fair to officers and their families.

 

Who is going to pay for these severance packages?

Who is going to pay for these severance packages?

 

The new Sheriff out of his budget otherwise there is zero accountability in the process.

 

There is more than "just a job" involved, this practice can destroy you financially and ruin your retirement benefits. The new Sheriff can "put out the hit" on the fired employee making him almost unemployable in law enforcement and therefore the fired employee can never collect on his/retirement which may only require a couple more years of work.

 

For all you private sector people, in your case imagine if your employer fired you "just because" and in addition to losing your job you lose your 401K (and the money in it). I know this is not an exact analogy but it is in the ballpark. Just sit back and think about that for a few minutes.

 

And CC, and everyone, all I am saying is there needs to be some checks and balances, but under the current system the incoming Sheriff is all powerful.

The new Sheriff out of his budget otherwise there is zero accountability in the process. There is more than "just a job" involved' date=' this practice can destroy you financially and ruin your retirement benefits. The new Sheriff can "put out the hit" on the fired employee making him almost unemployable in law enforcement and therefore the fired employee can never collect on his/retirement which may only require a couple more years of work. For all you private sector people, in your case imagine if your employer fired you "just because" and in addition to losing your job you lose your 401K (and the money in it). I know this is not an exact analogy but it is in the ballpark. Just sit back and think about that for a few minutes. And CC, and everyone, all I am saying is there needs to be some checks and balances, but under the current system the incoming Sheriff is all powerful.[/quote'] I don't disagree with you, but I don't see how the Sheriff can pay severance packages on what I assume is a limited budget.

 

I especially don't think they can pay 5K for each year of service.

I don't disagree with you, but I don't see how the Sheriff can pay severance packages on what I assume is a limited budget.

 

I especially don't think they can pay 5K for each year of service.

 

Making it high stakes is a great check and balance.

Making it high stakes is a great check and balance.

That doesn't answer the question as to who pays and how?

 

I don't know the sheriff's budget but I'd have to assume it cannot compensate one terminated employee (under your proposal), much less several.

So how many got whacked and how many hung on?

There could be a probationary period for an employee after the interview. Instead of just getting rid of someone that hasn't even performed a task under you, after the interview a 90 day probationary period could be given. This lets that employee know they are on notice and lets the employer know if they can perform the job or not.

 

Now that I think about it, each one I've seen the person has been given at least 30 days notice that they were being let go or have been given a 90 day probationary period.

First of all, I'll admit that Mike is a friend and I know him extremely well, so I'm biased towards him.

 

But because I know him so well, I'm extremely confident that Mike made/will make great decisions as to which employees will be retained.

 

Because I have such a low opinion of Kidwell and his decision making abilities, I too would want to carefully look at every one of his employees before I made them one of my employees.

First of all, I'll admit that Mike is a friend and I know him extremely well, so I'm biased towards him.

 

But because I know him so well, I'm extremely confident that Mike made/will make great decisions as to which employees will be retained.

 

Because I have such a low opinion of Kidwell and his decision making abilities, I too would want to carefully look at every one of his employees before I made them one of my employees.

Gotta love that the Reps are still at each others throats . Keep it up !!! :sarcastic:

First of all, I'll admit that Mike is a friend and I know him extremely well, so I'm biased towards him.

 

But because I know him so well, I'm extremely confident that Mike made/will make great decisions as to which employees will be retained.

 

Because I have such a low opinion of Kidwell and his decision making abilities, I too would want to carefully look at every one of his employees before I made them one of my employees.

 

This! This! This!

That doesn't answer the question as to who pays and how?

 

I don't know the sheriff's budget but I'd have to assume it cannot compensate one terminated employee (under your proposal), much less several.

 

I already gave you the answer, that was a follow up to your follow up.

First of all, I'll admit that Mike is a friend and I know him extremely well, so I'm biased towards him.

 

But because I know him so well, I'm extremely confident that Mike made/will make great decisions as to which employees will be retained.

 

Because I have such a low opinion of Kidwell and his decision making abilities, I too would want to carefully look at every one of his employees before I made them one of my employees.

 

I want to be clear, I have no issues with Mike, I have an issue with the process that allows this. I think there needs to be balance that includes, money, health benefits, and a letter of recommendation.