RISING STAR ! The ultimate source to ace your NYPD Sergeant, Lieutenant, and Captain Exam Visit www.RisingStarPromotion.com to subscribe to our mailing list and get info on the next Sgt, Lt. or Captain Exam!
Question #47 was definitely the department vehicle accident (217-06). I believe the DCAS answer was to "issue a CD and send for retraining"...I dropped it, too.
I picked "C" and if I remember correctly, the answer I picked stated "find the cops at fault and send them for retraining". I definitely did not pick the choice that said to issue a CD and send them for retraining.
My logic was that they were responding to a crime in progress and that disobeying a traffic control device was warranted. I knew we would get a department vehicle accident question, but never would have guessed that they would ask us about a captain's duty...either way, I'm protesting it!
If the need to interview a member of the service under the provisions of P. G. 206-13, Interrogation of Members of the Service becomes apparent and a serious violation is alleged or sufficient justification is present, although the violation is minor, a member will be permitted sufficient time to have a representative respond prior to start of interview. Members of the service who were involved in Department vehicle accidents in which it has been determined that the members driving ability was a contributory factor to the incident would benefit from the Driver Training Units Accident Retraining Course. However, depending upon the circumstances, other corrective measures such as disciplinary action may be more appropriate. Therefore, to insure that only those members who would benefit are scheduled for retraining, the following guidelines are offered. Driver retraining should be implemented only if the operator of a Department vehicle is determined to be at fault due to a driving deficiency, based on factors such as: a. weather conditions which e. mirror usage (vans) affect the road surface f. avoiding obstructions, debris, potholes b. loss of control g. braking c. backing h. turn negotiation d. fender judgment The precinct/unit commander will be responsible for ensuring that appropriate individuals attend accident retraining within ninety (90) days of the accident. These provisions will be strictly adhered to absent exigent circumstances, i.e., extended sick leave or other valid reasons preventing timely retraining. Commanding officers are reminded that the Driver Training Unit is a tool best utilized to improve a members overall driving performance. It should not be viewed as disciplinary action. The Commanding Officer, Driver Training Unit, is available to all commanders for conferral whether scheduling a specific member for retraining would be appropriate. New York State Vehicle and Traffic Law (Section 1104 A - V.T.L.) allows the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when involved in an emergency operation, to disregard regulations with certain conditions. These conditions include proceeding past a steady red signal, but only after slowing down as may be necessary for safe operation, or exceeding the maximum speed limits as long as life and property are not endangered. However, it should be noted that disciplinary action would be more appropriate than driver retraining for those members who are involved in vehicle accidents which occurred as a result of their unsafe disregard of such regulations, as opposed to the member merely having deficient driving skills.
If 47 is the dept mva, there could be an issue. It states in the pg that is a COs duty, but a lieutenant could be a CO of a unit, so DCAS might screw us. I don't remember the particulars of the question, but if the cops were assigned to precinct we can argue that a lieutenant can not be the CO of a precinct, therefore it is not within the scope of his duties.
If you look at what nycop80 posted(I don't have a pg on hand), it states precinct/unit commander. Technically a lieutenant can be a unit commander. Not trying split hairs here but i believe it can be thrown out based on the cops being assigned to a precinct, meaning a Lt can not be a CO.
Are we still going back and forth over this ? We established this the day after the test. The department vehicle accident question will get tossed and so will the pins. We just have to break down their stupid loop holes in the other 98 questions.
Are we still going back and forth over this ? We established this the day after the test. The department vehicle accident question will get tossed and so will the pins. We just have to break down their stupid loop holes in the other 98 questions.
Not so fast....just palying devils advocate, consider this:
Lt's are part of the accident review board. People on the accident review board make reccomendations regarding the outcome of dept vehicle accidents. This is where they could get us.
I got it wrong so I hope it gets tossed but don't consider it a done deal yet
The question asked what the Lt. should do not what he should recommend. Two different things. The decision is up to th C.O. The question made it as if what the Lt. decides is final. Throw out!
Regardless the additional data statement applies to precinct/unit commanders. There are many additional data statements that only apply to commanding officers. Are they implying we should know them all for a Lt's test?
Under step 35 under Precinct Commander in 217-06 is states implement disciplinary ( or other action ), if warranted. Also read step 33 under precinct commander, the precinct xo recommends everything and the precinct co puts the stamp on it.
If 47 is the dept mva, there could be an issue. It states in the pg that is a COs duty, but a lieutenant could be a CO of a unit, so DCAS might screw us. I don't remember the particulars of the question, but if the cops were assigned to precinct we can argue that a lieutenant can not be the CO of a precinct, therefore it is not within the scope of his duties.
Question made you lieutenant platoon commander. That would eliminate the possibility of them saying a lieutenant can be a co for this question.
If 47 is the dept mva, there could be an issue. It states in the pg that is a COs duty, but a lieutenant could be a CO of a unit, so DCAS might screw us. I don't remember the particulars of the question, but if the cops were assigned to precinct we can argue that a lieutenant can not be the CO of a precinct, therefore it is not within the scope of his duties.
Question made you lieutenant platoon commander. That would eliminate the possibility of them saying a lieutenant can be a co for this question.
Plus the PG states the duty is for the "Precinct Commander," not just CO, which could leave it open to some LT led unit.
I aim to please. I won't get enough thrown out to pass, but hopefully some of you guys will. 4 years in rank and I have barely moved on the seniority list. Gotta get you crusty old bastards promoted!
I got this one wrong too. I think the protest angle should be that we don't issue a command discipline, we prepare a supervisors complaint report. A CO initiates the Command Discipline process. Everything else in the question is actually correct. The xo ENSURES that the at fault is properly stated, since there is no injuries we are the Investigating supervisor and we indicate fault in the ARPdv steps 17 to 21. Sucks but we have to stick to what was in the stem of the question.
-- Edited by Hangingonbyathread on Friday 2nd of December 2011 03:34:13 PM
I protested this question. Sighting several areas. I think Dcas tried to be cute. They read the note after step 22 where it says if it's minor injuries the patrol supervisor does steps 17-21. This is correct. But in steps 17-21. All that is done is finding fault. It does not give authority to discipline. Step 35 precinct commander implements discipline . This should be a throw out question. Again Dcas dropped the ball an made a very poor question.
Exactly. Good point. Like I said the discipline has to be the angle. There is some reference to considering discipline in the additional data. It's vague. The right points have to be protested to get it thrown out. I need this one.
I'm protesting this one too. The discipline angle is the way to go. Everyone is focused on the patrol guide. I think we all need to submit form PD 301-153 Accident Report-Police Department Vehicle. The sergeant might be the one filling out part A and finding the operator at fault, but the recommendations section is under part B. The form itself states part B is "prepared by the Executive Officer, Precinct of Occurence, under the supervision of the Precinct Commanding Officer. The question was you as platoon commander advising the patrol sergeant what to do. You would most certainly not recommend him to perform XO's duties.
