Snapdragon

Resident Members
  • Content count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About Snapdragon

  • Rank
    Forum Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

218 profile views
  1. I have discovered disparity between some constabularies, concerning the reimbursement of its officers who use their own motor vehicles to travel to work on a cancelled rest day, when the rest day is not reallocated to another day. I appreciate that the question is null and void ifn a cancelled rest day is reallocated. Some constabularies will reimburse its officers when they have to use their own motor vehicles to travel to work on a rest day, which is not reallocated (effectively, an additional day at work) and others will not. The Essex constabulary makes it clear that it does pay such mileage. http://www.essex.polfed.org/index.php?type=rest-days&paged=3 but as I say others will not. Does anyone have any definitive answers, regarding mileage claims for non re-rostered rest day working? Are the constabularies that do not pay, wrong not to do so, or is the matter open to interpretation/local policy?
  2. TOIL v PAYMENT

    Police regulations make it quite clear that, having worked overtime, it is the constable/sergeant's choice to elect for payment or time off in lieu, as compensation for the additional hours worked. I prefer the time off, not the money. My management are forcing me to take the money, due to staffing issues/other time off I have booked off. They won't authorise any time off whatsoever. Has anyone any advice for me, regarding my management preventing me the right to choose?
  3. TOIL v PAYMENT

    I would have to agree with reasonable man. It seems wholly bonkers to be able to book TOIL on any given date in the future, no matter how long in the future. But that said, this method would ensure that an officer receives TOIL, when it is their choice as to whether or not they receive payment or TOIL in compensation for working overtime.
  4. TOIL v PAYMENT

    Grumpy2, Are you certain that there is only a requirement to request TOIL within 3 months of having worked overtime and not to actually take the TOIL, within the same 3 month period? What's your policing background? Thank you
  5. TOIL v PAYMENT

    So if the officer would prefer TOIL, but has no opportunity to take the time off in lieu within 3 months, then the officer must receive payment, instead. Hardly sounds like the "officer's choice" between payment or time off, when working overtime, like the regulation provides.
  6. TOIL v PAYMENT

    No. I think this issue is overcome as salary is annual, it just so happens that every 4 years the year is one day longer, so there is no additional entitlement. I don't think you can claim the additional hour due to a change in the clocks as it is seen to balance over time.
  7. TOIL v PAYMENT

    All good ideas are contagious, Westie. It would appear that police regulations provide, no conclusive answer to my question, "Does the officer retain the ability to still take the time off, beyond 3 months of having worked the overtime or at that point, does the officer then HAVE to receive payment?"
  8. TOIL v PAYMENT

    Thanks for the posts. I prefer to work overtime for TOIL. Whilst you effectively work more in the short term (overtime), you ultimately work less once you have taken the TOIL, since the compensation is always more than the flat rate, whether it be time & a third, time & a half or double time. The only problem is that, my force has begun adhering to the regulation rigidly, preventing me from booking TOIL more than 3 months advance (when there is capacity to authorise my request) thereby ensuring that I can only book TOIL 3 months in advance (where inevitably there is less opportunity to take it, because others have most likely got their time off booked, It would appear that despite the regulation stating that it is the officer's preference as to whether or not (s)he opts for TOIL or payment, actually the other constraints may prevent the officer's choice, assuming that there is less or no opportunity to take the TOIL within 3 months for whatever reason, when the officer MUST then send the overtime for payment. Does anyone agree or disagree? Does anyone have a view from a Federation perspective? Any other thoughts?
  9. TOIL v PAYMENT

    Police regulations make it quite clear that, having worked overtime, it is the officer's choice as to whether or not (s)he opts to take compensation in the form of payment or time off in lieu. Police regulations make it quite clear that if the time off is not taken within 3 months of having worked the overtime, then payment can be claimed. My question is, what happens if an officer wants to take time off in lieu having worked overtime, but has not has the opportunity to take that time off in lieu, within 3 months of having worked the overtime, because the Constabulary has prevented the officer from doing do, due to operational demand. Does the officer retain the ability to still take the time off, beyond 3 months of having worked the overtime or at that point, does the officer then have to receive payment?
  10. Introduction

    Hi, Please may my account be completely enabled, having completed my account verification in order that I may be granted full access to your site.
  11. Welcome to Police UK Forum Snapdragon :)