week 6 replies

1

22

100 words each reply

526 d1 reply chang

Ethical behavior and adherence to the statute are interconnected but not equivalent, while regulations set minimum criteria, ethical management also demands righteousness, frankness, translucency, and a regard for the interests of all stakeholders. “It is therefore possible for a method which relies on compliance to permit actions that are damaging even though they are in line with the law” (Paine, 2016). There are, nevertheless, three measures which, although they may be unlawful, could still be considered as moral, a manager disclosing confidential evidence of grave corporate misconduct after the internal reporting channels have fallen, shattering a government order that unfairly differentiates against certain workers, and entering a restricted workplace during an emergency in order to save workers or to receive life saving supplies. These instances display that leaders should assess whether an move is lawful in a technical logic only. "True ethical leadership means having the moral strength to report or to oppose improper conduct, even if this brings personal or professional risk" (Cheng et al., 2019).

References

Cheng J., Bai H. and Yang X. (2019) 'Ethical leadership and internal whistleblowing: A mediated moderation model', Journal of Business Ethics, 155(1), pp. 115–130.

L. S. Paine, Harvard Business Review, 29 April 2016.

526 d1 reply thomas

 Here are two examples of management practices that, although unethical, are still completely legal. The first situation pertains to managers placing overly demanding workloads or establishing unattainable performance goals. Although there are no regulations prohibiting these actions, such pressures can lead to employee burnout and increased stress, which run counter to the ethical principles of fairness and employee well-being (Dessler, 2023). The second example relates to preferential treatment in promotions or coveted roles. Managers can legally choose a friend over a more qualified candidate, provided the decision does not discriminate based on any protected characteristic. However, this kind of favoritism erodes merit-based systems and fosters inequality within the organization, rendering it an ethically dubious decision (Treviño & Nelson, 2021).

          On the other hand, certain management actions may be illegal yet align with ethical principles. For example, a manager may encourage an employee to disregard a restrictive non-compete clause to pursue a more advantageous job opportunity. Although this action could violate contract law, it may be considered ethically defensible as non-compete agreements frequently restrict employee freedom and suppress wage growth (Starr et al., 2021). Another instance is when a manager discloses salary information to help employees uncover pay discrepancies and negotiate fair wages. Some companies try to restrict conversations about salary, but promoting transparency aligns with the ethical values of fairness and equity (Dessler, 2023). Lastly, think about a situation in which a manager casually permits an employee to take time off during a personal crisis, despite it being contrary to strict attendance policies. Although modifying the rules may technically breach company regulations, it demonstrates empathy and moral obligation toward employees (Treviño & Nelson, 2021).

References

Dessler, G. (2023). Human Resource Management (17th ed.). Pearson Education (US). https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9780137927357.

Starr, E., Prescott, J. J., & Bishara, N. (2021). Noncompete agreements in the U.S. labor market. Journal of Law and Economics, 64(1), 53–84.

Treviño, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2021). Managing business ethics: Straight talk about how to do it right (8th ed.). Wiley.

526 d2 reply richters

Reading through the text, I couldn't help but think about all the recent headlines with auto workers and baristas going on strike. It made the material on why people actually unionize feel super timely. It turns out, organizing usually comes down to a lot more than just wanting a bigger paycheck. As our textbook points out, "employer unfairness and the union’s power are also important" (Dessler, 2023, p. 497). This tells us that when management is disrespectful, communicates poorly, or disciplines people inconsistently, employees will seek out a union for protection just as fast as they would for better health benefits. In fact, recent research into the modern labor resurgence shows that a fundamental desire for workplace respect and a voice in company decisions is what is actually driving today's organizing efforts (Givan, 2023). This shows that employee relations and emotional well-being are just as critical to a workforce as basic economic factors.

If you look at the pros and cons, being in a union really is a mixed bag depending on your work style. The biggest upside is definitely the power of the "collective bargaining process" (Dessler, 2023, p. 497). Having a massive organization fighting for better wages and job security levels the playing field against a large corporation. Because of this group bargaining power, individual employees do not have to fear retaliation when asking for better treatment or safety standards. On the flip side, you're forced to pay union dues out of your paycheck. Plus, it can be pretty frustrating for high-performing employees since promotions and raises are usually tied to strict seniority rules instead of individual merit. You basically trade the ability to negotiate for yourself to get the safety of the group.

If a workplace does decide to organize, it’s not just an overnight thing. Dessler (2023) states it happens in five specific steps: the initial contact, obtaining authorization cards, holding a hearing, the campaign, and finally, the election. These steps ensure that both the company and the employees have a structured, legal pathway to voice their concerns and make an official decision. During the campaign phase, things can get pretty tense, so managers have to be incredibly careful. The book suggests following the TIPS acronym, meaning managers must remember to "do not Threaten, Interrogate, make Promises, or Spy" (Dessler, 2023, p. 497). Following this rule is critical, because stepping out of line can result in severe legal penalties from the National Labor Relations Board. Instead, management should focus on the FORE guidelines by actively sharing objective data, expressing their honest opinions, explaining existing policies clearly, and talking about their own professional history with unions (Dessler, 2023, p. 497). Relying on facts and open communication is really the only legally safe way for a manager to handle the situation.

Even with a union and a good contract, conflicts are still going to happen. But I really liked what Dessler said about this: "The best way to handle a grievance is to create an environment in which grievances don’t occur" (Dessler, 2023, p. 497). This highlights that proactive, fair management and treating people with daily respect will always beat relying on a formal dispute process after everyone is already angry. As for whether I’d join one myself, I think it totally depends on the industry. If I were doing a physically demanding job or working at a massive corporation where I felt like an expendable number, I'd absolutely join for the job security. But if I were at a smaller company where I could just walk into the owner's office to negotiate my own salary based on my skills, I'd probably prefer to stay non-union to keep that flexibility.

Dessler, G. (2023). Human Resource Management (17th ed.). Pearson. 

Givan, R. K. (2023). Why the U.S. is Seeing a Surge in Strikes. Harvard Business Review.

McCarthy, J. (2023). Labor Union Approval Remains Historically High. Gallup.

526 d2 reply Cecilio

 Employees join labor unions primarily to achieve collective bargaining power, transforming individual workers into a unified force capable of negotiating for better wages, benefits, and safer working conditions.  By pooling their influence, employees can address power imbalances that often exist between individual workers and large organizations.   Unions remain influential. Recently, 14.3 million U.S. workers belonged to unions—about 10.8% of U.S. wage and salary workers. Most are public-sector workers: for example, 34.8% of public-sector workers are union members, compared to only 6.3% of private-sector workers.2 However, in some private-sector industries such as utilities (20.6 percent), transportation and warehousing (17.0 percent), and telecommunications (14.3 percent), it can still be hard to get jobs without joining unions. Unionization also varies widely by state, from a high of 23.9% in Hawaii down to 2.9% in South Carolina. ^1     The advantages of union membership are significant, often including higher compensation, comprehensive health benefits, and “just cause” protections that prevent arbitrary termination.  Furthermore, unions provide a structured grievance process, ensuring that disputes are handled fairly.  Conversely, the disadvantages include the mandatory payment of union dues, which reduces net income.  Some critics also argue that unions can foster an adversarial culture, potentially limiting individual merit-based pay increases or creating rigid workplace rules that hinder organizational flexibility.        The process of forming a union is a rigorous legal journey.  It begins with an organizing drive where employees sign authorization cards.  Once at least 30% of the workforce signs these cards, a petition is filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). ^2 Following a review and potential hearing to define the appropriate bargaining unit, a campaign period ensues where both the union and the employer present their cases to the staff.  The process culminates in a secret-ballot election.  If a simple majority of the voting employees supports the union, the NLRB certifies it as the exclusive bargaining representative, legally mandating that the employer act in good faith.     The decision to join a union is a strategic choice contingent on the specific workplace culture.   In environments where management lacks transparency or fails to prioritize worker safety, a union is an essential mechanism for accountability.  Unions provide a “collective voice” that allows workers to improve their conditions without the need to quit their jobs, thereby reducing turnover and increasing productivity. ^3 However, in workplaces that already prioritize employee well-being and open communication, the necessity of a union may be diminished.       Ultimately, the effectiveness of a union depends on the active participation of its members in the democratic process.   Experts have spent much time and money trying to figure out why workers unionize, and they’ve proposed many theories. Yet there is no simple answer.  Pay is still important. For example, the recent median weekly earnings for nonunion workers ($958) are about 84% of those for union workers ($1,144).6 Union workers also generally receive more holidays, sick leave, unpaid leave, health plan benefits, and other benefits compared with nonunion workers. (Dessler) I would support joining a union if it served as a necessary check on power, ensuring that the dignity and rights of the workforce remain a priority.  Collective action remains a vital tool for ensuring that the economic gains of a company are shared equitably with those who produce them.  

1.  Dessler, Gary. Human Resource Management. Available from: Columbia College, (17th Edition). Pearson Education (US), 2023. 2.  Brofenbrenner, K. (2009). No Holds Barred: The Intensification of Employer Opposition to Organizing.  Economic Policy Institute.   3.  Freeman, R.B., & Medoff, J.L. (1984).  What do Unions Do? Basic Books.  

543 d1 reply Chet

Use of force can be defined as the amount of effort required to gain compliance by an unwilling subject. Effort can be categorized as verbal or physical (contact), intermediate (mechanical), or lethal force. Level one begins with mere presence and verbal commands and escalates to the officer reaching pain compliance and concludes with the officer escorting the subject to the ground for detention or restraint. Level two, intermediate force, involves the use of batons, Tasers, pepper spray, or stun guns. The final level, lethal force, is justified when an officer has a reasonable belief that he or she is facing imminent danger of serious bodily injury or death. Ross (20 23) helps define use of force as justified through the Constitution and your agency’s policy manual. Too much force can result in civil lawsuits, internal investigations, and loss of community trust.

The use‑of‑force continuum can matter because it provides officers with guidelines on using proper force. When there is a defined continuum, it allows your staff to identify what is proportional to the situation at hand and creates documentation that there were decision points during the incident. The continuum lists what constitutes verbal commands, how to gain compliance through control holds, when intermediate weapons should be used, and what meets the standards for using lethal force. Ross further explains that if your agency has a policy that is written, trained, and staff adhere to, and collects data (i.e., early intervention systems), you will have less risk of unconstitutional behavior that can lead to Department of Justice investigations or consent decrees. Another reason the use‑of‑force continuum matters is that if it’s well written, investigators will use it as a guide to determine if your officers acted within policy.

Most people who are not law enforcement or new officers may only know two levels of force: none and deadly. There are many reasons why we perceive force differently. As the public, we may only see a 20-second video clip of a police officer pulling his gun or striking someone. Officers have to make split‑second judgments about the level of threat based on a subject’s actions while balancing their safety, surrounding/environment issues, and department policies. National incidents, such as Ferguson (Michael Brown) and Minneapolis (George Floyd), ignited major reforms to police policy and community pushback that led to Department of Justice investigations using laws referenced in Ross (i.e., § 12 601). Tennessee v. Garner established that deadly force may not be used against a fleeing suspect who does not pose a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others. Graham v. Connor set the standard that “all force claims are analyzed under the Fourth Amendment and … objectively reasonable. However, it is hard for the public to understand use‑of‑force options when they only hear news soundbites or expect an officer to take no action when the situation escalates.

There are ways to close that gap. Departments that share their use‑of‑force policy, release body‑cam video footage, and explain why officers made certain decisions during a critical incident will gain more understanding from their community. On the other hand, if your use‑of‑force policy is vague, supervisors allow these types of incidents to occur because no one follows up with consequences, or officers are not trained properly, you open your department up to liability, causing more community harm. Ross preaches to administrators to manage their risks.

In conclusion, law enforcement officers should know the different uses of force and be trained on when it is justified to utilize each one. The community should be informed about uses of force so they can understand why an officer did or did not use force in certain situations.

Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989).

Kelling, G. L., & Coles, C. M. (1996).

Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring Order and Reducing Crime in Our Communities. Free Press.

Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978).

Police Executive Research Forum. (2016). Re‑engineering training on police use of force. PERF.

Ross, D. L. (2023). Civil Liability in Criminal Justice (8th ed.). Taylor & Francis.  https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781000844719

Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985). 

less

543 d1 reply Yolanda

Use of force is the amount of force a law enforcement officer uses to gain control of a situation, make an arrest, protect themselves or others, or stop someone from escaping. According to Ross (2023), officers may only use force that is objectively reasonable under the circumstances. This means the level of force has to match the threat or resistance the officer is facing and cannot be used to punish someone. The use-of-force continuum is important because it gives officers guidance on how to respond to different situations. It helps officers choose a level of force that is appropriate for the amount of resistance they are facing. It also gives agencies a standard for training officers and reviewing incidents when force is used. Even though officers do not have to move through every level of the continuum, the policy helps them know when they should increase or decrease the amount of force they are using (Ross, 2023). I don’t think most people who have never worked in law enforcement fully understand the different levels of force or why officers sometimes have to make quick decisions. Many people only see a short video online without knowing what happened before the recording started. That can make it difficult to understand why an officer responded the way they did. But, when officers use more force than what is necessary, they should be held accountable because those actions can damage public trust. One example is the shooting of Ma'Khia Bryant in 2021. Many people questioned the officer's actions after watching the video. However, the investigation found the officer responded to an immediate threat when Bryant appeared to be attempting to stab another person. The case shows why use-of-force decisions are based on what the officer reasonably believed at that moment instead of what is known afterward. It also shows why agencies need clear policies, good training, and transparency so the public has a better understanding of why force was used. References Ross, D. L. (2023). Civil liability in criminal justice (8th ed.). Taylor & Francis. Terrill, W., & Paoline, E. A. (2023). Police use of force and policy reform: Contemporary issues and challenges. Criminology & Public Policy, 22(3), 421–438.

543 reply to classmate SOP draft 100 words ( Troy)

MEMORANDUM To: Chief of Police and Command Staff From: Troy Frodl Date: August 3, 2026 Subject: Standard Operating Procedure - UAS / Drone Deployment and Flight Operations

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Standard Operating Procedure supplements the department’s General Order on Unmanned Aircraft Systems by converting its requirements into step-by-step instructions for requesting, approving, preparing, conducting, documenting, and reviewing drone deployments. It applies to remote pilots in command, visual observers, requesting officers, dispatchers, supervisors, evidence personnel, and the UAS Program Coordinator. The procedure covers mission classification, legal authority, airspace review, crew briefings, preflight inspections, scene communications, privacy safeguards, evidence handling, emergency actions, postflight reporting, maintenance, proficiency, and supervisory review. Public-safety drone operations must follow the operating pathway approved by the department and comply with applicable Federal Aviation Administration requirements, including Part 107, airspace authorizations, waivers, and accident-reporting requirements (Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, 2026; Federal Aviation Administration [FAA], 2026). Dissemination will occur through the department policy-management system, department-wide email, roll-call briefings, and electronic acknowledgment. Supervisors will verify that affected employees have reviewed both the General Order and this SOP before participating in a deployment. The UAS Program Coordinator will maintain the current SOP, checklists, forms, waivers, airspace authorizations, emergency contacts, and equipment-specific instructions in a location accessible to authorized personnel. Training will be role-specific. Remote pilots must hold the required FAA qualification, complete department instruction, demonstrate supervised flight experience, and pass written and practical evaluations before independent deployment. Visual observers, supervisors, dispatchers, evidence personnel, and requesting officers will receive training for their responsibilities. Quarterly proficiency flights, annual evaluations, and currency flights after extended inactivity will help ensure that operators can safely perform routine and emergency tasks. The UAS Program Coordinator will inspect flight records, certifications, maintenance, evidence uploads, access logs, training files, deployment reports, and incident records each quarter. Command staff and legal counsel will review the SOP annually and after a serious incident, major legal change, or significant technology change. These procedures are designed to support safe operations, constitutional compliance, reliable evidence, consistent supervision, and reduced civil liability (International Association of Chiefs of Police [IACP], 2019; Ross, 2023). Approval and implementation are recommended.

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE UAS / DRONE DEPLOYMENT AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS Effective Date    August 3, 2026 Review Date    August 2027 Responsible Unit    UAS Program

I. PURPOSE AND RELATIONSHIP TO GENERAL ORDER This SOP provides operational instructions for department UAS missions. It supplements, and shall be read with, the department General Order governing UAS operations. If a conflict exists, the General Order controls. Operators shall also follow the aircraft manufacturer’s limitations, current FAA approvals, department evidence procedures, and applicable Texas law, including Government Code Chapter 423 (Texas Legislature, n.d.).

II. RESPONSIBILITIES 1. The requesting officer will identify the public safety purpose, location, urgency, known hazards, requested capability, case or incident number, and whether the mission may involve a residence, prolonged observation, a public gathering, or enhanced sensors. 2. The approving supervisor will classify the mission as routine, emergency, or sensitive; confirm the legal basis and required approval level; assign a supervisor to the incident when needed; and approve, limit, delay, or deny the request. 3. The remote pilot in command (RPIC) has final authority over flight safety. The RPIC may decline, delay, redirect, or terminate a mission when conditions, staffing, aircraft status, airspace, or legal authority are inadequate. 4. The visual observer (VO) will maintain assigned observation duties, monitor hazards and aircraft position, and immediately communicate conflicts or safety concerns to the RPIC. 5. Dispatch will record the request and approval, identify the operating location, notify affected units, maintain the designated radio channel, and document significant operational updates.

III. REQUEST, CLASSIFICATION, AND APPROVAL 1. Requests should be made through the on-duty supervisor or dispatch. The request will include the mission objective, location, operational need, known people or vehicles involved, and the requested start time. 2. Nonemergency deployments require approval from an on-duty lieutenant or higher-ranking supervisor. Emergency deployments may begin when delay would threaten life or safety, but the watch commander must be notified as soon as practical and no later than 30 minutes after launch. 3. Sensitive missions require the approval and legal review identified in the General Order unless exigent circumstances prevent advance review. The RPIC will document the warrant, consent, exigency, statutory authority, or other legal basis relied upon. 4. Before launch, the RPIC will verify that the requested use is authorized, the aircraft carries only approved payloads, and the mission does not involve indiscriminate surveillance, unauthorized identification technology, personal use, harassment, or unapproved use of force.

IV. MISSION PLANNING AND CREW BRIEFING The RPIC will conduct a briefing before each operational flight. When an emergency limits time, the briefing may be shortened, but the essential safety and legal items must still be addressed. • Mission objective, boundaries, legal authority, approval, and termination point. • Crew assignments, command structure, radio channel, call signs, and communication with ground units. • Airspace classification, temporary flight restrictions, required authorization or waiver, maximum altitude, nearby airports, and manned-aircraft hazards. • Weather, visibility, wind, lighting, temperature, battery effects, obstacles, people, vehicles, animals, electromagnetic interference, and takeoff and landing security. • Lost-link action, alternate landing areas, return-to-home setting, emergency contacts, medical response, and scene security. • Evidence objectives, privacy limitations, body-worn camera coordination, file labeling, and case-number requirements.

V. PREFLIGHT PROCEDURE The RPIC will complete and initial the department preflight checklist. At a minimum, the RPIC and VO will: • Confirm current pilot qualification, aircraft registration, Remote ID status, department authorization, and crew fitness for duty. • Inspect the aircraft, propellers, motors, payload, controller, antennas, landing gear, memory media, and batteries for damage, secure installation, and adequate charge. • Update or verify software and geofencing before the mission when operationally practical; updates will not be initiated at the scene unless necessary and approved. • Review weather and airspace, obtain required authorization, establish the operating area, and confirm that the planned flight complies with FAA limitations or an approved waiver. • Power on the system, verify satellite and control links, confirm home point and return-to-home altitude, test controls and sensors, and check recording and time settings. • Secure the launch area, announce launch to dispatch and involved personnel, and stop the operation if any required check fails.

VI. FLIGHT OPERATIONS 1. The RPIC will maintain control of the aircraft, comply with the approved operating pathway, yield to all manned aircraft, and avoid careless or reckless operation. The VO will continuously scan the aircraft, surrounding airspace, ground hazards, and weather. 2. The crew will remain on the assigned radio channel or maintain another approved communication method. The RPIC will announce launch, significant position changes, loss of visual contact, emergency actions, and landing. 3. The camera will be directed only toward areas reasonably related to the mission. The RPIC will avoid unnecessary hovering over private property and will stop targeted observation when the authorized objective is completed. 4. When officers on the ground are required to use body-worn cameras, they will activate them under department policy. UAS video, body-worn camera video, and vehicle video will remain the original evidence for their respective systems and will be cross-referenced in the report. 5. The RPIC will land when battery reserves reach the department minimum, weather or visibility becomes unsafe, a manned aircraft conflict occurs, control or navigation becomes unreliable, the mission is complete, or a supervisor or the RPIC terminates the operation.

VII. EMERGENCY AND ACCIDENT PROCEDURES For lost link, flyaway, collision risk, hard landing, crash, injury, property damage, fire, or unexpected airspace conflict, the RPIC will use the applicable emergency checklist and take the following actions: • Protect life, warn ground personnel, yield to manned aircraft, and attempt the programmed recovery or safest available landing. • Notify dispatch, the on-scene supervisor, air traffic control, airport operations, fire or medical services, or other authorities when the circumstances require it. • Secure the aircraft, batteries, debris, controller, memory media, and scene; do not alter logs, recordings, or damaged components beyond what is necessary for safety. • Photograph and document the location, damage, injuries, witnesses, weather, control status, and actions taken. Notify the UAS Program Coordinator immediately. • Complete an incident report before the end of shift unless medically or operationally impractical. The Coordinator will determine and complete required FAA reporting, including the 10-day report under 14 C.F.R. § 107.9 when applicable.

VIII. POSTFLIGHT, EVIDENCE, AND REPORTING 1. After landing, the RPIC will disarm and inspect the aircraft, batteries, payload, controller, and accessories; record damage or abnormalities; and remove unreliable equipment from service. 2. The RPIC or authorized evidence employee will upload recordings, photographs, telemetry, and flight logs promptly to the approved system. Files will be associated with the case or incident number and preserved with the system’s integrity verification, access controls, and audit logs. Department data will not be stored on personal devices or transferred through unauthorized applications. 3. The deployment report will record the request, mission type, legal basis, approving supervisor, crew, aircraft, date, times, location, airspace authorization, flight duration, evidence collected, case number, unusual events, complaints, equipment problems, and any deviation from procedure. 4. Non-evidentiary recordings will be handled according to the General Order and adopted retention schedule. The Records Unit will manage public-information requests, lawful redactions, litigation holds, and release decisions in consultation with legal counsel.

IX. EQUIPMENT READINESS AND MAINTENANCE Operators will use the department equipment log to record inspections, battery cycles, firmware versions, repairs, replacements, and manufacturer-required service. Batteries will be stored, charged, transported, and retired according to manufacturer instructions and department fire-safety practices. Any aircraft involved in a crash, flyaway, hard landing, water exposure, or significant malfunction will remain out of service until inspected and released by the Program Coordinator or qualified technician.

X. TRAINING AND PROFICIENCY Before independent operational flight, an RPIC must hold the FAA qualification required by the department’s operating pathway; complete instruction on the General Order, this SOP, Texas law, constitutional limits, privacy, airspace, weather, emergency procedures, evidence, cybersecurity, and the assigned platform; log at least 10 supervised flight hours; and pass written and scenario-based evaluations. Each RPIC will complete at least four documented proficiency flight hours per quarter and an annual practical evaluation. A pilot who has not flown a department aircraft for 90 days will complete a supervised currency flight before returning to operational status. Failed standards require documented remediation and reevaluation. VOs, supervisors, dispatchers, evidence personnel, and requesting officers will complete role-specific training.

XI. DISSEMINATION, INSPECTION, AND REVIEW The SOP and appendices will be issued through the policy-management system, department email, roll-call review, and electronic acknowledgment. Supervisors will verify completion before employees perform assigned UAS duties. The Program Coordinator will maintain the controlled version and notify personnel of revisions. Each quarter, the Coordinator will inspect certifications, waivers, airspace approvals, flight logs, maintenance, evidence uploads, access records, training, deployment reports, incidents, and complaints. An annual audit by Professional Standards, Internal Affairs, or another reviewer outside the direct UAS chain will evaluate compliance and corrective actions. Command staff and legal counsel will review the SOP at least annually and after a serious incident, major legal development, FAA change, audit finding, or significant equipment change.

APPENDIX A - ABBREVIATED DEPLOYMENT CHECKLIST o    Request and incident number received; mission classified and approved. o    Legal authority, airspace, authorization or waiver, weather, and temporary restrictions checked. o    RPIC and VO assigned; crew briefing and communications completed. o    Aircraft, payload, controller, batteries, Remote ID, home point, and emergency settings checked. o    Launch announced; mission boundaries and privacy limits followed. o     Landing announced; postflight inspection, upload, report, and maintenance log completed. APPENDIX B - ABBREVIATED EMERGENCY CHECKLIST o    Maintain or recover control; warn personnel; yield to manned aircraft. o    Use return-to-home, alternate landing, or controlled shutdown as conditions require. o    Notify dispatch, supervisor, emergency services, ATC, or airport personnel when necessary. o    Secure the scene, aircraft, batteries, debris, logs, and recordings. o    Notify the Coordinator; complete incident and required external reports.

  References Electronic Code of Federal Regulations. (2026). Title 14, Parts 89 and 107: Unmanned aircraft systems. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F Federal Aviation Administration. (2026, March 23). Public Safety Toolkit. https://www.faa.gov/uas/public_safety_gov/public_safety_toolkit International Association of Chiefs of Police. (2019). Small unmanned aircraft systems. https://www.theiacp.org/resources/policy-center-resource/small-unmanned-aircraft-system Ross, D. L. (2023). Civil Liability in Criminal Justice (8th ed.). Taylor & Francis. Texas Legislature. (n.d.). Government Code Chapter 423: Use of Unmanned Aircraft. https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/GV/htm/GV.423.htm

Reply to troy SOP draft (100 words)

Discussion 8: SOP Draft Submission

Topic of the Issue:  Officer Response Procedures for Mental Health Crisis Calls.

For my Standard Operating Procedure draft, I selected  Officer Response Procedures for Mental Health Crisis Calls. This SOP gives officers, dispatchers and supervisors a uniform method for responding to people experiencing a mental illness, emotional disturbance, suicidal crisis, substance-induced behavioral emergency, or inability to care for themselves. It ultimately seeks to protect the individual's life and dignity, protect constitutional rights and to minimize unnecessary use of force through communication, de-escalation, and liaising with behavioral health resources.

The SOP initiates with dispatch information the person’s behavior, possible weapons, past violent or mental illness, medications, substance use, and immediate threats. Responding officers are to conduct a scene assessment, designate a primary communicator, maintain appropriate distance, reduce environmental stressors and use active listening and simple language. Officers should slow down the encounter when reasonably safe, give the necessary processing time, offer voluntary options, and ask for Crisis Intervention Team officers, mobile crisis professionals, emergency medical services, or supervisors.

The SOP also explains the requirement for emergency detention pursuant to Texas Health and Safety Code Chapter 573. Officers are obligated to articulate in writing the precise behaviors and circumstances that substantiate the detention decision. Later sections include transportation, report writing, supervisory review, annual training, body-worn camera review, and quarterly quality-assurance audits.

I would particularly appreciate feedback about whether the criteria for emergency detention are outlined, whether a better definition of officers and supervisor’s duties, and whether added recommendations should accompany additional guidance for suicidal persons, juveniles, veterans, or those with substance-related crises.

References

Compton, M. T., Bahora, M., Watson, A. C., & Oliva, J. R. (2008). A comprehensive review of extant research on Crisis Intervention Team programs. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 36(1), 47–55.

International Association of Chiefs of Police. (2018). Responding to persons affected by mental illness: Model policy.

Texas Health and Safety Code, Chapter 573. (2025). Emergency detention.

less