Why do cops have quotas

Illegal transport practice : Top grade for police officers only by quota

For quite a few police officers in the state of Berlin, this case is likely to raise crucial questions: Why were they not promoted? Why did others move up with the same grade? The reason is as simple as it is disastrous for a constitutional state: For years there was an illegal practice in the Berlin police when promoting civil servants. The interior administration now also had to admit that.

The former police chief Klaus Kandt and his deputy Margarete Koppers, who is responsible for personnel and finances, were responsible for this. One has been State Secretary for the Interior in Brandenburg for a few weeks, the other Attorney General in Berlin. The selection of the best for civil servants prescribed in the Basic Law has been overturned in at least three directorates, as can be seen from the documents that are available to the Tagesspiegel.

Accordingly, civil servants should not only be graded for their actual performance in the regular assessments by superiors, but quotas have been introduced. The number of top grades and second best grades has been limited. In addition, officials who were chosen as worthy of promotion should be given preference in the grading.

At the request of the FDP interior politician Marcel Luthe, the Senate Interior Administration has now admitted the existence of such specifications - after Police Vice President Marco Langner did not want to know anything about such specifications in the interior committee of the House of Representatives in May.

Accordingly, the internal administration, which had previously avoided clear answers after several inquiries from the MP, finds that "individual formulations (...) do not take into account the constitutional requirements" for selecting the best among civil servants "sufficiently clearly".

Has the transport practice been illegal since 2014?

The word “sufficient” is decisive. Because laws, ordinances and administrative acts must be clearly defined. This is precisely why the constitutional courts repeal a law when it is not sufficiently clear. So does the internal administration's answer mean that the transport practice has been illegal since 2014?

When asked about the minutes of a meeting in Directorate 2 on the promotion practice specified by Kandt, the administration now said: The minutes “contain formulations that allow the conclusion that the meeting discussed an assessment criterion that deviated from the constitutional requirements (...) and have been determined. ”But the determinations are not compatible with the Basic Law.

"The police have already been informed and have been instructed to revise these wording accordingly," said the interior administration. Formulations would have to be changed so that "it is beyond doubt that no unconstitutional standards of assessment have been discussed and established."

Ironically, the Berlin police had unconstitutional guidelines. The FDP politician Luthe, who had asked several questions about the practice of promotions and grades and mostly received evasive answers, is appalled. "After the Senate and the police initially denied the existence of these unconstitutional regulations, they are now admitting them to more and more parts of the police," said Luthe. It is about the principles of the professional civil service. “We have to investigate who issued these regulations and why, and who was disadvantaged by them. That is potentially hundreds of cases. "

In fact, quite a few officials are now likely to wonder why they, of all people, were not promoted despite good performance.

The approach taken by the authorities at the time was explosive - for peace in the Berlin police force, but also for trust in superiors.

There will be no binding written regulation for the "target value procedure"

It all began in 2014. The then Police President Klaus Kandt met with the heads of the Berlin police department and head of department. The meeting is recorded in notes. However, contrary to the usual practice, it was noted at the time for the “target value procedure there will be no binding written regulation”. There should therefore not be any formal business instructions from the top authorities. The then "Head of Personnel" of the police, Boris M., wrote it down in an email to the staff of the directorates and the State Criminal Police Office.

M. was the civil servant who later rose to the position of vice chief of the police academy and who, on behalf of Koppers, was to reorganize the training of young police officers. As is well known, the reform failed, the incumbent police chief Barbara Slowik had to intervene and put everything back in order.

Although Kandt expressly did not issue any written instructions, the mail from M. of January 15, 2014 was unequivocal. Accordingly, "Mr. Police President decided after extensive discussion" at the said meeting. We are talking about a presentation that was presented at the meeting.

The officer M. wrote further: "Nevertheless, the ideas of the authority management are based on the (...) presented system and the police chief expects that the target values ​​contained in the presentations will be achieved in the future." grade, pass on and "to be considered from now on". There will be no specific requirements from the management of the authorities.

Luthe: "These regulations practically reverse the principle of the best selection"

The police leadership decided something else - they gained access to the assessment of all officers in the higher service. These are those officials in the upper echelons who wear gold stars on their epaulettes. Kandt and Koppers ordered that they carry out the second assessments themselves for civil servants in the higher service - and thus to control centrally and from the top of the authority which individual civil servants should and should not be promoted from their point of view.

"These regulations practically reverse the principle of selection of the best, because the one with the best marks is no longer promoted, but only the one who is to be promoted can be given the best mark," said the FDP politician Luthe. "This enables a fatal development away from responsible, critical officials to streamlined yes-men." There should not be promotions like landlords in a democratic administration, said Luthe.

[In our people newsletters from the twelve Berlin districts we regularly deal with the police and justice issues, among other things. You can order the newsletter free of charge here: people.tagesspiegel.de]

After the mail from January 2014, the implementation began. A presentation from back then makes it clear what it was all about. With the prescribed target value procedure, only ten percent of civil servants of each salary level and career should be assessed with the grade “1 to 1 below range”, likewise only ten percent with the grade “2 above range”. And 30 percent of civil servants should be rated “2 to 2 lower range”. The police chief's presentation also stated explicitly: “It is not a question of a quota.” Instead, the authorities' management preferred to use the words “scale notions” and “target values”.

But the management of Directorate 2 went even further: According to a protocol dated July 12, 2016, the grades “1 lower range or better” should from now on “only be given to prioritized promotion applicants”. And the management ordered that the grade should always be subject to their reservation.

The minutes of Directorate 4 from 2015 also show that quotas were given for the grades. And officials who are “eligible for promotion” who were selected as particularly “worthy of promotion” should be “lumped together”. In the meantime, Directorate 4 admits that the letter from the management level from that time "was interpreted as an instruction and demonstrably implemented". Accordingly, "indirect influence on the assessments" could have been exerted.

Now new: We give you Tagesspiegel Plus for free for 30 days! To home page