Oh! You Don't Wanna Do It Like That!

So it appears that the world and their partner know everything they need to know about how the police should do their job and exactly how they would run it if they were Chief, Commissioner or Mayor.

It seems that wherever you go, people are quite happy to tell you how you should be doing your job, where you are going wrong and exactly what they would do if they were you.

Critical of our job, many members of the public think it's perfectly ok to berate us for carrying out a dangerous, thankless task even to the point of shouting out "Haven't you got any rapists or murderers to catch?" if you dare to deal with them for law breaking.

Would any of these people dare to tell their dentist how to pull a tooth, or a doctor how to perform heart surgery?

I ask this because it looks like even Mayoral candidates such as Green Party member Jenny Jones has suddenly became an expert on policing despite never having stepped foot on patrol in a police uniform and having never carried a warrant card.

Her comments for the incident involving the recent pit bull terrier in Forest Gate spoke volumes:

“Calling in CO19 just seems such an expensive way to deal with a mad dog. Could they not have used a Taser?

“Police should have done their homework before carrying out that operation.

They should have realised the potential for a dangerous dog at the premises.”

Not one quote from her concerning the five injured officers. Three with life changing injuries.

...More concerned about the cost.

I would like Jenny Jones to actually attend Plaistow, or Forest Gate, the area where these injured officers police and actually spend a front line shift with some officers and see exactly what we do.

When an incident like this occurs, Ms Jones, we front line officers do not put a thing like "cost" at the top of our list of priorities.

We put ours, our colleagues and public safety first and foremost and therefore I'm sorry if the cost of a couple of CO19 officers was too much and blew the budget.

Maybe if the officers had have put this thought first, the budget would have been saved,

....several officers and public may have been killed by a crazy dog, but at least some money would have been saved.

As for the remark about the Taser. I seem to remember you stating that it would be a bad idea if police officers routinely carried Taser. Stating that we would be "paramilitary"

Having worked alongside many Taser trained officers, I know for a fact that a Taser would have been no good against a fast moving animal. It takes a couple of seconds to reload a Taser and the chances are the probes could have hit someone else if the dog darted out the way.

Two quick bullets, however, did the trick.

....it also saved on the vets bill as after all, that dog has already been destroyed.




Follow me on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/responseplod
Or @responseplod #ResponsePlod

Oh! Mr. Winsor, What Have You Done?

The second part of the Winsor Report was published Thursday much to the misfortune of police officers in England and Wales.

According to the recommendations by Winsor, Police officers' fitness could be checked annually with disciplinary procedures facing any officer who fails the test three times.

Whilst I do agree that there are certainly some officers who need to get fitter, the nature of the job doesn't always allow this as easily as it seems.

We rarely get down time. Eat poor food, usually reheated several times due to racing off for calls. So fast food and microwave meals are usually the order of the day as its quick to eat.

We don't get the time to sit as a team and eat a cooked meal. Mainly because we aren't all allowed to be back at the nick at one time. Even allocated meal breaks don't work as assistance shouts or I Grade calls take priority over every thing.

We don't get the down time to work out. Unlike other services we can't stay in the nick until a call comes out then react. So therefore we don't get a chance to work out on equipment and even if we did, there's rarely the room to store it or the budget to buy it.

And thanks to pay freezes etc, gym membership is now considered a luxury. Thats if you have the time to fit it in with your shifts and family life of course.

If it's recommended that we have annual fitness tests. Who's time do we get fit in? Ours or The Jobs? Either way, The Job should then provide equipment or subsidised gym membership to assist.

Winsor, says there should be higher minimum educational standards for new police recruits.

I cannot understand how he thinks that someone with higher qualifications are immediately better than someone without.

A colleague of mine, left school with no qualifications at all. After lazing around for a bit he joined the Navy. After leaving there he joined the Prison Service finally becoming a copper 15 years ago. He is now an Inspector and one of the best Inspectors I've ever worked with. He has common sense, a nose for the job and is a good leader and listener.

Why will someone with A Levels or a Degree immediately make them a better prospect than him?

Winsor says some should join directly as Inspectors and Superintendents.

This will create an "Officer Class" amongst the ranks. A division that cannot be crossed where possibly the rank of Inspector will become the equivalent of the Military, Non Commissioned Officer.

What chance has a Private becoming a General? What chance then has a Constable becoming a Superintendent or even Commissioner?
I was told that I was sensationalising on Twitter when I said that an inexperienced cop could end up running a Borough or investigating a major crime.

I don't think it's sensationalising at all.

It could end up with someone who's been fast tracked through their probation and given a rank ending up in charge of officers with many years of experience just brushed over.

I've seen many officers including myself, fail the Sergeants exam by a mere one or two percent and whist I appreciate that a miss is as good as a mile. I still see brilliant officers fail to meet the grade because they cannot pass an exam. Whilst those who can, some of those make crap senior officers because they were crap Constables.

How can you have direct entry to the police as Senior Officers?

How can, for example a Director for Hovis suddenly decide to apply to become Superintendent?

They will know as much about policing as I do about baking bread.

Whilst I appreciate that senior levels are about managing budgets and people which a director will be very good at but at times that senior officer will need to make tactical decisions based on years of experience and consultations with their colleagues.

How will a director for Hovis make tactical decisions about the Notting Hill Carnival?

How will that stand up with other people from the likes of the local council when they find out that the senior officer in their meeting about the carnival has only about two years policing experience and most of that was in a class room?

Who will they trust to make the right decisions?

The officer who has made it thought the ranks with experience behind them?

Or the one bundled through the ranks?

Chief constables would have powers to make police officers compulsorily redundant to cut costs - at present they can do this only if police have served for 30 years or more.

So you can see where this is going.

Officers with years of experience who cost too much will be made redundant. Eventually replaced with new starters costing a lot less. The front line will be replaced with cost effective youngsters with little or no experience and no one to learn from.

There would also be new powers to remove police officers who are on restricted duties and cannot return to work.

So under these plans the likes of David Rathband would have been sacked.

It's the same with many other jobs and services. There are always those who swing the lead. Take the money but want to sit at home with their feet up on long term sick. Yes I agree, these do need reviewing and if necessary get them off the expensive wage bill but if you are a genuine case of ill health especially if its been brought on through an incident at work then The Job should help them, not get rid of them purely because they cost too much.

Constables would be able to move up the pay ladder more quickly but a "specialist skills threshold" should be introduced at the final pay point of all officer pay scales.

So they'll be massive queues for courses and the course grabbers especially those I know who sit behind desks getting a shiny backside and apply for courses because "why not" never use them and take up the quota for those genuinely want and need them.

What courses will be classed as "specialist" in order to get this wage increase?

I am a Response Driver, CBRN, Public Order, Search Trained and Optical Intelligence Evidence Gatherer. However, I use these skills regularly (apart from CBRN, one I hope I never have to use)

Those who gather courses to build up their wage but not experience will effectively be on the same wage as me and if not controlled properly, they will sit on these courses and watch them gather dust whilst their money rolls in.

At the moment, these courses are voluntary. That way, The Job knows that those who want to do it, are doing it for the right reasons.

The retirement age would be raised to 60 and a new system of negotiating pay rates set up.

So, I assume that this fitness test will allow for age like the military?

Also stated, it's going to be raised to 60 to bring it in line with other public services.

Do these public services suffer the same amount of stress and abuse with their jobs? Are they frequently having their days off cancelled, changed, lengthened? Do they have to work nights putting up with the evils of society while everyone sleeps?

Who wants a burnt out copper still walking the beat at 60? Theres a very good reason we do 30 years and that's because we're burnt out after!

I can't see anyone getting to 60 as they will probably be made redundant as they cost too much to keep them.

....or collapse under the stress of it all.


Follow me on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/responseplod
Or @responseplod #ResponsePlod

If You Pay Peanuts....

The shape of things to come?....

"Westshire Constabulary PLC today went into liquidation. This was after a a run of mishaps and blunders that could not be investigated due to privatisation of the organisation. Due to the loss of confidence in the board by shareholders and the glaring media spotlight, share prices plummeted and insolvency practitioners were called in...."

The above is of course fiction but could be accurate in the future as West Midlands and Surrey Police constabularies are inviting bids from security companies to carry out particular types of jobs usually done by police officers such as investigating crimes or patrolling neighbourhoods.

Claiming that money is tight after the budget slashes, these constabularies believe that this is the way forward for saving money and increasing front line presence.

Is it the way forward though?

In my humble opinion, no, it isn't.

Private companies such as G4S are answerable to the shareholder, where the constabulary is answerable to the public.

That means that the security company will put one thing only at the front of their agenda and that's "Profit" for its shareholders.

This could mean cutting corners as other companies in PPP to save money possibly affecting safety of those working with and working for the company. Reduced wages, reduced equipment all to save on costs.

I have never been a believer in contracting out to other companies. Yes I appreciate it creates business and therefore employment opportuniities but you need to look at the broader picture.

Take hospitals as an example, cleaning used to be done by the ward nursing staff. Nurses were responsible for the cleanliness of their ward and they were cleaned to within an inch of their lives. As a result, viruses such as MRSA were not in existence.

Give the contract to a cleaning company who's one sole aim is to make money and you could find that wards are quickly dusted due to there not being enough cleaning staff or mopped with an old dirty mop as buying a new one will effect budgets.

You only have to look at the failed Public-Private Partnership of London Underground to realise just how dangerous this move can be.

The collapse of Metronet in 2007 cost us, the tax payer £410 million. Who's to say that this would not happen again? No one dreamed it would happen to Metronet and them winning the contract with Tube Lines was like the Golden Goose.

Has anyone thought of asking the tax paying public what they think of this and do they have their permission?

So let's ask?

You have been burgled, who would rather arrive to investigate?

A police officer, duty bound by law to investigate? The police officer would have been fully trained, experienced and have knowledge of forensic procedures.

Or a security guard who's company will want them to check it out as quickly as possible as they have three guards off sick and it's costing them to send a substitute guard subcontracted from another company?

Who do you want to see patrolling your streets?

A fully equipped police officer who can not only arrest a person breaking the law but deal with the investigation when necessary?

Or a security guard who cannot arrest, will not be fully equipped and in some cases may not speak much, if any English?

Once you start cutting costs to improve efficiency you effect the quality of service.

West Mids and Surrey are claiming that it will help protect the frontline during cost cutting restraints.

How?

If security guards are patrolling the streets, how is that protecting the front line? In my opinion, that's a significant cut back.

Also, how is it a better option for saving money? and who's decision will it be that one neighbourhood will get police officers and another will get security guards?

If that neighbourhood is paying the same contribution from their Council Tax towards policing, I would want a refund or a significant reduction as you are not getting a police service.

It's a cheaper option and from my experience of many things, quantity isn't quality.

The company, once it's landed a contract over several years, may suddenly find that they need to put their prices up a significant amount to keep up with other businesses alike.

The constabulary may well then find themselves in the middle of a price battle that spirals out of control. In several years time, the contract could cost more than having actual police officers doing that job.

That's when it will go full circle.

You see, this is my point. If I buy a cheap garden shed from a budget supermarket that sells other products as well as garden furniture, I may be making an initial saving but in the long run it will show why it was so cheap when the wood rots and the roof falls in and I have to buy another one or pay out a lot of money to repair it.

If I bought from a company that specialises in garden furniture, yes, it will be considerably more expensive than the cheaper option but it will last several more years and will not need much money to keep it maintained.

I know that the police are not perfect and I would be a fool to claim that they are but if you invest the money back into proper policing you will get results even if it costs more in the short term.

This is why I believe policing should remain with the police and let the guards look after the shops.

Follow me on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/responseplod
Or @responseplod #ResponsePlod