HR Management in the Forensic Science Laboratory: A 21st Century Approach to Effective Crime Lab Leadership

By John M. Collins

HR Management in the Forensic Science Laboratory: A 21st Century Approach to Effective Crime Lab Leadership introduces the profession of forensic science to human resource management, and vice versa. The book includes principles of HR management that apply most readily, and most critically, to the practice of forensic science, such as laboratory operations, staffing and assignments, laboratory relations and high impact leadership. A companion website hosts workshop PowerPoint slides, a forensic HR newsletter and other important HR strategies to assist the reader.

• Provides principles of HR management that readily apply to the practice of forensic science
• Covers and emphasizes the knowledge necessary to make HR management in the forensic science laboratory effective, such as technical standards and practices, laboratory structures and work units, and quality system management
• Includes an online website that hosts workshop PowerPoint slides, a forensic HR newsletter and other important HR strategies

• Language: English
• Publisher: Academic Press
• Release date: Feb 6, 2018
• ISBN: 9780128013625

John M. Collins

John Collins is among the most active and respected forensic science professionals in the United States. A prolific writer and speaker on contemporary forensic science practices, John has been a pioneering advocate for the improvement of leadership and HR practices in forensic science organizations. His educational workshops are among the most highly attended of any forensic science instructor in practice today, and his writings have had an unprecedented impact on modern forensic science policy in the United States and overseas. John is a member of the forensic science faculty at Michigan State University, and he also works as a high-stakes leadership consultant and executive coach at Critical Victories (www.criticalvictories.com), a company he founded to help people, teams, and organizations function more effectively in high-stakes, high-pressure environments. John has a master’s degree in Organizational Management and is formally recognized by the Society for Human Resource Management as a Senior Certified Professional. In 2013, John was honored by the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors with the prestigious Briggs White Award in recognition for his expertise and outstanding contributions in the field of forensic science administration.

Book preview

here.

Part I

Introduction

1

Forensic Science and the Promise of HR

Abstract

The mystique of forensic science laboratories should not confuse what is the primary predictor of their success—they must select, develop, and retain the best possible practitioners. The most fundamental principles of HR management stand ready to support laboratories in their pursuit of a healthy and productive future.

Keywords

Forensic; Forensic laboratory; Human resources; HR; Introduction; Crime lab; Crime laboratory; Police; Administration

Chapter Outline

Forensic Science at a Glance

Forensic Laboratory Disciplines

Levels of Responsibility

HR Philosophy—Then and Now

HR History

Federal Labor Law and the Birth of HR

HR and Executive Strategy

HR and Forensic Science—Moving Forward

We can look back on the 20th century and appreciate, at least retrospectively, the emergence and growth of two critical but unrelated professions—forensic science and human resource management. But if we also take the time to study the circumstances under which they evolved, not only will we see similarities, we can also predict that the 21st century represents not only an opportunity to facilitate a uniting of these two professions but also a compelling necessity to do so.

Why?

There are two answers to this question that largely set forth the purpose for this book. First, forensic science is a demanding, high-stakes profession that, for decades, has been starved of effective support from competent, well-informed human resource management professionals. Second, those human resource professionals now supporting the affairs of forensic scientists, law enforcement personnel, or both have yet to be afforded a close look at how modern forensic science works, what its organizational imperatives are, and how the people of forensic science can best be prepared and empowered to meet their scientific, social, legal, and judicial responsibilities.

Surprisingly, no specialized approach to managing human resources in a forensic science environment currently exists. Forensic science, as we know it today, is about a century old. For the most part, it is managed by leaders and practitioners whose only exposure to HR professionals is tangential at best. This is not to say that HR functions aren’t applied in forensic science organizations or that HR professionals are not currently involved in supporting forensic science employees. But there is a difference between being involved and being committed. The reality is that despite the criticality, sensitivity, and need for reliable forensic science services in today's criminal justice system, the HR function in today's forensic science organizations remains surprisingly substandard and not tailored to the unique needs of forensic science personnel—and there are many.

Of course, the vast majority of forensic science professionals will have no reason to suspect that they are being underserved. They are not in the HR business and cannot be expected to have the training or education with which to form a nuanced opinion about how their HR needs are being addressed, if at all. They simply get by with what they have, which seems to describe much of forensic science today.

HR professionals, however, are not entirely to blame. They cannot be expected to understand what happens in the confines of a forensic science organization without being given a chance to see it and experience it for themselves. Forensic science is highly specialized, and even within forensic science exists a variety of areas of subject matter expertise that bring forth their own needs and challenges. We are left, therefore, with a profound disconnect that is both dangerous and tragic. Forensic scientists, whose jobs are demanding enough, must now cope with organizational instability resulting from substandard HR practice. Furthermore, HR professionals are equally disenfranchised as they attempt to support forensic science personnel with minimal information at their disposal about how to do so. Both sides suffer as a result.

The modern forensic science laboratory is equipped with impressive technology requiring personnel having advanced academic and professional knowledge. Courtesy: Orange County Crime Laboratory in Anaheim, California.

Forensic Science at a Glance

Forensic science is the application of any number of scientific principles or methods to resolve disputes, usually civil or criminal. The word forensic is derived from the word forum, which was a center of social and legal activity in the ancient Roman Empire where public meetings, discussions, debates, and trials were held. From these origins, forensic came to mean anything related to disputes. High school debate teams, for example, are often called forensic teams because students compete to resolve disputes of some sort, whatever they may be. Forensic science, more specifically, describes the use of science to bring forth resolutions to such disputes.

Interestingly, forensic science is a broad industry comprised of a wide variety of responsibilities and areas of expertise. In fact, for the purpose of discussing human resource management practices, the term forensic science is of rather limited use. To make this point more clear, consider the following scenario.

Imagine being introduced to a person at a holiday party and asking what she does for a living. If she answered, I work in healthcare, one would immediately be struck by how many possible enterprises that could include. Is she a doctor, a nurse, and physical therapist, or a receptionist at a hospital? Is she a pharmaceutical rep? Is she a professor at a university medical school? Is she a lawyer who litigates medical malpractice suits? Maybe she is an architect who specializes in the design of emergency rooms. We wouldn’t know because the term healthcare is not one that sufficiently identifies or categorizes the myriad people working therein. The same holds true with forensic science, a term that envelopes such a wide range of possible tasks, knowledge bases, and capabilities that its use requires additional inquiry to understand what is meant.

Forensic Laboratory Disciplines

Attentive readers might immediately recognize how the title of this book was crafted to avoid ambiguity. HR Management in the Forensic Science Laboratory applies to the development and management of people in one distinct segment of the forensic sciences—the forensic laboratory sciences. Forensic laboratory science is the application of specialized, scientific principles and methods for solving the most common types of crimes so that courts of law can prosecute the actual offenders—or exonerate the innocent—fairly and reliably. Examples of the most common forensic laboratory sciences are usually named and characterized by the types of evidence examined:

•Body fluids

•Controlled substances

•Digital/computer/device evidence

•DNA

•Explosives

•Firearms

•Flammables/combustibles

•Latent prints

•Questioned documents

•Toolmarks

•Toxicology

•Trace evidence

Each of these areas of expertise is called a discipline, comprised of the collective knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary to examine and test particular kinds of physical evidence recovered from or associated with the scenes of crimes. These disciplines are collocated in forensic science laboratories because doing so gives police investigators a single, convenient place to submit evidence for forensic testing or to consult with forensic experts about certain facts in a case. Assuming a laboratory practices each discipline on the list, each will be located in a unit or section of the laboratory, which may also have its own facility and quality assurance requirements.

This arrangement of multiple disciplines in a forensic science laboratory creates economies of scale that also have the effect of reducing the marginal cost of forensic laboratory science as compared to having individual laboratories for individual disciplines, which would prevent scientists in multiple disciplines from having access to each other as evidence flows from one unit to the next. This ability of scientists to consult with one another pays tremendous dividends in more serious or complex cases where multiple units will be responsible for processing a single piece of evidence. For example, a firearm submitted to the crime lab may be covered in blood. It may also have a few hairs adhering to the blood. To prevent one unit from compromising the work of subsequent units, the proper sequencing of forensic testing is established by policy to ensure that the integrity of the evidence is maintained at all times.

Levels of Responsibility

Forensic science laboratories employ both scientific and nonscientific personnel having different levels of education, training, and responsibility, all working together with a common purpose. For the purposes of this book, we focus on those employees of the forensic science laboratory who have the ultimate responsibility of testing physical evidence, forming expert opinions, and communicating and defending those opinions in courts of law. These individuals are known as forensic laboratory scientists. They will typically be the highest paid nonmanagerial employees in the laboratory mainly because of the skills and abilities needed to function in this critical role. Other nonmanagerial personnel may also perform work that, in one way or another, supports the overall cause of conducting reliable scientific testing for eventual use in a criminal investigation or proceeding. The intent here is not to discount the importance of other laboratory employees who are not forensic laboratory scientists. But when the HR needs of forensic laboratory scientists are met, and those HR practices are applied to all employees in the laboratory, the entire organization will become a more stable and more harmonious place to work.

The nature of the typical organizational structure for a forensic science laboratory requires vigilance among HR professionals. An urban laboratory located in a major city center that employs 350 people, for example, may seem like a well-staffed laboratory. But upon closer examination, we may observe that the laboratory only employs 15 DNA scientists and 10 latent print examiners. The specialization of the forensic laboratory sciences prevents the portability of expertise from one unit to another. A firearms examiner cannot be transferred to a DNA unit if a DNA employee suddenly retires. Similarly, a drug chemist cannot be transferred to the latent print unit when a latent print examiner goes on FMLA leave. In the forensic laboratory sciences, employees remain tightly affiliated with their areas of expertise and the units or sections in which they work. This is not the result of stubbornness or a lack of willingness to take one for the team. The phenomenon is not entirely different than what we might observe in medicine where a brain surgeon, no matter how skilled and experienced he may be, cannot suddenly go to work conducting knee replacements. Expertise matters, and it dictates what scientists can and should being doing with their time and energy on a daily basis.

There is much confusion about what a forensic science laboratory is and the types of roles that are performed therein. We need only look to an organization as respected as the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), an arm of the US Department of Labor that is the principal Federal agency responsible for measuring labor market activity, working conditions, and price changes in the economy. Occupational data maintained by the BLS for a variety of employment categories includes Forensic Science Technicians, which it describes as follows:

Forensic science technicians help investigate crimes by collecting and analyzing physical evidence. Many technicians specialize in either crime scene investigation or laboratory analysis. Most forensic science technicians spend some time writing reports.

In the above description, we can clearly see a lost opportunity. BLS makes no real distinction between the work performed in the forensic science laboratory and work performed in the field. Yet the work performed by scientists in a forensic science laboratory is so different from what technicians (usually specially trained police officers, not scientists) do during the response and processing of crime scenes that to have them lumped together in a single occupational category is inappropriate and serves only to fuel further HR dysfunction in forensic science laboratories.

HR Philosophy—Then and Now

Just as one might suspect that the growth of forensic science over the last 100 years is the result of increased crime and the need for our criminal justice system to have more accurate and reliable ways to solve it, the profession of Human Resource Management emerged for similar reasons and, coincidently, during the same historical period.

HR History

As immigrants flocked to the United States seeking economic opportunity, religious freedom, and relief from oppressive government regimes, innovation and entrepreneurship gave rise to industry. The production of wealth led to banking and the creation of financial instruments through which private interests could invest in and profit from the success of companies. This same wealth also allowed entrepreneurs and their companies to hire, train, and manage employees. And, not surprisingly, these employees needed a place to live and work, which itself created new jobs as construction companies built up the cities we know today. The Industrial Revolution, as historians call it, was a period of approximately 200 years beginning with the development of the steam engine in 1712 until Henry Ford manufactured his Model-T in 1908, which was the first automobile made affordable to a mass consumer base, mainly due to Ford's innovative use of the assembly line production method.

Unfortunately, with all good things come challenges. Many blue-collar employees of that era were struggling to survive and were therefore vulnerable to managerial greed and incompetence. Workplace conditions were often horrific. Hours of work were abusive. Air quality was dangerously poor. Work tasks could be back breaking, but there was little that employees could do but quit. And if they did, someone would quickly fill the vacant spot and life would go on. So for the purpose of surviving in the new American economy, many employees and their families endured great hardship and sometimes death as the result of working in these sweatshops. Among the most famous workplace disasters in American history, one that is still as relevant as it was tragic, was the deadly fire at the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory in Manhattan on March 25, 1911.

The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory was owned by Max Blanck and Isaac Harris, Russian-born immigrants who’d come to enjoy lavish lifestyles as the result of the fortunes they amassed in the clothing industry, producing a popular woman's blouse called a shirtwaist. Known for arriving at their factory each day in chauffeured vehicles, their wealth came at the expense of approximately 500 employees, mostly young immigrant women, who were subjected to some of the worst working conditions of that era. The women were expected to work 12 hours a day on weekdays and 7 hours on Saturdays in the brutal conditions.

On Saturday afternoon, March 25, 1911, a fire broke out in a rag bin at the top floors of the Asch Building in Greenwich Village. The fire spread quickly, but the egress routes were so narrow that it was impossible for everyone to escape. The factory's owners were later accused of keeping egress doors locked, a common practice at the time, so employees could not leave before the end of the work day. Many victims waited at windows hoping to be rescued by fire fighters, whose ladders turned out to be too short to reach the windows of the top floors of the Asch Building where the factory was located. Many victims chose to fall to their deaths instead of burning in the fire.

Although the Triangle Shirtwaist fire is not the only example of workplace tragedy resulting from inhumane conditions, it is considered a seminal moment in the history of American labor, one that sparked a national debate and eventual intolerance for industrial greed and its danger to vulnerable American workers, many of whom formed the population centers of the northeast, living in cities like New York, Boston, and Philadelphia. Understandably, work life in the sweatshop factories of the northeast was too much for some to bear, and thanks to the invention of the steam engine, there was a way out. Railroad lines were being built as Americans were looking west in search of new opportunities and less burdensome lifestyles. Particularly in the wake of the Civil War, westward expansion happened quickly, and the railroads grew as arguably the most critical industry in the United States after the turn of the 20th century. It is estimated that approximately 35,000 miles of track had been laid between 1866 and 1873.

Westward expansion gave rise to American railroads, which became hotbeds of labor unrest. The Great Railroad Strike of 1877 prompted aggressive activism leading to labor reforms that affected nearly every industry. Image by Shutterstock.

But just as it happened in the northeast, the growth of the railroads eventually produced the same kinds of working conditions that made factory life unbearable. Attitudes, fortunately, had changed by then. The lessons of the Triangle Shirtwaist fire had fueled an unrelenting movement to improve workplace conditions and contain the industrial greed that was causing it. So in 1877, when the Baltimore & Ohio (B&O) Railroad cut wages for the third time in a year, railroad workers went on strike, virtually shutting down railroad traffic in West Virginia.

Quickly, word of the strike spread and workers in other states, including Illinois, Maryland, and Pennsylvania, also began to shut down railroad traffic. There were no labor unions yet, meaning that workers were unrepresented and personally exposed to the risks of their actions. Federal troops were eventually called in, which ended the Great Railroad Strike of 1977, 45 days after it started. But the economic damages were so significant that both sides, management and labor, began to prepare themselves for the next possible strike. Railroad management lobbied lawmakers to outlaw strikes and prevent the kinds of chaos that erupted in 1877. Similarly, labor witnessed first-hand the power it held when it acted in an organized fashion and saw that they could potentially improve working conditions and protect workers from unscrupulous management by bargaining with management collectively. The labor union was born.

Federal Labor Law and the Birth of HR

The first half of the 20th century is marked by an astonishing volume of activism, legislation, and regulation aimed at producing more humane conditions for American workers. Entire textbooks have been written on individual laws so it is unnecessary to cover each of them here. But in understanding how the profession of Human Resource Management emerged and became what it is today, it is necessary to appreciate that the earliest years of HR resulted from the passage of laws that were the direct outcome of fierce labor union activity and advocacy.

For example, consider the most sweeping and influential labor law in history, the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which is also known as the Wage and Hour Law. FLSA sought to eliminate what labor unions argued were abusively long work hours and wages that were unacceptably low, especially when considered in the context of the wealth being enjoyed by upper management. Later in the 20th century, President Richard M. Nixon signed what would become labor legislation of equal importance. The Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) clearly defined employee rights to safe and healthy working conditions as well as the right to file complaints against their employers without suffering retaliation. The law created the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which has the authority to respond to employee complaints by inspecting suspicious work locations and punishing nonconforming employers with fines. Both FLSA and OSHA are two landmark laws brought forth by the labor activism that erupted in the early 1900s.

The many laws passed to improve work life for employees, however, created regulatory conditions that required employers to hire or assign specially trained personnel who were responsible for monitoring compliance with changing labor legislation. Anything related to the management of employees within the context of legislative compliance came to be known simply as personnel, a field of work dedicated to assisting employers with their conformance to labor legislation. In 1948, the American Society for Personnel Administration (ASPA) was formed and headquartered in Berea, Ohio.

With the economic boom that occurred in the 1980s, personnel administrators took on greater importance in organizations as successful companies grew to become enormous corporations, some with tens of thousands of employees. In 1984, ASPA moved its offices to Alexandria, Virginia, where it could gain better access to legislators in Washington, D.C., not simply for the purposes of lobbying, but to stay informed of new or potential changes to labor legislation. The move also came at a time when personnel administration was being recognized as more than simply writing paychecks and keeping track of time. In 1989, ASPA changed its name to the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM). SHRM is still located in Alexandria, Virginia. SHRM also has an office in Sacramento, California, and has approximately 600 individual chapters located around the world. As of this writing, SHRM has approximately 275,000 members and 450 employees.

HR and Executive Strategy

At its core, the management of human resources is about the hiring, development, and retention of effective employees. Competent HR professionals recognize that the goals and objectives of any organization cannot be realized unless the right people are employed in the right positions. At the same time, organizational leaders are constantly evaluating these goals and objectives as conditions in the marketplace change. When executive decisions result in significant shifts of organizational priorities, HR must react to ensure that employee hiring and development practices become aligned with the stated organizational vision.

This complex interaction between HR and executive leadership is a relatively newer trend. In years past, HR, or personnel as it was called, was largely a transactional enterprise focused almost exclusively on payroll, benefits, and time keeping. HR practitioners were responsible for ensuring that employees were paid correctly and on time. They also maintained records so that compensation paid was commensurate with hours worked. Managing eligibility for and administration of benefits was also a critical function in the traditional HR model.

Still, of course, these responsibilities continue to fall within the realm of the contemporary HR department as it did in the past. But today, the transactional nature of HR has matured into a transformational influence within many modern organizations. Jack Welch, the famous CEO of General Electric from 1981 to 2001, hailed HR as among the most critical functions in any organization. During his tenure as CEO at GE, the company's value rose by 4000%. Welch believed that HR was the foundation of corporate strategy because of its focus on people. Here's what he said:

HR is the driving force behind what makes a winning team. We make the argument that the team that fields the best players wins. HR is involved in making sure we field the best players. That's their job. Their job is to sit in every meeting, be involved in every part of the business equation. They’re not the health and happiness, picnics and benefits team. They are the development team developing today's and tomorrow's leaders. If you have an organization where HR is relegated to forms and benefits, you’ve got the wrong game going.

Jack Welch's understanding of the importance of HR in driving organizational success created an environment where HR had a seat at the table. This connected HR's employee hiring and development practices with GE's corporate vision. Thus, HR was in a better position to advance GE's goals and objectives while also being able to react faster to changes in direction as communicated by Welch and his executive leadership team. And, to a large extent, Jack Welch could better gauge the capacity of his company by considering HR's perspective on what the GE workforce may or may not be able to achieve at any one time.

The GE example illustrates the potential for organizations to advance by keeping HR, as Jack Welch said, involved in every part of every business equation. This means that HR professionals must have a complete and nuanced understanding of the employees, what they do, the issues and challenges they face, how they do what they do, and what they need to become in order to contribute to the organization's advancement.

HR and Forensic Science—Moving Forward

Contrast this 21st century, contemporary philosophy of HR with current HR practices in most forensic science laboratories and we are confronted with a most dismal reality. Not only do the HR practices in many forensic science laboratories suffer the shortcomings that are generally common in the public sector, these shortcomings are exacerbated by an excessive focus on supporting the policing functions of the law enforcement agencies in which so many public forensic science laboratories operate. HR professionals in a typical law enforcement agency are likely well-informed about all things related to policing. The same is likely not true for the forensic science operations. The more forensic laboratory professionals learn about the potential for HR to drive progress in their organizations, the more they will come to understand how underserved they are as compared to what is actually possible.

Forensic laboratory scientists should consider the following questions when evaluating the effectiveness of their HR support. Answering no to any of these questions is a sign that the current HR function is substandard:

1.My HR representatives, with few exceptions, are always available to discuss and consider emerging issues.

2.From time to time, and without prompting, my HR representatives approach my laboratory to initiate conversations about emerging trends in forensic science.

3.My HR representatives make an effort to attend forensic science conferences when possible.

4.My HR has representatives who are sufficiently knowledgeable about forensic science to give a presentation or write an article about forensic science management topics.

5.My HR representatives subscribe to forensic science literature.

6.My HR representatives regularly initiate discussion about current organizational structures and employee assignments to ensure that my laboratory is well-positioned for the future.

7.My HR representatives request and file copies of records for training completed.

8.My HR representatives track dates of expiration for active professional certifications and memberships.

9.My HR representatives make training recommendations to our forensic science employees.

10.My HR representatives take an interest in our accreditation audits and ask to see copies of reports.

It is highly unlikely that any employee working within a public forensic science laboratory today would be able to answer yes to many or most of the above questions. This is because HR tends to function as a semidisinterested service provider, where forensic scientists are treated as customers whose requests are processed as time and resources allow. HR might also be tasked with having to serve other nonforensic customers. That HR should perform and communicate as an enthusiastic partner with forensic science personnel is nothing short of a pie-in-the-sky dream in most of today's forensic science laboratories.

Regardless of how dysfunctional the nature of the relationship between a forensic science laboratory and its HR support might be, it doesn’t have to be this way. HR can become a source of support and stability for a forensic science laboratory. Similarly, forensic science laboratories can learn to communicate more effectively with HR by understanding how HR works and affording HR representatives a seat at the table.

The author is confident that this book will serve as a resource in creating whatever improvements are necessary or possible.

2

The Story of Forensic Science

Abstract

For readers seeking to better understand and support the forensic laboratory sciences, this chapter tells the story of forensic science in a clear and compelling way. It also helps anyone not familiar with the history of forensic science to better understand where it came from, and how it got to where it is.

Keywords

History; Forensic; Forensic science; Crime lab; Criminal justice; 20th century; Crime; Crime wave

Chapter Outline

The Early 1900s

Forensic Science and Workplace Safety

The Radium Girls

The Loony Gas Building

The Crime Explosion

The St. Valentine's Day Massacre

The Baby Lindbergh Murder

Insatiable Demand for Forensic Science

In the previous chapter, a brief history of human resource management was outlined to help readers understand the circumstances that made the profession a necessity. As we saw, it emerged as the result of legislation and regulation aimed at protecting employees from inhumane work conditions, substandard compensation, and abusively long work hours. Human resource management, therefore, became necessary to help organizations comply with new or changing laws. Eventually, the profession would become much more than this, but initially it was born of the need for employers to rethink how they were doing business and bring a stop to what had become the unacceptable mistreatment and endangerment of employees.

In this chapter, we will look at the circumstances that gave rise to the forensic laboratory sciences as we know them. But we will do so by also highlighting the unappreciated relationship between forensic science and the early American labor movement, which would eventually create the necessity for the modern HR function. It is, in fact, in the early years of the 20th century that pioneering forensic scientists in the United States played a critical role in proving that employee deaths and illnesses were being caused by workplace exposures. In this regard, forensic scientists and human resource managers share a storied past that is worthy of both attention and celebration.

The Early 1900s

At the dawn of the 20th century, the United States was still recovering from the death and damage of the civil war. More American soldiers died in the civil war than all other wars combined, a grim statistic that remains true to this day. The population of the United States had grown to over 76 million, and large clusters of urban population centers had developed into major cities having their own economies and systems of governance. To keep the peace during the critical years of the reconstruction, policing had evolved from a community-based volunteer endeavor to a full-time occupation where cities, townships, and counties hired and employed their own police officers. The concept of uniformed policing arose as many of these new professional police officers wore surplus uniforms made available by the Union Army after the end of the civil