Disable-Adblock.png

We have detected that your browser is using AdBlock

Police Community is a not for profit organisation and advertising revenue is key to our continued viability.

Please disable your AdBlocker on our site in order to continue using it.
This message will disappear once AdBlock has been disabled.

Thank you for your support - we appreciate it !

If you feel you are getting this message in error please email support@policecommunity.co.uk


skydiver

Resident Members
  • Content count

    1,803
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    76

Posts posted by skydiver


  1. 20 hours ago, coops1964 said:

    Whatever happened to the Pension Challenge as well?

    Its still going but Emerge its commercial arm and attempted rival to the Fed has gone belly up.  Its FB presence has gone but members of the challenge are still getting email updates.

    • Thanks 1

  2. Direct entry DCs are not exactly the most popular change to happen to the police in recent years, partly because police  look at candidates as missing out on the hard, boring and unpleasant side of the job by starting straight away as an investigator who doesn't get their hands dirty.  I may also be misinterpreting Susan's thought process behind her debate to go for a uniformed role or to reapply as a DE DC, but I hope you're not looking at a uniformed role as being second best in comparison to the DCs role.  Starting in uniform gives you a great grounding in dealing with a wide variety of incidents right at the start of the process and also gets you used to dealing with aggression as well as the smells and unpleasant side of the job.  It also means that you might have more opportunity to move around more later which may mean better promotion prospects if that interests you.

    • Like 1

  3. Arch.

     

    I started to look at your survey but didn't answer any questions as I didn't think the questions on page 1 would give you any useful data.  I can't think of anyone who would want to say anything else other than agree or strongly agree unless they are trying to be mischievous.  If you asked 'does Sussex police provide clear and engaging information on their website'  then you'd get a more useful response.


  4. Hi Susan.

     

    I'm not MPS so I can't give much advice about where to live but you do tend to find that nowadays PCs tend to live away from where they work because of the perception that criminals will target them.  By and large that doesn't happen but you do get the odd person who gets fixated on a specific PC or the police in general.

     

    Secondly I started at 40 and absolutely love what I do but nowadays government 'reforms' have made the job less attractive than it used to be particularly for the more mature starter.  Starting salaries have been cut and pensions are less generous than they used to be, whilst cuts in general have made promotion harder and there are less resources for us to do our jobs properly.


  5. It varies between forces and roles.  In my force its a bit of a lottery as to when response officers get their standard course with some getting lucky and getting theirs within a few months of starting whilst others have to wait 6 months to a year.  A couple of years ago there was a TV documentary series about Lincs probationers which showed them getting their standard courses just after they finished in company which is very early but really useful when you work in a such a rural force where officers are spread very thinly.   


  6. 2 hours ago, Reader12 said:

    Ok, thanks for all your replies. You have been very helpful. Will report back to the author with this, sounds like he will have to rework things a bit!

    Thanks again :)

    it really depends what he is looking for.  If he is looking for a Midsummer Murders or Morse style murder mystery then it would be spot on but if he is trying to write a realistic police procedural then he is miles away from anything realistic.

    • Like 1

  7. Its not that hard but some people fail it due to problems with technique more than anything else.    If you are concerned when your test comes let other people in the group go first,  watch a few people and listen to the trainer's tips.


  8. We need some sort of representation but I joined the police to be a police officer not a Fed rep, but given that I am a paying member I expect them to try to act effectively on my behalf and quite frankly I very rarely see that from the national Fed.  Locally they are quite effective so I have got some admiration for some officials but they are a laughing stock nationally.  

    There is another old saying that if you own a dog why bark yourself.


  9. Ah the Fed's strongly worded letter, their main weapon of choice.  I'm left wondering of if they are still keeping their fabled powder dry because I don't see much evidence of them doing anything effective to counter Tory spin regarding the police.  May's response, if she deems it worthy to respond to, will be to repeat the mantra that finding is protected, police have adequate resources, funding has increased, reforms are working and crime is down with any increase being due to better recording,  and last but not least they have fully approved the PRBs pay recommendation.

    • Like 1

  10. May must have taken lessons from the DM and taken one small aspect of police pay and focused all her attention on it.  Its a shame then that she didn't mention that the 1% bonus doesn't apply to unsocial hours payments or overtime and that it is going to be paid for from reserves or budget cuts.  The much vaunted protected budget for my force means that our budget is falling year on year even before the effects of 2.8% inflation are taken into account. 


  11. Lets contrast our pay situation with an MP's pay.  They received an 11% pay rise three years ago after agreeing to reduce some of their expenses.  They also agreed to link their future pay rises to the average rise in public sector pay.  So far so good, however once their pay grew by 11% it also boosted their pensions as the expenses they had originally received would not have affected their pay and therefore wouldn't benefit their pensions.  IIRC tax payers had to pay a few million £ into their pension pot in order to help keep it fully funded.  Secondly linking their pay to public sector rises also mean that it would be affected by increments and changes to the national minimum wage.  There is two problems with that.  First Tories hate increments as they don't see why pay increases should be linked to time in a job, but they now seem happy to benefit from that system in terms of their own pay rises.  Secondly a lot of public sector workers earn the NMW such as cooks, cleaners, drivers etc, so whenever the NMW goes up and remember the government has boosted that so that it has kept pace with inflation whilst the rest of public sector wages have been capped,  MPs will benefit.  That is why they have received a 1.5% and 1.4% pay rise since the 11% rise whilst the headline rate for police, teachers, nurses etc has been capped at 1%. 

    MPs pay rises automatically yet ours is assessed by a so called independent pay remuneration board which seems to have recommended 2.8% this year yet the government has only awarded us 1% with the other 1% coming from further savings or force reserves.  MP's pay awards are met in full by the tax payers and their pay and working conditions seems to defy reform, but when it comes to other people's pay they connive to minimise rises or to force reforms onto us which they seem immune to.

    What has happened to House of Commons and HoL reform?  Nothing that's what.  MP's numbers were supposed to be cut in the 2020 election but May has effectively delayed that by holding the early election before the Boundary commission had put its ideas out for consultation, whilst there have been stories in the papers that the cuts won't be introduced as they will affect the number of Tory constituencies which the Tories and their lack of overall parliamentary majority can't accept.  HoL numbers defy cuts as well with the Lords growing in number almost every year, defying both common sense and reform.  I think that I'm also right in saying that the number of politicians in the UK has grown massively since 1997 with devolution and directly elected mayors and PCCs etc.  At the same time teaching has been reformed and we have gone through Winsor 1 and 2, yet our pay masters are beyond reform and and have set up a nice little pay accumulator which means they benefit no matter what happens in the wider economy.