cheese_puff

Resident Members
  • Content count

    3,307
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    61

cheese_puff last won the day on February 19

cheese_puff had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,031 Excellent

About cheese_puff

  • Rank
    Forum Member
  • Birthday

Recent Profile Visitors

305 profile views
  1. The way the CARE sceme works, part time has no effect on length of service for the purposes of the Pension. Every year you build up an individual 'pot' (imaginary but it's easier to think of it that way) as a proportion of your earnings. So whatever you earn, your 'pot' is 1.8% of that, which then gets enhanced by CPI plus 1.25% every year. Same with next year's etc etc. So if you earn less (by virtue of being part time) then you just have a smaller 'pot'. Doesn't have any bearing on when you can leave, other than your own economic circumstances. And obviously the before or after 55 bit which you know about. The only time length of service comes into play is with the 87 pension as you have pointed out. You need 25 years which means you can take it at 50 and 17 years gives you 17/50ths etc etc. But you know all that.
  2. I presume that's directed at Archermav? As a career tec, you're preaching to the converted with me.
  3. Yes I agree entirely. You can have bigger response teams, but more abstractions, or smaller response teams and less abstractions. Whichever produces the most (effective) cop hours on the streets. Ours isn't perfect by any means.
  4. Their words, not mine. Actually they also used the word 'promotion ' too. However there are still the odd few people who won't accept that going into the Dept is actually a promotion, so I didn't use it.
  5. Are they? Well they don't seem suffering breakdowns where I work. No-one wants to come off it to do other things as they all claim (to me at least) that they like the life. No carry over of jobs and a fresh start every day. They seem to like the shift pattern as well. What's not to like about the whole thing. No-one wants to join CID any more, far too much hassle. CID seem to be the ones suffering stress from workloads. The response teams simply don't have a workload. I used to see it in the weekly performance figures, they don't carry any crimes at all. If they did then questions would be asked as to why they are. It's one of the few times in my service that response policing has not been bottom of the heap.
  6. It's precisely because there are all these units that there are plenty of people for response policing. Everything is handed over and they are back out again for the next job as opposed to being tied up for the rest of the shift.
  7. I think it just shows the disparity of different forces. Ours, response officers just drive from call to call and whatever they deal with gets handed over to the relevant unit. Mispers, high risk to the CID, others to the Misper unit, arrests to the relevant investigation department, crimes with suspects again to the relevant department. At the end of the day they hang up their uniform and start completely afresh the next time they are on duty. Whilst I can see the merits of it, it does foster a handover culture and there is no real interest in seeing a professional job done. People would be arrested who didn't necessarily need to be arrested, most statements started with the dreaded 'I am the above named person and I live at an address known to police' type thing. We don't really have that many non confrontational positions and those that exist are generally taken up with restricted (health or discipline wise) full time officers. However I accept that forces have different procedures.
  8. Being slightly pedantic I'm struggling to work out how someone can 'know what they don't know'! 😉 I tend to agree somewhat with the last bit. Winsor did try to recognise this but was met with a fair amount of opposition from the Police and the Federation kicked it into touch. The US do this. For example the NYPD reward detectives and have a higher pay structure to recognise the extra skill and responsibility. This can be continued and promotion to Detective first grade pays about the same as a Lieutenant (I guess equivalent to an Inspector). They also have Detective specialists as well as Detective Investigators who are also rewarded commensurately. Just can't see a similar thing happening here.
  9. I presume this was a while ago. Part time now, just seems to mean that you do less hours in the same role, nothing more, nothing less. It's ideally suited to response team where there is no carrying of jobs. You book off at the end of the day and start afresh the next time you're at work, the same as everyone else. Presents slightly more of an issue in the CID where there is a caseload, but still perfectly manageable.
  10. I believe he did a lot of Aid so relatively few court appearances. But obviously he had no choice if he was giving evidence.
  11. I miss that! It was a fantastic pattern. Actually it was the Friday I had off. I felt that two days wasn't enough for a weekend so the Friday made it more relaxing. I think (hope) that Zulu is joking. I remember coming across someone who only worked Sat and Sundays. Never did mon to fri as he was doing some course during the week. Worked well for him.
  12. No it wouldn't affect your service, 25 years is 25 years whether full or part time. Obviously you'll get less in the end. As far as I am aware the Pension you get is based on the full time equivalent salary.
  13. They challenged the Transitional Protection provisions. Similar to us.
  14. I saw. That's a bit of a setback!!
  15. I have no experience of the army, but a reasonable amount of the RN and the RAF and I tend to agree with you, it seems to work fairly well in those services. As you say there is a certain amount of taking advice from others more experienced in the particular field but that's the whole concept of leadership. Maybe less so in the RAF since being a pilot is generally an officer only role. No-one expects a leader to know absolutely everything, indeed it would be somewhat detrimental - a jack of all trades, master of none can be a dangerous thing. The PM has advisors in the same way as the CEO of a major company has advisors, in the same way that an Admiral of the fleet has advisors, in the same way that the Duty Officer would come and ask my advice about stuff that was my field but not his. The trick is obviously being able to assimilate the information and then make the right decision based on that. Agreed it's not an easy thing for a Direct Entrant to do. But there's no reason why, with the right recruitment strategy, training and support, someone from the outside world couldn't do it quite successfully. We don't have the monopoly on snap decisions that affect people's lives, the armed forces do it quite regularly for example. I would also worry that there is pressure to make it a success but I also worry that there are those in the organisation who would seek to ensure that it is a failure also. Maybe the two will balance each other out!