Career Experiences of African American Police Executives: Black in Blue Revisited (Criminal Justice (Lfb Scholarly Publishing Llc).)

Criminal Justice Recent Scholarship

Edited by Marilyn McShane and Frank P. Williams III

A Series from LFB Scholarly

This page intentionally left blank

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives Black in Blue Revisited

R. Alan Thompson

LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC New York 2003

Copyright © 2003 by LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC All rights reserved. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Thompson, R. Alan. Career experiences of African American police executives : black in blue revisited / R. Alan Thompson. p. cm. -- (Criminal justice : recent scholarship) ISBN 1-931202-57-5 (alk. paper) 1. Police chiefs--United States. 2. African American police. 3. Occupations and race. I. Title. II. Criminal justice (LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC) HV8141.T48 2003 363.2'089'96073--dc21 2003000397

ISBN 1-931202-57-5 Printed on acid-free 250-year-life paper. Manufactured in the United States of America.

Contents

Foreword

vii

Acknowledgments

ix

1. The Impetus for Racial Integration of American Policing

1

2. A Brief History of Black Police

7

3. Early Treatment of Black Officers by Police Departments

15

4. Black and White Officers Together on the Job

31

5. Black Officers and the Black Community

39

6. Black Officers and the White Community

53

7. Institutional Barriers to Widespread Promotion

61

8. A Tentative Notion of the Black Executive’s Working World 75 9. The Research Initiative

81

10. Research Findings

101

11. Observations and Conclusion

155

Notes

167

References

169

Index

177

v

This page intentionally left blank

Foreword

When Dr. Thompson first asked me to consult on a study of racial integration in law enforcement leadership, I joked of being jealous because he had undertaken the next step in my very own research on the history of African Americans in American law enforcement. Nevertheless, I was very pleased to work with him and to also read the subsequent results of his endeavor. As readers of this volume will see, Alan’s work is very impressive insofar as it provides a unique empirical understanding of the influence that African-Americans have had as leaders within the law enforcement profession. Fortunately, however, the opportunity remains for me to explore the subject matter from a historical standpoint - Thanks Alan! As future researchers expand their collective understanding of racial integration in law enforcement leadership, Alan’s work will no doubt serve as an invaluable starting point. Not only does he consider several theoretical questions about the career experiences of African American police executives but, most importantly, his inquiry is supported by empirically derived data. One particularly interesting aspect of this volume from a historical perspective is the focus upon perceived changes in the status of African American law enforcement personnel over the years since integration was first undertaken. Although many of vii

viii

Foreword

the study’s 123 participants indicated that working relations and conditions for African American officers are better today than in the past, perceptions of differential treatment and regard persist. Scholars should use this paradoxical finding, along with others, as a basis for further research into the relative status of African Americans police executives. Overall, Dr. Thompson's research has illuminated an important aspect of American criminal justice. It is an interesting "snapshot" that must be read in order to fully understand the role that African Americans have had in shaping the late twentieth century police establishment. W. Marvin Dulaney, Ph.D. Department of History College of Charleston

Acknowledgments

The author would like to acknowledge the assistance of several individuals who made publication of this work possible. Dr. Richard Ward of Sam Houston State University and Dr. Donald Cotten of The University of Southern Mississippi both provided generous funding for the research initiative. Dr. Marvin Dulaney, author of Black Police in America, and Bob Stewart, Executive Director of N.O.B.L.E, both endorsed the project thereby facilitating access to the individuals whose career experiences form a basis for the study’s findings.

ix

This page intentionally left blank

CHAPTER 1

The Impetus for Racial Integration of American Policing

With little room for disagreement, the 1960’s were extremely tumultuous years in the history of American democracy. Not only were several prominent political and civil rights leaders assassinated early on, but the nation also became involved in an unpopular war taking place half-way around the world. To many who lived through these years, it must have seemed as though the wheels had come off and society was rapidly careening out of control. Trying as best they knew how, law enforcement agencies across the country struggled to maintain domestic tranquility. These efforts were not always successful, however, as evidenced by the fact that large-scale civil disturbances occurred in several major cities by the end of the decade. In many of these instances the police were simply responding to clashes between two or more groups with competing political ideologies or social agendas. In others, the police themselves were later found to be responsible for unnecessarily inciting much of the decade’s riotous violence. 1

2

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

When the dust finally settled, several blue-ribbon commissions were created with the intent of better understanding exactly what had sparked this unprecedented era of violence and, more importantly, what might be done to ensure that it never occurs again. Perhaps most notable among these was the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders (1968) chaired by the late Otto Kerner. In seeking to better understand the phenomenon of widespread mob violence, the Commission astutely acknowledged the breakdown of communications between police officials and ghetto residents as a major contributing factor to many of the riots. Consequently, the Commission’s final report urged law enforcement agencies to undertake efforts aimed at integrating more black personnel into their sworn ranks as a simple method for easing tensions between the two groups. Thus, the 1960’s and early 1970’s witnessed the widespread introduction of blacks into American law enforcement with very little consideration or forethought being given to either the latent or long-term consequences that such a seemingly logical initiative might pose for the new recruits. Perhaps recognizing the potential psychological stress and interpersonal conflict that such an integrative approach presented for the new recruits, Nicholas Alex (1969) set out to conduct a series of informal, open-ended interviews with a convenience sample of black officers regarding their perceptions of differential treatment and discrimination within the New York City Police Department. Despite the fact that he was white and thus an obvious “outsider” to members of the target population, Alex capitalized upon his own employment as an NYPD officer to eventually gain the trust of 41 black officers who candidly expressed their concerns regarding a myriad of work-related issues. In particular, Alex (1969) asked the men about their: 1) Reasons for entering and remaining in police work; 2) Interpersonal relationships with white officers both on and off duty; 3) Perceptions of departmental discrimination in assignment, performance evaluation, discipline, and promotion, and; 5) Relations with both the black and white civilian communities. The net result of these qualitative interviews was a general recognition that many early black officers experienced a sociological role dilemma described as “double marginality.” Although the term “marginalization” had found previous usage in the sociological literature,1 Alex (1969) convincingly argued that it uniquely applied to the situation of black officers to the extent that they confronted simultaneous rejection from at least two significant reference and

The Impetus for Racial Integration

3

support groups - First, the largely white-dominated police department and its officers who refused to accept them as equals, and; Second, the black civilian community which now regarded them largely as “turncoats,” “lackeys” and “Uncle Toms” for having “sold out” to the “white establishment” simply for the sake of achieving middle class status. In simple terms, Alex (1969) interpreted the generally negative accounts provided by the officers he interviewed as rough indicators of social marginalization, concluding that those blacks who aspired to simultaneous membership in both groups were left on their own to deal with the competing demands that often arose between their new jobs and social lives. Partly inspired by this seminal line of inquiry, Stephen Leinen (1984) sought to further explore the working world experiences of black NYPD officers. Like Alex before him, Leinen not only overcame the problem of being a white “outsider” by capitalizing upon his own employment as a police officer, but also chose to conduct his inquiry using a similar methodological approach. Specifically, Leinen (1984) explored the perceptions and attitudes of an altogether different convenience sample of 46 black officers regarding three broad areas: 1) Discrimination and the black officer; 2) Working relations between black and white officers, and; 3) The police and the black community. Within the context of the first of these three areas - Discrimination and the black officer - Leinen (1984) examined in greater detail the following dimensions: a) The manner in which discrimination against black officers had been affected by factors such as changing political and social climates, black police militancy, black politicians, and the news media; b) Interpersonal relationships with both black and white superior officers, and; c) The roles of favoritism and preferential treatment between the races in assignments, transfers, discipline, promotions, recognition and rewards. The second area of exploration Working relations between black and white officers - considered such dimensions as: a) Factors favoring improved relations (black police activism, increased integration, and breakdown of barriers to promotion and advancement); b) Forces against improved relations (Racial exclusivity, incidents between police, and prejudice directed toward the black public), and; c) The variable nature of police race relations (working environment, the job as a basis of solidarity, and the public as a common enemy). Finally, Leinen’s third area of interest - The police and the black community - explored dimensions such as: a) Images, attitudes and expectations (assignment to precincts on the basis

4

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

of race, and the question of integrated police teams), and; b) The police role in the black community (black police officers as peace-keepers, dealing with ghetto youth, and the black offender). Although not specifically stated, Leinen (1984) seems to suggest through his comments and conclusions that black officers do, in fact, experience the sociological role dilemma of marginalization that Alex (1969) previously described. His comments also suggest that little had changed in the collective working world experiences of black police officers since Alex’s (1969) initial exploration. Regrettably, little additional research has since been conducted to further Alex’s (1969) seminal and promising line of inquiry, perhaps on the assumption that he, and later Leinen (1984), had fully exhausted the phenomenon of interest. The remaining body of literature that does exist on the topic of blacks in policing is largely historical (e.g., when was the first black officer appointed in a given jurisdiction2) or anecdotal (e.g., a biography or autobiography of a particularly notable black officer3) in nature. The consequence of this apparent lack of interest and literature building upon this early foundation, combined with the limited nature of both researchers’ methodological approaches (problems with external validity due to sample selection and size, the agency used - N.Y.PD., and other historical artifacts) seems to be that very little generalizable knowledge is readily available about the collective experiences of black police pioneers, many of whom have since ascended to significant and influential positions of supervisory, command and executive leadership within the profession. The question that then comes to mind is “Why should scholars of police behavior be interested in the collective career experiences of black law enforcement leaders?” The response to this line of inquiry should become clear upon considering the relatively important positions of social policy implementation occupied by a growing population of blacks across the nation. Stated differently, black supervisory, command and executive personnel, many of whom are believed to have experienced the dilemma of social marginalization described by Alex (1969) earlier in their careers, now lead many of the nation’s law enforcement agencies. Failure to more fully explore the collective responses of these individuals to various sources of social and professional marginalization during the course of their careers thus neglects a unique opportunity to better understand the manner in which they have been integrated into contemporary American law enforcement despite facing presumed individual, institutional and social resistance.

The Impetus for Racial Integration

5

In essence, very little information is available regarding what it has been like for black supervisory, command and executive personnel to advance within the ranks of a profession that has been historically dominated by whites. In spite of their methodological weaknesses, the works of Alex (1969) and Leinen (1984) serve as valuable sources for identifying the core dimensions necessary to assess the collective views and career experiences of black supervisory, command and executive personnel. Those relevant dimensions which stand most clear include: 1) Nature of early working and social relations with white officers; 2) Relations with members of both black and white segments of the civilian community; 3) Differential treatment between races in the distribution of assignments and transfers; 4) Equity between races in performance evaluation and discipline matters; 5) The relative influence of favoritism and other informal factors in promotion decisions; 6) Interpersonal relations with supervisors of both races; 7) Interpersonal relations with subordinate personnel of both races; 8) Interpersonal relationships with white supervisors of equivalent rank; 9) Concerns serving as a black supervisor, and; 10) Nature of current working relations between law enforcement personnel of both races. Using these dimensions and items relevant to each as rough indicators, it is generally believed that blacks who are promoted to supervisory, command and executive positions within law enforcement experience marginalization from a greater number and variety of sources than only those two originally conceptualized by Alex (1969). Thus, in addition to the initial rejection they face from black civilians and white officers, it is hypothesized that blacks who are promoted within the professional hierarchy also experience rejection from other critical support and reference groups along the way. Specifically, as aspiring leaders in a historically white dominated profession, it is logically expected that blacks who are promoted not only confront social and professional rejection from white supervisory peers of equivalent rank, but also experience differential treatment and reactions by white superior and subordinate personnel who refuse to acknowledge them as deserving of the same respect given to others. Beyond these three newly conceived sources of marginalization (white supervisory peers, superiors and subordinates), it is hypothesized that black law enforcement supervisory, command and executive personnel also face rejection and isolation from an otherwise unlikely source - namely, black subordinates. Thus, it is quite possible that once promoted black

6

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

law enforcement leaders are rejected by their only remaining source of social support on the basis of having compromised their values of racial solidarity in exchange for personal advancement. In sum, it is firmly believed that by the time they achieve supervisory, command or executive status, black law enforcement leaders will have experienced marginalization from various sources of reference and support critical to their long-term professional success. These include: 1) White superiors; 2) White supervisory peers of equivalent rank; 3) Subordinate personnel of the opposite race; 4) Subordinate personnel of the same race; 5) The black community, and; 6) The white community. In the end, black law enforcement leaders may very well be left without any professional or social support whatsoever except for that which they are able to glean from others who share in their common dilemma. For one reason or another, however, researchers of police behavior have not been widely interested in assessing the extent to which blacks who occupy positions of supervisory, command and executive responsibility within the law enforcement hierarchy endure these various hypothetical sources of professional rejection and social isolation. In the interest of better understanding the collective career experiences among the members of this growing population within the law enforcement community, the following chapters are designed to not only provide readers with a historical review of their gradual integration into the professional ranks, but also serve as a basis for the development of several specific research questions and attending hypotheses which are then tested. The results of this analysis are then interpreted in terms of their implications for future efforts to expand this heretofore uncultivated but fertile field of inquiry.

CHAPTER 2

A Brief History of Black Police

As best can be determined, the first appointment of a black police officer in the U.S. occurred in Washington D.C. in 1867 (Dulaney, 1996). Although not much is known about the duties and experiences of this particular officer, it is interesting to note that only a few years later in 1873, a black police officer in that same city arrested President Ulysses S. Grant for driving a team of horses at an unsafe pace (Alfers, 1976; Kuykendall & Burns, 1980). Less than ten years following this initial lead, numerous other urban centers began to appoint blacks to enforce their laws. In fact, the last quarter of the 1800’s witnessed the appointment of blacks in many cities across the country, including Galveston, Texas (1870), Meridian, Mississippi (1871), Chicago, Illinois (1872), both Columbia and Charleston, South Carolina (1873), followed by Jackson (1874) then Clinton, Mississippi (1875), Memphis (1878) and Los Angeles (1886) (Dulaney, 1996; Kuykendall & Burns, 1980; Rudwick, 1962) Following the turn of the 20th century, significant appointments began taking place in major cities like St. Louis (1901), Dayton (1913), Berkeley (1919), and Atlanta (1948) (Dulaney, 1996; 7

8

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

Kuykendall & Burns, 1980; Rudwick, 1962). During the second half of the 1900’s, the frequency with which black officers were appointed to many of the nation’s newly created police forces continued to increase. In particular, substantial advances were made in the South where the greatest objection to such a trend might have been expected. To illustrate this point, Rudwick (1960, 1961 & 1962) has reported that as early as 1945 the Southern Regional Council became interested in the utilization of black law enforcement personnel to such an extent that they not only began collecting data on their numbers, but the various factors precipitating their appointment as well as testimonials by city officials regarding their perceived effectiveness. As a result of this initial data gathering effort, it was reported that between 1945 and 1954 representation of blacks in state and local law enforcement agencies increased from approximately 131 to 710 uniformed and plainclothes officers (Rudwick, 1962, p. 13, Table 1). Despite this initial flurry of empirical interest in the integration and utilization of black law enforcement personnel, data collection ceased after only a few short years. Shortly thereafter, Rudwick conducted independent followup analyses carried out in two waves (1959 and 1961). The conclusion drawn from this early line of inquiry revealed that “Negroes did not lose ground, but they did not gain much either” (Rudwick, 1962, p. 4). Although they were being integrated into many departments throughout both the North and South during this early era, such initiatives were largely viewed as “experiments” (Rudwick, 1962) subject to immediate cessation upon indication that a black officer’s actions posed even the slightest risk of public embarrassment for the agency (Jenkins, 1973). When problems arose, they seem to have been handled internally with black officers receiving a disproportionate number of disciplinary actions than their white counterparts for committing roughly the same types of rule infractions (Alexander, 1978). Thus, the “experiment” of racial integration was allowed to continue perhaps, in part, because there existed a high degree of satisfaction among many police officials regarding its success thus far (Rudwick, 1962). Into the mid 1960’s, law enforcement continued to be largely dominated by middle class white males while blacks were only allowed to serve in token numbers (Alexander, 1978; Dulaney, 1996; Hahn, 1971; National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968; Rudwick, 1962; Wilson, 1964). As a result of growing disparity in political power and economic conditions between the races, this

A Brief History of Black Police

9

particular decade witnessed a number of clashes between the police and black demonstrators in several major urban centers such as New York City (Harlem, 1964), Los Angeles (Watts, 1965), Chicago (1966), Cleveland (1966 & 1968), Newark (1967), Detroit (1967) and Washington D.C. (1968). As a result of these and other large-scale civil disorders, several “blue ribbon” commissions were established to explore their root causes and possible solutions with the objective of future prevention (Sherman, 1979). Notable among these efforts was the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders - frequently referred to as the Kerner Commission (1968). In examining root causes of the violence that erupted in cities like Tampa, Cincinnati, Atlanta, Newark, Plainfield, New Brunswick and Detroit, the Commission made several astute observations. For example, not only was it noted that the presence of an all-white police force in a black neighborhood served as a “dangerous irritant” to the extent that officers were perceived as being there to simply maintain the status quo, but that minorities were sorely under-represented among the ranks of sworn law enforcement personnel relative to their numbers in the general population (National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968). Examination of available data gathered by the Commission from 28 departments supported this point by revealing that blacks represented only 6% of the sworn personnel while they constituted roughly one-fourth of the civilian population (National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968, p. 315). Also noted was the fact that blacks were even more severely underrepresented at supervisory levels. For example, the San Francisco Police Department - whose total sworn strength at the time was 1,754 officers - had only one black in the entire department above the rank of patrol officer (National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968, p. 321, Table A). More dramatic still was the underrepresentation of blacks on the New Jersey State Police force which employed 27,610 sworn personnel, 1,785 of which were white sergeants as compared to only 65 non-white sergeants (National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968, p. 321, Table A). In fulfilling its Presidential mandate, the Kerner Commission offered a variety of seemingly obvious recommendations intended to remedy these shortcomings within the profession. Primary among them was the suggestion that police departments not only “intensify their efforts to recruit more Negroes,” but that they also examine their “promotion policies to ensure that Negroes have full opportunity to be

10

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

rapidly and fairly promoted” (National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968, p. 316). Once adequate numbers of blacks had been successfully recruited, the Commission encouraged departments to further demonstrate their commitment to proportional representation through the full and visible use of integrated patrols in ghetto areas (National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968). Wisely, however, the Kerner Commission’s members acknowledged that efforts aimed at increasing minority representation on the nation’s police forces would not likely provide complete resolution to the problem of enduring hostility between the police and black community. Rather, this exceedingly complex issue was one that had previously defied such simple resolution. Realizing that the goal of increasing black representation on the nation’s police forces would be problematic to achieve, the Commission broke new ground by proposing the creation of a federally-funded pre-service initiative that would allow young blacks to enter the profession as “community service officers.” In this capacity, recruits would be provided with limited exposure to police work while at the same time completing the educational criteria necessary to eventually become a fully sworn officer (National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968, p. 317). These and other suggestions were duly incorporated by a number of progressive departments across the country, especially when tied to federal funding (Alexander, 1978; Trostle, 1992). To a certain extent these policy and program initiatives enhanced the number of opportunities under which blacks could enter the profession. At the same time, however, implementation of the Commission’s recommendations served to increase on-the-job tension between black and white officers on many police forces (Alexander, 1978; Hahn, 1971). In the end, the initiatives nonetheless served to raise awareness regarding the potential contributions this heretofore untapped resource had to offer. Acting upon these recommendations, combined with increased pressure from the public, many departments undertook efforts aimed at recruiting and promoting larger numbers of blacks into their sworn ranks (Jacobs & Cohen, 1978; Saltzstein, 1989; Watts, 1981). Thus, the 1970’s and 1980’s saw increased activity in both areas. Encouraging evidence for this assertion is to be found in a number and variety of sources. One such “post-Kerner” inquiry into the issue of black representation on the nation’s police forces was the National Manpower Survey of the Criminal Justice System (1978) conducted a

A Brief History of Black Police

11

decade later. In its report, the Manpower Survey revealed that the percentage of all sworn officers who were racial minorities rose from an estimated 3.6% in 1960 to 6.5% by 1973. While these findings are indeed interesting, it is important to note that they are based on aggregate level data which inherently represent members of other minority groups (i.e., Hispanics, Asians, etc.). For this reason, it is more technically accurate to examine the results of other studies in which this information has been disaggregated and attention is given to the question of proportional representation among sworn black officers in particular. To this end, the results of analyses conducted by Lewis (1989), Walker (1989) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics (2000) are worth noting. Perhaps a more methodologically appropriate illustration of research designed to directly address the issue of black representation on the nation’s police forces was that carried out by Lewis (1989) who compared the percentage of sworn black officers employed by 46 select municipal police departments in 1975 to data acquired for these same agencies ten years later. Analysis of the data revealed that all but six (6) of the departments manifested an improvement in the percentage of sworn black personnel over the ten year period (p. 258, Table 1). Simply stated, 40 of the 46 departments that participated in Lewis’ survey had actually increased the percentage of black officers employed during the previous decade. Further analysis of the data revealed that 11 of the 46 cities serving populations with over 100,000 residents were so successful in their integrative efforts that they had achieved the goal of racial parity by 1985 (p. 259, Table 2).4 In addition to these comparative findings, noted law enforcement historian Samuel Walker (1989) has also examined the representation of sworn black personnel on police departments in the nation’s 50 largest cities. Walker’s objective was to statistically assess the extent to which blacks had been integrated into the sworn ranks of these departments between 1983 and 1988. To accomplish this task, useable data bearing on the question at hand were obtained from a total of 47 cities. Among these, only two (2) departments - Charlotte, NC and Albuquerque, NM - reflected a decrease in the percentage of black personnel among their sworn ranks. Stated differently, 45 out of the nation’s 47 largest police departments manifested an increase in the percentage of black officers employed between 1983 and 1988. Finally, Walker (1989) also reported the finding that racial-minorities had become so prevalent that

12

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

they actually constituted a numerical majority of sworn personnel within some large police departments. Most recently, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (2000) estimated that in 1997 there were 48,950 blacks employed as full time sworn local police officers in the United States (p. 4). Between 1993 and 1997 - the last two years for which data describing the characteristics of over 13,000 local police departments was available - the number of black full time officers had increased by approximately 6,600 individuals (p. 4). This change represented a 16% increase over the four year period (p. 4). Overall, it was estimated that the percentage of sworn black personnel in local law enforcement was 11.7% in 1997 up 4/10th’s of one percent from 11.3% in 1993 (p. 4). Beyond the empirical question of just how far law enforcement has advanced toward the goal of racial integration since the recommendation to do so was first made by the Kerner Commission (1968), it is also important to examine how well blacks have been represented at various supervisory ranks within the professional hierarchy. To date, the most comprehensive historical review of blacks in American law enforcement is that authored by Dulaney (1996) who has successfully pieced together from various sources a rough timeline depicting the year in which they were first promoted to the rank of sergeant in select departments. Credited with being among one of the first formally organized police departments in the nation, Boston also bears the distinction of being the first city to promote one of its black officers to the rank of sergeant in 1895, followed by Chicago two years later. As police departments gradually became more formally organized across the country, others began to follow the example set by these two cities. In particular, Dulaney (1996) reports that the first half of the 20th century witnessed appointment of blacks to the rank of sergeant in several major departments like Los Angeles (1917), Detroit (1918), St. Louis (1923), New York City (1923), Philadelphia (1929), Columbus (1943), Cincinnati (1949), and Cleveland (1949). The only caveat noted by Dulaney (1996) in reporting these dates is that several of these initial appointments did not extend supervisory responsibilities to these pioneers. Rather, they were generally “appointed as ‘detective sergeants’ and were not allowed to supervise other officers or to command districts” (Dulaney, 1996, p. 117, Table 5). The lead taken by these northern cities to advance blacks - albeit in limited numbers and capacities - beyond the rank of patrol officer during the first half of the 1900’s was followed by others during the

A Brief History of Black Police th

13

second half of the 20 century as well. Among select southern cities whose histories were studied by Dulaney (1996, p. 120, Table 9), appointments to the rank of sergeant were also witnessed in Louisville (1944), Baltimore (1947), Memphis (1950), Richmond (1952), Miami (1955), Charlotte (1956), Atlanta (1961), Galveston (1961), San Antonio (1966), Dallas (1966), Austin (1969), Charleston (1971) and Houston (1974). Once widespread promotion to the rank of sergeant had been secured, further advancement of blacks within the profession’s hierarchy became more promising. In “Black Shields,” Dulaney (1984) also reported the year in which blacks were first promoted to the rank of captain in several select departments. Among those credited with making such historical advances were Chicago (1940), New York City (1952), Columbus (1952), Philadelphia (1954), St. Louis (1956), Cleveland (1960), Washington, D.C. (1965), Newark (1967), Atlanta (1968), Los Angeles (1969), and St. Paul (1970). Gradually, political pressure began to mount for the appointment of several promising blacks to occupy the executive role of police chief, public safety director, superintendent or commissioner in many cities across the nation. Again, Dulaney (1996, p. 121, Table 12) has provided a timeline highlighting these historic appointments which occurred in cities such as Palmyra, NJ (1958 - Payton I. Flournoy), Portsmouth, OH (1962 - Theodore Wilbourn), Cleveland (1970 Benjamin O. Davis, Jr.), Gary, IN (1970 - Charles Boone), Newark (1972 - Edward Kerr), Atlanta (1974 - Reginald Eaves), Detroit (1976 William Hart), Washington, D.C. (1978 - Burtell Jefferson), Houston (1982 - Lee Brown), Charleston (1982 - Reuben Greenberg), Chicago (1983 - Fred Rice), and New York City (1984 - Benjamin Ward). Today, blacks occupy top command and executive positions within many law enforcement agencies at all levels of government municipal, county, state, institutional and federal. In fact, even a cursory survey of the landscape in American policing reveals several major departments and agencies that are currently or until just recently were under the direction of black chief executives - Los Angeles, Oakland, Chicago, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, Detroit, Washington D.C., Tallahassee, Cincinnati, Charleston, New Orleans, Baltimore, San Diego, Phoenix, New York City and Richmond, among others. Despite their ever-expanding sphere of influence in formulating policies for responding to many of this nation’s most pressing and intractable social problems - namely crime, drugs and social disorder - very little

14

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

accurate knowledge about the collective career experiences of this historically beleaguered minority is readily available. In fact, about all that can be safely said about the black men (and in some cases women) who have been vested with such weighty official responsibilities is that they have had to make considerable personal sacrifices as well as overcome substantial public opposition to achieve this distinguished level of professional success. Beyond this generalized observation, not much else is really known about what it was like for many of today’s highest-ranking black law enforcement leaders to ascend within the ranks of a profession historically dominated by whites. In sum, black executive personnel constitute an increasingly influential population within law enforcement circles - one that is just beginning to “hit its stride.” It thus becomes vitally important to understand all that we can about those who, to borrow a phrase from a well-known book on the topic, are “black in blue.” To accomplish this objective, the following chapter will be devoted to conducting a review of that which is known about the integration of blacks into American law enforcement. The most logical place to begin such a review is, of course, the manner in which law enforcement agencies initially treated this newly incorporated segment of the population.

CHAPTER 3

Early Treatment of Black Officers by Police Departments

From the time that black officers first set foot on the job they were treated differently than their white counterparts. Evidence for this assertion is to be found in the fact that they were initially assigned as “doormen” or “turnkeys” for precinct houses beginning around the mid 1870’s (Alexander, 1978; Dulaney, 1996; Lardner & Reppetto, 2000; Leinen, 1984; Reaves, 1991). Their responsibilities during this time also included keeping the station house clean, stoking the furnace, putting out the trash or maintaining prisoner security (Reaves, 1991). To be sure, assignment to perform such limited tasks must have not only been insulting to the ability and intelligence of blacks, but also constituted a gross under-utilization of available manpower. Perhaps realizing that their money and resources would be better spent assigning these men to perform actual police duties, law enforcement and city administrators gradually began to place black officers on foot patrol (Dulaney, 1996). Almost without exception, these initial walking assignments were restricted to exclusively black 15

16

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

neighborhoods (Sax, 1968). From this point in time forward, black officers were only assigned to work foot patrol in ghetto areas - never would these early officers be allowed to work in white neighborhoods or operate patrol vehicles (Griffin, 1975; Leinen, 1984; Rudwick, 1962). In fact, even the mere suggestion that black officers be allowed to work in a white neighborhood or operate a patrol vehicle seems to have been entirely unconscionable or altogether taboo to both police administrators and members of the white community (Dulaney, 1996; Griffin, 1975; Hawkins & Thomas, 1991).

The Practice of Segregated Patrol Assignments Perhaps the most frequently cited reason underlying the initial practice of exclusively assigning blacks to minority neighborhoods was simple logic - black police officers, more so than whites, were believed to be more responsive to the cultural needs and crime problems of their own people. The available literature is replete with this logic which was, rightfully or wrongfully, reinforced by the Kerner Commission’s statement that “Negro officers also can increase departmental insight into ghetto problems, and provide information necessary for early anticipation of the tensions and grievances that can lead to disorders (National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968, p. 315).5 Alternatively stated, it was believed that white officers would likely “know nothing of the life-style of the communities where they will work (black communities) and have neither the sensitivity nor inclination to attempt to relate to the community’s life-style” (Palmer, 1973, p. 25). Other arguments frequently cited for assigning black officers to ghetto neighborhoods soon began to flow from this officially sanctioned line of reasoning. Specifically, considerable pressure was brought to bear on police departments to provide increased protection in ghetto areas (Alexander, 1978; Dulaney, 1996; Jones, 1977; Lardner & Reppetto, 2000; Rudwick, 1962; Trostle, 1992). If they patrolled black neighborhoods at all, white officers were often slow to respond to calls for service and frequently dismissed complaints thereby failing to address the area’s persistent and growing crime problem (Hawkins & Thomas, 1991; Jones, 1977; Lardner & Reppetto, 2000; Lewis, 1996). If the police did enter the ghetto for purposes of responding to a call or apprehending a violator, it was not uncommon for them to exercise excessive force against any and all parties believed to be involved

Early Treatment of Black Officers by Police Departments

17

(Alexander, 1978; Lardner & Reppetto, 2000; Rudwick, 1962). When white officers encountered black civilians outside of the ghetto, seldom did the interaction result in an improvement in interracial policecommunity relations because white officers would regularly stop black motorists without cause and beat or interrogate them as a matter of standard operating procedure (Cross, 1964; Palmer, 1973; Reaves, 1991; Wright, 1984). At the opposite extreme, the “lily-white” police presence was so prevalent in certain black communities that officers eventually came to be viewed by residents as members of an “occupying force” intent on maintaining the status quo (Baldwin, 1961; Cooper, 1980; Hawkins & Thomas, 1991; Hudson, 1990; Lardner & Reppetto, 2000; Margolis, 1971; National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968; Reaves, 1991). Consequently, it should not be surprising to find that members of the black community were persistent in their demands that police administrators minimize the incidence of excessive force frequently employed against them (Hawkins & Thomas, 1991). They also demanded that departments either increase or minimize the overall presence of officers based upon local expectations - there always seemed to be too many or not enough white police officers in the area. Given all of this, reason suggested that since black officers were believed to be more capable of communicating with black citizens and suspects than were white officers (Kephart, 1954 & 1957; National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968), they would be less inclined to use force in order to gain compliance from their own people. At the same time, it was hoped that black citizens would be less likely to view lawmen of their own race with the same level of hostility expressed toward nonminority officers (Alexander, 1978). While a considerable amount of credit for facilitating early racial integration of the profession can certainly be attributed to black activist groups who pressed for greater representation and protection (Trostle, 1992), it is important to acknowledge the fact that their demands also set off a chain of events which quickly culminated in what has perhaps been the most unanticipated outcome of the entire effort to integrate American law enforcement. Specifically, the demand that black officers be assigned to patrol ghetto neighborhoods resulted in the almost immediate institutionalization of segregated work assignments between the races - a widespread practice that black officers across the United States would have to both live and operate under for years to come. In simple terms, black communities pressed for their neighborhoods to be

18

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

patrolled by officers of the same race. Police administrators, responding to these demands, moved white officers out of the colored neighborhoods and replaced them almost exclusively with blacks. Whether intentional or not, differential treatment between the races in the types of duties assigned to each had found its original justification. As members of the New York City Police Department during the tumultuous 1960’s when such policies were initiated, two white officers later turned sociologists astutely recognized the unique problems that segregated duty assignments and other discriminatory practices created for their newly integrated counterparts. Nicholas Alex (1969), whose seminal work would be later expanded upon by Stephen Leinen (1984), undertook a series of focused interviews spanning almost a full year (December 1964 to October 1965) with 41 black officers involved in different aspects of the Department’s operation. The objective, in Alex’s own words, was to examine “the special problems that Negro policemen face[d] in their efforts to reconcile their race with their work” within the context of American values and beliefs as they existed at the time (1969, p. vii). More specifically, Alex asked the officers about various dimensions of their jobs - “the ways in which these men were recruited into the police, the nature of their relations in regard to their immediate clientele, their white counterparts, and the rest of society, and the consequences of their actions as they saw them” (1969, p. vii). Leinen, seeking to update and clarify the social developments affecting the ability of black officers to “achieve greater acceptance and equality within their departments,” roughly followed the same tack by conducting his own interviews with an altogether separate convenience sample of 46 black NYPD officers (1984, p. 1). When the largely qualitative results derived from these two studies are combined with one another, they provide an invaluable (but not infallible) perspective on various dimensions of what it might have been like to be a black police officer during early efforts to racially integrate American law enforcement.6 One of the first areas of interest probed during interviews with these men was, of course, their thoughts and feelings on the practice of exclusively assigning black officers to patrol ghetto and minority neighborhoods. As might be anticipated, these expressions were not entirely supportive of such unwritten policies. This becomes quite clear in the generally representative comments of at least two officers who explained:

Early Treatment of Black Officers by Police Departments

19

There are more blacks in this precinct than any other precinct in the city. Blacks are over-represented in black precincts and underrepresented in white precincts. Personally, I feel this is not right particularly when it’s forced on you and you don’t have a say in the matter (Leinen, 1984, p. 79). Blacks are over-represented in black areas. Manpower is allocated by race, not qualification. The department is using the wrong criteria. Now, if you ask me whether this is a form of discrimination, yes it is. Anytime you shift men around by color and some have to work in more dangerous precincts for prolonged periods of time because of their color, it’s discrimination. There’s just no other way to cut it (Leinen, 1984, p. 79). In many cases, however, segregated patrol assignments were openly accepted by black officers. For example, some of the men preferred working in black areas citing altruistic reasons - namely the opportunity to serve the minority community. Others felt that assignment to black neighborhoods relieved them of many hassles otherwise associated with working in white neighborhoods where citizens would sometimes refuse to acknowledge their lawful authority. Finally, some of the men recognized that this is where they were, perhaps, most effectively deployed. These rationales become evident in the comments of several officers interviewed by Alex (1969) who openly acknowledged the view that blacks were more effective than whites in policing ghetto neighborhoods: It has been my experience that the white policemen have a very high opinion of Negro policemen. Of course, I think there are a lot of reasons this is so. One thing, by and large, Negro police officers are assigned to predominantly Negro areas and this increases his effectiveness because he has greater rapport with people working there than the white policeman. He is also able to come by more information than the white police officer (p. 89). I am for putting Negro policemen in Negro neighborhoods. A Negro policeman in a Negro neighborhood can communicate the idea that the policeman is a friend instead of an enemy.

20

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives The black policeman in a black community is definitely much better than putting white policemen there. Negro policemen can bring about a better relationship (p. 141). I say this: as a Negro I may know my people better than a white individual would know Negro people. And white policemen may know his people better than a Negro policeman. So I think he can be more effective than a white policeman because he is a Negro and knows his people better (p. 141).

Some of the men interviewed by Leinen (1984) expressed this same pragmatic view: Putting black cops in minority precincts may be discriminatory to the cop, but it may also be viewed as a practical administrative strategy. Why? Because there is less community resistance and static putting a black officer in a black area than putting a white officer there or putting a black officer in a white area (p. 172). The black policeman is generally more effective because he can find out more about what is going on in his precinct. This is because he mixes with the people. He stops and talks with them as a friend, not as a cop . . . The black citizen just feels more comfortable in the company of black cops. He feels more at ease with them and he is more willing to open up to them (p. 215). In terms of color, the black officer is much more effective. In most instances, he functions better. Black officers understand the problems in black communities better than most white officers. They have a better rapport with the people. Take a guy with a knife, for example. The black officer is in a better position to get the guy to drop the knife without having to use his gun. Black cops better understand the situation. The white cop may shoot much quicker. Also, white officers may feel that something is of major importance, while the black officer sees it as minor most often (p. 212).

Early Treatment of Black Officers by Police Departments

21

While logic indeed suggested that the strategy of assigning black officers to black neighborhoods benefited the residents of those areas, it nonetheless seems to have served as a thinly veiled opportunity for police departments to exercise even more troubling forms of discrimination. Thus, beyond the simple argument that black officers related to black citizens better than white officers, the probable truth of the matter was that working in ghettoes was regarded as an undesirable duty among all officers so that letting this task fall to blacks served as a means of escape for whites. Even white rookies seem to have been held in higher esteem and treated better than the most senior black officers. If blacks wanted to do “real” police work, the white officers argued, then they would have to start working in the least desirable neighborhoods which, it just so conveniently happened, were predominantly black. Hence the following additional comments in the words of black officers themselves: I don't think you should assign mostly black officers to black areas when you have other officers who are getting the same pay (Leinen, 1984, p. 173). It’s discriminatory. It’s simply unfair to the black officer who is assigned here strictly on the basis of his color. Supposedly, you can deal better with the people in the community. However, I don’t go along with that. Cops should be trained to handle any situation in any neighborhood. They feel that you have to saturate black areas with black cops. Well, white officers should be trained properly to work here. Besides, I feel cheated somehow if I have to lock up blacks all the time (Leinen, 1984, p. 173). Based upon the preceding narrative remarks and brief historical review surrounding initial efforts to integrate the law enforcement profession, it becomes clear that early black officers were often subjected to discrimination at the hands of their employers who assigned them almost without exception to perform foot patrol in exclusively black neighborhoods. Some of these officers strongly resented the fact that they were being exploited in such a manner. Others, however, were more realistic in their assessment of this practice, acknowledging that they were probably far more effective than their white counterparts could ever be in dealing with the unique crime

22

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

problems and cultural concerns prevalent among ghetto residents. Unfortunately, the practice of segregated patrol assignments was not the only form of discrimination early black officers faced when they first came on the job. They also confronted informal policies of differential treatment in the distribution of other duty-related assignments and requested transfers from one command to another.

Differential Treatment in the Distribution of Assignments and Transfers Given the history of differential treatment between the races with regard to segregated patrol assignments, it is perhaps not surprising to also find the perception among black pioneer officers previously studied by both Alex (1969) and Leinen (1984) that white officers always got “first shot” at the most desirable duty assignments. What was often left over for black officers were the least desirable or - in their own words “shit” details. Primary among these tasks was, of course, foot patrol and its accompanying responsibilities as compared to other types of police work such as investigations and other specialized details (Alexander, 1978; Griffin, 1975; Hawkins & Thomas, 1991; Kelley & West, 1973; Kuykendall & Burns, 1980; Sullivan, 1989). For example, most plain-clothes assignments including detective work were routinely given to whites over blacks. Only in instances where it was necessary to have an officer who could easily “blend in” with others were blacks allowed to participate in undercover operations (Sullivan, 1989). Even then, many officers who were utilized in such a manner frequently complained that their service in this capacity was overlooked when it came time for promotions despite noteworthy results in the face of considerable risk to their personal safety. Consequently, many black officers who were even temporarily reassigned from patrol to investigation units felt as though their assignment to work undercover on the basis of their race was exploitative. On the other hand, being excluded from undercover work in a white neighborhood based on the argument that one would readily “stand out” may have been accepted by many blacks as a practical reality. Thus, just as a white undercover officer would be easily identified as an outsider in an all-black neighborhood, so too would a black undercover officer be quickly spotted in an all-white area. There certainly may have been mixed emotions and responses to the practice among officers studied by Alex (1969) and Leinen (1984) on the matter, but one’s perspective may

Early Treatment of Black Officers by Police Departments

23

have boiled down to whether or not he was given an opportunity to voice an opinion or, rather, forced into the role without any say. Accompanying the dual concern that black officers were “locked into” ghetto neighborhoods and that white officers always got “first shot” at all of the good assignments was the perception that transfers from one unit or command to another was more difficult for them than whites. In other words, it was firmly believed that the career path for white officers was far more flexible than their own unless, of course, exceptional circumstances arose requiring their temporary involvement or reassignment (Charles, 1991). Several of the officers interviewed by Leinen (1984) commented on the issue of racial disparity in requested transfers: And then on top of this there are white cops who put in 57’s (transfer requests) to get out of Harlem for one reason or another. This, you see, is possible. There’s black officers who put in 57’s to get out and they can’t. I don’t know what you would call it, but I personally feel that the black cop who finds himself locked in a black precinct while white cops move around freely is being discriminated against twice (p. 80). I worked with a guy a few years ago, a friend of mine. His thing was car stops, good stops. He knew cars inside and out. He accumulated in a few years well over a hundred collars for stolen cars and forged licenses and registrations . . . All he wanted was a shot at the Auto Squad. He got a few interviews he told me, but never got in. He also had a clean record, never had any problems that I know of . . There was no reason why this guy wasn’t transferred to this outfit. He felt personally that it was because of prejudice on the part of the white lieutenant who interviewed him. His attitude now is ‘fuck it’ with everything. When I see him all he talks about is getting out in 15 (years) (p. 59). By more than one account, there were many specialized units of operation within the NYPD that nonetheless remained exclusively white. One of Alex’s (1969) officers, commenting on this problem, noted:

24

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives …[h]ave a homicide squad in Manhattan North where 80 percent of the homicides are Negro. They don’t have any Negroes assigned! They had one who asked out because of the treatment he received. There was one fellow who insisted on going there but he never got in. So he got disgusted and so he went sick on an old injury. He forced the issue where they either had to put him in or drop him and they found a reason not to accept him. So he played sick on this old injury. And now he has a nothing detail (p. 110).

In sum, once black officers had been “locked in” to certain assignments, it was virtually impossible for them to get out. Sure, they could apply for a transfer, but chances were that white supervisors responsible for making such decisions would reject it. In fact, it was almost as though an unwritten policy prohibited black officers from either transferring out of or into certain assignments. This perception was touched upon by another of Leinen’s (1984) officers who asserted: Transfers from, say, Harlem to midtown or Queens precincts, they are difficult to come by. Blacks are placed in Harlem and that’s where they stay, most of them anyway. The department has an unwritten policy about this. I think this is discriminatory (p. 80) Given the apparent level of displeasure among these early black officers with the informal policy that white officers always got “first shot” at the good assignments while they were left with the “shit details,” it seems prudent to also consider the perceived importance of membership in a dominant group as a prerequisite for receiving certain job-related perks or favors. Accordingly, attention is given to the influence this factor is believed to have had upon early efforts to integrate the profession.

Membership in White Cliques as a Prerequisite to Receiving Certain “Perks” Whether it was the belief that they were always being given “shit” details or that transfers and special assignments were more easily obtained by white officers, a common perception among the black men interviewed by both Alex (1969) and Leinen (1984) was that such

Early Treatment of Black Officers by Police Departments

25

practices were deeply rooted in favoritism exercised by influential white supervisors seeking to reward their friends. In essence, black officers knew that as long as white bosses had a say in such matters, that first preference would almost always be given to a white officer before it would fall to them. This pervasive view was given substantive meaning by several officers, four of who separately commented: I guess it’s just a gut feeling I have about how blacks are generally received. Take something like precinct assignments. Sometimes details are not posted on the board; they are passed from mouth to mouth. White guys who become aware of these details somehow tell friends who are also white and blacks get shafted in the end (Leinen, 1984, p. 64). Blacks, I don’t feel are treated equally. I’m not sure whether it is racial discrimination or not. It may not exactly be racial discrimination as it is defined in a dictionary, but discrimination by personal contact . . . An example, if there are two cops who put in for a special detail, the white cop will get it, whether he merits it or not. Why is that? They have people in the right places . . . Friends do favors for friends, and white cops have friends in the right places to do favors for them. That’s what it boils down to (Leinen, 1984, p. 64-65). If you are the boss you can keep anyone out. The Irish are the bosses. It’s an Irish job and they want to keep it. They can’t stop you on the promotion jobs, because you take a test and the marks are posted, so everyone knows. But they can stop you from getting into the detectives, Youth Division, and Plainclothes (Alex, 1969, p. 111). There are Sergeants who go home with white cops in car pools. Blacks are not involved in that type of thing. The sergeant will give the detail to the white cop he rides with first. The black cop will be the last to be considered even when he’s more qualified (Leinen, 1984, p. 69). Clearly, the foregoing comments suggest the existence of a pervasive belief among the black officers interviewed that the distribution of rewards, privileges and favors depended to a large extent

26

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

upon membership in a white group or clique. Since black officers often lacked close personal ties with key white officers, they were at a distinct disadvantage when it came to competing for desirable assignments. Given this, it seems only natural that black officers would take measures necessary to document such instances of favoritism in order to prove a case of racial discrimination. Doing so, however, apparently proved to be more difficult than initially thought as indicated through the narrative comments made by at least two officers interviewed by Leinen (1984): So in effect what you really have is just a different way of discriminating against black cops. And what makes it all the worse is that you really can’t claim discrimination because you really can’t prove it. But people downtown and even some of the C.O.’s think that they’re on top of the situation. They don’t hear the complaints so they think things are on the up-and-up (p. 65). It’s just more subtle now. It’s not quite right out in the open as it was in the past. What has happened is that they just painted it a different color, that’s all. It’s the same thing, has the same effect on black cops. What do I mean? Years ago a black cop didn’t bother to put in for a detail. He knew right up front that he would be turned down, so he didn’t even bother. Today, there is a feeling that the department can no longer do that, there are laws now against discrimination. So now they exclude you ‘unofficially’ by letting the roll call man make up assignments . . . He generally picks men for details, sometimes with the sergeant’s approval. Naturally everyone involved is white so they naturally pick friends who are also white (p. 67).

Evidence of Differential “Trust” in the Ability of Black Officers Having gotten a proverbial “foot in the door” and finally allowed to do some actual police work, black officers nonetheless continued to experience other forms of discrimination on the job. For example, black officers were only allowed to wear their uniforms while on-duty and required to change into civilian attire before leaving at the end of a shift. (Kuykendall & Burns, 1980; Rudwick, 1962). Black officers

Early Treatment of Black Officers by Police Departments

27

were also prohibited from wearing their uniforms even while testifying in court (Bayor, 1992). In an autobiography describing his experiences as Chief of Police for the City of Atlanta from 1932 - 1972, Herbert Jenkins (1973) notes that not only was he partly responsible for the integration of colored officers into the southern city’s all-white force, but he was also directly responsible for their supervision. Interestingly, Jenkins explained that black officers in his department were prohibited from wearing the uniform while off-duty in order to protect them from white citizens who had all along objected to the idea of giving the men weapons and enforcement authority. Restricting the time and places that black officers could wear their uniforms was, according to Jenkins’ explanation, a simple method for preventing any embarrassment that might occur in the event of a racially motivated altercation. Jenkins did not, however, provide an adequate explanation for the fact that in his city and numerous others across the country, black officers were not allowed to work out of the same building as whites. In fact, this rather absurd rule extended so far as to deny black officers entry to police headquarters even for purposes of conducting official business (Kuykendall & Burns, 1980). Instead, early black officers were frequently required to change into and out of their uniforms in the basement of the local YMCA or some other location specifically set aside for their use (Bayor, 1992; Cashmore, 1991; Lardner & Reppetto, 2000). Finally, black lawmen were also limited in their powers of arrest and detention over white suspects while on patrol (Alex, 1969; Alexander, 1978; Charles, 1991; Kuykendall & Burns, 1980; Sullivan, 1989). To illustrate this point, Rudwick (1962) conducted extensive research on the status of black officers in Southern jurisdictions and found that there existed great variation in the extent to which they were authorized to take white violators into custody. In some jurisdictions they had no power whatsoever over white offenders of any sort, while in others they were required to call for assistance from a white counterpart who would “officially” effect the arrest. In essence, black officers in these jurisdictions were relegated to nothing more than mere witnesses when the case went to trial. In still other jurisdictions Rudwick (1962) found that black officers were allowed to take whites into custody based upon the felony-misdemeanor distinction. Only in the most progressive and liberal of jurisdictions were black officers legally allowed to effect full arrests without needing the permission or assistance of a white officer. In the event that a black officer ever

28

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

overstepped his legal bounds in dealing with white offenders - say by issuing a summons - he would face certain punishment at the hands of his white superiors generally in the form of standing guard duty for an extended period of time - a detail regarded as less desirable than having to work foot patrol (Griffin, 1975; Reaves, 1991). It should also be noted that the lasting effect of restricting the arrest powers of blacks early on seems to have resulted in limiting opportunities for future advancement since they never received credit for making the arrest - a factor frequently given considerable weight in making promotion decisions (Rudwick, 1962). Finally, black officers who were lawfully attempting to take white violators into custody were sometimes held directly responsible for sparking large-scale riots protesting the power they had been given. Following an altercation involving a black officer and intoxicated white violator in Meridian, Mississippi, a white public official was quoted as saying “Negroes ought not be put in a position to discharge constabulary functions which it is proper for white men to exercise” (Wharton, 1947, p. 167-168).

General Observations Regarding the Early Treatment of Black Officers Based upon the preceding historical review, it becomes readily apparent that black officers were treated substantially different than white officers during the early years of professional integration. In particular, black officers were almost exclusively assigned to patrol black neighborhoods. This practice was, of course, premised on the idea that they would naturally “blend into” the ghetto environment better than white officers (Sullivan, 1989). Whether this segregated deployment strategy was truly intended to satisfy the black community and help resolve some of its enduring crime problems or, instead, there were more sinister motivations at work such as seeking to relieve white officers of having to deal with colored residents, early black officers eventually became conditioned to accept the fact that whites were more likely to have first shot at all of the “choice” assignments. Accompanying this belief was, of course, an apparent sense among these officers that they had been intentionally given undesirable assignments on the basis of race alone and that the distribution of rewards and privileges depended largely upon membership in a white group or clique. Since, however, it was difficult for early black officers to document instances of favoritism and discrimination stemming

Early Treatment of Black Officers by Police Departments

29

solely from membership in a particular racial group, there was little official recourse they could pursue. About the only time black officers were allowed to briefly venture away from their assignment to ghetto neighborhoods was if they were temporarily needed to perform a special undercover assignment. Even then, black officers were apt to feel as though they had been exploited on the basis of their race and that the department did not want them to occupy certain positions unless doing so was politically expedient for its purposes. The service and sacrifice of black officers who were temporarily allowed to serve in such capacities was often overlooked, especially when it came time for promotion. Over time, it seems only natural that early black officers treated in this manner would come to believe that departments trusted them less than white officers. On top of all this, black officers were not well received by their white colleagues. Accordingly, it is toward a more complete understanding of their adjustment to this particular dimension of the job that attention is now directed.

This page intentionally left blank

CHAPTER 4

Black and White Officers Together on the Job

Since the earliest efforts aimed at integrating the profession, white officers have resented the presence of blacks on the force and openly said so (Griffin, 1975). In fact, it is rather ironic to find that the most far-reaching and enduring forms of discrimination against black officers has always seemed to stem from their white counterparts rather than the public where one would naturally expect to find the greatest degree of outward rejection. Thus, contrary to what one would expect, white officers did not initially accept the idea of working with black officers either one-on-one or in general. Since, however, they were required to work closely with one another during these early years despite their personal dislike for each other, it becomes important to understand the true nature of both their working and social relationships with one another. In the early days of professional integration, it was not uncommon for white and black officers to experience very little if any personal contact with one another (Cashmore, 1991). White officers rarely spoke 31

32

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

to black officers unless absolutely necessary but, when they did, racial slurs were freely used (Alexander, 1978). Clearly, the notion of the two races interacting with one another in social settings away from the job was almost unheard of. This is not surprising when one considers Myrdal’s (1962) finding in his study of race problems during the 1930’s and 40’s that much of the KKK activity in the south was carried out by white law enforcement officers. More recently, Stratton (1984) found that police officers constituted approximately ten percent of the Klan’s membership in California. Given these data, it is not surprising that the relations between blacks and whites on the job have been characterized as a source of continual tension (Reaves, 1991). Common among many white officers of the day, as well as among members of the general public, was the concern that if too many blacks were appointed as officers they would overtake the profession or that the department would become all black (Alex, 1976; Bayor, 1992). Similarly, white police officers seem to have been threatened from early on by the possibility that widespread introduction of blacks into the profession would diminish what little amount of social prestige was then associated with the job (Alex, 1976).

Black Officers as “Tokens” In a later study aimed at better understanding the beliefs, perceptions and attitudes of white NYPD officers, Alex (1976) discovered that much of the hostility toward black officers stemmed from a perception that they were being hired on the basis of racial preference rather than merit. White officers therefore viewed the department as sacrificing the long-term integrity of the merit system simply to obtain some shortterm public relations advantage with the black community. The net effect of this effort on behalf of many departments, as well-intended as it may have been, was to establish the view among white officers that blacks did not really deserve to be on the job and that they were, by and large, simple “tokens” without the same rights as those who had come in through a more rigorous system (Alex, 1976; Jones, 1977). As one black officer commented: ...They look at the Negro as an oddity. How did he get on the job? He has a hell of a nerve wanting to be a cop, they say. This is the sort of thing. So the Negro who works in this

Black and White Officers Together on the Job

33

department gets the feeling that he is working for the John Birch Society. Isn’t that a hell of a note? (Alex, 1969, p. 94). A white officer had this to say regarding the lowering of test standards and the hiring of more black officers: Today, to get more blacks on, they have relaxed the standards - not relaxed, they have lowered the barriers all the way on this, and I honestly don't feel that is right. No one did anything for anybody at any other time to have them get the job insofar as relaxing the barriers to let them in. And we always had a decent police force. But today they have become so idealistic that we have to give this fellow a chance because he has been held down...It’s no favor to him. It’s no favor to the Department. And it certainly is no favor to the people of the city. And I think it’s wrong and they have no business doing this (Alex, 1976, p. 34-35). Still another white officer commented on the lowering of standards and, in doing so, illustrated the latent hostility directed toward those including blacks - that the changes were intended to benefit: We have to let deprived people on the job, they tell us, because they didn’t have the same opportunities . . . . And because of politics they are letting in the dregs of humanity in my opinion. And they are going in there and saying because they were deprived we have to make it easier for them on the tests. That wasn’t my fault they were deprived. I had nothing to do with that because they were deprived (Alex, 1976, p. 35) By far the most telling indication that blacks were regarded as “outsiders” by white officers and did not really deserve at all to be on the job was revealed in the final remarks of one of Alex’s (1976) white officers: Now I don't hold any bias or prejudice against anybody if a man can take the test and pass it and become a police officer. If a man can qualify under the same test that I had to qualify under, fine. That makes him a good citizen of good character.

34

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives But don’t turn around and use that double standard which they say we use on the street on us! This is the real double standard. They are going to take a man who is an outsider to us...He is not a peer by any sense of the word. The man’s educational background, the man’s moral background, his character and everything. He just doesn’t fit the suit. And if you don't fit the suit you can't wear it (p. 37).

The fact that many black officers were admitted into the profession under standards different than those which had been previously applied to earlier generations of white personnel clearly set them up to be both viewed and treated as “tokens.” Under such circumstances, it seems only natural that many black officers might feel as though their white counterparts did not view them as equals. To the extent that this perception held true, relations between new black and existing white officers were doomed to failure - or at least a substantial amount of interpersonal strain - from the outset, despite the presumably wellintentioned efforts of departments to counteract such racial animosities.

Social Acceptance and Racial (In)Tolerance Not only would the reactions of white officers to the appointment of blacks sometimes closely border on mutiny (Alexander, 1978), but such hostility frequently manifested itself in other forms. For example, black officers were sometimes “framed” and even cited or arrested for minor violations of department policy in an effort to initiate disciplinary actions aimed at their eventual termination (Alexander, 1978; Lewis, 1996). In still other instances, white officers working in patrol cars would actually try to run over black officers working foot patrol as they attempted to cross the street. The enduring tension between black and white officers was most commonly manifested, however, through generalized feelings of contempt, aggression, resentment and antagonism between one another (Alex, 1976). In some instances these emotions erupted into verbal and physical confrontations between black and white officers to the extent that fist fights or “Mexican standoffs” where guns were actually drawn and pointed at one another actually occurred (Alexander, 1978; Cooper, 1980; Lewis, 1996).

Black and White Officers Together on the Job

35

The pervasive sentiment among white officers that black recruits were “outsiders” who did not really deserve to be on the job could not help but adversely affect their informal relationships with one another. Simply stated, black officers were unwelcome around whites not only while on duty, but especially while off duty (Griffin, 1975). Even though they had to work with another to accomplish a common objective, that friendship often ended at the station house door when the tour of duty was over. As two black officers explained: It’s wonderful in the station house. We are going to apprehend this criminal together - wonderful. We are going to do police work together - wonderful. But off duty, that’s different. It’s funny. When you walk into a room full of white cops getting together for a few drinks with their wives, there’s a very cold feeling (Alex, 1969, p. 87). As long as you are working side by side you treat each other as policemen. You act in a professional manner. But ten minutes after 4:00 p.m., the majority of the white cops go their way and the Negro cop goes his way (Alex, 1969, p. 87). In fact, segregation within the profession was so pronounced that members of both races organized separate fraternal groups (Alexander, 1978; Dulaney, 1990; Hahn, 1971). Quite ironically, however, it may very well have been the exclusion of black officers from white social activities such as these that facilitated their eventual integration into the contemporary landscape as professionals with considerable political influence. Evidence for this unexpected turn of events is to be found in Dulaney’s (1990) historical review of the Texas Negro Peace Officer Association’s (TNPOA) evolution. Originally, the TNPOA formed as a social group out of the exact situation previously described - segregated policemens’ balls to benefit the same charitable organization. Eventually, through association with black officers from other jurisdictions, the TNPOA helped form other black police organizations at the local level across the nation. According to Dulaney (1990), although the TNPOA was not as effective in realizing its own ideals and objectives, it nonetheless provided an impetus for the formation of what would later become several of the more active and leading organizations at the local level working to secure full rights, privileges and protections for black officers.

36

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

Despite this and other evidence in the available literature indicating that segregation between the races was primarily a product of white officers’ wishes not to associate with black officers either on or off duty, such was not always the case one hundred percent of the time. Rather, Alex (1976) reported narrative evidence that integration of the profession and a general improvement in relations between officers from different racial backgrounds was even inhibited by the actions of black officers themselves. That is, the assumption has always been that black officers actually desired to work with white officers when, in fact, quite the opposite appears to have been the case as indicated through one white officer’s comments: It works both ways. Blacks refuse to ride with whites and whites refuse to ride with blacks. It is all over the city. In other words, this attitude does not reflect a particular precinct or neighborhood. It reflects the general attitude towards keeping the races apart (Alex, 1976, p.154). The typical knee-jerk response to the fear among white officers that blacks might overtake the composition of the department or even the entire profession manifested itself in the formation of what Alex (1976) has described as “white enclaves” that effectively limited or “monopolized opportunities” (p. 45). Although law enforcement has traditionally been dominated by white males for decades or even longer, the white backlash among its conservative members has served to maintain the partial exclusion of blacks from attaining full recognition and acceptance among their counterparts (Hahn, 1971). Certainly, from time to time, a black and a white officer might strike up a conversation with one another but rarely, if ever, did the discussion seem to focus on sensitive issues such as race relations based on the perception that such topics were best left unaddressed for the sake of maintaining morale. Alternatively, a white and black officer may have even become friendly with one another on the job, but it seems as though many of these friendships ended at the station house door or at the close of a tour of duty (Griffin, 1975). At best then, black and white officers simply tolerated one another and it was almost unheard of for black officers, at least in large numbers, to successfully enter into and become accepted by the dominant white group. While these and other forms of discriminatory behavior would be considered shocking by today’s standards of political correctness, one

Black and White Officers Together on the Job

37

would hope that we have come much farther in our relations between the rich mixture of races that comprise our modern law enforcement forces. Sadly, however, there exists clear evidence that such problems persist within and to a certain extent may even be tacitly condoned by some departments. Specifically, the Report of the Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department edited by Warren Christopher (1991) not only found evidence of racist computer transmissions by LAPD officers, but also uncovered other more troubling evidence of discrimination such as supervisory tolerance of openly racist groups, internal threats against the lives of minority officers, and the unregulated use of racial slurs.

The Development of Mutual Trust and Confidence Between Black and White Officers There is at least one notable exception to the general rule of enduring racial animosity between officers of the two races. Specifically, there seems to have been very little doubt that they would go to the aid of one another when the “chips were down.” In fact, this exception to the persistent theme of racial tension between the two groups seems to be about the only common ground that effectively united them. According to Alex’s (1969, 1976) interpretation of narrative comments made by officers he interviewed, members of both races viewed the public as a common enemy. Thus, the classic battle between the police and the criminal element formed a basis of cooperation virtually unparalleled in other areas of their working relationship. It is thus somewhat refreshing to find that even though they did not share much social interaction or mutual respect for one another, black and white officers were able to set aside their differences when it came to assisting one another in dangerous situations. In fact, many black officers went so far as to indicate that they would still assist a white officer even if they had knowledge that he held racist or bigoted views. The willingness to set aside their racial differences and assist one another in such dangerous situations speaks volumes about the character of these men, one of who directly commented: To me, it’s a funny thing about being a policeman. A guy in my office I know he is a bigot. I have told him so. But if anyone should attack him I would go to his aid. I would hope

38

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives he would come to my aid if I was in trouble. You have to stick together for self-protection and self-preservation. They say strength in unity against the common enemy. The public! (Alex, 1969, p. 89). There is no problem about whether he will come to my aid. This is the necessity of the job. The job you hold makes it a fraternalistic dependence. Like I say, you work by yourself as one and patrol vast areas, a minimum of six blocks. You are there by yourself. And if you need aid, he will come to you and you will go to him. There is a definite dependence, and race and color don’t enter the fact. You know if this wasn’t so, the whole structure of the thing would fall apart. There may be resentment but you have got to help one another (Alex, 1969, p. 88).

General Observations Regarding Early Relations Between Black and White Officers Despite encouraging evidence suggesting that most officers were willing to set aside their racial differences and assist one another when the “chips were down,” it nonetheless remains safe to observe that inter-racial tension has existed in some form or another since widespread efforts to integrate the profession were first undertaken. The root of this racial animosity seems to stem, in large part, from the perception among white personnel that black officers were “tokens” who came on the job under less rigorous selection criteria than those previously applied to other groups. Certainly, this attitude on the part of whites made it exceedingly difficult for black officers to be accepted not only while on the job, but off duty as well. About the best that could be said was that members of the two races generally tolerated one another and that any cordial relationship they shared ended at the stationhouse door when their tour of duty had come to an end. Within this general context, it is perhaps not at all surprising to also find there existed little social interaction between members of the two races during off-duty hours. When the two groups did socially mix with one another - say at an annual celebration or fund-raiser - black officers would later admit that they had felt especially uncomfortable. With little disagreement, such an environment is not generally conducive to improving or sustaining positive relations between the two groups.

CHAPTER 5

Black Officers and the Black Community

As noted in briefly reviewing the historical role of blacks in American law enforcement, logic strongly suggested that assigning them to patrol ghetto communities would provide a simple solution to the pressures and concerns of residents regarding the unsatisfactory quality of police service and abuse they were experiencing at the hands of largely white police departments. However, acting upon such simple reasoning and blindly pursuing a strategy of race-based assignments without giving considered thought to the historical relationship that had previously existed between the black community and white police eventually lead to the failure of this strategy for reasons that become readily apparent in hindsight.

39

40

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

The Origins of Tension Between Police and the Black Community Historically, law enforcement has been used to control the perceived threat to majoritarian society that was posed by aggressive minority groups. Central to this balance of power in a democratic society is the right to vote (Alexander, 1978). Unfortunately, white police officers were frequently used to keep blacks from exercising their Constitutional right to vote, thereby preventing them from influencing the delicate balance of political power in their direction (Hawkins & Thomas, 1991; Reaves, 1991). White officers were also routinely deployed in large numbers throughout black communities in an effort to control their daily behavior, whether or not it conflicted with the law. In doing so, they strictly enforced curfews as well as routinely stopped, interrogated, searched and beat minority citizens without justification (Cooper, 1980; Palmer, 1973). Not infrequently, such aggressive tactics resulted in the tragic killing of many innocent minorities by the police who acted with near impunity and were never held responsible for their actions (Cooper, 1980; Cross, 1964; Hawkins & Thomas, 1991; Rabinowitz, 1976). It did not take long before the police began to symbolize for blacks the power of life and death frighteningly reminiscent of the Old South. From this early antagonistic relationship, the white dominated police forces eventually came to be viewed with considerable disdain and fear in many black communities as slave overseers and an occupying army intent on protecting white property, middle-class values and the status quo (Alexander, 1978; Bannon & Wilt, 1973; Cooper, 1980; Cross, 1964; Hudson, 1990; Margolis, 1971; National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968; Palmer, 1973). Clearly, such an impression and reputation was far from conducive to creating a positive environment between the police and those they were intended to serve. An alternative to resolving the conflict that inevitably ensued between the white police and black citizens was clearly and urgently needed. One apparent alternative for overcoming the dislike among black citizens for white officers was to altogether remove their presence from the ghetto community, instead only entering the area when summoned (Lewis, 1996). Unfortunately, this ill-conceived strategy was almost as harmful to police-community relations as that of total occupation because the perception then arose among blacks that the police were callously unresponsive to their needs, dismissive of the growing crime

Black Officers and the Black Community

41

problem, and especially liberal in the use of force to gain compliance when summoned (Hawkins & Thomas, 1991). In response to the failure of this option, agencies eventually came to realize that another viable strategy for dealing with the problem was to be found in assigning black officers to ghetto areas based on the assumption that they were more capable of responding to the cultural needs and crime problems of their own community (Cooper, 1980; National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968). Surely, it was reasoned, minority officers could do a much better job of policing ghetto neighborhoods and residents than could their racial counterparts who were mostly foreign to the subtleties of black culture (Bannon & Wilt, 1973; Kelly & West, 1973; Sullivan, 1989). Additionally, from the perspective of the department’s administration, it was considered more desirable to see black officers policing their own rather than whites having to do so (Alex, 1969; Cashmore, 1991). This logic was elaborated upon by a white officer whose thoughts on the matter likely represented prevailing attitudes of the time: In order to understand the neighborhood and the people you have to put that type of person in there. And what better type of person than the type of person who just got out of there? I went out on the job with cops who were colored in Harlem. And nobody would talk to me. [You mean black people who live in the neighborhood? Alex probed] Yeah, they wouldn’t talk to me. He understands. He was brought up that way. And he knows exactly what their problems are better than I would. And I’m sure that I could probably understand something up on Fordham Road better than he could (Alex, 1976, p. 146). Still another officer attested to the virtual ineffectiveness of his own as well as other white officers’ efforts to gain compliance and respect from black civilians: I’ve worked with black cops and not just in Brooklyn, but when I was in the Bronx. I used to fill in the South Bronx on a regular basis during the summer and I felt that black cops were listened to more than I was. In other words, I can go to a situation in a black neighborhood, in a bad neighborhood as we put it, and the people won’t respect you. They call you a

42

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives pig and a mother-fucker. So you can't communicate with them like a black cop can. A black cop can go over and say, ‘Listen, brother!’ If you go over and say, ‘Listen, brother’ they laugh at you (Alex, 1976, p. 147).

Rejection of the Black Officer’s Authority Over Black Citizens Given the overwhelmingly negative historical relationship that existed between the largely white police department and black society, the plan of exclusively assigning black officers to work in ghetto neighborhoods was doomed to fail from the outset. At the core of this unanticipated failure was the fact that relations between the minority community and the police department were already strained beyond such simple repair. Rather quickly, two realizations were drawn - first, an officer’s skin color did not matter because he was viewed as an unwelcome intruder to be regarded with the same dislike as his white predecessors (Cooper, 1980). Secondly, black citizens did not necessarily prefer black policemen to whites as had been expected (Kuykendall & Burns, 1980; Wallach & Jackson 1973). Accordingly, an examination of the hostility among black residents toward officers of their own race becomes necessary in order to fully appreciate the working world experiences of these men.

Typologies of Black Police Despite the fact that black ghetto residents in many instances altogether disliked the police - irrespective of an officer’s race (Bannon & Wilt, 1973) - hostility toward black lawmen in particular runs deep. Minority officers, finally given the opportunity to serve the police department and their community were in for a rude awakening. In very short order it was discovered that they were no longer welcome in the black community. Rather, they were viewed as traitors, turncoats, sell-outs, lackeys or pawns (Cashmore; 1991; Cooper, 1980; Lardner & Reppetto, 2000) among their racial peers. Even worse, they soon came to represent a new threat as an enforcer of the white man’s law and the middle-class establishment (Alex, 1976; Bannon & Wilt, 1973; Cooper, 1980; National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968; Palmer, 1973). Frequently exposed to outward intra-racial

Black Officers and the Black Community

43

hostility as the target of verbal insults such as “Oreo,” “Uncle Tom,” “Massa’s Man,” “House (or White) Nigger,” and “Mr. Charlie’s Boy” (Alex, 1976; Bannon & Wilt, 1973; Cooper, 1980; Lardner & Reppetto, 2000; Palmer, 1973; Runnels, 1991), black officers began to assume what Cooper (1980) has described as one of five distinct social roles while performing their duties in the ghetto. These roles are given the descriptive terms “pariah,” “Judas goat,” “sacrificial lamb,’ “cool cop’ and “ghettoized cop.” The Black Officer as a “Pariah” While both black and white police officers expect to be viewed with a certain amount of disdain by those they must control, black officers in particular seemed to face considerably more dislike from ghetto residents than did their white counterparts. It is this heightened level of animosity generated toward black officers by minority residents that lead Cooper (1980) to describe their social status as that of “pariahs” men forced to live between two social roles in which they are put down by their own racial group while at the same time aspiring to an elevation in status through their employment as police officers (Cooper, 1980). In Cooper’s own words: “Pariah people are in society, but at the same time they are outside of it” (p. 80). It is within this context that black officers entered the ghetto with the collective authority and legitimacy of the police department behind them, while at the same time lacking any true measure of autonomy or power of their own. In essence, they amounted to “nothing” without the uniform or backing of their police peers - To illustrate, the black officer’s pariah status was frequently given verbal description by ghetto residents who may be heard to proclaim: “Yeah, you may have that blue uniform on, but it can't cover your black ass. You’re still nothing but a Nigger, even if you live up there in Scarsdale” (Cooper, 1980, p. 111). This outward rejection of the black officer by his own racial peers clearly stemmed from their perception of him as the worst type of traitor - “he has turned on the group and become an oppressor” (p. 111).

44

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

The Black Officer as a “Judas Goat” The job of a law enforcement officer, at its very core, is one of brokering essential social services for the community and its residents. Frequently, the police are the only source of assistance available to civilians during evening and weekend hours when other social service providers are closed for business. They operate 24 hours per day, seven days per week, every day of the year, all the while “taking the sick to hospitals, settling domestic quarrels, searching for lost children, directing traffic, guarding school crossings, and doing many other services like directing people to the right kinds of social services that can deal with their problems” (Cooper, 1980, p. 84). This level of service suggests that individual officers do their jobs because they have “an honest beneficence for ghetto residents” (Cooper, 1980, p. 85). However, a more cynical view is offered by Cooper (1980), who likened black officers to “Judas Goats” (p. 84 & 116). The essence of this role was one of leading the ghetto’s “feral children” (p. 85) into further reliance upon the police for assistance while neglecting to resolve the community’s underlying social problems. This dependence gave the police reason to intervene in the otherwise private affairs of ghetto residents, although “they are discouraged from being too helpful or friendly” (p. 117). This emotional detachment from the problems of the black community was difficult for black officers to reconcile, Cooper (1980) argues, since he was constantly expected to represent the ghetto’s residents and their views. The competing demands of emotional separation versus the expected role of representing the ghetto community’s views thus caused black officers to eventually withdraw and turn their backs on racial peers just as Judas Iscariot was depicted in his betrayal of Christ. The Black Officer as a “Sacrificial Lamb” Cooper’s (1980) depiction of the black officer as a “sacrificial lamb” (p. 119) begins with the assertion that “all cops in the ghetto are expendable” in the battle to eliminate crime and drugs. Although it is unfortunate, some officers may die in this effort, but the rewards for making the ultimate sacrifice will come in the form of a funeral with full police honors. In this role, black officers were viewed as being exploited by their departments. Evidence supporting this claim is found in their token inclusion within the profession, not as true crime-

Black Officers and the Black Community

45

fighters like their white counterparts but, rather, as community relations personnel or undercover mercenaries used to spy upon black radicals. When finally given an opportunity to do some real police work, they were assigned only to patrol ghetto neighborhoods based on the logic that they would more easily blend in than white officers with the indigenous population. Serving in these capacities exposed black officers to being “pumped for information” (p. 121) by the department about the sometimes not-so-subversive activities of ghetto residents. Thus, black officers in particular were viewed by their departments as expendable resources to be exploited as fully as possible for purposes of achieving the desired goals by whatever means necessary. The Black Officer as a “Cool Cop” In describing the black officer as a “cool cop,” Cooper (1980) referred to his ability to remain emotionally detached and impartial in performing the job’s official duties. As an employee of a public bureaucracy, the police officer was seen as “cold, uncaring, and without feeling for life” (p. 124). Eventually, the officer’s behavior became highly rationalized and procedural in nature - a condition contradicted by the sometimes high level of emotion accompanying life’s tragic events that occurred in the ghetto. Because bureaucratization had become a popular method for managing public sector organizations, Cooper (1980) speculated that the emotional detachment associated with this style of delivering law enforcement services would eventually filter down to the patrol level and affect the manner in which officers performed their day-to-day duties. Black officers were believed to be most susceptible to accepting these changes on the basis that they had acquired middle class status, values and attitudes. Blind acceptance of such impersonal routinization, Cooper (1980) argued, would only increase the existing level of friction between ghetto residents and black officers, thereby making conditions even more difficult for both to endure. The Black Officer as a “Ghettoized Cop” Cooper’s (1980) final classification was one in which black officers served as a symbol to other blacks that middle class membership was, in fact, attainable. Although not likely to live in the ghetto or view

46

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

himself as a black person, the ghettoized cop is one who was treated poorly by both the department and the black community - neither accepted him as one of their own. To be ghettoized, Copper stated, meant to be “taken for granted and ill-considered when being considered at all” (p. 126). Specifically, he charged that police departments failed to consider the feelings of their black personnel when assigning them, whether they liked it or not, to ghetto neighborhoods. This lack of consideration caused officers to experience self-pity and lament the bad fortune of being cast back into a prison from which they had already been forced to escape. Returned to walk among their racial peers, black officers soon found that they no longer fit in with the minority community. They must, therefore, “pretend to be black” (p. 127) which, in the long run, often proved unsuccessful. Like the pariah previously described, ghettoized cops eventually become marginalized - rejected by both the white department and their racial peers. “Threatened, squeezed and crushed” (p. 127) by the expectations of both groups, ghettoized cops eventually manifested symptoms commonly associated with extreme social alienation. Like most typologies, Cooper’s (1980) classification and characterization of black police officers as falling into one of five distinct categories probably does not exist in reality. Rather, it is more likely than not that there exists considerable overlap and “blending” between the categories so that it becomes difficult to draw a clear line of demarcation identifying one officer as a “pariah” and another as a “ghettoized cop.” Perhaps the greatest utility of Cooper’s (1980) work is, therefore, to be found in identifying the various pressures to which black officers are exposed as a result of their unique position in society. At the very least it has certainly been helpful in identifying and understanding the causes of animosity and dislike among ghetto residents not only toward the police in general, but that which has been aimed over the years at black officers in specific. Thus, Cooper’s (1980) work helps scholars move one step closer to understanding why there existed within the black community an underlying sense that, above all else, black cops have been unwelcome even in their own neighborhoods (Runnels, 1989). The rejection of black officers among their own racial civilian peers is also illustrated by those instances when ghetto residents summoned the police for assistance and were forced to chose between two lesser evils - talking to a white officer who likely cared nothing about the black community and its crime problem or talking with a black officer

Black Officers and the Black Community

47

who was concerned with ghetto problems yet regarded by its residents as a “traitor” or “sell-out.” Oddly enough, there have occurred instances where black citizens refused to talk to officers of their own race, requesting instead that a white officer be summoned to the scene and take the report (Runnels, 1989). In fact, it has been succinctly noted that “so much hatred can be generated towards black cops by black ghetto residents that white cops can ... be seen as more acceptable by comparison” (Cooper, 1980, p. 112). Surely, such reactions and rejection by ghetto residents must have been perceived as a figurative slap in the face by black officers and a crushing blow to their efforts to pacify the membership expectations of both social groups.

Coping With Competing Demands for Loyalty At its height, the social rejection of black officers by their own racial peers became particularly acute when their financial situation required them to live in the same area they patrolled. In these instances, black officers soon found themselves walking a very fine line between two competing loyalties. One officer who found himself in just such a situation obtusely explained: There is no doubt that the white officer has a rough time in a Negro neighborhood. On the other hand, with a white officer, after he finishes his 8-hour tour of duty, he can go home and forget what he has done - maybe what damage he has done. The Negro police officer quite often is stymied along those lines because predominantly he is living in a Negro neighborhood. Because of this fact, he will get the same problems twenty-four hours a day. The Negro officer will get complaints from Negro citizens of what a white officer has done to so-and-so. You can either shrug your shoulders and walk away - you can try and appease them and tell them that this particular officer was only trying to do his duty. You can try to sympathize with them. When you do this, this doesn’t satisfy them as far as their animosity toward the white police officer is concerned, but makes you more friendly toward your own kind. But it is a situation of living with your own kind too - and you can’t say it was this white officer’s fault. Because if you say that he was at fault in a particular

48

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives situation, what you do is help reinforce their hostile feelings toward you as a police officer. The more you take their position regarding the situation - that is, the more you side with them, the more hostile they become toward the cop, and indirectly, you give them fuel to hate you (Alex, 1969, pp. 136-137).

When one closely reads between the lines of this statement, it should become readily apparent that black officers experienced a unique form of dual tension between their roles as members of the black community while at the same time serving as enforcers of the law. In an attempt to avoid the social discomfort certain to occur in the presence of one’s racial peers, black officers were forced to adopt various techniques of avoidance, deception and social withdrawal. At the most innocuous level, black officers would avoid contacts with those whom they had previously shared social relationships prior to joining the force. This was especially true when an officer and former friend occupied social roles on opposite sides of the law. This solution to the problem of role tension through avoidance was given meaning by one officer who related: I know several police officers who live in Harlem. They grew up there and many of the people they arrest are people they grew up with. One of my best friends while I was going to high school is a junky today. I see him very often but he will not speak to me. He won’t speak to me because of what I am, and because of where he is today. He told another friend of mine that he would never speak to me because of that. This is a sad commentary. Now as far as I am concerned, I don’t know how I will react if I saw him do something wrong. The possibility of catching him either in the act of stealing, or possessing narcotics is very good. But I don’t know what I would do. This puts me in a bind. I would have to make a decision to go one way or the other when we do meet in such a situation. What way I would go - I don’t really know (Alex, 1969, p. 137). An alternative strategy for alleviating this role tension involved the use of deception. This approach allowed officers to avoid social interactions that had the potential to become particularly uncomfortable when others discovered the true nature of their employment. The use of

Black Officers and the Black Community

49

calculated deception to achieve this objective was perhaps best illustrated by an officer who explained: Sometimes they get into big discussions with civil rights and they want my opinion as a Negro and as a policeman. And then I discuss it with them. There are times when I wish they didn’t know I was a policeman. Perhaps, certain people think that because you are a policeman you are a big man. But I don’t want to be a big man, I want to be something else. So if I am at a party and people don’t know who I am and they ask me I tell them I am a cab driver or something like that (Alex, 1969, p. 139). At worst, the social rejection caused by incongruence between their occupational status and minority group membership resulted in what can only be described as a form of “self-imposed isolation” (Alex, 1969, p. 139). Quite simply, black officers who were uncomfortable with the use of avoidance and deception as techniques for counteracting the tension created by their role conflict simply negated the problem by withdrawing from social interactions altogether. Two officers described this solution: I kind of keep away from people. I don’t want to get too involved (Alex, 1969, p. 139). No one can hurt you unless he is your friend. And you won’t let people become your friends (p. 139). Finally, the social rejection that black officers experienced arising from their official capacity as enforcers of the law began to flow over into their personal lives. Not only did the black community at large view them with contempt, but they eventually began to lose contact with friends whom, for one reason or another, they were no longer able to relate to. One possible explanation for this final phase of social separation from others may be attributable to the fact that their professional status as police officers became their predominant social role while their status as a friend, relative or acquaintance assumed secondary importance. This transition was underscored by an officer who explained:

50

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives As of last summer the regulations were changed to make us wear our uniform to and from work. So now they all know. It’s not now a matter of first being Jimmy. This is out now. Now there are always police problems that come up after duty. There is always conversation along police lines. Where we used to talk about baseball or football, it’s now talk about police work. They don’t let me forget who I am. In this neighborhood I thought I would be better off because so many cops live in the neighborhood. And I figured people would be used to having a cop as a neighbor and accept you as a neighbor. In my old neighborhood where I was making about twice the salary anybody else was making they attached a status to the job. My new neighborhood, where there are a lot of cops and professionals, I thought it would be different in atmosphere than it is (Alex, 1969, p. 138).

General Observations Regarding Early Relations with Black Civilians In light of these accounts, it may be said that being a black police officer assigned to patrol ghetto neighborhoods was not always an enjoyable or easily accomplished task. Rather, it seems as though black officers were, in many instances, more disliked and disrespected than even the most abusive white officers who routinely dispensed law and order within the area through unrestrained use of their nightsticks. In essence, black officers were regarded by many of their racial peers as traitors - men who had sold out or abandoned their racial identity to the white political establishment solely for the purpose of achieving an elevation in social status. Constantly being ridiculed by their racial peers as pariahs, Judas goats, or sacrificial lambs (Cooper, 1980), black officers quickly became aware of the deeply-entrenched feelings of disrespect and contempt held for them by ghetto residents. Only in the rarest of instances did law-abiding blacks seem to truly appreciate the altruistic sacrifices of these men and look up to them with respect as symbols of accomplishment. Based upon early qualitative interviews conducted by both Alex (1969) and Leinen (1984), there begins to emerge a sense that black officers often found themselves occupying an especially awkward social position - one causing them to experience tension as a member of the black community while at the same time being an enforcer of the white

Black Officers and the Black Community

51

man’s law. This underlying role conflict surely created frustration in the minds of these men who, by their own admission, would sometimes take their anger out upon black suspects who refused to acknowledge or respect their lawful authority. With little room for disagreement, the relationship between black officers and black communities was not off to as prosperous of a start as many white law enforcement administrators had hoped. Despite evidence that the seemingly logical plan of assigning black officers to black neighborhoods in an effort to improve police-community relations within those areas had not worked as planned, little empirical attention was given to the early career experiences of black officers from other departments during this early period of integration. In part, this inattention may be due to the specious assumption that the experiences of black officers from other jurisdictions were not that different from those reported by both Alex (1969) and Leinen (1984). As a result of inattention to these issues by scholars of policing, it is generally unknown if the animosity between these two samples of black officers and their civilian counterparts also existed in other settings outside of New York City. Finally, there is also a need to determine how widespread tensions actually were between black officers and ghetto residents from other jurisdictions. Such an assessment may contribute to a better understanding of how many of today’s veteran black officers view their professional obligations and responsibilities to the communities and residents which once so outwardly rejected them.

This page intentionally left blank

CHAPTER 6

Black Officers and the White Community

Blame for denying black officers the opportunity to work outside of ghetto neighborhoods was not solely the product of administrative discrimination, although this explanation cannot be altogether denied. Rather, much of the responsibility for sluggish integration of the profession can be traced to fear among white citizens. Whether reasonable or not, the idea of allowing blacks to serve as police officers was an obvious source of concern for many average white citizens, particularly those in the South (Jenkins, 1973). Most feared was, of course, the possible arrest of a white female by a black officer (Bayor, 1992). A more generalized and pervasive concern stemmed from the possibility that a white suspect might not acknowledge a black officer’s arrest powers or as quickly heed his verbal commands thereby resulting in an interracial altercation (Rudwick, 1962). Clearly, the KKK and other groups protested the notion of extending such awesome powers to black males who, they argued, might act out of rage against whites for 53

54

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

past injustices if given the opportunity (Sax, 1968). Still others, even less outwardly racist, simply feared that as a result of their newfound power over whites certain segments of the black population would become “uppity” and overtake one of the final bastions of white supremacy (Bayor, 1992; Jones, 1978; Moss, 1977; Palmer, 1973; Rudwick, 1960; Stokes, 1973). Within this context it is perhaps not surprising to again discover that black officers of earlier generations not only faced rejection from the minority communities they sought to both serve and represent, but experienced much the same reaction from whites. In some instances, what was feared would happen actually took place - white citizens rejected the legal authority of black officers. Such refusal obviously constituted an enduring and sometimes dangerous source of tension for both parties.

The Black Policeman as a Source of Curiosity As noted by Alex (1969), “a fundamental problem facing the Negro policeman in white neighborhoods is how to maintain his position and integrity as a policeman while adjusting to the role definitions made by his clientele” (p. 123). As a result of this dilemma, black officers who worked in white neighborhoods were generally required to adopt one of two social roles largely defined and controlled by the reactions of white citizens - on the one hand they were viewed as a source of public curiosity to be closely scrutinized for behavioral weaknesses or, on the other hand, considered a “non-entity” to be dismissed as lacking any legitimate source of power. Because they presumably gave shape and meaning to the working world experiences of early black officers, these externally-imposed role definitions deserve further reasoned consideration. Because their overall numbers were relatively small at the time, previous generations of black officers assigned to perform patrol duties in white neighborhoods were easily recognized - very few whites were accustomed to seeing blacks in their neighborhoods, let alone one wearing the distinctive uniform of a police officer. Being set apart from the crowd on the basis of skin color, while at the same time serving in an official capacity historically occupied by whites, black officers quickly became viewed as a source of curiosity for the white citizenry. In this role as an object of interest, black officers figuratively operated under a microscope of public scrutiny so that every action or reaction

Black Officers and the White Community

55

on their part was examined for conformity to official police regulations and unspoken public expectations. Deviations from these standards were quick to be acknowledged and amplified, making the duties of these men even more difficult to perform. In response to being asked why he was less comfortable working in a white as compared to black neighborhood, one officer interviewed by Alex (1969) explained: You may feel right from the start that the inhabitants may be more critical of you because of maybe their first contacts with you...it is like the feeling of a Negro being seen when he has never been seen before. You can sense when you get extra observation. By being critical I mean that the whites are more awed and more eager to see what my actions would be, what actions I would take. They want to evaluate you and see what type of protection they are going to get (Alex, 1969, p. 116117).

Rejection of the Black Officer’s Authority Over White Citizens Based on long-standing and relatively well-defined differences in the accepted social roles between members of both races, early black lawmen were sometimes also treated as “non-entities” or “second-class” officers by white civilians who refused to acknowledge their legal power. Thus, rather than seeing black officers as a source of legitimate social control and authority, some whites responded to them on the basis of their race rather than occupation.7 Black officers were, therefore, regarded as Negroes first and as officers of the law second. Clearly, this reaction presented the potential for an altercation to erupt between a black officer and white violator who did not see “eye-to-eye” with one another on the respective social roles each should assume. One officer, commenting on such tense encounters, stated: Every once in a while you would find a situation when a person would refuse to give you his license, or he would throw the license down on the ground for you to pick up when you stopped him for speeding or something like that, and he

56

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives was white. Or a person would tell me if I didn’t have a shield or gun what would I do? (Alex, 1969, p. 118).

Even more disturbing, but hopefully less frequent, were the types of racial comments directed at black officers by white violators as related in the following first-hand account: White people might say to me: Why don’t you arrest some niggers. I want to be arrested by a white man (Alex, 1969, p. 118). Despite displays of racial animosity, some black officers felt that white civilians would, over time, grow to accept them simply on the basis of routine exposure. Another officer best expressed such optimism regarding this eventual acceptance: I feel if he works a steady post where people see him every day and get to know him, there are no problems. But white people are not accustomed to seeing a Negro as a policeman. And because of that, the white person will have reservations about the Negro policeman. You get the stares, for example, from people who are not accustomed to seeing you. They look at him as a Negro policeman and not as a policeman (Alex, 1969, p. 117). One would hope that with time such views would fade and black officers would be more fully defined and accepted by the white community on the basis of their occupation rather than skin color. Whether or not this has been the case, evidence exists suggesting that pockets of racial animosity directed at black officers as legitimate figures of authority in the eyes of white civilians continues to exist. The memoirs of Runnels (1989) illustrate this point. For example, even as a senior officer (FTO) responsible for training rookie officers in the field, it was not uncommon for white citizens who summoned the police to acknowledge and interact exclusively with the white rookie officer (even though that officer lacked the requisite experience), while at the same time completely ignoring the more senior black officer who was actually in charge of the call. Similarly, interactions took place in which white citizens refused to acknowledge a black officer’s authority, insisting instead that a white officer be called to the scene to resolve

Black Officers and the White Community

57

their problem or complaint (Runnels, 1989). An illustration of refusal to accept an officer’s assistance based on skin color rather than occupational role was also related to Alex (1969) by an officer who met with resistance while responding to an emergency call for assistance: A woman was pregnant. The husband meets you at the door. Wife is ready to have a baby. You call the ambulance. Hasn’t arrived yet. Time is getting short. You say: Let me see your wife. He says: you want to see my wife? You say: Lady, did your water break? The man looks at you and says: Look, I don’t want you talking to my wife that way - I don’t even want you looking at my wife. Why in the hell do they send people like you here anyhow? He tells the sergeant that he doesn’t want me to look at his wife. The sergeant tells him that I am a police officer. It goes on like that (p. 130). As absurd as it may seem, some whites flatly objected to the idea of a black officer assisting them even in an emergency situation. Not only was this objection apparent in the preceding case, but in others as well: I’ll give you some examples of this. My partner and I are on radio motor patrol duty. It’s an ambulance call. When you arrive (and this example is in the Yorkville section of New York) you find a low income family of Irish background and the grandmother is hurt with a broken arm. We respond, my white partner and I, and the ambulance which has a white driver and negro attendant. The daughter and son-in-law are present at the scene. And the patrolmen are attempting to help her. She turns to the Negro patrolman and says to him, ‘Don’t put your hands on me!’ I can’t touch her. Can you imagine that. I come to her aid, and she tells me to get my hands off her (Alex, 1969, p. 178). There is an emergency call. A nurse lived in the East 80’s. four radio cars respond. That means sixteen patrolmen. There are fifteen white patrolmen and one Negro, me. my car caught the call, and my partner and I dash into the apartment. The woman is in a night gown. She is hysterical. But when she sees me she goes into complete shock! Ironically, I had to get

58

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives all the information from her because we got the call. Things were running through my mind that the assailant was a Negro and this was why she responded to me, but he was white. She almost screamed again when she saw me. there I am with my brass buttons and my shield. It’s obvious I’m a policeman but she goes back into shock. I keep telling her I’m a policeman. I actually ran downstairs and told my partner that I didn’t want to have anything to do with the case. But I went back up. I have dozens of such incidents (Alex, 1969, pp. 178-179).

Another officer who participated in the same study speculated on what might occur in the event that he was required to use physical force to subdue a suspect in a white neighborhood: One night, around Fulton Street where I was working, this fellow was kicking this girl under the car. I subdued him and walked him to the corner of Nostrand and Fulton, a wellknown corner and very active. I tried to get this guy to put his hands up while I searched him. He was a Negro. When he didn’t comply, I hit him with a stick on the forehead, causing a small cut on his eyebrow. To my surprise, the local citizens, the Negro citizens, said good. That is what these young punks need. Now, why am I saying this? Well I don’t think I would be able to hit someone with a stick in a white neighborhood as I did to this Negro in a Negro neighborhood. I don’t think the reaction of citizens would have been the same. What would they have seen? I think they would have seen a Negro hitting a white person, not a Negro cop hitting a rowdy. They would be more apt to accept it if a white cop hit a white person (Alex, 1969, p. 124). This real-world insight clearly suggests that the use of force by a black officer against a white suspect would likely be perceived and responded to considerably different than if the roles were reversed - that is, a white officer using force against a black suspect. The potential for adverse public reaction, combined with a perception that the actions of black officers were more closely scrutinized by white citizens and the department alike, may have resulted in a black officer who mistreated a white civilian getting into more trouble than a white officer who had mistreated a black civilian.

Black Officers and the White Community

59

Perhaps on a more encouraging note, limited narrative evidence is found within the available literature suggesting that black officers indeed commanded a certain measure of respect from white civilians. As one officer reported: When I worked in an all white neighborhood, I never had any trouble. I think the Negro community, however, will accept the white person more readily than the white community is accepting the Negro. I worked for six months in an all white area with another Negro cop. You tell citizens to move, they move. You tell him to put that coin in the meter, he runs over there and he does it. Why? Because they don’t know you. You are a novelty. You stand out. This standing out, and you being strange, make them move. Many white people, if you tell them to move, and if they don’t - you assert yourself. I’m also a policeman you try and tell them. If you don’t respect me for what I am, then respect my uniform (Alex, 1969, p. 125). At a minimum, this comment implies that some white citizens reacted to the directives issued by black officers out of fear for the unknown - that is, the average white citizen probably knew little about blacks in general and even less about how a specific officer would react if defied. As a result, they were inclined to act upon his instructions rather than push their luck with what amounted to them as an entity whose limits were largely unknown. Even if white civilians did not respect black officers on the basis of their race, there remained the possibility that they nonetheless respected the uniform and the authority it symbolically represented. Based upon this presumed respect for the uniform and not necessarily the person by which it was physically occupied, there likely existed a portion of the white community that cared more about an officer’s ability to simply “get the job done” than they did about his specific race. In the eyes of some liberal-minded whites, ability may have been the more important overall criteria for judging an officer rather than his race. However, it is believed that the extent of such progressive thinking among members of the white community was limited at the time given the greater frequency with which more negative accounts of interactions between the two groups appear in the literature.

60

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

General Observations Regarding Early Relations with White Civilians Based upon review of the literature regarding the nature and quality of their early interactions with white civilians, it may be said that many black officers experienced considerable social rejection from this influential segment of the general population. In some instances, this social rejection even took the form of outwardly refusing to acknowledge their lawful authority. To a large extent, the foregoing accounts also suggest that many white civilians viewed black lawmen as second-class officers unworthy of their full respect. In white neighborhoods black officers were initially judged on the basis of skin color - their master social status was that of Negro first and police officer second, while the exact opposite seems to have held true in colored neighborhoods where their master social status was that of “cop” or “oreo” first and “brother” second Presumably, these formative social interactions and externally imposed role definitions negatively affected the manner in which black officers viewed their early relationships with white civilians. Interestingly, however, little attention has been devoted to assessing how widespread these negative interactions between black officers and white civilians actually were. Rather, our knowledge of the nature and quality of interactions that occurred between black officers and white civilians is limited to the experiences of those officers from the New York City Police Department interviewed by Alex (1969) and Leinen (1984) several decades ago. This point becomes especially critical when one considers the fact that many blacks who entered the profession during the initial period of integration when friction between black officers and white civilians was believed to be at its worst have since ascended to positions of executive leadership within many of the nation’s law enforcement agencies. In the absence of knowing just how widespread the social rejection of black officers actually was, it becomes difficult to fully appreciate the manner in which these professionals view their current obligations to respond to the political demands of a population which once so outwardly objected to and defied their authority.

CHAPTER 7

Institutional Barriers to Widespread Promotion

In addition to the preceding accounts illustrating the manner in which some police departments treated black officers during the early years of integration, there exists credible evidence suggesting that these pioneers also confronted institutional discrimination in the context of performance evaluations and disciplinary actions (Alexander, 1978; Charles, 1991; Kelley & West, 1973; Kephart, 1954 & 1957; Sullivan, 1989; Trostle, 1992). The most notable study aimed at examining perceptions of differential treatment between the races in these two areas was conducted by Beard (1977) who surveyed 947 black officers from the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department. Primary among the findings reported was that ninety-one percent of the males and 78% of the females expressed the belief that white supervisors treated black and white officers differently than one another (p. 51). Furthermore, an overwhelming 91% of the almost 1,000 black officers felt that discrimination was the major factor accounting for differences 61

62

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

in job performance ratings between the two races (p. 51). In essence, the major complaint at the time was that white supervisors failed to give black officers the credit they deserved for a job “well-done.”

Differential Treatment in Performance Evaluations and Reprimands Leinen (1984), in conducting interviews with black officers from the NYPD, uncovered evidence of this concern. At least two different officers related their experiences in the following terms: Yeah, this is the type of job that a black cop can work and work and never get (a good word) from some white sergeants. With these bosses you rarely hear, ‘You did a good job’ (p. 57). There are a few things that I could point to. For instance, there’s plenty of good work by black detectives in my office, and rarely does it go noticed by the boss. He just doesn’t seem to feel it’s important to tell a black detective he did a good piece of work or maybe handled a sensitive situation well. There’s just no communication here at all. In other places I worked, it didn’t seem to matter what color you were, you did the job and you heard about it. It was a good feeling you had. I think all the black guys in the office felt the same way (p. 58).

Black Officers as “Targets” of Racially Motivated Reprimands Not only is it disappointing to find that black officers felt as though they were sometimes denied positive recognition for having done a good job, but even more troubling to learn that they may have been intentionally “targeted” to receive more than their fair share of negative recognition - namely in the form of racially-motivated disciplinary charges (Alexander, 1978). Generally speaking, disciplinary charges are filed when a fellow officer, supervisor or member of the public accuses an officer of violating some formally stated rule, policy, practice or law established by the department, administrative or legislative body. There

Institutional Barriers to Widespread Promotion

63

often exists, however, considerable discretion on behalf of an officer’s supervisor in determining whether or not formal disciplinary charges will be filed or if the matter will instead be dealt with on a more discrete, informal basis. Of course, there was concern on the part of early black officers that they were routinely denied the benefit of such discretion so that they were “brought up” on disciplinary charges more often than not by racist supervisors who had a bad habit of overlooking the same violations committed by white officers. For example, Alexander (1978) reported that in 1892, forty-two officers within the NYPD were brought up on disciplinary charges. Forty-one white officers were retained and only one officer - the sole black in the entire group - was fired. This concern was also manifested in the research of Beard (1977) who found that 84% of the black officers he surveyed felt as though departmental rules and regulations were unequally enforced between the two races (p. 51). As if this finding alone were not bad enough, the claim has also been raised that black officers were more likely than their white counterparts to face official sanctions when accused of violating departmental rules and regulations. Here again, the research of Beard (1977) revealed that 88% of his survey respondents believed they were more likely to receive disciplinary sanctions than white officers who had committed the same types of rule infractions (p. 51). A small number of black NYPD officers interviewed by Leinen (1984) agreed with this perspective, one of who stated: There is no doubt about it. Black cops get more complaints than white officers. It happened to me and two other black guys. This is because the complaint will be entertained downtown (p. 86). In some instances, the filing of disciplinary charges may not have even been the product of actual misbehavior on a black officer’s part but, rather, the result of some perverted “contest” or “clash of egos” between two or more supervisors of opposite races. To illustrate just such an occurrence, one officer reported to Alex (1976) an exchange that he witnessed between a black and a white supervisor. In essence, the two verbally disagreed over what the black supervisor believed to be the racially motivated filing of disciplinary charges against his officers by the white supervisor.

64

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives A colored and a white sergeant were drinking together, and the colored sergeant said to this white sergeant that you guys are giving out complaints to the colored cops, and I think I’m going to give out some complaints to some of your white boys now. And this white sergeant told him, ‘Well, they are the only ones that I’m catching in the gin mills. That’s why I’m giving out complaints.’ So the white sergeant is saying to him, ‘What are you trying to say?’ And the Negro sergeant says, “I think I’m going to give out some complaints to white boys.’ And the white sergeant says, “If you want to play that game, well, it’s ridiculous.’ But the colored sergeant thought that they were getting complaints because they were colored” (p. 158-159).

Reprimands as the Result of Factors Other Than Race The validity of Beard’s (1977) empirical analysis and the claim that black officers were unfairly targeted by white supervisors for disciplinary action has, however, been called into question. In particular, Leinen (1984) discovered that a majority of the officers with whom he discussed this topic clearly rejected the notion that blacks were more likely than whites to receive disciplinary action. In fact, 14 out of the 16 men Leinen (1984) interviewed on this dimension of their careers expressed the view that most disciplinary cases were attributable to what they described as “personality clashes” (p. 86) between black officers and white superiors. How the two “got along” with one another as well as how the supervisor viewed the officer’s “work ethic” were more important considerations than an officer’s race in determining whether or not disciplinary charges would be filed (Leinen, 1984). As one officer who shared this view commented: I have no feelings that black officers receive more complaints, although there are plenty of prejudiced white supervisors. Complaints are individual. If a supervisor knows that a guy is a good worker he might speak up for him if he screws up. If a guy is a general fuck-up, no matter what his color, he will get one [a complaint] (Leinen, 1984, p. 86). Finally, it is encouraging to note that some of the officers interviewed by Leinen (1984) felt as though they had a greater number

Institutional Barriers to Widespread Promotion

65

of administrative remedies at their disposal than were previously available. To illustrate, one officer commented: If a boss gives a black officer a complaint, he (the officer) has recourse, and I don’t think a supervisor would want to have a weak complaint aired today, especially when it involves a racial issue. He would hesitate to give a complaint that would not seem to be fair, but he would turn around and give the black officer a shit detail (Leinen, 1984, p. 86).

General Observations Regarding Differential Treatment in Performance Evaluations and Reprimands While the independent research efforts of Beard (1977), Alex (1969), and Leinen (1984) provide collective support for the contention that black officers were treated differently than whites when it came to the related issues of performance evaluation and disciplinary action, the external validity of this information is constrained to the extent that it is based upon accounts provided by officers from only two departments - Washington, D.C. and New York City. Consequently, little is known about the more pervasive beliefs, perceptions and attitudes of black personnel who served in other departments and historical periods regarding these arguably important career dimensions. At a minimum, the existing research suggests that when asked about their views on such issues black officers will not only express consensus that they are evaluated more harshly than their white counterparts, but that discrimination by white supervisors is the major factor accounting for differences in performance ratings between the two groups. Also expected to be uncovered is the perception that white officers are more likely to get away with violations of rules and regulations as well as a sense that it is difficult to substantiate instances in which disciplinary actions are racially motivated. To be sure, an up-to-date and more comprehensive understanding of these and other issues is necessary in order to assess how far, if at all, the profession has progressed toward the goal of minimizing not only perceptions but actual instances of racial discrimination in the application of performance evaluation criteria and discipline.

66

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

Obstacles to Promotion If, as claimed, black officers were intentionally targeted by white supervisors to receive more than their fair share of poor performance ratings and disciplinary actions as compared to whites, then it should not be surprising to also find among those populations previously studied the belief that they were further discriminated against when it came to being considered for advancement (Charles, 1991; Kelley & West, 1973; Kephart, 1954 & 1957; Lardner & Reppetto, 2000; Trostle, 1992). Within the context of merit-based promotions, the individual most qualified to perform the tasks associated with the position to be filled should be the one that is selected for advancement. Unfortunately, law enforcement has not always adhered to this seemingly logical principle of administration but, instead, sometimes operates under principles of favoritism and preferential treatment so that promotions are granted on the basis of group membership and personal affiliation. Given the fact that law enforcement has and continues to be a largely white-dominated profession, it would therefore be particularly naïve to deny that members of this numerical majority have in the past made use of their administrative “clout” to promote those most like themselves while “passing over” others who were different (Alexander, 1978; Felkenes & Schroedel, 1993). Because black officers shared little in common with white supervisors during their first few years on the job, it is not difficult to see how and why they may have been the victims of racial exclusivity and discrimination in the context of promotion decisions.

Promotions as the Result of Knowing the “Right People” in the “Right Places” Guided by the assumption that promotion decisions during the early years of racial integration were largely based upon knowing the “right people” in the “right places,” Leinen (1984) explored the perceived influences of favoritism, group membership, personal affiliation, and informal social interaction. In essence, many of the officers interviewed acknowledged that because favoritism in its various forms was not exclusively restricted to law enforcement but was also known to occur in other lines of employment, about the only thing that could be done was to accept the practice as a “way of life” that pervaded virtually

Institutional Barriers to Widespread Promotion

67

every occupational position within the department. Also uncovered during the course of these interviews was a belief among officers that the dispensation of “rewards, privileges and favors” depended to a large extent upon membership in white groups or cliques to which black officers had been denied access. The comments provided by several officers illustrate very well the foregoing perceptions: It’s my estimation that there is still discrimination in a lot of areas. It now depends upon friends in the precinct and officers of higher rank whether you’re going to get a detail or possibly put in for the shield . . . The situation strictly depends on your relationship with some higher up. The tricky thing here, and I speak for a lot of guys you talked to, is that there are too few black bosses. And a white boss might be more inclined to do a favor for a white guy, just as a black boss might do for a black cop. What it boils down to, the bottom line, we need more black bosses (Leinen, 1984, p. 69). The climate of the job has not really changed that much. I can remember some years ago when there was [sic] outright instances of discrimination against black officers in all areas. Now it’s done more underhandedly. [How is that? Leinen asked] Well, for instance, competent black officers in my precinct haven’t been assigned to anticrime patrol. This I observed personally. White sergeants who are in the majority choose white cops for these assignments when they come up. They drink with them after work and they live near them, so naturally who do you think they are going to pick when an opening in anticrime comes up? And it really doesn’t matter much whether the black cop is more suited for the assignment. You see, blacks don’t ordinarily get involved with whites off duty. They generally don’t fraternize with white sergeants after work and they certainly don’t travel home with them (p. 68).

68

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

Rationalizing Preferential Treatment in Police Promotions At this point, astute readers will note that in certain instances black officers may actually have benefited rather than suffered from the existence of racial favoritism in the promotions process - Take, for example, the hypothetical situation in which a black administrator is responsible for making a promotions decision involving one or more black officers with whom they may have previously worked or shared informal social relations. Given this possibility, it was interesting to find on the part of those black officers Leinen (1984) interviewed an ability to rationalize the role of preferential treatment in the promotions process. The observations of several officers demonstrated exactly how they viewed favoritism in practical, easy-to-understand terms: What you’re asking me, are blacks discriminated against more? There isn’t any of that as far as I’m concerned. This is based on my own personal experiences. People who have the ability to move others usually move friends, who also happen mostly to be of the same color. Cops do favors for guys they know, guys they ride with, guys they travel with. The only catch here is that it’s not always the best guy who winds up filling a special slot. But this has always been the way on the job and it will probably always be that way. You can’t fight it. Cops who like each other stick together and look out for each other. I’ve seen blacks moved up, favors done for black cops by white bosses who are their friends. So it’s not really a racial thing. . . . I remember after a few years on the job, I was really pissed when I saw mostly white guys getting special favors, anticrime, tit jobs [choice assignments] in the precinct. Then I saw that this is the way things are done all over, not just here in my precinct. As I said, you can’t fight it so you accept it. You just hope that eventually you make the right friends too (Leinen (1984, p. 74). Things are pretty much on the up and up now. The department doesn’t practice discrimination by choice. I may have thought that it was policy years ago. Maybe it was then, but not really today. You have bosses and even patrolmen in certain positions who can manipulate other officers into good jobs.

Institutional Barriers to Widespread Promotion

69

But I don’t look at this as racial discrimination anymore. It’s really present in all types of areas . . . favoritism. I think in your language, nepotism . . . and it goes for black cops as well today, to be honest. Black bosses choose blacks who are friends or belong to the Guardians, you know for special assignments when they can (Leinen, 1984, p. 74).

Difficulty in Substantiating Claims of Preferential Treatment When favoritism could not be rationalized as “a way of life” or accepted as part and parcel of the job, black officers quickly learned that complaints about racial exclusivity were difficult to substantiate. As one officer explained the situation to Leinen (1984): It’s just more subtle now. It’s not quite right out in the open as it was in the past. what has happened is that they just painted it a different color, that’s all. It’s the same thing, has the same effect on black cops. What do I mean? Years ago a black cop didn’t bother to put in for a detail. He knew right up front that he would be turned down, so he didn’t even bother. Today, there is a feeling that the department can no longer do that. There are laws now against discrimination. So now they exclude you “unofficially” by letting the roll call man make up assignments . . . He generally picks men for details, sometimes with the sergeant’s approval. Naturally everyone involved is white so they naturally pick friends who are also white. Still another officer who felt he had been discriminated against commented on the difficulty associated with proving his case: I was promised the gold shield first in 1965 then in 1966 and 1968. I finally got it in 1972, well after some white cops who worked with me. This I feel is because there is discrimination against black cops. I can’t prove it. It’s not something you can prove easily but that’s how I feel - case closed (Leinen, 1984, p. 81).

70

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

Other Informal Criteria Influencing Promotion Decisions Another subjective factor long suspected of influencing whether or not blacks were promoted centered upon the general prohibition against “rocking the boat” on sensitive or taboo issues. Because it was absolutely essential for officers of both races to maintain a civil on-thejob relationship with one another, the “norms of racial etiquette” (Alex, 1976, p. 145) dictated that they avoid discussing any controversial topic that might drive a wedge into their already tenuous relationship. Among those topics generally considered “off limits” for discussion between black and white officers were perceptions of discrimination on the job and the civil rights movement. Although there was no written or formal policy prohibiting them from engaging in discourse on these matters, black officers who verbally criticized their white supervisors did so at the risk of jeopardizing their chances for promotion. Black officers were, in essence, expected to conform to white values in order to be considered for advancement in the organization. As one officer summed up the situation: For a black to move in the detective bureau (a promotion in some departments), you couldn’t be outspoken. It seems like you have to play some sort of predesignated role, and if you don’t play this role, if you criticize the choices your boss makes for you, let us say, promotions or assignments, then they sort of delete you, ‘X’ you out (Leinen, 1984, p. 90). There is also a suggestion within the available literature that black officers had to “perform substantially better” than whites in order to be considered for promotion (Alexander, 1978). This conclusion is drawn from Leinen’s (1984) subjects, one of whom who noted: The only time the black can get assignments to good details [sic] is if he is needed for the job. That goes for street crime units and the bureau. Otherwise there is discrimination when it comes time to be considered for promotion. There is always a question mark as to the black officer’s competence . . . The black officer always seems to be passed over when it comes to promotions. He must be three times as good as the white cop to even be considered (p. 88).

Institutional Barriers to Widespread Promotion

71

More direct and to the point was another interviewee’s comment: . . . This equality thing is bullshit. The black officer has to be ten times better because the department is concerned about his performance. A lot of bosses feel that blacks are dumb, stupid and have to be led by the hand. This is a misconception . . . So you have to work ten times as hard to show that you can handle some mickey-mouse detail (pp. 88-89). Even in instances where black officers performed better than their racial counterparts on examinations and other promotion-related criteria, there was still no guarantee that they would not be “passed over” in favor of a less-qualified white candidate (Griffin, 1975). As one interviewee related his experience to Leinen (1984): There is definitely discrimination in promotions in grade too. I was put up for grade five times in about eight years. Each time I was in the top third. Three times a white detective who was under me in evaluations got grade early (p. 83). While it cannot be altogether denied that black officers were sometimes passed over for promotion on the basis that they did not belong to the “in crowd” or had perhaps “rocked the boat” by raising certain issues despite being clearly qualified for the position, there is to be found within the available literature a less sinister explanation for why they have been historically underrepresented at supervisory ranks within the profession. This alternate explanation is rooted in the logic that blacks are still relative “newcomers” to police work - so new, in fact, that they have not yet had the opportunity to be promoted in the same proportion as whites who have been on the job a great deal longer (Leinen, 1984; Sullivan, 1989). Given the recentness of their widespread integration into the profession, combined with the fact that turnover at supervisory, command and executive levels is slow by nature, it is clear to see why so few blacks are found in these types of positions. With the passage of time and the gradual retirement of existing white supervisors, it is expected that a greater number of blacks will be promoted to fill these vacancies. Until this shift occurs, however, the collective ability of blacks to establish widespread bases

72

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

of power necessary to influence the distribution of rewards and promotions is likely to remain limited.

General Observations Regarding Differential Treatment in Promotion Decisions Based upon review of the available literature, it is possible to draw several meaningful observations from the comments of those black officers interviewed by both Alex (1969) and Leinen (1984) regarding perceptions of fairness in law enforcement promotion decisions. For example, most of the officers interviewed by these two researchers did not place a high degree of confidence in the notion that promotion decisions were based upon the formal criteria of individual merit and ability. Rather, more weight was given by these men to informal criteria such as membership in a particular group or having connections with the “right people” in the “right places.” Also apparent was a sense that personal contacts with the potential to translate into future opportunities for promotion developed in informal settings away from the job. Unfortunately, early black officers were often excluded from these social activities thereby precluding them from developing the important relationships that might later help them obtain a promotion. Still other narrative comments indicated that it was difficult to substantiate claims of racial favoritism due to the fact that such practices were carried out in very subtle ways. Perhaps realizing the difficulty of altogether eliminating favoritism from promotion decisions, there is evidence that some early officers began to rationalize its existence. In simple terms, they acquiesced that having connections with those who occupied positions of power constituted a legitimate means for achieving upward mobility. At the same time, however, they recognized that other factors sometimes intervened in the decisionmaking process. Among these were expectations that they refrain from “rocking the boat” on sensitive issues, conform to “white values,” and substantially outperform others against whom they were competing for promotion. Finally, the question remains unresolved as to whether or not their status as relative “newcomers” within the profession is widely accepted as an explanation for their numerical under-representation in various supervisory capacities.

Institutional Barriers to Widespread Promotion

73

The Importance of Maintaining Positive Relations with White Superiors Given the belief among early black officers that speaking out on sensitive issues had the potential to limit future opportunities for promotion, combined with the perception that white supervisors intentionally targeted them for disciplinary action, the relationship between members of these two groups could only be described as one that was tenuous at best. In essence, some black officers felt as though they received less support from white supervisors than other officers. Evidence for this type of concern is apparent in one officer’s comment to Leinen (1984): Treated equally? That’s not an easy question, because basically I feel yes and no. On the job level I think yes. When you drop down to the individual level, say with some white sergeants, I would be inclined to say absolutely not. What I’m directly thinking of here relates to a couple of experiences I personally observed with white sergeants who turned their backs on black cops who I guess you might say found themselves in a ticklish situation . . . I feel that if you’re black and this one sergeant in particular is working, you’ve got a problem. You’re on your own. I get the feeling that if I personally ran into a ticklish situation and he knew it was me involved, he’d be in the wind or if I was dead wrong he’d look to stick one up my ass [prefer formal department charges]. Fortunately, we don't have this problem anymore because he just got transferred (p. 60-61). Interestingly, however, the perception among black officers that white supervisors did not equally support them may not have been as widespread as initially suspected. Rather, some of the men interviewed by Leinen (1984) indicated that the degree of support they received - or failed to receive - from a supervisor was dictated by the nature of the situation more than anything else. As one officer explained his thoughts on the issue: Again, I’m not sure whether it’s color that matters here so much. Both groups I think have common problems that are

74

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives founded in fact . . . I think it boils down to the fact that some bosses today haven’t had the experience some of the younger men have had. They seem to disappear when the going gets rough. They don’t back their men at all. How many supervisors do you see today going down to the trial room to testify on behalf of a cop brought up on bullshit charges? I’ll tell you, very few. They’re afraid to stick their necks out. They’re afraid they’ll lose their spot [detective superior designation] if things go bad. This is especially true with those bosses who have the money [e.g., a detective sergeant or lieutenant who is receiving special compensation because of his supervisory position within the detective bureau] (Leinen, 1984, p. 61).

General Observations Regarding Relations with White Superiors In sum, Leinen (1984) identified contradictory perceptions within the sample of black officers he interviewed regarding the degree of administrative support they received from supervisors of the opposite race. For example, some of the officers felt as though white supervisors intentionally failed to provide them with administrative support in “ticklish” situations solely on the basis of their racial differences. A second group of officers rejected this accusation, reasoning instead that any real or perceived lack of administrative support by white supervisors was largely a function of the situation rather than any racial differences between the two parties. This apparent contradiction in the existing literature presents an interesting research question in need of further examination and reconciliation. Specifically, it should be determined which of these two beliefs has been most prevalent over the years in the minds of another sample of black officers. A second dimension in need of further exploration is the extent to which black officers preferred interacting with supervisors of their own race in problematic situations. Finally, whether or not early black officers believed that approaching a white supervisor with a problem placed them at risk for being viewed in a negative light remains to be explored. Assessing each of these dimensions more fully promises to provide interested scholars of policing with a better understanding of how black officers viewed their early working relations with supervisors of the opposite race.

CHAPTER 8

A Tentative Notion of the Black Executive’s Working World

Although the available literature has given interested scholars a narrow glimpse into the early working world of black law enforcement officers, it has provided virtually no insight whatsoever into the collective experiences of those pioneers who have since ascended to positions of supervisory, command or executive responsibility within what continues to be a largely white-dominated profession. Simply stated, the existing literature has altogether failed to explore the beliefs, perceptions and attitudes of black supervisory, command and executive personnel on a number and variety of arguably important as well as theoretically interesting career-related dimensions. The reason for this lack of attention may be at least partly traced to the erroneous belief among scholars of policing that the narrative accounts reported by Alex (1969) and Leinen (1984) were generally representative of all black officers across the nation irrespective of their rank or position within the organizational hierarchy. Careful reading of these and other works, however, provide ample reason to believe otherwise. In fact, the next 75

76

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

several pages will demonstrate that the career experiences of black supervisory, command and executive personnel have the potential to differ quite significantly from those of line personnel in several key respects. In doing so, readers as well as interested researchers will be exposed to a tentative and hopefully more theoretically complete understanding of the unique career experiences believed to be shared among members of this particular segment within the larger law enforcement community.

Relations with White Subordinates Although the available literature does not specifically address this dimension, it is nonetheless firmly believed that black supervisory, command and executive personnel experience strained relations with subordinates of the opposite race. Indirect evidence for this belief stems, in large part, from earlier reports indicating a strong dislike among white officers for their black counterparts. In essence, astute readers will surely recall from earlier review of the literature that white officers viewed black officers with a high degree of outward contempt and hostility, oftentimes characterizing them as “tokens” that did not really deserve to be on the job. Given this knowledge, it certainly does not require a huge stretch of the imagination to believe that these feelings are even more pronounced among whites toward black superiors. Although the literature has not yet directly proven this point, it may nonetheless be hypothesized that black supervisory, command and executive personnel not only experience trouble relating to white subordinates based upon racial differences with one another, but also have trouble gaining their respect and compliance. Arising from this is a situation in which black superiors, finally given legitimate authority over white subordinates, are perhaps even more vehemently and outwardly rejected than ever before. Because this hypothesis has not yet been acknowledged and fully explored within the available literature by scholars of police behavior, it seems entirely appropriate to suggest that efforts be immediately undertaken to assess the extent to which such strained relations pose negative consequences in the minds of black supervisory, command and executive law enforcement personnel.

A Tentative Notion of the Black Executive’s Working World

77

Relations with White Supervisory Peers By this time, it should be readily apparent that black law enforcement personnel not only experienced considerable rejection from white officers when they first came on the job, but that such problems had the potential to become more exacerbated as these pioneers advanced throughout the organizational or professional hierarchy. In particular, it was suggested in the foregoing section that black supervisory, command and executive personnel would report experiencing strained relations with white subordinates who may very likely view them as lacking any legitimate source of authority. To make matters even worse, black supervisors may experience the same problems in their interactions with white peers of equivalent rank. That is - although the available literature fails to directly touch on this possibility - it seems entirely tenable to suggest that the rejection and social isolation characteristic of early relations between officers of the two races has the potential to “follow” blacks throughout the course of their law enforcement careers as they advance through each level of the hierarchy. Consequently, it is hypothesized that black supervisory, command and executive personnel not only experience isolation and rejection from white subordinates, but that much the same is true regarding the nature of their relations with supervisory peers of the opposite race. Because so little attention has been given to understanding the collective experiences of this beleaguered minority, the extent to which this hypothesis temporally derived from review of the literature actually holds true in the real world remains unknown. In the interest of developing positive working relations between supervisory, command and executive personnel of both races, scholars of policing should strive toward a more complete understanding of this particular career dimension. Unfortunately, the available literature does not provide any empirical data from which a sound conclusion or guidance on the issue may be drawn. It therefore becomes the task of researchers to undertake efforts aimed at better understanding the nature and extent of this particular phenomenon. In the absence of doing so, law enforcement agencies may - if they have not already - become unnecessarily hampered in their long-term effectiveness by allowing interracial tension and acrimony to infect other levels of the professional hierarchy.

78

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

Other Working World Experiences In addition to the hypothetical belief that black law enforcement personnel at all levels of the organizational and professional hierarchy experience social isolation and rejection from subordinates and supervisory peers of the opposite race, logic suggests they confront the same problems in their relations with members of several otherwise unlikely groups such as black subordinates, the black community, as well as their own families and friends. This expectation is also derived from careful reading of the available literature which, although it does not specifically address the issue, provides astute scholars of police behavior with various indications that such might be the case. To illustrate this point, recall momentarily the reports of other researchers indicating the high degree of contempt that members of the black community had for black police officers. Combine this with the possibility that even black subordinates might view their own black superiors as having “sold out” to the department’s white values simply to obtain an elevation in professional status, and it is not difficult to see how easily it would be to quickly become alienated from these important reference and support groups. In the absence of any direct empirical literature supporting this hypothetical but highly tenable line of reasoning, scholars of police behavior are left not knowing if black supervisory, command and executive personnel actually experience problems of alienation and rejection from members of these arguably vital reference groups. If, as is expected to be the case, they do experience strained relations with black subordinates, members of the black community as well as family and friends, then blacks who occupy positions within the profession’s upper echelon have been left with no choice but to deal as best they can on their own with what can only be imagined as an overwhelming and tragic sense of isolation from the world. Given the potential for such negative consequence arising from a failure to acknowledge this problem, it becomes imperative that interested researchers pursue this hypothetical line of inquiry in such a manner that allows them a glimpse not only into this particular dimension of the working world experiences of black law enforcement supervisory, command and executive personnel, but also those previously identified within the present section.

A Tentative Notion of the Black Executive’s Working World

79

Tentative Observations Regarding the Black Police Executive’s Working World Collectively, the foregoing paragraphs within this section have asserted that black supervisory, command and executive personnel experience strained relations with a number and variety of important groups beyond those previously identified in the literature. In essence, it is believed that members of this beleaguered minority not only suffer rejection and social isolation from white officers when they first enter the profession, but that such problems have a tendency to “follow” them throughout the course of their careers. For example, logic suggests that if white officers on average view black officers as “tokens” who do not really deserve to be on the job, then they are likely to hold the same views about those blacks who occupy supervisory positions within the organizational hierarchy. In fact, this racial animosity may be so pronounced that black supervisors not only have trouble simply relating to white subordinates under their command based upon racial differences, but also find it difficult at times to gain their full compliance. Furthermore, black supervisors are also believed to face ostracism from supervisory peers of the opposite race who might also regard them as tokens and refuse to treat them as equals or include them in social activities. Finally, it is also suspected that black supervisory, command and executive personnel experience strained relations with members of several other reference groups such as subordinate black officers, the black community and perhaps even family and friends. Despite being based upon sound logic, these beliefs have yet to receive serious attention by researchers of police behavior. Given the presumed negative consequences likely to emerge from these strained relations with members of various reference groups, it becomes imperative that scholars acknowledge and attempt to narrow this gap within existing knowledge. Once the nature of these hypothesized relations has been explored, a more theoretically complete understanding of the working world experiences of black law enforcement executives can be developed. Before describing one useful method for achieving this understanding, it is important that consideration be given to one last dimension related to the career experiences of all black law enforcement personnel.

This page intentionally left blank

CHAPTER 9

The Research Initiative

Based upon review of the literature combined with limited instances of well-reasoned speculation, there exists a need to conduct research aimed at better understanding the collective career experiences of black law enforcement professionals. At present, information surrounding this issue is largely constrained to two studies involving especially small numbers of participants from the NYPD carried out, at least in one instance, over three decades ago. While undeniably providing scholars of policing with a narrow “glimpse” into the experiences of this beleaguered minority, the results of these two studies have never been confirmed using independent samples of black officers from other departments or historical eras. Consequently, there abounds much information about the experiences of black police officers that, at best, can only be presumed as true. If, however, this “common knowledge” is found to be incorrect after all this time, then scholars of police behavior have committed a grave error by blindly operating under misguided assumptions. To exacerbate this problem, there exists virtually no information whatsoever about the collective career experiences of those blacks who have since ascended to positions of 81

82

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

supervisory, command and executive responsibility within the law enforcement profession. In order to fully understand the philosophies that guide the behavior of this increasingly influential population, it is necessary to develop an appreciation for their collective career experiences. Along these lines, it should first be determined how closely the early work experiences of a separate sample of black law enforcement professionals resemble those previously reported by other researchers in the available literature. Assuming that these two sets of accounts will roughly parallel one another with perhaps only slight departure on a few minor points, the next step should involve assessing the perceived nature of their more recent relations with members of various reference and support groups such as subordinate personnel of both races, white supervisory peers, members of the black community as well as family and friends. In essence, the major expectation underlying such an inquiry is that at virtually all stages of their careers, black supervisory, command and executive personnel experience social isolation and rejection from each of these groups. Finally, the black law enforcement professionals of interest are also uniquely capable of providing interested researchers of police behavior with insight into what they perceive as obstacles to the goal of achieving racial equality within the profession. Given these mandates, the following chapter sets forth a method by which the answers to such pressing questions were sought, obtained and analyzed.

General Research Objectives Based upon the preceding literature review, it becomes apparent that little is readily known regarding the collective career experiences of black command and executive personnel within the law enforcement profession. Compounding this weakness is the fact that the limited amount of knowledge that is available on the more general subject of blacks in American law enforcement is constrained in terms of its external validity. Specifically, most inquiries into the experiences of blacks in law enforcement were conducted between fifteen to thirty years ago. To be sure, conditions surrounding integration of the profession have since changed and are, therefore, in need of reconsideration. Compounding this primary weakness is the fact that these early studies were focused so narrowly that attention was only given to a small handful of officers from New York City and other

The Research Initiative

83

select metropolitan police departments. While such accounts undeniably provided researchers of policing with a valuable glimpse into the obstacles these “pioneers” confronted early in their careers, in no way can they be safely generalized to the collective career experiences of other black law enforcement personnel from different geographic regions, types of agencies or even those from more recent generations. Finally, even if this early body of literature were generalizable to other blacks within the profession, it remains limited by the fact that attention was only given to the experiences of line personnel - mostly patrol officers and a few detectives. Consequently, little if any is known about the collective career experiences of those blacks that have since ascended to positions of supervisory, command or executive leadership within the profession. At best, current knowledge regarding the career experiences of blacks within law enforcement is limited to research involving only a handful of patrollevel officers from select agencies carried out, in some instances, as long as three decades ago. In response to these apparent gaps in existing knowledge, this study constituted an in-depth examination of the collective career experiences of those blacks that have since ascended to positions of supervisory, command and executive leadership within the profession. As such, its objectives were multi-fold. First, it was designed to assess the external validity of several earlier studies cited above. In doing so, it both asks and answers the question “To what extent have black law enforcement supervisory, command and executive personnel experienced conditions of employment similar to those previously depicted by other researchers within the available literature?” This initial objective was given substantive attention by six (6) research questions and attending hypotheses, all of which are more fully elaborated below. The study’s second objective was to gain a more complete understanding and appreciation for the collective career experiences of black law enforcement personnel who have since advanced beyond the patrol level to assume positions of supervisory, command and executive leadership within the profession. As the number of black men and women occupying these types of positions within the profession continues to grow, it becomes not only theoretically interesting but vitally important to understand their beliefs, perceptions and attitudes regarding a myriad of race-related issues likely to affect the evolution of

84

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

future personnel practices within the field. In particular, the importance of developing this understanding becomes even more significant when one stops to consider the fact that blacks now lead many of the nation’s law enforcement agencies. Because so little is currently known about the experiences of black supervisory, command and executive personnel, numerous questions arise. For example - What has been the nature of their perceived relations with subordinates and supervisory peers of the opposite race? What has it been like to serve as a black supervisor in a largely white-dominated profession? What are their perceptions regarding differential treatment between the races in the application of performance, discipline and promotion criteria? What are their views regarding the current state of working relations between black and white officers? These and other areas of inquiry formed a basis for the study’s second objective which was addressed by four (4) research questions and attending hypotheses. Overarching these two objectives was a third that sought to determine how far, if at all, law enforcement has progressed toward the goal of fair and equitable treatment between members of the two races (i.e., blacks and whites). Although there certainly exist a number and variety of methods for making such an assessment, the present study accomplished this objective by examining statistical differences in the pattern of responses obtained from a sample of black supervisory, command and executive law enforcement personnel who entered the profession prior to or during 1980 as compared to those who entered later.8 The results of these analyses are reported in Chapter Four.

Specific Research Questions and Hypotheses The study’s three broad objectives are elaborated through a series of eleven (11) research questions. Research questions one through six pertained to the first objective, while the next five questions (#’s 7-10) addressed the second objective. Research question number eleven addressed the study’s third objective. Each of these questions and their attending research hypotheses are more formally enumerated below. Research Objective #1 - The study seeks to assess through a series of six research questions (#’s 1-6 below) and attending hypotheses the extent to which black law enforcement supervisory, command and executive personnel have experienced conditions of employment similar to those previously depicted by other researchers within the available literature.

The Research Initiative

85

Research Question #1: How similar, if at all, are the perceptions of the present study’s sample to those previously reported in the available literature regarding the general nature of interracial working and social relations during the first five years of their careers? •

Hypothesis #1a: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report a perceived lack of social acceptance among white officers during the first five years of their careers.

•

Research Hypothesis #1b: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report the perception that white officers did not view them as equals during the first five years of their careers.

•

Research Hypothesis #1c: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report the development of mutual trust and confidence in the individual abilities of their racial counterparts.

•

Research Hypothesis #1d: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report the perception that officers of both races generally “tolerated” one another.

•

Research Hypothesis #1e: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report the perception that white officers held negative attitudes about them despite efforts to counteract racial stereotypes.

Research Question #2: How similar, if at all, are the perceptions of the present study’s sample to those previously reported in the available literature regarding unequal treatment and exploitation of black personnel by law enforcement agencies during the first five years of their careers? •

Research Hypothesis #2a: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report the perception that law enforcement agencies treated black personnel differently and trusted them less than white personnel.

86

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives •

Research Hypothesis #2b: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report the perception that membership in white groups or cliques to which black personnel were denied access played an important role in the distribution of various job-related rewards, privileges and favors.

•

Research Hypothesis #2c: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report perceptions of unequal treatment between the races in the distribution of assignments and requested transfers.

•

Research Hypothesis #2d: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report the perception that law enforcement agencies exploited black personnel to their own benefit in responding to both ghetto crime and demands from the minority community.

Research Question #3: How similar, if at all, are the perceptions of the present study’s sample to those previously reported in the available literature regarding the general nature of their interactions with members of both the black and white civilian communities during the first five years of their careers? •

Research Hypothesis #3a: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report experiencing social rejection by white civilians.

•

Research Hypothesis #3b: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report the perception that white civilians either failed or refused to acknowledge their lawful authority as officers.

•

Research Hypothesis #3c: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report the perception that black civilians were not supportive of the police in general.

•

Research Hypothesis #3d: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report the perception that black civilians did not respect black law enforcement personnel.

The Research Initiative

87

•

Research Hypothesis #3e: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report the perception that black civilians failed or refused to acknowledge their lawful authority as officers.

•

Research Hypothesis #3f: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report having experienced tension between competing sources for their loyalty (i.e., that which is expected by the black community and that which is expected by the law).

Research Question #4: How similar, if at all, are the perceptions of the present study’s sample to those previously reported in the available literature regarding the general issue of fairness between the races in performance evaluations? •

Research Hypothesis #4a: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will reject the inversely phrased assertion that performance evaluations play only a minor role in promotion decisions.

•

Research Hypothesis #4b: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will indicate perceptions on inequity between the races in the administration of performance evaluations conducted by white supervisors.

•

Research Hypothesis #4c: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will not only report the perception that black personnel were differentially discriminated against in the enforcement of administrative rules and regulations, but that such instances of discrimination were difficult to substantiate.

•

Research Hypothesis #4d: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report a perceived inadequacy in the availability of administrative remedies in instances where rules and regulations were suspected of being differentially enforced between the two races.

88

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

Research Question #5: How similar, if at all, are the perceptions of the present study’s sample to those previously reported in the available literature regarding the general issue of fairness between the races in the promotions process? •

Research Hypothesis #5a: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will disagree with the inversely phrased assertion that black officers receive their fair share of promotions.

•

Research Hypothesis #5b: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report the perception that favoritism and group membership play important roles in the promotions process.

•

Research Hypothesis #5c: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report feeling pressure to satisfy certain informal or unspoken prerequisites in order to be seriously considered for promotion.

•

Research Hypothesis #5d: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will agree with the proposition that racial tensions increase when black and white officers compete against one another for promotions.

•

Research Hypothesis #5e: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will disagree with the assertion that under-representation of blacks at higher supervisory levels is attributable to their status as relative “newcomers” within the profession.

Research Question #6: How similar, if at all, are the perceptions of the present study’s sample to those previously reported in the available literature regarding the nature and quality of relations with supervisors of both races? •

Research Hypothesis #6a: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will indicate a preference for interacting with supervisors of the same race rather than those of another.

The Research Initiative •

89

Research Hypothesis #6b: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report the perception that white supervisors treated and supported them differently than white officers.

Research Objective #2 - The study seeks to better understand through a series of five research questions (#’s 7-10 below) and attending hypotheses the collective career experiences of black law enforcement supervisory, command and executive personnel on a number of heretofore empirically unexplored dimensions such as: interpersonal relations with (1) white subordinates; (2) social and professional acceptance among white peers of equivalent rank; (4) changes in professional and social relations with others as a result of their supervisory status, and; (5) views regarding the current nature of interracial working relations. Research Question #7: What are the perceptions of the present study’s sample regarding the nature of their current or most recent relations with subordinate white personnel? •

Research Hypothesis #7a: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will indicate the belief that they have more difficulty relating with white than black subordinates.

•

Research Hypothesis #7b: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report a perceived lack of respect from white subordinates.

•

Research Hypothesis #7c: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report difficulty in gaining compliance from white subordinates due to their racial differences.

Research Question #8: What are the perceptions of the present study’s sample regarding the nature of their current or most recent relations with white supervisory peers of equivalent rank?

90

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives •

Research Hypothesis #8a: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will express the belief that white supervisory peers did not treat or regard them as equals.

•

Research Hypothesis #8b: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report experiencing a sense of social isolation and resentment from their white counterparts.

Research Question #9: To what extent do members of the present sample report experiencing altered relations with members of various groups such as subordinate personnel, the minority community, as well as family and friends? •

Research Hypothesis #9a: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report experiencing strained relations with subordinate black personnel since being promoted.

•

Research Hypothesis #9b: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report experiencing strained relations with subordinate white personnel since being promoted.

•

Research Hypothesis #9c: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report experiencing altered relations with members of the black community since being promoted

•

Research Hypothesis #9d: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report experiencing strained relations with friends, relatives and acquaintances since being promoted.

Research Question #10: What are the perceptions of the present study’s sample regarding the nature of current working relations between black and white law enforcement personnel? •

Research Hypothesis #10a: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will indicate the perception that

The Research Initiative

91

interracial working relations have improved over the past ten years. •

Research Hypothesis #10b: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will attribute improved interracial working relations to the gradual attrition of older white personnel from the profession.

•

Research Hypothesis #10c: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample will report the belief that some white law enforcement personnel continue to hold negative views about black officers.

Research Objective #3 - The study seeks to determine the extent to which law enforcement has advanced toward the goal of fair and equitable treatment between members of the two races as determined through an examination of statistical differences in the pattern of responses obtained from a sample of black supervisory, command and executive personnel who entered the profession prior to or during 1980 as compared to those who entered the following year (1981) or later. Research Question #11: To what extent, if any, does the historical era in which an individual entered law enforcement as a career9 facilitate an assessment of the relative progress made toward the goal of achieving racial integration within the profession? •

Research Hypothesis #11a: It is hypothesized that members of the present study’s sample who began their law enforcement careers prior to or during 1980 will be more likely than those who entered in later years (1981 or later) to report generally negative beliefs, perceptions and attitudes regarding the nature of their treatment, experiences and relations while members of the profession.

92

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

The Survey Instrument Review of the available literature led to formation of the specific research questions and accompanying hypotheses stated above. Subsequently, these questions and their respective hypotheses were more fully explored through a series of focused conversations with several law enforcement scholars, researchers, practitioners and executives of both races. From this process, a list of potential survey items addressing each research objective and hypothesis was generated. These items were in turn examined for temporal relevance and redundancy with additions, substitutions and deletions being made where necessary. Emerging from this process of continual refinement was a number of survey items determined to be as directly applicable as possible to each of the research questions and attending hypotheses. The instrument ultimately developed for use in the present study was the “Law Enforcement Executive Survey” (LEES). In essence, the LEES consisted of 82 Likert-type items10 divided into ten substantive areas or “dimensions” of inquiry. More specifically, the survey items examined participants’ beliefs, perceptions and attitudes regarding: •

Early working relationships and experiences with white officers (15 items);

•

Early experiences with differential treatment, trust and exploitation by their respective departments (12 items);

•

Early experiences and relationships with members of both the black and white civilian communities (7 items);

•

Recent experiences with differential treatment between members of the two races in performance evaluations (7 items);

•

Recent experiences with differential treatment between members of the two races in promotions (15 items);

•

Recent experiences and relationships with immediate supervisors of both races (5 items);

The Research Initiative

93

•

Recent experiences and relationships with subordinate personnel of the opposite race (4 items);

•

Recent experiences and relationships with supervisory peers of the opposite race (4 items);

•

Recent experiences as a supervisory, command and executive personnel (7 items);

•

Current working relations between personnel of both races (6 items).

In addition to this these general areas of inquiry, the following demographic data were also solicited from each participant: • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Age Gender Marital status Highest level of education attained Age at which first entered law enforcement Employment status (current or retired) Type of law enforcement agency by which they are/were employed State in which agency is/was located Current (most recent if retired) position Length of tenure in current (most recent if retired) position Number of sworn personnel under their command Estimated size of population served Annual salary (not family income) Pre-Testing of the Instrument

Prior to circulation, a near-final draft of the survey was pre-tested for identifiable errors, oversights, and other methodological “glitches.” This was accomplished by again asking a number of qualified experts in the methodology of survey research to closely examine the instrument for such issues as spelling, clarity, redundancy, formatting and construction errors, as well as sensitivity to any potentially offensive or problematic items. As a result of this process of reexamination and revision that occurred over the course of several

94

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

weeks, multiple items were deemed redundant and deleted, some misspelled words were caught and corrected, while other items were rephrased or more specifically operationalized in order to eliminate any ambiguity in interpretation. Once pre-testing was complete and all necessary revisions made, the final version of the instrument was professionally formatted and printed. This measure was taken in order to enhance the instrument’s overall appearance as a well-thought-out research project worthy of a busy professional’s time, attention and effort. Also included in the survey “booklet” was an introductory letter explaining the focus of the project signed at bottom by the Principal Investigator as well as several others whose professional affiliations were purposefully noted with the objective of increasing the response rate. Equally influential was a separate letter of endorsement written by noted historian and author Dr. Marvin Dulaney.

Collection of the Data A small number of respondents (18) initially completed the LEES while in attendance at a CEO development conference sponsored by the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives during the month of March 2000. Given the relatively limited number of participants present during this meeting, a mail strategy was adopted for purposes of establishing contact with additional members of the target population. In order to facilitate this approach, a list of all N.O.B.L.E. members designated as occupying “CEO” status was obtained from the organization’s national office. From this list, an additional 270 prospective participants were identified for inclusion in the study, bringing the final size of the target population to 288. Making use of the names and addresses provided by NOBLE, a cover letter, survey instrument, business card and postage-paid return envelope were mailed to each prospective participant. The cover letter explained the objective of the study - to examine the career experiences of African American law enforcement executives - as well as instructions for completing and returning the attached survey instrument. In order to facilitate follow-up with those who might fail to respond to this initial solicitation for involvement, a unique number was assigned to each survey. The purpose of this numbering system was also explained in the cover letter.

The Research Initiative

95

Over a period of several weeks, a large proportion of respondents returned the completed surveys through the mail as instructed. After an initial period of approximately six weeks, a follow-up reminder in the form of a postcard was sent by mail to those who had not yet responded to the initial solicitation for involvement.

Demographic and Background Characteristics of Participants Participants (n=123) for this study represent a purposive sample of black law enforcement command and executive personnel drawn from various federal (n=15, 12.2%), state (n=6, 4.9%), county (n=4, 3.3%), municipal (n=69, 56.1%) and institutional (n=29, 23.6%) branches of the profession. More specifically, participants were selected from a master list of NOBLE members classified as CEO’s where this term refers to law enforcement professionals occupying the rank of Lieutenant or above (or GS 13 and above in the federal civil service system). The total sample thus comprised 88 participants who categorized their rank as that of either Chief of Police, Superintendent or Sheriff, 7 as Special Agent in Charge (SAIC), 2 as Director, 11 as Assistant or Deputy Chief, 5 as Assistant Director, 1 as Division Chief, 4 as Captain, 1 as Major, 1 as Lieutenant, and 3 as Special Agent. The mean age at which participants reported entering the profession was 23.8 years with a low and high range of 17 to 45 years. The average length of tenure among participants in their current (if still employed, n = 104) or most recent (if retired, n = 19) position (not entire length of service in the profession) was 5.5 years, with a range of 1 to 27 years. As can be expected, there also existed considerable variation in the number of sworn personnel under each participant’s direct command. For example, the smallest number of subordinates under one’s command was a single individual while the largest number was a department with some 13,000 “plus” personnel. The mean number of personnel under the direct command of the collective sample was 561, with a median of 82 and mode of 10. Perhaps not surprisingly, 95.9% of those who responded were black males with the remainder (4.1%) representing a small handful of black females. The mean age of the complete sample was 50.7 years with a range of 29 to 75 years. A majority of participants (79.7%)

96

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

indicated that they were married, with those remaining either being single (5.7%) or separated / divorced (14.6%). In terms of education, the largest percentage of respondents (38.2%) possessed master degrees, with the second highest percentage (35%) possessing bachelor degrees. At the extremes of the educational distribution, 4 participants had earned a Ph.D. or other advanced degree. Those remaining had either earned a high school diploma or GED (n=3, 2.4%), some college hours (n=16, 13%), or an associate’s degree (n=10, 8.1%). Geographically speaking, participants represented law enforcement jurisdictions from 24 different states or, in the case of some federal employees, multi-state, regional or even nationwide jurisdiction. The modal response for the size of jurisdiction served was “over 1 million.” The modal response for annual, individual (not family) salary was the category of “over $100,001.”

Data Analysis Techniques The first form of statistical analysis applied to the obtained data involved the simple tabulation and reporting of frequencies for each survey item. By way of brief review, a frequency distribution is best described as a simple method by which numerical information may be both summarized and reported - i.e., it reveals the frequency with which each obtained score occurs within a given survey item’s response categories. Despite the fact that frequency distributions are sometimes regarded as statistically unsophisticated, it should be noted that the simplicity of this technique is indeed its greatest strength. This is particularly true in the case of exploratory research such as that which was undertaken by the present study. In this specific endeavor, the patterns of obtained frequency distributions are very telling. For example, they allow both the researcher and reader to assess the relative magnitude and direction of survey respondents’ reactions to individual survey items, some of which are dramatic whereas others are not. This ability to examine the nature of responses becomes valuable in two notable regards - First, it allows the researcher to at least draw rough comparisons between participants’ reactions to individual survey items and those which have been previously noted elsewhere; Secondly, it helps to identify certain items, dimensions or topics that are in need of further empirical elaboration and exploration through more focused or sophisticated methodological strategies. Given this potential contribution to the exploratory research endeavor, the analysis and

The Research Initiative

97

reporting of the pattern of frequency responses obtained for each survey item constitutes a major portion of the results to be reported in Chapter Four. In addition to the reporting of frequency patterns, the data analysis plan also involved the application of a second statistical technique Pearson’s chi-square - for purposes of fulfilling the study’s third major research objective which seeks to determine if true statistical differences exist in the pattern of responses provided to survey items by two distinct groups of participants. As noted, the LEES contained 82 items formatted into Likert-style responses. The nature of this data is, therefore, most accurately described as “non-metric’ or “categorical” in nature. Because of the inherent limitations in the types of statistical analyses that can be applied to data sets based upon the ordinal level of measurement, the most appropriate technique for identifying the anticipated differences in response patterns between groups of participants is chi-square. This method of statistical analysis has found widespread application in such situations due to the ease with which it can be both computed and interpreted. In essence, the null hypothesis for the chi-square test states that two categorical variables are statistically independent - that is, that they have no dependent relationship with one another. Of course, departures from independence are to be expected simply by chance alone. Thus, when departure from independence does occur, the question becomes one of determining whether or not this is due to chance alone or if, in fact, there is a true departure from the assumed model of statistical independence. In reporting the results that follow, chi-square analysis is applied to independent variables with two categories and dependent variables with three categories. Observed and expected cell values are computed. To the extent that similarities or differences between these two values are obtained, it will then be determined whether or not the two variables are, respectively, independent or dependent of one another. While the obtained chi-square statistic itself has no inherently interpretable meaning, what can be said is that as this value increases, there exists a greater departure from the chance / null model. At this point, determining the magnitude of departure constituting a true statistical difference becomes possible through examination of a chisquare distribution and table of critical values at the appropriate degrees of freedom where df = (number of rows - 1) x (number of columns - 1). If the obtained chi-square coefficient exceeds the critical tabled value at

98

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

the desired level of significance (p<.05, for example) with the appropriate degrees of freedom, then the null hypothesis of statistical independence between the two variables is rejected and it is instead concluded that a true difference exists. One issue that sometimes arises in chi-square analysis is the problem of "thin cells." Specifically, the probability density function upon which the model is based begins to break down when greater than twenty-five percent (25%) of the cells within a derived contingency table manifest expected values less than five (5). A distorted probability density function may lead to an erroneous conclusion regarding whether or not the null hypothesis should be retained or otherwise rejected. Fortunately, there exists a statistical remedy to this problem. In essence, the correction involves subtracting 0.5 from each calculation of the difference between expected and observed cell frequencies. This adjustment for continuity is not generally required, however, when contingency tables are larger than 2x2 in size due to the fact that "corrected" and "uncorrected" chi-square values do not tend to differ greatly from one another. To the extent that all of the chi-square tables in the analysis that follows are larger than 2x2 in size, corrections for continuity are unnecessary. In simple terms, a corrected chi-square value is not likely to be that different from a model that has not been adjusted for continuity (Ritchey, 2000). Accordingly, the potential weakness of "thin cells" in the following analysis is minimal.

The Problem of Non-Response A total of 288 survey instruments were initially distributed to members of the target population (18 of these in-person at the CEO development conference and another 270 using the mail strategy). Of these, 123 were completed and returned resulting in a response rate of 43%. While clearly providing an adequate basis for purposes of drawing conclusions regarding the collective career experiences of a significant number of African American law enforcement executives, the question of nonresponse must be addressed. Quite frankly, it is believed that the problem of non-response within the context of this study is directly attributable to the length of the survey instrument. This, combined with the rather demanding daily schedule imposed upon most law enforcement executives from both large and small jurisdictions likely resulted in some prospective respondents disregarding the solicitation for involvement as too time-consuming. Here, the qualitative comment

The Research Initiative

99

of one prospective participant whose involvement was solicited inperson several months following the initial mailing is insightful. He commented: “You mailed me this thick @$$ survey which takes forever to complete and I just don’t have the time.” In all fairness, however, this reaction is certainly valid - police chiefs and other law enforcement executives are extremely busy professionals with a myriad of more demanding priorities than completing a lengthy survey surely to be only one of many that they receive on a frequent basis. A second factor perhaps accounting for the problem of nonresponse is the possibility that the survey instrument never made it all the way to its intended destination - the chief, sheriff, special agent in charge or other party of interest. In particular, it is not uncommon for many law enforcement command and executive personnel to have administrative assistants or secretaries who as a matter of practice “screen” all incoming correspondence for relevance and priority. It is therefore possible that a secretary or assistant decided on their own accord that the chief or other intended recipient would not be bothered with such solicitations for his/her time. In only one instance was it apparent, based upon known demographic data as compared to that which was provided by the respondent, that a prospective respondent delegated completion of the survey instrument to another individual with the department. Even in this isolated instance, however, the respondent was still of interest for purposes of the present study - that is, the party that responded was both African American as well as a member of the agency’s command-level staff. A third explanation for why some prospective participants may have failed to respond may be traced to the fact that each survey instrument was assigned a unique identifying number for purposes of facilitating follow-up. This, combined with the suspiciousness characteristic of many law enforcement personnel may have resulted in a certain degree of uneasiness about the confidentiality of their responses on such a sensitive topic as race relations.

The Problem of Missing Data In some instances, data are categorized as “missing” on certain survey items - i.e., a participant did not provide a response to the question asked. Examination of data during the entry phase seemed to indicate a clear explanation underlying this phenomenon within the present context. In particular, it was noted that a small number of respondents

100

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

“skipped” a page and its facing contents. It is firmly believed that this “skipping” of items is directly attributable to the thickness - or lack thereof - of the paper upon which the survey was printed. That is, it appears as though participants “turned an extra page” when they perhaps did not intend to do so, thereby inadvertently skipping two pages of items. It was also noted during the data entry phase that one or two items at the end of a given section were inadvertently “skipped” by the respondent. The apparent explanation for this occurrence is to be found, again, in the instrument’s construction. Specifically, all items were single-spaced with only a limited amount of “vertical” font space between them thereby resulting in a situation where the last item in a section blended together and may have simply been “overlooked.” There are, according to the literature (Hair, Anderson, Tatham & Black, 1995), several methods for dealing with the problem of missing data. For example, the researcher may impute the mean response of other participants to those that are absent. The weakness of this particular approach as well as some others is to be found in accurately representing the true nature of the data. Because the incidence of missing responses in the present data set is so limited - on any given variable there were only one or two responses out of the total which were missing - it was determined that no such remedy or manipulation of the true data was necessary. Thus, the occurrence of missing responses in the present data set is limited to such a small number of cases that, on balance, the researcher felt that the best approach was to simply leave the missing data as it naturally occurred. Despite the rarity of this occurrence, the issue nonetheless bears mentioning for purposes of making future improvements to the instrument.

CHAPTER 10

Research Findings

Early Working and Social Relations with White Officers The initial section of the LEES was designed to answer the research question “How similar, if at all, are the perceptions of the present study’s sample to those previously reported in the available literature regarding the general nature of interracial working and social relations during the first five years of their careers?” In pursuing this line of inquiry, five specific hypotheses were formulated. The first of these predicted that respondents would relate experiences similar to those found in the existing literature regarding a perceived lack of social acceptance by white officers (#1a above). The second hypothesis expected to find the perception among respondents that white officers did not view them as equals (#1b above). Two other hypotheses asserted that, consistent with the available literature, participants would not only indicate the development of mutual trust and confidence in the individual abilities of their racial counterparts (#1c above), but that officers of both races generally “tolerated” one another (#1d above). 101

102

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

Finally, it was predicted that members of the sample would report the perception that despite efforts to counteract racial stereotypes, negative attitudes toward them persisted nonetheless (#1e above). Social Acceptance Among White Colleagues As noted, the first hypothesis (#1a above) predicted that study participants would report a perceived lack of social acceptance among white officers during the first five years of their careers. The extent to which this particular hypothesis held true was assessed by examining the pattern of responses obtained from a series of five items. As anticipated, greater than one-half (52.5%) of participants collectively disagreed with the inversely-worded proposition that they felt welcome around white officers during their first five years on the job. A notably larger percentage (70.5%) manifested combined disagreement with a second inversely worded item suggesting that it was easy for them to be accepted for membership in white groups or cliques. With regard to describing the perceived nature of their off-duty relations with white officers, three out of every four respondents (75.4%) agreed there was little social interaction between members of the two races while two out of three (67.7%) indicated the belief that relations with one another differed while away from the job. Contrary to expectation, however, a larger percentage of respondents (46.7%) collectively agreed than disagreed (41%) with the proposition that they felt comfortable around white officers in social situations. Thus, only one of the five items used to assess this dimension of participants’ early career relations with white officers did not logically coincide with the stated hypothesis. In addition to these general findings, the results of chi-square analysis reported in Table I revealed that participants differed in their responses to several items depending upon when they first entered the profession. For example, not only were those respondents who came on the job prior to or during 1980 less likely to report feeling welcome around white officers than others who entered the field more recently (Pearson’s chi-square = 9.558, df = 2, p = .008), but they were also less likely to report feeling comfortable around their racial counterparts in social situations (Pearson’s chi-square = 7.514, df = 2, p = .023). Participants who entered the field in 1980 or earlier were also more likely to report that it was difficult to gain access to white groups or cliques (Pearson’s chi-square = 15.143, df = 2, p = .001) and that there

Research Findings

103

was little social interaction between members of the two groups while off duty (Pearson’s chi-square = 13.213, df = 2, p = .001). Table I. Chi-square analysis of perceived social and working relations with white officers. Survey Group Collectively Undecided Collectivey Item Membersh Agree fo (fe ) Disagree ip fo (fe ) fo (fe ) Felt 1980 & 36 (41.8) 10 (10.7) 54 (47.5) welcome earlier around white 1981 & 15 (9.2) 3 (2.3) 4 (10.5) officers later Felt 1980 & 41 (46.7) 13 (12.3) 46 (41) comfortable earlier in social 1981 & 16 (10.3) 2 (2.7) 4 (9) situations later Easily accepted into white groups or cliques Little social contact w/ white officers outside of the job

1980 & earlier

12 (15.6)

10 (13.9)

78 (70.5)

7 (3.4)

7 (3.1)

8 (15.5)

1980 & earlier

82 (75.4)

4 (4.9)

14 (19.7)

1981 & later

10 (16.6)

2 (1.1)

10 (4.3)

1981 & later

Based upon the pattern of frequency responses obtained from the preceding items, there exists support for the prediction that members of the present sample would report a perceived lack of social acceptance among white counterparts during their first five years on the job (#1a above). This conclusion is consistent with experiences previously reported by others in the reviewed literature. Alone, however, a finding of support for the stated hypothesis provides only partial insight into the perceived nature of respondents’ early working relations with white

104

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

officers. Only through balanced evaluation of the three remaining hypotheses within this section can a more complete and accurate understanding of these experiences be developed. Accordingly, attention now turns to analysis of respondents’ perceptions regarding whether or not white officers initially viewed them as equals. Perceptions of Equality A second hypothesis (#1b above) explored within this section of the instrument anticipated that respondents would report the perception that white officers did not regard them as “equals” during their first five years on the job. Two items were developed and included to test this prediction. Analysis of responses obtained for the first item revealed a collective belief among 57.4% of participants that white officers did not regard them as equals. A second item further revealed that 51.6% of participants collectively agreed with the assertion that white officers viewed them as “tokens” that did not really deserve to be on the job. Disaggregation of the data using chi-square analysis, the results of which are reported in Table II, revealed that participants who came on the job prior to or during 1980 were more likely than these who did so later to indicate the belief that white officers did not regarded them as equals during the first five years of their careers (Pearson’s chi-square = 11.897, df = 2, p = .003). Table II. Chi-square analysis of perceived equality. Survey Group Collectively Undecided Item Membership Agree fo (fe ) fo (fe ) Felt 1980 & 22 (23.8) 14 (18.9) regarded earlier as an 1981 & 7 (5.2) 9 (4.1) equal by later white officers

Collectivey Disagree fo (fe ) 64 (57.4) 6 (12.6)

Frequency responses obtained for these two items lend support to the hypothesis that participants would report the belief that white officers did not regard them as equals during the first five years on the job. These findings also affirm the external validity of previous studies on this particular dimension. While such findings are indeed insightful,

Research Findings

105

three hypotheses of interest remain to be examined within this section. Respectively, these center upon respondents’ perceptions of interracial trust, tolerance and animosity. Developing Mutual Trust and Confidence in Professional Abilities A third hypothesis (#1c above) included in this section of the instrument for purposes of assessing the external validity of earlier research findings stated that participants would report developing a sense of mutual trust and confidence in the professional abilities of their racial counterparts, especially when it came to assisting one another in emergency situations. In simple terms, it was not only expected that respondents would report a high degree of willingness to assist white officers in emergency situations despite racial differences with one another, but that they were confident white officers would do the same for them in return. It was thus firmly anticipated that members of the sample would stand by the principle that “when the chips are down and things go bad, cops will always help one another” irrespective of race. This prediction was tested through the inclusion of three items. Examination of the responses obtained for each of these revealed several notable findings. Primary among them was a belief manifested by seven out of every ten participants (70.5%) that white patrol officers trusted their individual abilities in dangerous situations. Also revealed was an indication by almost every single respondent (98.4%) that they would go to the aid of a white officer in need of assistance even if that officer had expressed racist or bigoted views in the past. Perhaps most important from the perspective of survey respondents, however, was the belief among roughly nine out of every ten (89.3%) that white officers could be depended upon to come to their aid in emergency situations. Finally, chi-square analysis did not identify any statistically significant differences in the pattern of observed responses for the three items used to assess this dimension of participants’ early career relationships with white officers. This suggests that members of the present sample were clearly willing to set aside their racial differences with white officers and unquestionably go to the aid of one another whenever the “chips were down.” Accordingly, it is safe to conclude that the present hypothesis (#1c above) was supported by the data. It remains important, however, to explore the dimension of racial

106

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

tolerance - or lack thereof - in order to fully understand the perceived nature of early interracial working relations. Racial Tolerance Although prior research depicted a somewhat inhospitable working environment for black officers during the early years of professional integration, the same body of literature has suggested that members of the two races essentially learned to “tolerate” one another. This assertion derived from the reports of other researchers formed a foundation for the fourth hypothesis (#1d above) assessed by way of examining the responses obtained from two survey items. Analysis of the data for these items revealed that a clear and sometimes overwhelming majority of the present sample (82%) agreed that black and white officers generally “tolerated” one another while exactly onehalf (50%) agreed that their working relationship with one another during the first five years “was basically a good one.” Disaggregation of the data obtained for these two items through the application of chi-square further revealed that participants who entered police work as a career prior to or during 1980 were less likely than those who came on the job in later years to agree with the proposition that their early working relationship with white officers was basically a good one (Pearson’s chi-square = 8.188, df = 2, p = .017). These results are reported in Table III. Table III. Chi-square analysis of perceived racial tolerance. Survey Group Collectively Undecided Collectivey Item Membership Agree fo (fe ) Disagree fo (fe ) fo (fe ) Working relations 1980 & 44 (50) 15 (13.9) 41 (36.1) with earlier white officers were 1981 & 17 (11) 2 (3.1) 3 (7.9) basically later good Taken in context with one another, the frequency results obtained for these two items affirm the hypothesis (#1d above) predicting that

Research Findings

107

members of the sample would manifest the collective belief that officers of the two races generally tolerated one another during the early years of their careers. The additional finding that participants who came on the job before 1980 were less inclined than others who came on the job since then to agree with the assertion that working relations between the two races were “basically good” identifies an opportunity for future research into the underlying causes for this divergence in perceptions. In the meantime, however, results obtained from the last dimension of inquiry within this section of the instrument require attention. Persistence of Negative Racial Attitudes The final hypothesis tested within this section (#1e above) predicted that members of the present sample would manifest a belief that many white officers harbored persistent negative attitudes about blacks. This prediction was tested through inclusion of three survey items. Analysis of the data obtained from this line of inquiry not only revealed that two-fifths of respondents (40.2%) suspected that white officers held latent racist views, but that eight out of ten (82%) also believed that white officers manifested discrepancy between what they said but actually felt about blacks. Finally, it was also determined that roughly seven out of ten study participants (69.4%) were convinced that white officers would continue to hold negative stereotypical views about blacks no matter how hard one worked to dispel them. Comparison between predicted versus obtained responses for these three items based upon when respondents first entered the profession did not reveal any statistically significant departures from the null chi-square model. The pattern of responses obtained from study participants for these three final items supported the stated hypothesis (#1e above). To be sure, the fact that greater than eight out of ten participants manifested the belief that white officers exhibited discrepancy between what they said and really felt about blacks provides an adequate basis for concluding that tensions and divisiveness between the two groups ran much deeper than the eye or ear could easily detect. Taken in context with one another, the salient findings derived from each of the five preceding areas of inquiry (social acceptance, equality, mutual trust & confidence, racial tolerance, persistence of negative attitudes) provide an answer to the first major research question which asked “How similar, if at all, are the perceptions of the

108

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

present study’s sample to those previously reported in the available literature regarding the general nature of interracial working and social relations during the first five years of their careers?” Specifically, it was determined that survey respondents not only perceived a lack of social acceptance among white officers but also manifested responses consistent with the belief that they were not regarded as equals during the first five years on the job. Fortunately, however, participants indicated the collective belief that black and white officers were able set their racial differences aside and help one another in dangerous situations. Also encouraging was the finding that members of the two races generally “tolerated” each other. Less encouraging was the sense among many study participants that white officers harbored negative racial attitudes toward them despite efforts to dispel such views. These findings are all generally consistent with existing reports suggesting that the first five years of a black officer’s law enforcement career were often characterized by strained working and inter-personal relations with officers of the opposite race.

Early Treatment of Black Officers by Police Departments The second section of the LEES addressed the research question “How similar, if at all, are the perceptions of the present study’s sample to those previously reported in the available literature regarding the unequal treatment and exploitation of black personnel by law enforcement agencies during the first five years of their careers?” This inquiry was facilitated through the development and testing of four distinct hypotheses. Examined first was the hypothesis (#2a above) that members of the sample would manifest the perception that law enforcement agencies treated them differently and trusted them less than white personnel. A second hypothesis (#2b above) expected participants to report that membership in white groups or cliques to which they had been denied access played an important role in the distribution of various job-related rewards, privileges, and favors. The third hypothesis (#2c above) expected respondents to report perceptions of unequal treatment between races in the distribution of assignments and requested transfers, while the final hypothesis (#2d above) expected to uncover the belief that law enforcement agencies exploited black personnel to their own benefit in responding to both ghetto crime and demands from the minority community.

Research Findings

109

Perceptions of Differential Treatment & Trust As stated, the first hypothesis (#2a above) expected participants to report the perception that law enforcement agencies treated them differently and trusted them less than their white counterparts. This prediction was tested through the inclusion of two narrowly focused items. Greater than two-thirds of respondents (68%) not only manifested collective disagreement with the proposition that departments treated them the same as white officers, but three out of every five (59.9%) also disagreed with the assertion that departments trusted black and white officers equally. Further disaggregation of the data associated with these two items revealed that participants who came on the job in 1980 or earlier were more likely than their less-tenured counterparts to collectively disagree with the assertion that departments trusted black and white officers equally (Pearson’s chi-square = 7.076, df = 2, p = .029). Table IV reports the results of this analysis. Table IV. Chi-square analysis of perceived differential trust by departments. Survey Group Collectively Undecided Collectivey Item Membership Agree fo (fe ) Disagree fo (fe ) fo (fe ) Black officers 1980 & 18 (22.1) 17 (18) 65 (59.8) were earlier trusted as much as white 1981 & 9 (4.9) 5 (4) 8 (13.2) officers later Reactions to these two inversely phrased items supported the stated hypothesis (#2a above) to the extent that a majority of the present sample’s membership believed that departments treated them differently and trusted them less than white officers during the first five years of their careers. These findings are also consistent with reports of other researchers found in the literature.

110

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

The Role of Restricted Access to Membership in White Cliques for the Distribution of Various Job-Related Rewards, Privileges & Favors The second hypothesis (#2b above) within this section predicted that respondents would indicate a belief that membership in white groups or cliques to which they had historically been denied access played an important role in the distribution of various job-related rewards, privileges, and favors. This hypothesis was tested through the use of three survey items. For example, two-thirds of participants (65.5%) collectively agreed with the proposition that rewards, privileges and favors were distributed on the basis of membership in white groups or cliques. Seven out of ten (70.5%) also felt that black officers who did not have close ties with key white officials were at a distinct disadvantage when competing for certain job-related perks. Furthermore, three out of every five respondents (61.5%) collectively agreed with the assertion that instances of favoritism and discrimination based upon membership in a particular group or clique were difficult to substantiate. Disaggregation of the data obtained for each of these survey items through the application of chi-square analysis did not reveal any statistically significant departures from the chance model based upon when survey respondents first entered the profession. Affirmative responses to these three items not only demonstrated support for the stated hypothesis (#2b above), but also served to validate claims within the literature that restricted access to white groups or cliques posed negative perceived consequences for black officers when it came to the distribution of various job-related rewards, privileges and favors. At this point, it becomes interesting as well as theoretically important to further consider participants’ beliefs, perceptions and attitudes regarding differential treatment between the races in the specific context of duty assignments and transfers. Specific Concerns Regarding Differential Treatment in the Distribution of Assignments & Requested Transfers Beyond the general perception that black officers were denied access to white groups or cliques that later became important in the distribution of various job-related perks, it was further hypothesized (#2c above)

Research Findings

111

that members of the present study’s sample would report experiencing instances of differential treatment in the specific context of duty assignments and requested transfers from one command to another. This prediction was tested by way of including three narrowly focused survey items. The pattern of responses obtained for two survey items were logically consistent with reports found in the early literature. For example, greater than one-half (56.6%) of the sample expressed collective agreement with the assertion that white officers always got “first shot” at all of the good assignments. Furthermore, eight out of every ten (81%) manifested collective disagreement with the inversely worded proposition that transfers were more easily obtained by black than white officers. Interestingly, however, a sizable portion of the sample (53.2%) collectively disagreed with an item suggesting they had been given undesirable assignments on the basis of their race during the first five years on the job. Although it was indeed encouraging to find that that slightly greater than one-half of all participants did not believe they had been given undesirable assignments on the basis of race, chi-square analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in the pattern of predicted versus observed responses for this particular item depending upon when participants first came on the job. Specifically, those who entered the profession prior to or during 1980 were more likely than those who did so in 1981 or later to manifest collective agreement with the proposition that they had been given undesirable assignments on the basis of their race (Pearson’s chi-square = 7.839, df = 2, p = .02). Table V reports the results of this analysis.

112

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

Table V. Chi-square analysis of perceived differential treatment in duty assignments. Survey Group Collectively Undecided Collectivey Item Membership Agree fo (fe ) Disagree fo (fe ) fo (fe ) Black officers 1980 & 45 (39.3) 6 (74) 49 (53.3) received earlier less-thandesirable details on 1981 & 3 (8.7) 3 (1.6) 16 (11.7) the basis later of race Frequency responses to these three items supported the hypothesis (#2c above) to the extent that most participants agreed with the proposition that white officers always got first shot at all of the good assignments while at the same time disagreeing with the inverselyworded assertion that requested transfers from one command to another were more easily obtained by black than white officers. The only basis upon which the stated hypothesis did not receive the full degree and direction of logically predicted support emanates from the finding that many participants did not report having been given undesirable assignments on the basis of their race. This anomalous finding was clarified, however, through the use of chi-square analysis which indicated that respondents who had been on the job longer were more likely to collectively agree with the wording of this particular survey item. While it is indeed troubling to find that members of the present sample believe they were treated differently than white officers when it came to the distribution of assignments and requested transfers, the possibility that departments actually “exploited” them for political purposes must also be acknowledged. Evaluating the veracity of such claims and perceptions was the focus of the remaining survey items included within this section of the instrument. Perceptions of Exploitation Based on Race Given that the literature is replete with claims that black officers were subjected to differential treatment in various contexts, it was also hypothesized (#2d above) that members of the present sample would

Research Findings

113

manifest the perception that law enforcement agencies exploited them in responding to both the ghetto crime problem and demands from the minority community. This prediction was explored through a series of five items focusing on a range of arguably exploitative employment policies and practices including, among others, segregated patrols and exclusion from certain types of assignments. The data obtained from this series of survey items revealed several trends supportive of the stated hypothesis. For example, slightly less than two-thirds (63.1%) of respondents collectively agreed with the proposition that they had been assigned to certain neighborhoods based on their ability to “blend in,” while almost three-fifths (59.2%) felt that their assignment to minority neighborhoods served to relieve white officers of having to deal with ghetto residents. Interestingly, however, seven out of every ten study participants (71.1%) acknowledged that their assignment to black neighborhoods was an effective method for alleviating some of the problems in those areas. A slightly greater percentage (72.1%) expressed the view that black officers were not allowed to occupy certain positions unless it was politically expedient for the department’s purposes. Finally, the data revealed that, contrary to logic, a majority of study participants (56.6%) collectively disagreed with the proposition that they had been called upon by white officers to help resolve a problem involving black citizens. Further disaggregation of the data through chi-square analysis revealed that participants who entered the profession in 1980 or earlier were more likely than those who came on the job in the years since then to collectively agree with the wording of two items. In particular, members of the sample who came on the job in 1980 or earlier were more inclined to collectively agree with the proposition that their assignment to ghetto neighborhoods was an effective method for alleviating some of the problems in those areas (Pearson’s chi-square = 9.097, df = 2, p = .011). This same group of respondents was also more likely to collectively agree with the assertion that blacks were not allowed to occupy certain positions unless it was politically expedient for the department’s purposes (Pearson’s chi-square = 14.414, df = 2, p = .002). No further differences were revealed depending upon when participants first entered the profession. The results of these analyses are reported in Table VI.

114

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

Table VI. Chi-square analysis of perceived racial exploitation by departments. Survey Group Collectively Undecided Collectivey Item Membership Agree fo (fe ) Disagree fo (fe ) fo (fe ) The presence 1980 & 76 (70.4) 10 (11.5) 13 (17.2) of black earlier officers helped solve 1981 & 10 (15.6) 4 (2.5) 8 (3.8) problems later in black areas Black officers 1980 & 78 (71.3) 5 (8.2) 0 (0.2) only earlier occupied certain positions 1981 & 9 (15.7) 5 (1.8) 1 (0.8) when it later was expedient Not only has it been determined through the preceding series of items that many members of the present sample believed they had been given assignments based on their natural ability to “blend into” particular neighborhoods - a clearly segregated deployment strategy but that this practice was viewed as a method for relieving white officers of the burdens otherwise associated with serving black citizens. Knowledge of these arguably exploitative employment practices becomes even more troubling in light of the finding that at least seven out of every ten respondents collectively agreed with the proposition that blacks were denied access to certain positions unless it was politically expedient for the department’s purposes. These findings provide support for the fourth hypothesis (#2d above) predicting that respondents would report perceptions of being exploited on the basis of race by law enforcement agencies during the first five years of their careers.

Research Findings

115

On a much broader level, the pattern of responses obtained from the multitude of items included in this section helped answer the study’s second research question interested in determining how closely participants beliefs, perceptions and attitudes resembled those previously reported in the literature regarding the manner in which law enforcement agencies treated them during the first five years on the job. In particular, it was first determined that, consistent with previous reports, many members of the present sample felt as though departments treated them differently and trusted them less than white officers. Furthermore, many participants felt that they were denied access to white-dominated groups that effectively precluded them from receiving various job-related rewards, privileges and favors. To make matters worse, a majority of study participants also believed that they had been treated less than fairly in the distribution of certain assignments and requested transfers - In essence, they felt locked into undesirable segregated assignments from which they could not easily escape. One last finding also consistent with the previously reviewed literature was the perception that departments politically exploited black officers. Given these findings, it seems reasonable to conclude that the collective experiences of the present sample’s membership are generally consistent with those reported by others in the existing literature.

Black Officers and the Public A third section of the LEES examined the perceived relationship that study participants shared with members of the civilian community both white and black - during the first five years on the job. In particular, an answer was sought to the research question (#3 above): “How similar, if at all, are the perceptions of the present study’s sample to those previously reported in the available literature regarding the general nature of their interactions with members of both the black and white civilian communities during the first five years of their careers?” Inquiry into this dimension was facilitated through the formation of two distinct sets of hypotheses - one set (#’s 3a & 3b) made specific predictions about the nature of perceived relations between black officers and white civilians, while a second set (#’s 3c-f) made specific predictions about the perceived nature of their relations

116

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

with civilians of the same race. These two sets of hypotheses are stated and tested in turn below. Relations with White Civilians Two hypotheses were formulated to evaluate the nature of survey respondents’ perceived relations with members of the white community during their first five years on the job. The first of these (#3a above) expected that participants would report experiencing social rejection by white civilians and was directly tested through the use of a single inversely-worded survey item which read: “White citizens were friendly toward black officers.” Obtained results indicated that although roughly one-half (49.6%) of all participants collectively agreed with the statement, roughly one-fourth (24.8%) collectively disagreed. Another one-fourth (25.6%) remained undecided, perhaps suggesting that perceptions of social rejection by white civilians among black officers in the form of “unfriendliness” was not as widespread as previously suggested by the available literature. Chi-square analysis also revealed that participants who began their careers in 1980 or earlier were more likely than others who came on the job since then to collectively disagree with the wording of this statement (Pearson’s chi-square = 6.350, df = 2, p = .042). Stated differently, participants who had been on the job the longest were more inclined to feel as though white citizens were unfriendly toward them during their first five years on the job. The second hypothesis (#3b above) predicted that survey respondents would manifest the perception that white civilians either failed or refused to acknowledge their lawful authority as officers. The item used to directly test this prediction stated: “I have been on calls where white civilians refused to talk to me and insisted on talking to a white officer instead.” A majority of participants - greater than threefourths (77.7%) - expressed combined agreement with this proposition. Consistent with logic, further examination of the responses obtained for this item through the application of chi-square analysis also revealed that participants who entered the profession before or during 1980 were more likely to collectively agree with this statement’s wording than others who came on the job in later years (Pearson’s chi-square = 10.481, df = 2, p = .005). Table VII reports the results of these analyses.

Research Findings

117

Table VII. Chi-square analysis of perceived relations with white civilians. Survey Group Collectively Undecided Collectivey Item Membership Agree fo (fe ) Disagree fo (fe ) fo (fe ) White citizens 1980 & 45 (49.1) 25 (25.4) 29 (24.5) were earlier friendly toward 1981 & 15 (10.9) 6 (5.6) 1 (5.5) black later officers White citizens 1980 & 82 (76.9) 2 (4.1) 15 (18) have earlier refused to talk to 1981 & 12 (17.1) 3 (0.9) 7 (4) me on later calls Upon examining the pattern of frequency responses obtained for the two preceding items, it may be concluded that the first hypothesis (#3a above) did not receive the full degree and direction of support predicted. While certainly encouraging, the finding that a greater combined percentage of respondents agreed than disagreed with the proposition that white citizens were friendly toward black officers contradicts the logically anticipated outcome derived from review of the literature. Having said this, however, it was also interesting to find that “tenured” participants - those who came on the job in 1980 or earlier were more likely than others newer to the profession to disagree with the stated proposition. In the case of the second hypothesis (#3b above), greater than three-fourths of those surveyed collectively agreed with the proposition that they had been on calls where white civilians refused or failed to acknowledge their lawful authority - a finding consistent with the expectation derived from the literature. Here again, participants who had been on the job the longest were more likely than those who were newer to the profession to report having had such negative experiences. The fact that these findings do not provide a clear pattern from which a

118

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

simple conclusion can be drawn indicates a need for scholars of policing to undertake additional research in this area. In the meantime, however, attention is given in the following pages to the nature of respondents’ perceived relations with civilians of the same race. Relations with Black Civilians Considerable attention has been given in the previously reviewed literature to the perceived nature of early relations between black officers and their civilian racial peers. This focus contributed to the development of four logically derived hypotheses (#’s 3c-f), the first of which (#3c above) expected to uncover a belief among respondents that black civilians were not supportive of the police in general. A second hypothesis (#3d above) predicted that respondents would report feeling as though black civilians did not have respect for them in particular. The third hypothesis (#3e above) expanded upon these initial areas of inquiry and anticipated finding evidence supportive of the claim that black civilians sometimes refused to acknowledge the lawful authority of black officers, while a fourth hypothesis (#3f above) predicted that members of the present study’s sample would report experiencing tension between competing sources for their loyalty. The hypothesis predicting that respondents would report a belief that black civilians were not supportive of the police in general (#3c above) found mixed results. Specifically, 48% of those surveyed collectively agreed with the inversely-worded proposition that “Members of the black community supported the police department.” By comparison, another 41.3% collectively disagreed with this statement, leaving some ambiguity regarding the degree of support that should be attributed to the stated hypothesis. Disaggregation of the data through chi-square analysis, the results of which are reported in Table VIII, revealed a notable distinction. Specifically, members of the sample who entered police work prior to or during 1980 were more likely to manifest disagreement with the wording of this statement than others who came on the job later (Pearson’s chi-square = 10.567, df = 2, p = .005).

Research Findings

119

Table VIII. Chi-square analysis of perceived relations with black civilians. Survey Group Collectively Undecided Collectivey Item Membership Agree fo (fe ) Disagree fo (fe ) fo (fe ) Black 1980 & 46 (47.5) 7 (10.6) 46 (40.9) citizens earlier support1981 & 12 (10.5) 6 (2.4) 4 (9.1) ed the later police The distribution of categorical responses obtained from the two items used to test the prediction (#3d above) that members of the sample would manifest a belief that black civilians did not respect them in particular were more distinctive. Interestingly, however, these results did not support the stated hypothesis but, instead, altogether contradicted the logical expectation derived from review of the literature. For example, not only was it determined that almost two out of every three participants (64.5%) collectively disagreed with the proposition that “Black citizens did not have respect for black officers,” but it was also learned that greater than three out of every four participants (78.5%) collectively agreed with the statement that “A black police officer was viewed as a symbol of accomplishment by members of the black community.” Taken in combination with one another, it must be concluded that the stated hypothesis (#3d above) failed to meet with empirical reality based upon analysis of the responses provided by members of the present sample. Despite expressing relatively decisive views on these two items, chi-square analysis did not reveal the existence of any statistically significant departures from the null model depending upon when participants first entered the profession. Based upon review of the literature regarding the perceived nature of early relations between black officers and their civilian racial peers, it was further hypothesized (#3e above) that study participants would reflect the belief that black citizens sometimes failed or otherwise refused to acknowledge their lawful authority as officers. This expectation was directly tested through the inclusion of a single item which read: “I have been on calls where black civilians refused to talk to me and insisted on talking to a white officer instead.” Greater than

120

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

one-half of survey participants (53.7%) collectively agreed with this statement whereas slightly greater than two-fifths (42.2%) collectively disagreed. Again, however, no statistically significant departures from the null chi-square model were observed for this item depending upon when participants first began their law enforcement careers. The final hypothesis (#3f above) examined within this section of the LEES predicted that respondents would report having experienced tension between competing sources for their loyalty during the first five years on the job. In particular, the literature has suggested that early black officers were placed in the uniquely difficult position of having to balance two competing loyalties at once - being an enforcer of the law on one hand, while being a member of the minority community on the other. In order to determine the extent to which this perceived tension existed among members of the present sample during the first five years of their careers, reactions were solicited to an item which read: “The black police officer experienced a unique form of tension between his/her role as a member of the black community while at the same time being an enforcer of the laws.” Consistent with the stated prediction, four out of every five study participants (80.2%) collectively agreed with the wording of this item. Irrespective of when participants first entered the profession, no statistically significant differences were discovered through application Pearson’s chi-square model. Responses associated with the five preceding items provided only limited support for the four stated hypotheses (#’s 3c-f). For example, it was initially predicted that respondents would manifest the perception that black civilians did not support the police in general. This expectation was not decisively satisfied. Respondents were also expected to report the belief that black citizens did not have respect for them in particular. This expectation was also contradicted by the data obtained from two survey items. A third prediction expecting participants to report having been on calls where black civilians refused to acknowledge their lawful authority also failed to receive convincing support. In fact, the only hypothesis to receive convincing support from the data was the prediction that respondents would report having experienced tension between competing loyalties. Although these findings fail to coincide with earlier assertions logically derived from the existing literature, they nonetheless present a unique opportunity for interested scholars to conduct research aimed at explaining these contradictions.

Research Findings

121

Perceptions of Differential Treatment in Performance Evaluations and Discipline A fourth section of the survey instrument addressed the research question: “How similar, if at all, are the perceptions of the present study’s sample to those previously reported in the literature regarding the general issue of fairness between the races in performance evaluations?” Four specific hypotheses (#’s 4a-d above) were formulated to help guide this inquiry. The first of these (#4a above) expected participants to reject the inversely-phrased assertion that performance evaluations play only a minor role in promotion decisions. A second hypothesis (#4b above) expected respondents to indicate perceptions of inequity between the races in the administration of performance evaluations conducted by white supervisors, while the third hypothesis (#4c above) further predicted they would not only report the perception that black personnel were differentially discriminated against in the enforcement of administrative rules and regulations, but that such instances were difficult to substantiate. Finally, it was hypothesized (#4d above) that study participants would report a perceived inadequacy in the availability of administrative remedies when rules and regulations had been differentially applied to the two races. A total of seven survey items were used to test these hypotheses, most centering on issues such as the importance of performance evaluations for career mobility, equity between the races in performance ratings, discrimination by white supervisors, disparity in the enforcement of departmental rules and regulations, as well as adequacy of administrative remedies. Perceived Importance of Performance Evaluations in the Promotions Process Within the broad context outlined above, the first hypothesis (#4a above) predicted that respondents would disagree with the inverselyworded assertion that performance evaluations play only a minor role in the promotions process. The item developed for purposes of directly testing this prediction solicited reactions to the statement: “Performance evaluations play a minor role in the promotions process.” Roughly one out of every two participants (50.4%) collectively disagreed with this inversely-worded item. By comparison, some

122

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

42.1% manifested collective agreement. No statistically significant departures from the null chi-square model were found for this item based upon when study participants first entered law enforcement. It appears as though the prediction that respondents would disagree with the inversely-phrased assertion that performance evaluations play only a minor role in the promotions process received only limited support from the data. Obviously, a greater level of disagreement and divergence was expected. Finding, however, that at least two out of five respondents agreed with the wording of this item (42.1%), the focus then shifted to an assessment of their collective views regarding fairness in the application of evaluative criteria between the races. Perceived Fairness in Performance Evaluations Between the Races As previously noted, the second hypothesis (#4b above) within this section of the instrument not only predicted that respondents would indicate the perception that they had been treated differently than white officers in the application of performance evaluation criteria, but that the major factor accounting for this trend was discrimination by white supervisors. Consistent with this expectation, slightly greater than three-fifths of those surveyed (62.8%) collectively agreed with the assertion that black officers are more harshly evaluated than whites. Roughly one-half (51.7%) also agreed with the proposition that discrimination by white supervisors was the major factor accounting for differences in performance ratings between the races. Finally, the obtained data also revealed a belief among greater than seven out of every ten participants (72.7%) that white supervisors were more likely to evaluate white officers more favorably than black officers who had performed the same type and quality of work. Chi-square analysis did not, however, indicate any statistically significant departures from the chance model based upon when respondents first entered law enforcement as a profession for any of these three items. Responses to the three survey items detailed above indicated support for the second hypothesis (#4b above) which not only expected participants to express the view that black officers were evaluated more harshly than whites, but that the primary factor accounting for this difference was discrimination at the hands of white supervisors. Still at issue, however, are participants’ experiences and views regarding the differential enforcement of administrative rules and regulations that comprise the foundation upon which many performance evaluation

Research Findings

123

systems are based. Accordingly, attention is now given to this dimension as well. Differential Enforcement of Rules and Regulations A third hypothesis (#4c above) predicted that respondents would not only report the perception that black officers were discriminated against in the enforcement of administrative rules and regulations, but that instances of such differential treatment were difficult to substantiate. Two items were developed to test this prediction. Analysis of responses obtained for the first of these revealed that a majority of participants (57%) did, in fact, collectively agree with the proposition that white officers were more likely than black officers to get away with violations of rules and regulations. Furthermore, it was determined that slightly greater than three out of every five participants (61.2%) manifested combined agreement with the second item asserting that discrimination against black officers in the enforcement of rules and regulations exists, but is difficult to prove. Disaggregation of the data through the use of chi-square analysis did not reveal any statistically significant differences in response to these two items depending upon when participants first entered the profession. Results obtained for these two items provide support for the hypothesis predicting that respondents would not only report perceptions of differential treatment against black officers in the enforcement of administrative rules and regulations, but that evidence of discrimination in such instances was difficult for them to substantiate. Given this, a logical follow-up question focused attention on the perceived adequacy of administrative remedies in instances where the enforcement of rules and regulations was believed to be racially motivated. Perceived Adequacy of Administrative Remedies A final line of inquiry within the present section examined the perceived adequacy of administrative remedies in instances where it was believed that rules and regulations were being applied in a racially discriminatory manner. Specifically, the fourth hypothesis (#4d above) expected participants to view administrative remedies as inadequate for purposes of successfully defending themselves against racially

124

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

motivated charges of misbehavior. Just greater than one-half of the respondents (52.1%) manifested combined agreement with an item worded along these lines. Another one third (35.6%), however, collectively disagreed with the assertion that black officers have adequate administrative remedies at their disposal in such instances. Despite the apparent diversity in participants’ responses, no statistically significant departures from the chance model were found through the application of chi-square analysis. Based upon the obtained survey data, it cannot be safely concluded that the preceding hypothesis received the full degree and direction of support logically predicted. That is, although slightly greater than onehalf of all participants agreed that administrative remedies were adequate enough to protect them where charges of misconduct were suspected of being racially motivated, there nonetheless remained a sizable portion of individuals who were not so clearly convinced. Further research is therefore recommended to determine what factors, if any, account for this pattern of belief. Generally speaking, the results reported in this fourth section of the instrument revealed several trends. As predicted, at least one half of the study’s participants rejected the inversely-phrased assertion that performance evaluations play only a minor role in the promotions process while at the same time expressing the belief that black officers are more harshly evaluated than whites. When asked if they believed that discrimination by white supervisors accounted for this difference, a majority of respondents agreed with the stated proposition. Also worth noting was the belief among participants that departmental rules and regulations were more strictly enforced against black officers than against whites. Contrary to expectation, however, was the belief among respondents that administrative remedies provided adequate protection in cases where rules and regulations were being enforced in a racially discriminatory manner. Taken in context with one another, these findings not only provide a partial answer to the fourth research question confirming that study participants’ beliefs, perceptions and attitudes generally resemble those previously reported by others in the literature, but also serve as an interesting backdrop for further probing the working world experiences of black law enforcement personnel who aspired to promote within the organizational hierarchy. Accordingly, it is toward the findings associated with this line of inquiry that attention now turns in the section to follow. More specifically, survey

Research Findings

125

respondents’ perceptions of fairness between the races in law enforcement promotion decisions are examined.

Perceptions of Differential Treatment in Promotion Decisions Having analyzed respondents’ perceptions of unfairness in the application of performance evaluation criteria by white supervisors, it becomes interesting to also explore their concerns regarding differential treatment between the races in promotion decisions. In doing so, the instrument’s fifth section addressed the research question: “How similar, if at all, are the perceptions of the present study’s sample to those previously reported in the available literature regarding the general issue of fairness between the races in promotion decisions?” Specifically, five hypotheses (#’s 5a-e above) were proposed and the results for each are explored in greater detail through the following paragraphs. The first hypothesis (#5a above) expected survey respondents to disagree with the inversely-phrased assertion that black officers receive their fair share of promotions. A second hypothesis (#5b above) predicted that respondents would manifest the perception that favoritism and group membership play important roles in the promotions process, while a third (#5 c above) stated they would report feeling pressure to satisfy certain informal or unspoken prerequisites in order to be seriously considered for promotion. The fourth hypothesis (#5d above) expected to find agreement among participants with the proposition that racial tensions increase when black and white officers compete against one another for promotions. The final hypothesis (#5e above) predicted that participants would disagree with the assertion that under-representation of blacks at higher supervisory levels is attributable to their status as relative “newcomers” within the profession. General Perceptions of Equity and Fairness in Promotion Decisions A single item was used to first assess participants’ reactions to the inversely-worded proposition that blacks receive their fair share of promotions within the law enforcement profession. As anticipated, greater than twice as many participants collectively disagreed (58.2%)

126

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

with this proposition than did others who collectively agreed (27.9%) with the item’s wording. Generally speaking, this pattern of responses coincides with the stated hypothesis (#5a above). Further examination of the data using chi-square analysis did not reveal any statistically significant departures from the null chi-square model depending upon when survey respondents first entered the profession. The Perceived Role of Favoritism and Other Informal Criteria in Promotion Decisions Generally speaking, the principle underlying sound promotion practices states that the most qualified individual is selected for advancement from among a number of other candidates. In some instances, however, law enforcement does not always adhere to this seemingly logical principle. Rather, it is strongly believed that other less-than-formal criteria are relied upon to determine who will be promoted or assigned to a given position within many law enforcement organizations. It is this suspicion, counterbalanced against ideal promotional practices, that provided the foundation for the second hypothesis (#5b above) tested within this section of the instrument. In particular, it was predicted that respondents would manifest the collective perception that favoritism and group membership play more important roles than merit or personal ability in the promotions process. Nine survey items were used to test this prediction. The first of these explored the relative amount of agreement or disagreement generated in response to the proposition that law enforcement promotions are merit-based. If, as is expected to be the case, a majority of study participants disagree with this statement, the remaining eight items will each give consideration to the role that is played by other, less-than-formal criteria suspected of influencing the outcome in these types of situations. It is toward these nine survey items and the results obtained for each that attention is now directed. As indicated, the hypothesis to be tested within this section (#5b above) expected respondents to manifest a lack of support for the notion that law enforcement promotions are based on the criteria of merit and ability. This issue was directly addressed through the use of an item which stated: “Promotions are based on merit and ability rather than informal criteria.” In examining the distribution of observed responses, only one-third (35.2%) of all study participants expressed any level of agreement whatsoever with this statement, apparently

Research Findings

127

indicating a lack of confidence in the notion that law enforcement promotion decisions are based upon personal qualifications. In the absence of widespread confidence among members of the present sample that merit-based criteria play an important role in law enforcement promotion decisions, it can be assumed that other lessthan-formal requirements are relied upon for such purposes. Among other informal criteria that have evolved over the years, perhaps the most enduring is the practice of making promotion decisions based on informal group ties, friendships or alliances. The logical follow-up question to the preceding line of inquiry thus not only became one of determining the extent to which participants believed that informal group ties and associations influence law enforcement promotion decisions but, perhaps more importantly, the adverse consequences such a system has had upon their ability to legitimately advance within the profession. Given this question, the first item intended to assess the perceived role of favoritism and informal group connections in law enforcement promotion decisions asked participants to express their relative agreement or disagreement with the statement: “The distribution of rewards, privileges and favors in the law enforcement profession depends upon membership in a majoritarian group or clique.” This item met with combined agreement from one-half (50.8%) of all respondents, while less than one-third (32.8%) expressed any level of disagreement whatsoever. A second approach to assessing respondents’ perceptions regarding the necessity of knowing the right people in order to secure advancement took the form of an item which read: “You have to know someone in the ‘right place’ in order to be promoted.” Reactions to this item were, for the most part, fairly evenly split between those who indicated collective disagreement (35.6%) or agreement (38.9%). Another one-fourth of participants (25.6%) remained undecided in their reactions to the wording of this item. The non-divergent pattern of responses obtained for this item suggested a need to further explore participants’ views on the perceived impact of favoritism and informal relations upon promotion decisions. Analysis of the following seven items facilitated this objective. For example, an item was included to probe the belief that “People who have the power to promote others generally help promote their friends.” Responses to this statement indicated that an overwhelming

128

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

majority (78.7%) of participants collectively agreed that such unspoken practices exist. Upon closer examination, the pattern of responses obtained for this item significantly departed from the null chi-square model. Specifically, it was discovered that participants who began their law enforcement careers prior to or during 1980 were more likely to agree with the wording of this item than were others who came on the job in more recent years (Pearson’s chi-square = 9.716, df = 2, p = .008). These results are reported in Table IX. Table IX. Chi-square analysis of perceived favoritism in promotion decisions. Survey Group Collectively Undecided Collectivey Item Member Agree fo (fe ) Disagree -ship fo (fe ) fo (fe ) People with the power to 1980 & 83 (78.7) 6 (9.8) 11 (11.5) promote earlier generally help promote their 1981 & 13 (17.3) 6 (2.2) 3 (2.5) friends later Not only has it been asserted in the literature, but logic also seems to support the notion that interpersonal relationships with the potential to translate into an “advantage” when competing for promotions later on are likely to develop both on as well as off duty. That is, the nature and quality of informal off-duty interactions is believed to be equally important as the more formal ones that occur while on duty. This logic lead to the inclusion of another survey item which read: “Contacts that later become important for receiving promotions are made in informal social settings.” Here again, a clear majority (68%) collectively agreed with the view that personal contacts made in informal settings have the potential to influence future advancement decisions. Despite this divergence, no statistically significant differences were found to exist among participants depending upon when they first came on the job. Of course, it seems only natural to ask what is so inherently wrong with the fact that informal, after-hours contacts have the potential to influence promotion decisions. In theory, there may be nothing inherently wrong with this practice. Unfortunately, however, since black officers are often excluded from these informal social gatherings,

Research Findings

129

it is believed that they are placed at a distinct disadvantage when they later compete against white counterparts for promotion. Based on this belief, it becomes interesting to explore the perspective of black law enforcement professionals regarding their exclusion from such activities. Participants were thus asked to indicate their relative agreement or disagreement with the proposition that: “Black officers are excluded from the informal social settings where important contacts for promotion are made.” While just slightly greater than one-fourth (27.1%) of the study participants collectively disagreed with the foregoing statement, greater than twice as many (54.1%) collectively agreed that blacks are excluded from the informal social events where important promotion-related contacts are made. Participants were no more or less likely to respond to this item in any specific manner depending upon when they first entered the profession. The possibility that black officers are excluded, either intentionally or unintentionally, from these and other informal social settings where important relationships and contacts are made raises a concern that white officers receive some exclusive advantage in the promotions process. Generally speaking, this subjective advantage is referred to as “favoritism.” The question therefore arose regarding the extent to which respondents believed that “favoritism” exists and whether or not it is possible to prove such cases of unequal treatment in promotion decisions. To satisfy this curiosity, an item which read: “Favoritism in promotion toward white officers over black officers exists, but is hard to prove” was also included in the instrument. Greater than threefourths (79.5%) of those who responded to the survey expressed combined agreement with this statement. Again, chi-square analysis did not reveal any statistically significant departures from the chance model, thereby indicating that participants were no more or less likely to answer in any specific manner depending upon when they first entered the profession. The extent to which participants felt that promotion based upon informal group associations constituted a form of discrimination was also explored. Specifically, participants were asked to express their reactions in terms of relative agreement or disagreement with the proposition that: “The practice of making promotions based on informal group ties constitutes an active and deliberate form of job discrimination.” This statement evoked clear agreement from a combined 79.2% of participants. No statistically significant differences

130

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

were found to exist between participants based upon when they first entered the profession. The critical reader is sure to note that there likely exist law enforcement agencies where blacks rather than whites occupy the numerical majority of command positions directly involved in making promotion decisions. In such instances, it may be argued that blacks exercise preferential treatment among themselves to the exclusion of whites. Simply stated, favoritism does not always have to work against blacks in law enforcement - in some instances it may actually work to their direct benefit. Consequently, they may not always view favoritism in a negative manner. Given this line of reasoning, study participants were asked to agree or disagree with the proposition that: “Having connections is a legitimate mechanism through which upward mobility can be attained.” In examining the pattern of responses obtained for this item, it was found that two-thirds of those surveyed (66.1%) collectively agreed with the proposition that having “connections” constitutes a legitimate means for facilitating upward career mobility. Again, no statistically significant departures from the null chi-square model were identified in the data based upon when respondents first came on the job. As response patterns associated with the nine foregoing items indicate, members of the present sample expressed a lack of confidence in the notion that law enforcement promotion decisions are based on personal merit and ability rather than informal criteria. This initial finding presented the need to more fully explore their views regarding the role that other, less-than-formal criteria play in this administrative decision-making process. Chief among those examined by the remaining eight items was the role of “favoritism” based upon informal group ties and associations. Results of this more focused inquiry confirmed the existence of a generalized belief among respondents that favoritism and other informal criteria stemming from group ties and associations play an important role in the promotions process. For example, not only was it determined that a majority of respondents expressed belief in the principle that “you have to know someone in the right place in order to be promoted,” but they also endorsed the view that “people who have the power to promote others generally help promote their friends.” Further concerns arose from the belief among a majority of participants that contacts which later become important for receiving promotions occur in informal social settings from which they are often excluded. Despite these generally negative perceptions, a

Research Findings

131

majority of the present sample nonetheless endorsed the utilitarian view that “having connections is a legitimate mechanism through which upward career mobility can be attained.” While these findings provide considerable insight into the perceived role of favoritism in law enforcement promotion decisions, they certainly do not address the full realm of other factors also suspected of influencing this process. For example, two others that readily come to mind include: 1) Unspoken or informal expectations that blacks conform to certain value systems, and; 2) That they substantially outperform their racial counterparts on promotion-related criteria. The need to better understand the influence these two requisites also have upon promotion decisions is addressed below. Other Informal Criteria Suspected of Influencing Promotion Decisions In addition to outward or subtle favoritism, there remain a number of other informal criteria believed to influence the outcome of law enforcement promotion decisions as far as blacks are concerned. These criteria, although admittedly not exhaustive of all that potentially exist, were given consideration by the third hypothesis (#5c above) predicting that respondents would report feeling pressure to satisfy certain informal or unspoken prerequisites in order to be seriously considered for promotion. This prediction was operationalized and tested through the use of three survey items - one addressing the expectation that blacks refrain from “rocking the boat” on certain issues, a second concerning the expectation that they conform to white values, and a third that they clearly “outperform” white officers who are also seeking promotion. As either a numerical or racial minority in the law enforcement profession, there are any number of behaviors that have the potential to jeopardize one’s future chances for promotion. One such behavior is speaking out on sensitive issues like discrimination. Given this possibility, members of the present sample were asked to agree or disagree with an item that read: “Speaking out on issues such as discrimination can hurt your chances for receiving a promotion.” Just greater than three-fifths (63.1%) of those surveyed expressed combined agreement with the proposition that expressing personal views on issues such as discrimination has the potential to jeopardize one’s

132

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

chances for future promotion. Irrespective of when participants entered the profession, no statistically significant differences were observed in the pattern of responses to this item. Refraining from “rocking the boat” on certain issues such as claims of racial discrimination and other sensitive matters implies that black officers who seek eventual promotion should also embrace the prevailing views and values held by those who occupy positions of influence. In many departments, these positions are held by white supervisors. Study participants were therefore asked if they agreed or disagreed with the proposition that: “If a black officer wants to be promoted, s/he must conform to white values.” Examination of the data revealed that one-half (50.8%) of survey participants collectively agreed that conformity to white values was expected of blacks seeking advancement within law enforcement. By comparison, only one-third (33.6%) expressed any disagreement whatsoever. Subsequent examination of the data using chi-square analysis did not reveal any statistically significant differences in the distribution of obtained responses depending upon when participants first entered the profession. A third and final theme prevalent in the available literature has centered upon the assertion that black officers, no matter how well qualified, must clearly out-perform their white counterparts in order to be seriously considered for promotion. The extent to which respondents endorsed this belief was assessed through inclusion of an item stating: “If a black officer is to be considered for advancement, s/he must perform substantially better than his/her white counterpart.” As expected, a clear majority (84.3%) of participants manifested combined agreement with the proposition that blacks are expected to outperform whites in order to be considered for promotion. Again, despite the clear divergence in this pattern of obtained responses, chi-square analysis did not reveal any statistically significant departures from the chance model based upon when participants first came on the job. Results obtained in response to the three preceding items support the hypothesis (#5c above) predicting that members of the present sample would report feeling pressure to meet other, less-than-formal expectations in order to be considered for advancement. In particular, it was determined that respondents felt as though they must not only refrain from speaking out on issues such as discrimination, but also conform to white values in order to avoid jeopardizing their chances for future career advancement. Finally, study participants also manifested a

Research Findings

133

belief that they had to clearly outperform whites when competing for promotion. In sum, it may be concluded that these other less-thanformal criteria, like favoritism and group membership, are suspected of influencing promotion decisions as far as blacks are concerned. Given these findings, concern with increased tension between members of the two races competing for promotion comes to the fore. Racial Tension Arising from Competition for Limited Promotional Opportunities One of the unavoidable consequences that must be recognized any time members of two races directly compete against one another for promotion is the risk of animosity arising from the selection of one over the other. Under these conditions, “hard feelings” certainly have to potential to develop and endure into the indefinite future. This eventuality formed the basis for a fourth hypothesis (#5d above) expecting to find among study participants a general level of agreement with the proposition that racial tensions increase between members of the two races when they compete against one another for promotion. The singular survey item designed to test this prediction read: “Whenever a black officer is selected for promotion over a white, tension between the two groups increases.” In response to this proposition, no less than six out of every ten respondents (60.8%) manifested some level of agreement. By comparison, only one-half as many (30.9%) expressed any level of disagreement whatsoever. Despite this apparent diversity of opinion among participants, no statistically significant departures from the chance model were detected through the application of Pearson’s chi-square. Consequently, there was no difference in how participants responded to this item based upon when they first began their law enforcement careers. The preceding finding clearly supports the hypothesis (#5d above) expecting to uncover among respondents a belief that tensions increase between officers when competing for promotions, especially where a black is selected over a white for the position. Having examined respondents’ perceptions toward various dimensions of the promotions process, the very last item included in this section of the instrument assessed their beliefs regarding an explanation that has been proposed in the literature as to why blacks are under-represented in many supervisory positions.

134

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

Explanations for Under-Representation of Blacks in Supervisory Positions Over the years, several explanations have been proposed for why so few blacks occupy supervisory positions within the profession as compared to whites. Whereas most explanations were couched in terms of racial discrimination against blacks, recent explanations seem to be more pragmatic in nature. For example, one contemporary explanation reasons that blacks have not yet achieved proportional representation at supervisory levels due to their status as relative “newcomers” to the profession. That is, since they have not been on the job as long as whites, black personnel have not yet had the opportunity to be promoted in the same proportions. This logic, combined with the fact that only a finite number of supervisory positions are available to be occupied, results in a slow rate of advancement for black personnel. As time passes, however, and more whites retire from supervisory positions, it is expected that a greater number of blacks will be promoted to fill these vacancies. Thus, the ascension of blacks to these positions is only to be a matter of two factors - time and the gradual attrition of whites presently occupying the limited number of available supervisory positions. Despite its apparent pragmatic appeal, the extent to which this rationale is accepted by blacks within the profession remains to be assessed. In light of this, combined with the historical discrimination that blacks have faced within the profession, the fifth and final hypothesis (#5e above) took the more conservative approach and predicted that respondents would manifest disagreement with the logic that under-representation of blacks at higher supervisory levels is attributable to their status as relative “newcomers” to the job. This hypothesis was operationally translated into a statement which read: “One reason blacks have not yet been promoted in significant numbers is due to their status as relative ‘newcomers’ to the profession.” As expected, roughly three-fifths (59.5%) of study participants expressed at least some level of combined disagreement with the wording of this item. By way of comparison, less than one-half as many (28.1%) expressed any agreement whatsoever. Interestingly, however, no statistically significant differences were found to exist in the pattern of obtained responses based upon when participants first entered the profession. Thus, tenured participants who started their careers in 1980

Research Findings

135

or earlier were no more or less likely than participants newer to the profession to react in any particular manner to the wording of this item. Taken in combination with one another, responses to the many items contained in this fifth section of the instrument provided considerable insight into the beliefs, attitudes and perceptions of survey respondents toward various factors suspected of influencing law enforcement promotion decisions as far as blacks are concerned. For example, members of the present sample expressed the view that favoritism and group membership play a more important role than merit and personal ability in law enforcement promotion decisions (#’s5a&b above). Furthermore, not only was it determined that many participants felt pressure to satisfy certain informal or unspoken prerequisites in order to be considered for promotion (#5c above), but that racial tensions tend to increase between black and white officers who compete against one another for advancement (#5d above). Lastly, many participants rejected the assertion that blacks are underrepresented at supervisory levels due to their status as relative “newcomers” to the profession (#5e above). These findings, it should be noted, closely resemble those previously reported by other researchers within the available literature on the subject. Having examined respondents’ beliefs regarding a variety of issues related to promotion decisions affecting black law enforcement personnel, attention will be given in the following section to the perceived nature and quality of their more recent relations with immediate supervisors.

Perceived Relations with Supervisors of Both Races Assuming that members of the present sample would report experiencing strained relations with white officers during their first five years on the job, it seemed plausible to expect the same in describing their collective relations with supervisors of the opposite race. This expectation formed a basis for the study’s sixth research question which asked: “How similar, if at all, are the perceptions of the present study’s sample to those previously reported in the available literature regarding the nature and quality of relations with supervisors of both races?” To address this question, two distinct hypotheses (#’s6 a-b above) were formulated. The first of these (#6a above) expected to find among respondents a preference for interacting with supervisors of the same race rather than those of another, while the second (#6b above)

136

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

anticipated uncovering the perception that white supervisors treated and supported black officers differently than white officers. These two predictions were tested through the use of several survey items, the results for each of which are described below. Preference for Interacting with Supervisors of the Same Race Careful review of the available literature not only demonstrated that early black officers reported experiencing strained working relations with white officers, but also suggests that the same may have been true of their interactions with white supervisors. Simply stated, it has been claimed that early black officers did not get along well with supervisors of the opposite race. Consequently, it was hypothesized (#6a above) that members of the present sample would manifest a preference for dealing with supervisors of their own race, especially in problematic or sensitive situations. This prediction was tested using a single item which read: “Faced with a problem and given the option, I would rather take the issue to a black supervisor before I would take it to a white supervisor.” Examination of responses to this statement did not indicate a clear pattern of divergence as expected. In fact, a larger combined percentage (41%) of respondents disagreed than agreed (31.6%) with the idea of first taking their problem to a supervisor of the same race. Further examination of the data did not reveal a statistically significant departure from the null chi-square model based upon when respondents first entered the profession. Clearly, the obtained results did not support the stated hypothesis. Perceptions of Differential Treatment and Support The second hypothesis (#6b above) given consideration within this section expected to uncover among participants a collective belief that white supervisors treated and supported them differently from white officers. This expectation was operationally translated into four items, the first of which revealed that a combined 45% of participants believed that black officers who took their problems to a white supervisor were more likely than a white officer who had the same type of problem to be viewed as a “troublemaker.” By comparison, slightly greater than one-third (34.2%) of respondents collectively disagreed with this proposition. Reactions to a second item asserting that “If a white officer speaks out about his supervisor it is more likely to be forgotten

Research Findings

137

than if it is done by a black” were more divergent. Specifically, no less than seven out of every ten (71.7%) participants collectively agreed with the wording of this statement. Of the two remaining items included for purposes of testing the present hypothesis, analysis of the acquired survey data revealed that 44% of respondents collectively disagreed with the proposition that they would get the same support from a white supervisor as they would one of their own race in a “difficult situation.” In contrast, only three out of every ten participants (31.9%) collectively agreed with the notion that white supervisors would provide them with the same level of support as a black supervisor in such instances. Finally, roughly one-half of the study’s participants (49.2%) expressed combined agreement with an item asserting that “white supervisors only pay lip service to the principle of equal opportunity.” Further exploration of the data obtained for each of the preceding items through the application of Pearson’s chi-square model revealed only one statistically significant finding. In particular, it was determined that respondents who began their careers in 1980 or earlier were more likely to manifest collective agreement with the wording of the final survey item than others who entered the profession in more recent years. In simple terms, participants who entered law enforcement during the early years of integration were more likely than those who came on the job in the last twenty years to be more skeptical of white supervisors’ commitment to the principle of equal opportunity between the races (Pearson’s chi-square = 6.415, df = 2, p = .04). The results of this analysis are reported in Table X.

138

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

Table X. Chi-square analysis of perceived treatment and support from white supervisors. Survey Group Collectively Undecided Collectivey Item MemberAgree fo (fe ) Disagree ship fo (fe ) fo (fe ) White supervisors 1980 & 53 (48.7) 16 (19.8) 30 (30.5) only pay lip earlier service to equal 1981 & 6 (10.3) 8 (4.2) 7 (6.5) opportunity later Contrary to that which was initially expected, the data obtained within this sixth section of the instrument not only contradicted the first hypothesis predicting that members of the sample would manifest a clear preference for interacting with supervisors of the same race, but also fell short of supporting the second prediction expecting to uncover a collective belief that white supervisors treated and supported black officers differently than whites. While it is certainly true that the direction of observed responses for the last four items logically coincided with the expectation derived from review of the literature, the magnitude of divergence between response categories was not as strong as initially anticipated. It may therefore be stated that the second hypothesis was only marginally supported by the data.

Perceived Relations with White Subordinates Up to this point, all items contained within the survey instrument focused upon the perceived nature and quality of participants’ relations with others solely from the perspective of being a subordinate officer within the law enforcement hierarchy. The remaining sections of the LEES, however, shifted this focus to one in which responses to survey items were based upon participants’ more current beliefs, perceptions and attitudes from an altogether different perspective - as supervisory, command or executive personnel within the professional hierarchy. In essence, information was sought that would provide a better understanding of participants’ collective career experiences within these capacities. For example, the research question in this particular section

Research Findings

139

asked: “What are the perceptions of the present study’s sample regarding the nature of their current or most recent relations with subordinate white personnel?” Based upon review of the early literature suggesting that black law enforcement personnel experienced strained relations with both officers and supervisors of the opposite race, it was logically suspected that upon promotion to positions of supervisory, command and executive responsibility they would experience strained relations with subordinate white personnel. This suspicion contributed to the formation of three separate hypotheses. The first (#7a above) expected to uncover a pattern of responses indicating a collective belief among participants that they have greater difficulty relating with white as compared to black subordinates. The second hypothesis (#7b above) predicted they would also report a perceived lack of respect from white subordinates. The final hypothesis (#7c above) expected respondents to report difficulty in gaining compliance from white subordinates due to their racial differences. Each of these hypotheses are explored in turn below through a series of attending survey items. Relating with White Subordinates The first hypothesis (#7a above) predicting that members of the present sample would report greater difficulty relating to white rather than black subordinates was tested through inclusion of a single survey item which read: “I have more trouble relating with white subordinates than I do with those of my own race.” Greater than three-fourths (77.5%) of study participants expressed combined disagreement with the wording of this item. Given these findings, it must be concluded that the stated hypothesis did not hold true. Gaining the Respect of White Subordinates Two survey items were used to test the second hypothesis (#7b above) predicting respondents would manifest a collective belief that they lacked the respect of white subordinates. Analysis of the data obtained for the first item used to assess this dimension revealed that exactly one-half of the respondents (50%) collectively disagreed with the proposition that it was difficult to gain the respect of white subordinates due to their racial differences. By comparison, only 40%

140

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

collectively agreed with this assertion, leaving the remainder undecided. A second item solicited reactions to the statement: “I feel that white officers are just as respectful behind my back as they are when I am present.” Consistent with the stated expectation, greater than one-half (55.8%) of those surveyed disagreed at some level with the wording of this item. The apparent contradiction present in the results obtained for these two items raises doubt as to the amount of credence that should be given to the stated hypothesis. At a minimum, this inconsistency suggests that interested scholars should further explore the extent to which black law enforcement supervisors believe they have the respect of white subordinate personnel. Gaining Compliance from White Subordinates While the immediately preceding survey items addressed the dimension of respect, a final item was used to test the hypothesis (#7c above) predicting respondents would report difficulty in gaining compliance from white subordinates due to their racial differences with one another. Interestingly, slightly less than six out of every ten study participants (59.1%) collectively disagreed with the assertion that: “It is sometimes difficult to gain compliance from white subordinates because of our racial differences.” By comparison, only one-half as many (30%) expressed any level of agreement whatsoever with the wording of this item. Again, it seems as though the stated hypothesis failed to achieve both the degree and direction of support logically anticipated. More detailed examination of the responses obtained for each item included in this section of the instrument failed to reveal any statistically significant departures from the null model using Pearson’s chi-square. In simple terms, there were no significant differences in the pattern of predicted versus observed responses provided by members of this sample to the foregoing survey items based upon when they first began their law enforcement careers. In sum, all three hypotheses tested in this section of the instrument failed to find the anticipated degree and direction of support logically anticipated. Consequently, not only must each hypothesis be rejected, but it should also be acknowledged that the perceived quality and nature of participants’ relations with subordinates of the opposite race do not seem to be as overwhelmingly negative and acrimonious as casual observers and scholars of policing may have previously thought. This statement should not, however, be interpreted to mean that no

Research Findings

141

further research is required into this dimension of the working world experiences of black law enforcement supervisors. Instead, these unanticipated findings might form the basis for a follow-up study using an altogether different sample to determine if this trend holds true. In the meantime, consideration is given in the following section to the perceived nature and quality of relations members of the present sample shared with yet another important reference group - fellow supervisory peers of the opposite race.

Perceived Relations with White Supervisory Peers of Equivalent Rank In addition to interacting with white subordinates, black supervisors must also work closely with supervisory peers, many of whom are likely to be members of the opposite race. For this reason, it seemed vitally important to also examine participants’ beliefs, perceptions and attitudes regarding the quality and nature of their relations with these individuals. Accordingly, the present section of the LEES addressed the research question: “What are the perceptions of the present study’s sample regarding the nature of their current or most recent relations with white supervisory peers of equivalent rank?” Within this context, it was generally expected that members of the present sample would report experiencing strained interpersonal relations with supervisory peers of the opposite race. Specifically, two research hypotheses were stated and tested. The first of these (#8a above) anticipated uncovering among participants a collective belief that white supervisory peers did not treat or regard them as equals, while the second (#8b above) predicted that respondents would report experiencing a sense of social isolation and resentment from their white counterparts of equivalent rank. These two hypotheses were tested through the inclusion of two survey items each, the results for all four of which are reported below. Perceptions of Unequal Treatment and Regard by White Supervisory Peers As noted, the first hypothesis (#8a above) expected members of the present sample to collectively indicate a belief that white supervisory peers did not regard or treat them as equals. Interestingly, however, this expectation was not supported by the data derived from participants’

142

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

responses to two survey items. For example, one-half of all participants (50.8%) collectively agreed with an inversely-worded item stating: “I am treated as an equal by white supervisors of the same rank.” Furthermore, no less than seven out of ten participants (71.4%) collectively disagreed with the notion that they sometimes worry about other supervisors viewing them as “tokens.” Additional information regarding the distribution of categorical responses associated with these two items are reported in Table XLIII. Detailed examination of observed response patterns for both items revealed that participants’ who began their law enforcement careers prior to or during 1980 were more likely than others who came on the job since then to manifest concern with the possibility that other supervisors might view them as “tokens” (Pearson’s chi-square = 6.275, df = 2, p = .043). Table XI reports the results of this analysis. Table XI. Chi-square analysis of perceived regard by white supervisory peers. Survey Group Collectively Undecided Collectivey Item Membership Agree fo (fe ) Disagree fo (fe ) fo (fe ) I worry that other 1980 & 20 (17.3) 8 (10.7) 70 (70) superearlier visors view me 1981 & 1 (3.7) 5 (2.3) 15 (15) as a later token The hypothesis (#8a above) that members of the present sample would report feeling as though white supervisory peers did not treat or regard them as equals failed to find convincing support through the use of these two particular items. This conclusion suggests a need for both casual observers as well as full-time researchers of police behavior to seriously reconsider the presumed nature of relations between black and white supervisory, command and executive personnel. In the meantime, survey respondents’ collective views on not only being socially isolated from but perhaps even resented by members of this important peer group become the focus of attention in the paragraphs to follow.

Research Findings

143

Perceptions of Social Isolation and Resentment Beyond initial concern with the degree to which members of the present sample felt as though they were treated and regarded as equals by supervisory peers of the opposite race, this section of the instrument was also designed to assess their perceptions of social isolation from this important reference group. In particular, it was hypothesized (#8b above) that members of the sample would report feeling socially isolated from and perhaps even resented by their white supervisory peers. This prediction was tested through the inclusion of two survey items, the first of which solicited reactions to the inversely-worded statement: “I feel comfortable in social situations with other white supervisors.” Contrary to expectation, no less than eight out of ten respondents (80.8%) collectively agreed with this proposition. At the same time, however, slightly less than three-fourths (74.2%) reported feeling a sense of resentment from white supervisory peers upon having received their first promotion. Simply stated, three out of four participants thought that fellow supervisors of the opposite race were initially resentful of them having been promoted to an equivalent rank. Despite the clearly divergent response patterns obtained for these two items, no statistically significant departures from the null chisquare model were detected based upon when participants first began their law enforcement careers. In sum, data obtained from these two items create substantial doubt regarding the accuracy of the prediction that study participants would manifest a collective sense of social isolation and resentment emanating from supervisory peers of the opposite race. Consequently, only partial support can be said to exist for the second research hypothesis (#8b above). Indeed, the response patterns observed for all but one of the four survey items examined in this entire section clearly contradicted those which were logically anticipated. This inconsistency between the stated hypotheses (#’s8a & b above) and obtained data suggests a need for scholars of policing to reevaluate the presumed nature of interpersonal relations that black law enforcement supervisory, command and executive personnel share with white counterparts of equivalent rank. Simply stated, study participants did not manifest evidence of experiencing strained working or interpersonal relations with white supervisory peers. This somewhat unexpected (but nonetheless encouraging) finding clearly provides interested researchers with ample

144

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

reason to pursue a better understanding of the dynamics surrounding relations between these two groups. Equally important to determine in the interim is whether or not black supervisory, command and executive personnel also experience strained relations with members of other important support groups such as subordinate personnel, the minority community and family or friends. This objective formed a basis for the line inquiry undertaken and reported in the following section.

Recent Experiences as Black Police Executives Once promoted, it is believed that black law enforcement supervisory, command and executive personnel experience substantially altered relations with a myriad of groups other than just white supervisory peers. To a large extent, it is believed that these changes are attributable to their new occupational role combined with their status as racial minorities operating within a historically white-dominated profession. In simple terms, it was expected that study participants would manifest a pattern of responses to survey items indicating that they experienced altered relations with members of various groups. Those of particular interest included subordinate personnel of both races, members of the black community, as well as even their own families and friends. This expectation formed a basis for the next-to-last dimension addressed within the LEES. In particular, an answer was sought to the research question: “To what extent do members of the present sample report experiencing altered relations with members of various groups such as subordinate personnel, the minority community, as well as family and friends?” Inquiry into this dimension was facilitated through the development of four specific research hypotheses. The first of these (#9a above) expected members of the sample to report having experienced strained relations with subordinate black personnel since being promoted. A second hypothesis (#9b above) reasoned that participants would indicate a collective belief that their relations with white subordinates were also strained inasmuch as members of the latter group closely scrutinized their actions and decisions for evidence of error or reverse discrimination. The third hypothesis (#9c above) predicted that members of the sample would report experiencing altered relations with members of the black community insofar as they had been organizationally removed from exercising jurisdiction over

Research Findings

145

civilian peers since being promoted. A final hypothesis (#9d above) expected respondents to indicate a belief that their jobs had even caused them to experience strained relations with friends, relatives and acquaintances. Relations with Black Subordinates The first hypothesis (#9a above) tested within this section predicted that members of the sample would report experiencing altered relations with subordinate black personnel since being promoted to a position of supervisory, command or executive responsibility. This prediction was tested through inclusion of three survey items. Contrary to expectation, a clear majority of participants (73.1%) collectively disagreed with an item suggesting they did not “seem to get along as well with subordinate black officers since being promoted.” Reactions were not as clearly divergent, however, to a second item suggesting they had become removed from the affairs of black subordinates since being promoted. Specifically, 42.1% of respondents expressed combined agreement with this proposition while another 48.8% collectively disagreed. Finally, a third survey item explored the “tension” that study participants experienced as a result of having to simultaneously balance competing demands for their loyalty. Along these lines, reactions were solicited to the assertion that “Being a black supervisor causes one to experience tension between loyalty that is expected by black subordinates versus that which is expected by the department.” Consistent with expectation, roughly seven out of every ten participants (69.7%) indicated collective agreement with the wording of this item. More detailed examination of the data using Pearson’s chi-square did not reveal any statistically significant departures from the chance model for these three items depending upon when participants first began their law enforcement careers. Based upon the fact that a majority of survey participants collectively disagreed with the assertion that being promoted had damaged their ability to get along with subordinate racial peers, combined with the additional finding that a greater percentage of respondents collectively disagreed than agreed with the assertion that promotion had removed them from the affairs and concerns of lower-ranking blacks, the stated hypothesis (#9a above) expecting to find evidence of altered relations between these two groups

146

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

must be rejected. This conclusion, combined with the finding that nearly seven out of every ten participants (69.7%) nonetheless reported experiencing tension between competing loyalties, suggests a need for scholars of policing to further evaluate this perceived source of conflict between black supervisory, command and executive personnel and their lower-ranking racial peers. Relations with White Subordinates The second hypothesis (#9b above) considered within this section expected participants to report altered relations with white subordinates who would closely scrutinize their supervisory actions and administrative decisions for evidence of error or reverse discrimination. This prediction was tested through the use of two survey items. The pattern of responses obtained for the first of these revealed that roughly three-fourths of participants (74.8%) collectively agreed with the proposition that they had to exercise caution in order to avoid charges of reverse discrimination by white officers under their command. Examination of the data obtained for a second item revealed that just less than eight out of every ten respondents (79.8%) collectively agreed with the assertion that their decisions and actions were closely scrutinized for error by both white subordinates and superiors. Further examination of the data using Pearson’s chi-square indicated a statistically significant departure from the null model on at least one of these items. Specifically, participants who entered law enforcement prior to or during 1980 were more likely than others who entered since then to manifest collective disagreement with the assertion that black supervisors must be cautious to avoid charges of reverse discrimination by white subordinates (Pearson’s chi-square = 6.038, df = 2, p = .049). Table XII reports the results of this analysis.

Research Findings

147

Table XII. Chi-square analysis of perceived relations with white subordinates. Survey Group Collectively Undecided Collectivey Item Membership Agree fo (fe ) Disagree fo (fe ) fo (fe ) Blacks must be 1980 & 73 (74) 4 (5.8) 22 (19) cautious earlier to avoid charges of reverse 1981 & 16 (15) 3 (1.2) 1 9 (3.9) discrimlater ination The fact that three out of every four participants (74.8%) collectively agreed that black supervisors must be cautious to avoid charges of reverse discrimination, combined with the overwhelming belief among eight out of ten survey respondents that white personnel closely scrutinized their actions for error, provided convincing support for the stated hypothesis (#9b above). These findings also serve as a promising point of departure for researchers interested in developing a more comprehensive understanding of the relations that black law enforcement supervisory, command and executive personnel share with white subordinates. In the meantime, it seems important to also consider the nature of survey respondents’ perceived relations with the minority community. Relations with the Minority Community In addition to examining the nature and quality of survey respondents’ more recent relations with subordinates of both races, attention was also given to the hypothesis (#9c above) that members of the sample would report changes in their relations with the black community since being promoted. In order to facilitate this assessment, reactions were solicited to an item which stated: “The higher a black officer goes in the organizational structure, the less responsibility s/he is given for jurisdiction over black citizens.” Interestingly, this proposition did not receive the degree and direction of support logically anticipated as

148

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

evidenced by the fact that only 14.4% of respondents collectively agreed with the item’s wording. By comparison, however, slightly greater than seven out of ten (72.9%) respondents collectively disagreed with the assertion that black supervisors are given less responsibility over their civilian counterparts as they advance within the organizational and professional hierarchy. Further disaggregation of the data using Pearson’s chi-square technique did not reveal any statistically significant differences depending upon when respondents first began their law enforcement careers. Given that greater than seventy percent of respondents collectively disagreed with this inversely-worded item, the stated hypothesis (#9c above) must be reconsidered. One alternate explanation future researchers may wish to consider in understanding why so many black law enforcement supervisors do not feel organizationally removed from exercising jurisdiction over the minority community since being promoted centers upon the possibility that departments subtly exploit them for the political purpose of maintaining positive relations with this segment of the community. In order to be theoretically complete, however, this suggestion for future research may need to incorporate any perceived changes in participants’ relations with other support groups such as family and friends. Accordingly, it is toward this issue that attention is now directed. Relations with Family & Friends Finally, advancement in the organizational structure may also precipitate changes in the nature of relations that black supervisors and executives share with much closer sources of support, namely family and friends. Assessment of perceived alterations in respondents’ interpersonal relations with members of this arguably important support group was facilitated through inclusion of an item which read: “I sometimes feel isolated from my friends, relatives or acquaintances because of my job.” Although four out of ten participants (40.3%) collectively agreed with this statement, a larger combined percentage (58%) disagreed with the notion that their jobs had caused them to become isolated from family and friends. The additional finding that only a fraction (1.7%) of participants remained undecided in their reactions to the wording of this item indicated a very high degree of clarity among most respondents. Interestingly, however, chi-square analysis did not reveal any statistically significant departures from the

Research Findings

149

chance model based upon when participants first began their law enforcement careers. Given these findings, it may be concluded that the stated hypothesis (#9d above) did not receive the degree and direction of support initially anticipated. In particular, the assumption that members of the present sample would report experiencing strained relations with family and friends because of their occupational status must be reconsidered. Interested scholars are, therefore, strongly encouraged to give further empirical attention to this aspect of black law enforcement executives’ personal lives with an eye toward identifying the various coping mechanisms that are employed to overcome or otherwise prevent such problems from the outset. Taken in context with one another, the results obtained in this section indicated that most respondents did not perceive dramatic alterations in the nature and quality of their relations with members of various support groups arising from their occupational status as black law enforcement supervisory, command and executive personnel. Nonetheless, it remains important to acknowledge that certain caveats apply to this broad observation, the most notable of which was the finding that many respondents collectively agreed with the proposition that being a black supervisors caused them to experience tension between competing loyalties. This particular finding suggests an obvious point of departure for future research aimed at better understanding what it is like for black supervisory, command and executive personnel to simultaneously balance the demands of two or more competing loyalties. In the meantime, however, results obtained from the tenth and final section of the survey instrument are reported in the paragraphs to follow.

Current Working Relations Between Black and White Officers One of the primary motivations underlying this study was to obtain an answer to the research question (#10 above) which asked: “What are the perceptions of the present study’s sample regarding the nature of current working relations between black and white law enforcement personnel?” In attempting to provide an up-to-date assessment of how well members of the two races relate to one another while on-the-job, three hypotheses were formulated and tested. The first hypothesis (#10a

150

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

above) expected to find among respondents a collective perception that interracial working relations have improved over the past ten years. A second hypotheses (#10b above) predicted that participants would at least partially attribute this change to the gradual attrition of older white personnel from the profession who may have held racist views. Finally, it was also hypothesized (#10c above) that participants would indicate a belief that some white law enforcement personnel continue to hold negative views about black officers. The extent to which these three hypotheses were supported by the data comprises the remainder of this chapter. Improvements in Interracial Working Relations Ideally, it is hoped that the past several decades have witnessed an improvement in the nature of working relations shared by black and white law enforcement personnel at all levels of the professional hierarchy. As noted, one major objective underlying the present study was to assess this very issue. To this end, it is was hypothesized (#10a above) that survey respondents would indicate a collective belief that relations between law enforcement personnel of the two races have generally improved over the recent past. This prediction was directly tested through the inclusion of an item which read: “Relations between black and white officers are better today than they were 10 years ago.” Examination of the responses obtained for this item indicated that roughly eight out of every ten of participants (79.8%) collectively agreed with this assertion. The fact that subsequent chi-square analysis did not reveal any statistically significant departures from the null model based upon when participants first began their law enforcement careers suggests that more- as well as less-tenured respondents were equally likely to share similar views on this issue. The fact that an overwhelming majority of study participants collectively agreed with the proposition that interracial working relations within the profession have improved over the past decade irrespective of when they first came on the job is not only encouraging, but also provides convincing support for the stated hypothesis (#10a above). In light of this observation, the question now becomes one of determining whether or not members of the present sample attribute this perceived improvement to certain changes in the profession’s workforce composition.

Research Findings

151

The Role of Workforce Composition in Improved Interracial Working Relations One of the primary influences believed to account for the tumultuous nature of early interracial working relations was, of course, entrenched negative stereotypes held among senior white officers toward newlyhired black recruits. A good number of these senior white officers and supervisors have long since retired from the profession and, hopefully, taken with them any remaining vestiges of animosity toward their racial counterparts. The logical question thus became one of determining whether or not members of the present sample believed the departure of these officers has contributed to improved interracial working relations. Accordingly, the second hypothesis (#10b above) predicted that survey respondents would attribute improved interracial working relations to the gradual attrition of older white officers from the profession. This prediction was operationally translated into an item which read: “Improved relations between black and white officers has been facilitated by the retirement of some older white officers who expressed prejudiced views.” The pattern of responses obtained for this item indicated that roughly eight out of every ten participants (79%) collectively agreed with its wording. Much less frequent were responses indicating either collective disagreement (10.9%) or indecision (10.1%). A second, albeit somewhat less direct approach to testing the stated hypothesis took the form of an item stating the proposition that: “It is easier for two officers of different races to get along if they are young rather than old.” Although reactions to this item were not as divergent as those obtained above, the percentage of respondents who collectively agreed with the proposition (51.3%) that it was easier for younger black and white officers to get along with one another than it was if they were older nonetheless outweighed those who collectively disagreed (29.4%). Although chi-square analysis did not reveal any statistically significant differences in the pattern of obtained responses based upon when participants first entered the profession, these results are clearly supportive of the stated hypothesis (#10b above). They also seem to suggest that interracial working relations have improved as a result of the gradual attrition of many senior white personnel who held racist views. It nonetheless remains likely that isolated pockets of interracial

152

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

animosity and negativism still exist within the profession. This likelihood formed a basis for the third and final hypothesis tested. Equality and the Persistence of Negative Racial Attitudes While it appears as though interracial working relations have improved with the passage of time as well as the gradual attrition of older white officers whose views inhibited the goal of professional integration, it remains likely that isolated pockets of racial animosity continue to flourish. Evidence for this assertion may be found in the final Report of the Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department edited by Warren Christopher (1991) serves as a vivid illustration that tensions between black and white officers continue to run high. Accordingly, it was hypothesized (#10c above) that despite a perceived improvement in interracial working relations, study participants would nonetheless indicate a general belief that white officers continue to harbor negative views about them. This prediction was assessed through the inclusion of three related items, the first of which solicited reactions to the statement: “Many white officers will always hold negative stereotypical views of black officers no matter how hard one works to dispel such beliefs.” Consistent with expectation, three out of every four participants (75.6%) collectively agreed with the wording of this item. A second item asked participants whether or not they thought most white officers viewed them as equals. Slightly greater than one-half (54.6%) expressed combined agreement with this statement, while one in four (26%) did not. Finally, a third item solicited reactions to the assertion that white officers might avoid associating with black officers not because they are prejudiced, but because other white officers might give them a hard time about it. No less than one-half (56.3%) of participants collectively agreed that such concerns among white officers may account for why members of the two groups do not informally associate with another. Comparison between the observed pattern of responses for each of these items with the pattern naturally expected to occur by chance alone revealed the existence of only a single statistically significant difference. In particular, it was discovered that survey respondents who became officers in 1980 or earlier were more inclined than others who came on the job since then to collectively agree with the proposition that white officers might avoid associating with black officers out of concern that others might give them a hard time about it (Pearson’s

Research Findings

153

chi-square = 6.800, df = 2, p = .033). The results of this analysis are presented in Table XIII. Table XIII. Chi-square analysis of perceived racial attitudes. Survey Group Collectively Undecided Collectivey Item Membership Agree fo (fe ) Disagree fo (fe ) fo (fe ) White officers 1980 & 61 (55.7) 20 (22.5) 18 (20.8) avoid earlier black officers so that 1981 & 6 (11.3) 7 (4.5) 7 (4.2) others later wont harass them Finding that just greater than one-half of those surveyed (54.6%) collectively agreed with the assertion that white officers view black officers as equals was indeed encouraging. Less encouraging was the revelation that three-fourths (75.6%) felt as though white officers would always hold negative stereotypical views of blacks no matter how hard one worked to dispel them. This discovery, combined with the finding that at least one-half of all participants felt as though white officers avoided associating with blacks out of concern for being chastised by their peers very strongly suggests that the goal of professional integration is far from being fully achieved, at least in the minds of those comprising the present sample. Consequently, the hypothesis (#10c above) predicting that among study participants a general belief that white officers continue to harbor negative views about them must be accepted as holding a certain measure of truth. Taken in context with one another, the findings derived from these three hypotheses provide some insight into the final research question. Thus, not only was it discovered that many study participants felt that interracial working relations had improved over the past ten years and that this change was at least partly attributable to the gradual attrition of some older white personnel who held racist views toward black officers. At the same time, this encouraging information is

154

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

counterbalanced by the somewhat less-encouraging belief among respondents that some white law enforcement personnel nonetheless continue to hold negative views about them despite efforts to counteract such attitudes. Clearly, this finding alone is worthy of serious attention by other researchers who are encouraged to examine the more specific parameters of this belief among not only members of the present sample, but other blacks within the profession as well.

CHAPTER 11

Observations and Conclusion

Examination of study participants’ beliefs, perceptions and attitudes on each of the foregoing dimensions contributed to existing knowledge on the subject in several key respects. First, the obtained survey data revealed that members of the present sample shared many career experiences similar to those reported in the previously reviewed literature. For example, the data generally confirmed that during their first five years on the job many participants: 1) Experienced strained social and working relations with white officers; 2) Felt that agencies treated them differently and trusted them less than white officers; 3) Incurred rejection and isolation from members of both the black and white civilian communities, and; 4) Sensed a lack of fairness not only in the application of performance evaluation criteria, but in the promotions process as well. Consequently, it may be safely concluded that the present study served as an independent source of external validation for various claims, assertions and reports previously made by other researchers. A second and perhaps more important contribution of this study to knowledge surrounding racial integration of the profession was its 155

156

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

identification of certain inconsistencies between the obtained data and reports by other researchers. For example, it was suggested elsewhere that black officers experienced strained working and interpersonal relations with immediate supervisors of the opposite race. Accordingly, this assertion was tested by way of soliciting reactions to a number of logically operationalized survey items intended to assess this dimension of survey respondents’ early career experiences. Interestingly, however, the obtained data failed to support the stated hypothesis - that is, members of the present sample did not appear to manifest evidence of strained interpersonal and working relations with white supervisors during their first five years on the job. While certainly not the only unanticipated finding, the foregoing inconsistency illustrates a third contribution of this study - identifying those areas in need of further examination. Thus, interested scholars are encouraged to capitalize upon these discoveries as points of departure for at least two reasons. First, it would be particularly interesting to ascertain the extent to which the present findings can be replicated using another sample of black supervisory, command and executive law enforcement personnel. If similar results are subsequently obtained, then there arises a need to reconsider prevailing thought on these dimensions of the black experience in American law enforcement. If for some reason these findings cannot be replicated with an independent sample, then it seems only pertinent to try and identify those characteristics which make members of the present sample so unique. An additional reason for pursuing inconsistencies between the present study’s findings and those previously reported in the literature would be to identify potential explanations for their origin. To illustrate this point, consider the finding revealed in the third section of the previous chapter regarding participants’ relations with white civilians during their first five years on the job. Specifically, while it was both expected and confirmed by the data that many respondents would report having been on calls where white citizens refused to talk to them and insisted on talking to a white officer instead, the discovery that many participants agreed with the proposition that white civilians were friendly toward black officers was entirely unexpected. To be sure, the full range of factors which could possibly account for this contradiction must be explored just as attention should also be given to explaining why fewer participants than expected indicated having received assignments on the basis of their race.

Observations and Conclusion

157

In attempting to develop an explanation for these and other inconsistencies between the data and logically derived hypotheses noted in the preceding chapter, interested scholars should first examine how, if at all, certain independent variables might figure into the picture. For example, some utility may exist in partitioning respondents into different subgroups according to the region of the country where they first began their careers. This approach might reveal that participants who worked in certain regions of the country - perhaps the north, for example - had more positive or negative early career experiences when statistically compared to those from other regions. In sum, it is firmly believed that additional examination of the obvious inconsistencies that have arisen between the present study’s findings and those previously reported by other researchers will yield a more complete understanding about a growing population which, up to this point, has received only limited empirical or scholarly attention. To a certain extent, this advice was acted upon within the context of the present study insofar as the obtained data were subjected to examination through the application of chi-square analysis. Specifically, readers will recall from the preceding chapter that each survey item was statistically examined for evidence of significant departures from the chance model depending upon when participants reported having first entered the profession. Results of this comparative approach which divided participants into two groups - those who began their careers prior to or during 1980 and others who entered police work in 1981 and later - yielded several important findings. In some instances, this analysis revealed findings suggesting that law enforcement has progressed toward the goal of ensuring fair and equitable treatment between personnel of both races. In others, however, the findings reported above highlighted areas of serious concern in which the negative beliefs, perceptions and attitudes of participants regarding their career experiences have not dramatically changed over the past several decades. This undertaking and the findings it yielded constitute evidence of a fourth contribution to existing knowledge on the subject. In particular, one of the primary motivations underlying the study was not only an assessment of the relative extent to which reports previously made by others in the literature held true among members of the present sample, but to also identify the manner in which participants’ beliefs, perceptions and attitudes regarding their career experiences

158

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

differed depending upon when they first came on the job. In simple terms, the study sought to determine if respondents who entered the field in the years before 1980 would manifest more negative views and on-the-job experiences than those who came on the job in the years since then. Analysis of the data from this perspective revealed that on certain items respondents did, in fact, differ from one another in their views depending upon when they first entered the profession. Consistent with expectation, it was revealed that participants who came on the job prior to or during 1980 manifested many “negative” perceptions and experiences when compared to their less-tenured counterparts on several important career dimensions. For example, not only were respondents who entered the field during these early years of integration less likely to report feeling welcome around white officers, but they were also less likely to agree with the inversely-worded assertion that departments trusted black and white officers equally. In describing the nature of perceived relations with civilians of both races during the first five years on the job, this same group of tenured participants was more likely to disagree with two inversely-worded propositions - that white citizens were friendly toward them, and that members of the black community generally supported the police. These and several other statistically significant findings reported in the preceding chapter not only highlight important quantitative differences between participants’ beliefs, perceptions and attitudes on a variety of dimensions, but also serve to clearly identify major qualitative distinctions in how members of the two groups viewed their formative career experiences. Given the presumed impact these early interactions and events are believed to have had on shaping participant’s long-term working world view, it becomes especially important that future researchers capitalize upon these findings as a point of departure for exploring the subtleties of these differences between groups. To illustrate what is actually meant by this recommendation, let us return momentarily to the finding that participants who came on the job prior to or during 1980 were less likely than others who entered police work in later years to agree with the inversely-worded assertion that departments equally trusted black and white officers. This difference in opinion between the two groups seems like an ideal starting point for a follow-up study designed to clarify the more specific types of situations in which participants believed agencies may have trusted them differently than white officers.

Observations and Conclusion

159

While such a follow-up inquiry could certainly be based upon a set of similarly-constructed, Likert-type survey items broken down into very specific aspects of this dimension (i.e., trust), it may be more effective to conduct focused one-on-one interviews with participants on the issue. Such an approach would no doubt allow for greater latitude and flexibility in exploring the full range of situations in which respondents felt that departments trusted them differently than their white counterparts during the early portion of their careers. At a minimum, it allows participants an opportunity to not only describe thoughts and feelings in their own words, but it also provides them with a chance to explain how these formative experiences have shaped the way in which they view their work today. Having asserted that the identification of statistical differences in the obtained pattern of survey responses constituted a fourth contribution of the present study, it seems reasonable to suggest that identification of those survey items which did not manifest any statistically significant differences serves as yet a fifth distinct contribution to existing knowledge. Simply stated, the preceding paragraphs asserted that it was important to both identify and further explore the manner in which survey participants differed from one another in their views on certain job-related dimensions depending upon when they first entered the profession. Accordingly, the following paragraphs suggest the exact opposite - that identification and exploration of the manner in which survey participants did not significantly differ from one another is also of vital importance. To illustrate this point, readers will likely recall that no statistical differences were found to exist between participants based upon when they first began their careers in response to the assertion that “The black police officer experienced a unique form of tension between his/her role as a member of the black community while at the same time being an enforcer of the laws.” The same was true of responses to the assertion that “Discrimination by white supervisors is the major factor accounting for differences in job performance ratings between black and white officers.” The fact that a majority of participants not only collectively agreed with both of these assertions but that further analysis failed to identify any statistically significant departures from the null chi-square model irrespective of when they first began their careers strongly suggests that these views have prevailed over time for one reason or another. Therefore, additional research is needed to not

160

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

only determine if these views hold true among members of another sample but, if so, what unique factors might account for their ability to endure in the minds of black law enforcement professionals over time. Just as it was previously suggested that such research could certainly be undertaken by developing yet another survey instrument containing more specific Likert-type items, it is firmly believed that focused one-one-one interviews in which participants are encouraged to explain the origins of these feelings in their own words would be much more insightful. Although it cannot be said with absolute certainty, it is also believed that appropriately-oriented qualitative exploration of these dimensions will produce information that can be put to use in developing practical strategies aimed at eliminating any lingering perceptions of inequity in the minds of current and future black law enforcement professionals. In addition to these foregoing contributions, existing knowledge regarding the beliefs, perceptions and attitudes of black law enforcement professionals was further expanded on a number of other important career-related dimension as a result of conducting this study. In particular, readers may recall that prior to undertaking this study, knowledge on the experiences of blacks within the profession was solely limited to two, maybe three, studies conducted as long as threeand-one-half decades ago. Participants in these two or three outdated inquiries only represented line personnel from a single major metropolitan police department - New York City. At the time these initial studies were undertaken, there were not that many blacks occupying command and executive positions within the profession. If there were, they were presumably astute enough not to jeopardize their careers by disclosing information critical of the agency or their white supervisors and peers. Consequently, little accurate or detailed information has ever really been gathered regarding the career experiences of blacks who have served at command and executive levels within the profession. Hopefully, the present study has overcome this obvious weakness and, in doing so, opened to interested scholars a new area of exploration fertile with opportunity for subsequent research. One of the primary motivations underlying this particular endeavor was to thus gain a more comprehensive understanding what it was like for many black law enforcement executives to “come up” on a job that has been historically dominated by members of the opposite race. In order to develop this insight, it seemed only logical to first determine how closely the experiences of the present sample resembled those

Observations and Conclusion

161

previously reported in the literature by others. The end result of this undertaking, already discussed above as the study’s first two major contributions, laid the groundwork necessary to then ask respondents about their views on a variety of more recent career-related dimensions unique to their experiences as supervisors. Of particular interest were their perceived relations with subordinates and fellow supervisors of the opposite race as well as their own general career experiences as supervisors. Accordingly, the paragraphs which follow are not only devoted to highlighting the more notable findings that were uncovered among the present sample of respondents, but attention is also given to how this information might be expanded upon in the future by other interested scholars. An initial assumption logically derived through review of the available literature used to guide further inquiry into the collective career experiences of black command and executive personnel was the expectation that they would report experiencing strained relations with personnel of the opposite race as they advanced through various levels of the organizational hierarchy. This assumption was subsequently tested by examining the pattern of responses obtained from a series of specifically designed survey items. Contrary to expectation, however, the assumption did not bear out. Instead, it was concluded from the more specific findings reported in the preceding chapter that black command and executive personnel comprising the present sample did not experience the heightened degree of strained working relations with members of the opposite race as was initially anticipated. For example, readers will recall from the previous chapter that a majority of respondents not only expressed collective disagreement with the proposition that it was difficult to relate with white subordinates because of their racial differences, but they also rejected a similar assertion that it was difficult to gain compliance from white subordinates. Examination of responses obtained from another series of items designed to assess perceived relations between members of the sample and fellow supervisors of the opposite race also revealed encouraging results. Specifically, most participants collectively agreed with the proposition that they felt comfortable in social situations with white supervisory counterparts who, they also believed, treated them as equals. Perhaps the most encouraging finding was that a collective majority of participants collectively indicated that they did not worry about other supervisors viewing them as “tokens.”

162

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

Based upon these findings excerpted from the preceding chapter, it appears that the black command and executive personnel comprising this study’s sample did not experience the heightened degree of strained working relations with white subordinates and fellow supervisors as was logically anticipated from careful reading of the available literature. This is not to say, of course, that from time-to-time black command and executive personnel do not experience their fair share of professional challenges and obstacles. When this does occur, however, members of the sample appear to feel extremely confident in their individual abilities to effectively resolve these problems and meet headon the demands of executive leadership irrespective of their race. A sixth contribution this study offers to existing knowledge takes the form of providing readers and interested scholars with a cursory but nonetheless insightful assessment of current working relations between law enforcement personnel of both races as perceived by members of the sample. Encouragingly, readers may also recall that roughly eight out of every ten survey respondents collectively agreed with the proposition that relations between black and white officers are better today than they were ten years ago. Much of this improvement, perhaps not surprisingly, was attributed in the minds of respondents to the gradual attrition of older white officers who had expressed prejudiced views. These generally positive indications do not, however, mean that law enforcement has reached an ideal state of affairs in which black and white personnel have altogether abandoned their negative feelings toward one another. In fact, it would be particularly naïve to believe that the acrimonious tension characteristic of early relations between the two groups magically dissipates over the course of several years or even decades. Rather, the data analyzed in the preceding chapter revealed a strong belief among no less than three-fourths of participants that many white officers would continue to hold stereotypical views about black officers no matter how hard they worked to dispel them. Furthermore considerable doubt appears to pervade the minds of this particular group of participants regarding whether or not most white officers thought of black officers as equals. The conclusions to be drawn from these cursory findings are no less than two-fold. On a positive note the profession seems to have made considerable progress since the early days of integration when black officers were only given “shit” details, not allowed to work anywhere outside of ghetto neighborhoods, and served as moving “targets” for white officers who tried to run them over with patrol cars

Observations and Conclusion

163

as they attempted to cross the street on foot. On a less encouraging note, the profession clearly has room to improve many of its unwritten policies and informal practices believed to be responsible for sustaining an often times palpable tension between officers of the two races. In fact, these very tensions have the potential to weaken the profession to such a point that the greatest threat to its long-term stability as a provider of critical public services stems not from a common outside enemy of any sort but, rather, from racial animosity between its own rank and file membership. Consequently, it becomes exceedingly important that this line of research continue to be actively pursued by scholars with the objective of identifying those areas of concern that are in urgent need of attention. Once these pressing matters are acknowledged and their implications for on-the-job interracial relations have been fully explored, practical measures must be developed, implemented and consistently monitored with an eye toward eliminating the remaining barriers to the long-term goal of achieving professional integration. Before concluding this chapter, a cautionary statement is in order regarding the validity of these findings. With specific regard to the latter of these issues, it is prudent to openly acknowledge that although this study’s participants included some of the most influential black executives directly responsible for leading many of the nation’s law enforcement agencies, the beliefs, perceptions and attitudes reported herein should by no means be interpreted as representative of every single black police chief of the past, present or future. In fact, this is the very type of interpretive error believed to be at least partly responsible for the precipitous decline in empirical research and scholarly interest regarding the working world experiences of black law enforcement personnel that has occurred over the past several decades. While it was probably far from their original intent, the seminal studies by Alex (1969) and Leinen (1984) seem to have been broadly generalized to all black law enforcement personnel so that scholars of policing eventually accepted the initial findings of these two studies as “common knowledge” despite the fact they were based primarily on isolated claims and unverified assertions by especially small samples of officers from a department quite unlike most others. In essence, scholars of policing are strongly cautioned against making the same mistake again by overgeneralization of these findings even though they are based upon a larger number of respondents from a wider variety of

164

Career Experiences of African American Police Executives

agencies. Doing so would not only be a grave error in interpretation and extrapolation of the obtained results, but may also preclude further research into the working world view and experiences of this rapidly growing and increasingly influential body of law enforcement executives. With further regard to the issue of validity, it must be emphasized that members of the present sample are demographically different from those who participated in other studies. For example, Alex (1969) and Leinen (1984) both studied the experiences of line officers whereas the present initiative focused exclusively upon the beliefs, perceptions and attitudes of supervisory, command and executive-level personnel. A second difference is, of course, traceable to the historical era in which these three studies were carried out. These differences, among others, serve as the present study’s greatest strength as well as it most obvious weakness. With regard to the former of these two effects, the demographic differences between the population of immediate interest and those previously studied facilitates the desired objective of learning more about how black law enforcement personnel beyond the rank of patrol officer collectively view their working world experiences. On the other hand, however, the undeniable fact that members of all three target populations were surveyed at different points in time makes it especially difficult to formulate any hard-and-fast conclusions about areas of convergence or divergence in the absence of appropriate methodological controls. This is not to say, however, that the ability to draw rough comparisons between the three studies is entirely precluded. Rather, it simply means that comparative interpretations must be couched in terms of these, and perhaps other, more subtle demographic distinctions. In the final analysis, the most important conclusions to be taken from this research endeavor are that many members of the present sample reported experiencing a variety of negative career-related events during their first five years on the job. In some instances the pattern of beliefs, perceptions and attitudes surrounding these negative events were less pronounced among certain subgroups of participants than others. For example, the fact that respondents who came on the job in 1981 or later were less likely to manifest negative views on a number of career-related dimensions of interest may be interpreted as suggesting that although some changes within the profession have apparently been made for the better, there nonetheless remains room for improvement in others identified by the absence of statistically significant differences in

Observations and Conclusion

165

obtained response patterns. Furthermore, not only did the study serve to broaden existing knowledge by venturing into the previously unexplored working world beliefs, perceptions and attitudes of blacks law enforcement executives, but hopefully identified either directly or indirectly various dimensions in need of more detailed examination by other interested scholars of policing.

This page intentionally left blank

Notes

1. For a general description and discussion of the concept of marginalization, interested readers are referred to Kerchoff & McCormick (1955), Mann (1969) or Wright & Wright (1972). 2. Interested readers are referred to the work of Dulaney (1984, 1996). 3. Examples of such works include those by Douglass (1993), Friedman (1974), Lewis (1996), Powers (1996), Runnels (1989), and Williams (1990). 4. The term “racial parity” is generally interpreted to mean that members of a given group - in this case blacks - are represented on the department in equal proportion to their numbers in the civilian population. For example, if blacks comprise 25% of a hypothetical city’s civilian population, then racial parity is said to be achieved when its police department is also comprised of 25% sworn black personnel. 5. It is important to note that such segregationist practices were not restricted only to black officers. In fact, police administrators have since admitted that Italian officers were assigned to Italian neighborhoods for many of the same reasons, (Alexander, 1978). This admission suggests, of course, that black officers were not the only ones receiving differential treatment. 167

168

Notes

6. In fact, the works of Alex (1969) and Leinen (1984) provide an almost unprecedented glimpse into the working world experiences of this unique population within the profession insofar as they are the only two authors to have seriously considered the issue and reported their qualitative / narrative findings in the available literature. Therefore, if it appears as though the works of these two authors are overly relied upon in forming the basis for much of this chapter’s remaining review of the literature, it is because they literally constitute the only two sources providing interested scholars with such information as it directly pertains to the law enforcement context. 7. Note that this reaction is the exact opposite of that which generally occurred in the minority community where black officers were viewed as “cops” first and racial peers second. 8. This demarcation in time was deemed most appropriate based upon the logic that blacks who entered the profession prior to or during 1980 served during what may perhaps be best described as the first full decade and one-half of widespread efforts to achieve integration (circa 1965 - 1980). It was also during this first fifteen years that much of the research highlighting the plight of blacks within the profession was first conducted, with a considerable decline in attention being given to the issue thereafter. The impression to be taken from the body of literature available on the topic suggests that those blacks who entered the profession during this first fifteen years were exposed to greater professional rejection and discrimination than were those who entered in the years and decades to follow. The extent to which this holds true, however, is unknown and therefore forms an important basis for the present study. 9. The year in which a participant first entered the profession was calculated by subtracting the age at which they first entered law enforcement from their current age. The result for this operation was then subtracted from the year in which the study was conducted (2000) to derive a specific year which was then further classified as either 1980 or prior (coded as 1) or 1981 and later (coded as 0). 10. Available response categories to all Likert-type items included: “Strongly Agree,” “Agree,” “Undecided,” “Disagree,” and “Strongly Disagree.”

References

Alex, N. (1969). Black in blue. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Alex, N. (1976). New York cops talk back. New York: John Wiley & Sons Alexander, J. I. (1978). Blue coats: Black skin - The black experience in the New York City Police Department since 1891. Hicksville, NY: Exposition Press. Alfers, K. (1976). Law and order in capital city - A history of the Washington Police 1800-1886. Washington, D.C.: George Washington University. Baldwin, J. (1961). Nobody knows my name. New York: Dell. Bannon, J. D. & Wilt, G. M. (1973). “Black policemen: A study of self images.” Journal of Police Science and Administration, 1(1), 21-29. 169

170

References

Bayor, R. H. (1992). “Race and city services: The shaping of Atlanta’s police and fire departments.” Atlanta History, 36(Fall), 19-35. Beard, E. (1977). “The black police in Washington, DC.” Journal of Police Science and Administration, 5(1), 48-51. Bureau of Justice Statistics (2000). Local Police Departments, 1997. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. Cashmore, E. (1991). “Black cops inc.” In E. Cashmore & E. McLaughlin (Eds.), Out of Order? Policing Black People (pp. 87-108). New York: Routledge. Charles, M. T. (1991). “Resolving discrimination in the promotion of Fort Wayne police officers.” American Journal of Police, 10(1), 67-87. Christopher, W. (ed.). (1991). Report of the Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department. Los Angeles: The Commission. Cooper, J. L. (1980). The police and the ghetto. Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press. Cross, G. J. (1964). “The Negro, prejudice and the police.” Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, 55(3), 405-411. Douglass, M. I. (1993). “Dr. Louis Tompkins Wright: The first black police surgeon of New York City.” Afro-Americans in New York City Life and History, 17(January), 57-64. Dulaney, W. M. (1984). Black Shields: A Historical and Comparative Survey of Blacks in American Police Forces. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, Ohio. Dulaney, W. M. (1990). “The Texas Negro peace officers association: The origins of black police unionism.” Houston Review, 12(2), 59-78. Dulaney, W. M. (1996). Black police in America. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

References

171

Felkenes, G. T. & Schroedel, J. R. (Eds.) (1993). “A Case Study of Minority Women in Policing.” Women and Criminal Justice, 4(2), 65-89. Felkenes, G. T. & Unsinger, P. C. (1992). Diversity, affirmative action and law enforcement. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Friedman, I. (1974). Black Cop. Philadelphia: Westminster Press Griffin, J. S. (1975). “Blacks in the St. Paul Police Department: An eighty year survey.” Minnesota History, 45(Fall), 255-265. Hahn, H. (1971). “A profile of urban police.” Law and Contemporary Problems, 36(4), 449-466. Hair, J F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black W. C. (1995). Multivariate Data Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice. Hawkins, H. & Thomas, R. (1991). “White policing of black populations: A history of race and social control in America.” In E. Cashmore & E. McLaughlin (Eds.), Out of Order? Policing Black People (pp. 65-86). New York: Routledge. Hudson, M. (1990). “Black and blue.” Southern Exposure, 18(4), 16-19. Jacobs, J B. & Cohen, J. (1978). “The impact of integration on the police.” Journal of Police Science and Administration, 6(2), 168-183. Jenkins, H. (1973). Forty years on the force: 1932-1972. Atlanta: Emory University Press. Johnson, C. S. (1947). Into the mainstream: A survey of best practices in race relations in the south. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Jones, T. (1977). “The police in America: A black viewpoint.” The Black Scholar, 9(2), 22-39.

172

References

Kelly, R. & West, G. (1973). “The racial transition of a police force: A profile of white and black policemen in Washington, D.C.” In J. R. Snibbe & H. M. Snibbe (Eds.), The urban policeman in transition: A psychological and sociological review (pp. 354-381). Springfield, IL: Charles, C. Thomas. Kephart, W. M. (1954). “The integration of Negroes into the urban police force.” Journal of Criminal law, Criminology and Police Science, 45(3), 325-333. Kephart, W. M. (1957). Racial factors and urban law enforcement. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Kerchoff, A & McCormick, T. (1955). “Marginal status and marginal personality.” Social Forces, 34(1), 48-55. Kuykendall, J. L. & Burns, D. E. (1980). “The black police officer: An historical perspective.” Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 1(4), 4-12. Lardner, J. & Reppetto, T. (2000). NYPD: A city and its police. New York: Henry Holt. Leinen, S. (1984). Black police, white society. New York: New York University Press. Lewis, R. (1996). Black cop: The real deal. Shippensburg, PA: Destiny Image. Lewis, W. G. (1989). “Toward Representative Bureaucracy: Blacks in City Police Organizations, 1975-1985.” Public Administration Review, 49(May/June), 257-267. Mann, L. (1969). Social Psychology. Sydney: John Wiley. Margolis, R. (1971). Who will wear the badge? A case study of minority recruitment efforts in protective services. A report of the United States Commission on Civil Rights. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

References

173

Moss, L. E. (1977). Black political ascendancy in urban centers and black control of the local police function: An exploratory analysis. San Francisco: R&E Research Associates. Myrdal, G. (1962). An American dilemma. New York: Pantheon. National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders (1968). Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. National Planning Association (1978). The national manpower survey of the criminal justice system. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Palmer, E. (1973). “Black police in America.” The Black Scholar, 5(2), 19-27. Powers, T. (1996). Eyes to my soul: The rise or decline of a Black F.B.I. agent. Dover, MA: Majority Press. Rabinowitz, H. N. (1976). “The conflict between Blacks and the police in the urban South, 1865 – 1900.” The Historian, 39 (Nov), 62-76. Reaves, J. N. (1991). Black cops. Philadelphia: Quantum Leap Ritchey, F. J. (2000). The statistical imagination: Elementary statistics for the social sciences. Boston: McGraw-Hill. Rudwick, E. M. (1960). “Police work and the Negro.” Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, 50(6), 596-599. Rudwick, E. M. (1961). “The Negro policeman in the south.” Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, 51(2), 273-276. Rudwick, E. M. (1962), The unequal badge: Negro policemen in the South. Atlanta: Southern Regional Council. Runnels, G. D. (1989). Blacks who wear blue. Forney, Texas: Alexander Publications.

174

References

Saltzstein, G. H. (1989). “Black mayors and police policies.” Journal of Politics, 51(3), 525-544. Sax, R. M. (1968). “Why it hurts to be black and blue.” Issues in Criminology, 4(1), 1-11. Sherman, L. W. (1979). “Minority quotas for police promotions.” Criminal Law Bulletin, 15(1), 79-84. Stokes, C. B. (1973). Promises of power: A political autobiography. New York: Simon & Schuster. Stratton, J. G. (1984). Police passage. Manhattan Beach, CA: Glennon. Sullivan, P. S. (1989). “Minority officers: Current issues.” In R. G. Dunham & G. P. Alpert (Eds.), Critical Issues in Policing: Contemporary Readings (pp. 331-345). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press. Trostle, L. C. (1992). “Recruitment, hiring and promotion of women and racial minorities in law enforcement.” In G. T. Felkenes, & P. C. Unsinger (Eds.), Diversity, affirmative action and law enforcement (pp. 91-114). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Walker, S. (1989). Employment of Black and Hispanic police officers, 1983-1988: A five-year follow-up study (Occasional Paper). Omaha: Center for Applied Urban Research. Wallach, I. A. & Jackson, C. C. (1973).” Perceptions of the police in a black community.” In J. R. & H. M. Snibbe (Eds.), The urban policeman in transition: A psychological and sociological review (pp. 382-403). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Watts, E. J. (1981). “Black and blue: Afro American police officers in 20th century St. Louis.” Journal of Urban History, 7(2), 131-168. Wharton, V. L. (1947). The Negro in Mississippi: 1865 - 1890. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

References

175

Williams, N. E. (1990). “United States versus Bass Reeves: Black lawman on trial.” Chronicles of Oklahoma, 68(2), 154-167. Wilson, J. Q. (1964). “Generational and ethnic differences among career police officers.” American Journal of Sociology, 69(5), 522-528. Wright, G. C. (1984). “The billy club and the ballot: Police intimidation of blacks in Louisville, Kentucky, 1880-1930.” Southern Studies, 23(1), 20-41. Wright, R. & Wright, S. (1972). “A plea for a further refinement of the marginal man theory.” Phylon, 33(4), 361-368.

This page intentionally left blank

Index Authority Comments regarding, 58-60 Rejection of by black citizens, 42 Rejection of by white citizens, 54-60 Restrictions on, 27 Black citizens Perceived relations with, 118-120 Black police organizations, 35 Black representation Studies of, 10-13 Black subordinates Perceived relations with, 144-145 Black supervisors Preference for interacting with, 136 Christopher Commission, 37 Community Service Officers, 10 Competing loyalties Comments regarding, 47-50 Coping with, 47-50 Data analysis techniques, 103104 Data collection, 96-98 Differential treatment by departments Perceptions of, 109-111 Disciplinary actions Comments regarding, 61-65 Unfairness in, 8, 34, 61-65 Duty assignments Nature of early, 15-16 Duty Assignments Unfairness in, 22-26

Endorsements of project, 94 Equality Perceptions of, 104-105 Exploitation Perceptions of, 112-114 Family & friends Perceived relations with, 148-149 Favoritism Negative comments regarding, 24-26 Perceived role of, 126-131 Interracial working relations Current state of, 149-154 Negative racial attitudes and, 151-153 Role of workforce composition in, 150-151 KKK, 32, 53 Law Enforcement Executive Survey, 92 Los Angeles Police Department, 37 Minority community Perceived relations with, 147-148 Missing data Nature of, 99-100 Remedies for, 100 Mutual trust Comments regarding, 37-38 Perceptions of, 105-106 National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 2, 9-10, 16-17, 40-42 National Manpower Survey, 10-11 177

178 Negative racial attitudes Perceived persistence of, 151-154 New York City Police Department, 2-3, 18, 23, 32, 62, 65 Non-response, 98-99 Performance evaluations Comments regarding, 62 Perceptions of fairness in, 132-133 Preferential treatment Difficulty in substantiating claims of, 69 Pretesting of instrument, 93-94 Promotion decisions Perceived informal influences, 66-67, 70-72, 126-133 Perceptions of equality and fairness in, 125-26 Racial tension arising from, 133 Rationalizing preferential treatment in, 68-69 Promotion Decisions Comments regarding, 66-67 Racial tolerance Perceptions of, 106-107 Requested Transfers Unfairness in, 22-24 Research Hypotheses, 84-91 Objectives, 83-84 Response rate, 94-95 Rules and regulations Perceptions of fairness in enforcement of, 123 Sample Characteristics, 15-96 Size, 94-95

Index Segregated Patrols Logic of, 16-18, 21, 40-42 Negative comments regarding, 18-22 Positive comments regarding, 19-20 Unintended consequences of, 17-18 Slang terms for black officers, 43, 50 Southern Regional Council, 8 Target Population, 94-95 Texas Negro Peace Officer Association, 35 Tokens Black officers as, 32-34, 104 Typologies of black police, 4246 Underrepresentation of black supervisors Perceived reasons for, 134135 Washington D.C. Police, 65 White citizens Perceived relations with, 116-118 White subordinates Gaining compliance from, 140 Gaining the respect of, 139140 Perceived relations with, 138-141 White supervisors Perceived support from, 136-138 White supervisory peers Perceived relations with, 141-144