I would love it if we could distinguish between quotas and what happened to Adrian Schoolcraft. Just because the NYPD has (as Schoolcraft says) quotas (or at least something that line officers feel are quotas) does not grant legitimacy to Schoolcraft’s media-hungry self-serving whining about how he was treated by the NYPD.
There is a quota issue in the NYPD. High-ranking officers say there aren’t quotas, just “productivity goals.” Patrol officers say compstat creates stat pressure and they have quotas to meet. Regardless of the semantics, quota pressure makes officers write stupid tickets. And this is bad for policing and bad for New York City. For instance, a student just showed me a $50 ticket he got for… taking a nap on the subway. Technically it was for taking up two seats of a not crowded train at 10pm. That’s not right. But the officer had to write tickets. And my student was a sitting (or sleeping) duck.
So can anybody tell me the legal difference between a quota and a productivity goal? The state lawsays,
quota shall mean a specific number of (A) tickets or summonses … or (B) arrests or C) stops of individual suspected of criminal activity within a specified period of time.
But then the law goes on to say:
Nothing provided in this section shall prohibit an employer … from taking … job action against … a police officer for failure to satisfactorily perform his job assignment of issuing tickets or summonses for traffic … except that the employment productivity of such police officer shall not be measured by such officer’s failure to satisfactorily comply with the requirement of any quota.
Huh? So you can judge an officers on how many tickets they write as long as you don’t require them to write any? I don’t get it. What’s the law say?
(Update with working links to all the posts on Schoolcraft.)

