Cop layoffs to save money a bad idea

I was reading an article on the front page of your Saturday, Nov. 13 edition of the newspaper. It is entitled “Why lay off cops now.” I think that laying off police officers as a way to cut spending is a bad idea.

In one case, the police officers voted to take 30 furlough days rather than face layoffs, but their union contract forbids it. So they lost almost a third of their sworn officers. This is utterly ridiculous. The individual people made a decision and the union wouldn't allow it. The purpose of the union is to help the workers and because of its actions, six officers have lost their jobs.

The union should have allowed them to take the offer of the furlough days. Even if each person was getting less money, then at least the officers would still have jobs. Ironically, after reading about 80 police officers being laid off statewide, I turned the page and saw an ad requesting applications for the job of police officer. Cutting officers to help the budget today takes away experienced veterans and forces the communities to spend money on training inexperienced people down the road.

Your article said that police departments make up the largest part of town budgets. Rather than cost people jobs, why don't they just reduce their pay across the board? Security is very important to us, even more so after recent events. Why would we reduce our security force now?

David Traviolia

Naperville