Perception or Reality: An Examination of Police Misconduct, Organizational Justice, and Promotion Opportunities in the NYPD

• Author: Helen H. Yu,Deborah A. Carroll
• DOI: 10.1177/02750740221094468
• Date: 01 July 2022
• Published date: 01 July 2022
• Subject Matter: Articles

Perception or Reality: An Examination of

Police Misconduct, Organizational Justice,

and Promotion Opportunities in the

NYPD

Deborah A. Carroll

1

and Helen H. Yu

2

Abstract

Scholars across multiple disciplines have identif‌ied numerous correlates to police misconduct. Missing, however, from this body of

research is the impact of police misconduct on future promotion opportunities in a local police department. Using population data

(N=33,358) released by New York city’s Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB) from September 1985 to July 2020, this study

employs logistic regression to examine civilian complaints that were found to be substantiated, in comparison to complaints that

were found to be unsubstantiated or exonerated, and their effect on police off‌icers moving up in rank beyond the incident. The

intent is to examine the relationship between police misconduct and promotion. In addition, recognizing the inherent differences in

the promotion process for detectives from all other off‌icer ranks, we found that the odds of detectives being promoted to higher

ranks are somewhat impacted by the outcomes of complaints, but not by the types of complaints received. However, our f‌indings

suggest that all other off‌icers are impacted by the outcomes of civilian complaints, in addition to the types of complaints received, in

terms of promotion. Furthermore, we found that the severity of police misconduct, captured by the CCRB-recommended disci-

plinary actions associated with substantiated complaints, matters for NYPD off‌icer promotability for f‌irst-time offenders differently

than for off‌icers who repeatedly engage in misconduct.

Keywords

police misconduct, organizational justice, NYPD, civilian complaints, promotions

Introduction

In response to several tragic events, to include the killing of Eric

Garner (July 17, 2014) by Daniel Pantaleo, a New York City

Police Department (NYPD) off‌icer, President Obama issued

Executive Order 13684 (2014) creating a national task force to

identify best practices and offer recommendations on how

those practices can strengthen community policing and conf‌i-

dence among police and the communities they serve. One of

those recommendations included “establish[ing] a culture of

transparency and accountability in order to build public trust

and legitimacy”(President’s Task Force on 21st Century

Policing, 2015, p. 12). More specif‌ically, “when serious incidents

occur, including those involving alleged police misconduct, agen-

cies should communicate with civilians and the media swiftly,

openly, and neutrally, respecting areas where the law requires

conf‌identiality”(p. 13). However, police accountability—partic-

ularly outcomes to police misconduct—continues to be scruti-

nized by the public due to the perceived lack of organizational

justice, resulting in a questionable disciplinary system.

One police department that is often scrutinizedis the NYPD

(e.g., Ferrandino, 2018; Kane & White, 2009; MacDonald &

Braga, 2019; Morrow & Shjarback, 2019; Rengifo &

Fowler, 2015; Velasquez et al., 2020; White & Kane, 2013),

the largest police force in the United States (Hyland &

Davis, 2019) and the target population of this study.

Although police off‌icers are granted vast discretion in how

to effectively carry out their duties, they are accountable for

(1) violations of internal department rules and (2) incidents

of police misconduct during encounters with members of the

public (NYPD, 2021). The latter is handled by the city’s

Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB)—an independent

civilian agency—which investigates complaints from the

public about NYPD off‌icers. If the allegation of misconduct

is substantiated, disciplinary action is usually imposed to: (1)

correct the misconduct, (2) maintain orderly functioning of

the department, ( 3) ensure compliance to high standards of

conduct and establish appropriate consequences for the

1

University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

2

University of Hawai’iatMa

̄noa, Honolulu, HI, USA

Corresponding Author:

Deborah A. Carroll, University of Illinois Chicago, 412 S. Peoria Street

(MC 350), Chicago, IL 60607, USA.

Email: deborahc@uic.edu

Article

American Review of Public Administration

2022, Vol. 52(5) 351–365

© The Author(s) 2022

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/02750740221094468

journals.sagepub.com/home/arp