I'll answer the first part of your question.
It is different between police services and amongst collective agreements. For example, in the RCMP, if you go to court it's a four-hour callback, regardless of whether you have to testify or not. For other police services, it is eight hours. It can be time and a half; in some cases it's double time. It depends on whether it's right after a shift as opposed to a day off. It is different amongst jurisdictions and it depends on where it fits into your schedule. In most cases, that's all part of a collective agreement. With the RCMP not having a union, it is a bit different.
I think there is a better way. We have software that we're testing right now called CARM. It's software to better manage the whole shifting response, the court detail, etc. But often what happens in the criminal justice system is that a lawyer may not plead their client guilty until they see if the police officer is going to show up. Individuals may show up and plead not guilty for a speeding ticket and they'll wait to see if the police officer shows up. If the police officer shows up, they'll plead guilty. If the police officer doesn't show up, often the ticket is tossed out. There's always a bit of a shell game going on there, and it's hard to respond to that. Obviously when the police officer gets a subpoena he has to show up.
There has to be a better way to manage that, and I don't think the police can do that alone. Again, it has to be a collaboration between justice, the police, and others, in finding a more efficient way to run the criminal justice system.
The police can find efficiencies, but if there are no efficiencies in the courts or in corrections, those efficiencies may not be fully realized. It does require a full collaboration. We have to stop working in silos. We have to work together to find efficiencies because the system is crushing under its own weight.