roductivity has value and the city is willing to pay for measurable increases in productivity. That sounds reasonable to most people. The problem is that not everything that has value, or is valuable, can be measured.

One example the city frequently uses is the Department of Sanitation (DOS). The city is fond of pointing to them as an example of what they call “gain-sharing” where a portion of the savings from increased productivity is paid to the sanitation workers who are doing more work. It’s actually a good example because every truckload of garbage is weighed before disposal. Management can count the loads and chart the weight to show an increase in productivity.

The concept emerged in the mid-1980s when sanitation trucks — formerly staffed by a driver and two loaders— were converted to two-person crews that took turns driving and loading. An agreement between the city and the United Sanitation Workers (reached only when the sanitation commissioner issued a request for proposals to convert some city collection routes to private sanitation) resulted in a 33% head-count reduction by attrition. The city saved millions and paid its sanitation workers a significant bonus for doing the same work with one fewer crewmember. Years later, those same two-person crews were to get an increase in the bonus based on extending their collection routes. It was a good program that benefited the city and its sanitation workers. And the concept works when the tasks performed are easily measured.

But how do you calculate the value of the deterrent effect a police officer patrolling the community has? What is the value of a crime that did not occur because a uniformed officer was present? Can we assign a value to the comfort that revenue-generating tourists feel when they see a platoon of uniformed officers scattered all around Times Square? What is the value of a safe and festive parade where hundreds of officers control crowds and keep the peace?

Clearly, our police officers have been doing more with less by continuing to fight crime with historic success, along with the added burden of keeping terrorism at bay — all with nearly 5,000 fewer sworn members than in 1999. Doing more with less clearly has a cost benefit to the city, which treats that benefit like it has no value because it can’t be measured. And that puts our members at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to being paid for providing productivity improvements.

As police officers, our work can be measured in police actions that are taken to keep the peace, maintain order and prevent crime. Arrests, 250s, car-stops and summonses can be quantified. But will anyone want to live in a city that pays its police officers according to the number of arrests and summonses they issue? Talk about your collars for dollars problem!

When the city speaks to sanitation workers’ union about productivity improvements, it counts of number of loads and of trucks dumped and the amount of garbage collected. When the city speaks to the PBA about productivity, it talks about working more days, lengthening tours of duty, giving up days off and reducing night differential. That’s simply because, while everyone agrees that police officers’ work is extremely valuable, it just can’t be easily measured.

Ironically, all the additional productivity that the city pays sanitation workers has been accomplished within the framework of their eight-hour tours. Sanitation workers have not been asked to work longer tours or give up days off because the work they do can be counted and weighed.

There’s no question that the work we do as police officers has great value to the city and its citizens. It is time for the city to recognize that value and to compensate us fairly for it.