Copper earns 45k.... in overtime alone.
Discussion
Greendubber said:
It's a very fair point .
It's absolutely not.She's the government minister in charge of the Home Office; whilst the cuts are an attempt to deal with the financial issues we have as a country. By the nature of her role, she's a target and therefore is completely justified in continuing to have whatever protection detail is needed to ensure her safety.
The same counts of any high-ranking minister regardless of political affiliation.
BJG1 said:
If she doesn't want someone to attempt to take her life she could just try not being a massive 
rather than having a security detail tbf.
Ever thought of being a security adviser for the government? Absolute cretin. rather than having a security detail tbf.
MrBarry123 said:
She's the government minister in charge of the Home Office; whilst the cuts are an attempt to deal with the financial issues we have as a country. By the nature of her role, she's a target and therefore is completely justified in continuing to have whatever protection detail is needed to ensure her safety.
The same counts of any high-ranking minister regardless of political affiliation.
Quite. The tension between the Home Office and the Police is an odd one that I don't fully understand. "The Home Secretary is out to destroy policing as we know it" seems to be the default response, regardless of the real outcome.The same counts of any high-ranking minister regardless of political affiliation.
I was struck by her speech to the Police Federation:
"In 2002, you said David Blunkett had “done more harm to the police in five minutes than others have taken years to do.” In 2004, you said Labour were going to “destroy policing in this country for ever”. And in 2007, you said the government had “betrayed the police”. Now, I disagree with Labour policies – but even I don’t think those things are true. You said police officers were “demoralised” in 2002, 2004, 2007 and 2012. You warned of police officers’ “anger” in 2002, 2005 and 2008. And you warned that the police – and the public – were being put in danger in 2001, 2004 and 2007. The truth is that crime fell in each of those years, it’s fallen further since – and our country is safer than it has ever been."
She, and all her predecessors deserve close protection. Although whether the risk of attack is from terrorists, or members of the Police Federation is probably the real question...
Red 4 said:
Adrian W said:
1. Most salaried staff don't get paid overtime, they have to do the hours to get the job done, why should government employees be any different?
2. next someone is going to tell me that some of the overtime pay geos into their pensions.
1. Don't they ? Overtime is unheard of in the private sector, is it ?2. next someone is going to tell me that some of the overtime pay geos into their pensions.
2. Sorry to piss on your chips but no, it doesn't.
Adrian W said:
Red 4 said:
Adrian W said:
1. Most salaried staff don't get paid overtime, they have to do the hours to get the job done, why should government employees be any different?
2. next someone is going to tell me that some of the overtime pay geos into their pensions.
1. Don't they ? Overtime is unheard of in the private sector, is it ?2. next someone is going to tell me that some of the overtime pay geos into their pensions.
2. Sorry to piss on your chips but no, it doesn't.
Adrian W said:
Don't distort what I said,
Whether or not you get "overtime" depends on what job you do and what your contract says. It's got nothing to do with private sector or public sector. There are numerous jobs in the private sector where overtime isn't just available, it's compulsory, How do you think places such as Asda or McDonald's operate? How would you expect hospitals to operate is nurses are off sick?I'd be interested to know how PH business owners deal with peaks and troughs in workload. IME overtime is usually the most efficient way.
Red 4 said:
1. Don't they ? Overtime is unheard of in the private sector, is it ?
2. Sorry to piss on your chips but no, it doesn't.
1. Of course overtime is not unheard of in the private sector, but for salaried members of staff on £30k+ per year it would be almost unheard of. I would have said 99% of the private sector on £30k PA are expected to work till the job is done. 2. Sorry to piss on your chips but no, it doesn't.
All of our guys on clock cards get paid overtime, but they only get paid for the hours they work, miss 2 days of work lose 2 days pay.
2 Our guys overtime does count towards their pensions, but they don't get a pension pot worth £500k when they retire, unlike most police constables. Our pensions are our contributions matched by the company, fag packet calculations suggest one of our factory workers on £9ph would need about 200 years of matched contribution to get 40% of final salary...
NoNeed said:
There comes a point where the negatives of fatigue from too much work far outweigh the positives of sensible working hours. I work with somebody that does a lot of overtime and he is no where near as fast or sharp as his colleagues that don't.
I agree but some PH'ers are superhuman 
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=146...
nikaiyo2 said:
1. Of course overtime is not unheard of in the private sector, but for salaried members of staff on £30k+ per year it would be almost unheard of. I would have said 99% of the private sector on £30k PA are expected to work till the job is done.
All of our guys on clock cards get paid overtime, but they only get paid for the hours they work, miss 2 days of work lose 2 days pay.
Why do the clock card guys get paid overtime? Couldn't they just be told to work until "the job is done"? All of our guys on clock cards get paid overtime, but they only get paid for the hours they work, miss 2 days of work lose 2 days pay.
If I was to hazard a guess I'd say maybe the guys on £30k+ are happy with their overall package so they're willing to stay "until the job is done" whereas the "clock card guys" will tell their boss to FRO if he or she suggested that they work unpaid overtime. There's no nobility or self sacrifice in "working until the job is done". Those that do so, do it only because they're happy with their overall salary/benefits/perks
nikaiyo2 said:
2 Our guys overtime does count towards their pensions, but they don't get a pension pot worth £500k when they retire, unlike most police constables. Our pensions are our contributions matched by the company, fag packet calculations suggest one of our factory workers on £9ph would need about 200 years of matched contribution to get 40% of final salary...
Maybe your guys need to get better jobs?nikaiyo2 said:
Our guys overtime does count towards their pensions, but they don't get a pension pot worth £500k when they retire, unlike most police constables. Our pensions are our contributions matched by the company, fag packet calculations suggest one of our factory workers on £9ph would need about 200 years of matched contribution to get 40% of final salary...
Do they pay in 14% of their salary ? (That's almost £450 per month for a top rate PC).Are you aware that the police pension was always part of the "package" ?
Are you aware of the police pension reforms ?
Are you aware of the new pension age for police officers ?
I'll add, for the sake of balance, that the police pension is still good - IF, and this will be a big IF - you can get to full pensionable age.
The Fire Brigade Union understand what the pension reforms are all about - that's why they're undertaking industrial action.
This is just the start - the pension reforms are very wide-reaching.
Adrian W said:
Most salaried staff don't get paid overtime, they have to do the hours to get the job done, why should government employees be any different? next someone is going to tell me that some of the overtime pay geos into their pensions.
The police have far greater, legally enforceable restrictions on their private lives. If they're being legally ordered to work one of their 3 weekends off in 10 at short notice because of a demonstration, then they deserved to be compensated for it. If you and others want the same as the private sector (the non-overtime private sector, to be specific), then the police should not be legally forced to work and have their other restrictions removed, and should also be allowed to form a union as a lot of large workforces have.
Since that'll never happen, then we strike a balance between intrusiveness and compensation.
Adrian W said:
egor110 said:
So people who will work for free?
Fact is people need money to pay rent/mortgages and not rely on state hangouts, by bringing in this culture of being expected to do overtime for free is going to keep people relying on the state.
To late, in most private companies it is whatever it takes to do the job, don't go the extra mile, don't get any progression.Fact is people need money to pay rent/mortgages and not rely on state hangouts, by bringing in this culture of being expected to do overtime for free is going to keep people relying on the state.
Vaud said:
Ore we could accelerate some force mergers and back office?
Plenty of companies with 100,000's of employers have one IT system, one HR, one payroll, one procurement and manage very well. There is plenty of efficiency to be found without touching front line.
It needs the state to lead larger mergers (I know you didn't rule out they be the ones to make it happen, I just wanted to point it out). A lot of forces are merging lots of functions and in the process of doing more, but there's only so many savings to squeeze from that area. Plenty of companies with 100,000's of employers have one IT system, one HR, one payroll, one procurement and manage very well. There is plenty of efficiency to be found without touching front line.
Vaud said:
Or reducing Chief Constable salary to be in line with Ministers? The home sec earns £135k IIRC. The PM, £142k.
Chief constables earn 127-193k. (all wiki numbers so I am open to being corrected)
That would make no practical financial difference. A couple of million in a 10 billion budget. Chief constables earn 127-193k. (all wiki numbers so I am open to being corrected)
On a larger scale, I remember someone saying we should scarp the Superintendent rank on here - there are a lot more superintendents than CCs. When we looked at the data it would have amounted to about 10% of one years' funding reductions IIRC. People often default to looking at expensive management, but they often have so few numbers it has no practical relevance.
Vaud said:
Quite. The tension between the Home Office and the Police is an odd one that I don't fully understand. "The Home Secretary is out to destroy policing as we know it" seems to be the default response, regardless of the real outcome.
I was struck by her speech to the Police Federation:
"In 2002, you said David Blunkett had “done more harm to the police in five minutes than others have taken years to do.” In 2004, you said Labour were going to “destroy policing in this country for ever”. And in 2007, you said the government had “betrayed the police”. Now, I disagree with Labour policies – but even I don’t think those things are true. You said police officers were “demoralised” in 2002, 2004, 2007 and 2012. You warned of police officers’ “anger” in 2002, 2005 and 2008. And you warned that the police – and the public – were being put in danger in 2001, 2004 and 2007. The truth is that crime fell in each of those years, it’s fallen further since – and our country is safer than it has ever been."
She, and all her predecessors deserve close protection. Although whether the risk of attack is from terrorists, or members of the Police Federation is probably the real question...
She was clever and used the Fed's previous 'crying wolf' melodrama against them. Essentially people not liking change and over-reacting to it. I was struck by her speech to the Police Federation:
"In 2002, you said David Blunkett had “done more harm to the police in five minutes than others have taken years to do.” In 2004, you said Labour were going to “destroy policing in this country for ever”. And in 2007, you said the government had “betrayed the police”. Now, I disagree with Labour policies – but even I don’t think those things are true. You said police officers were “demoralised” in 2002, 2004, 2007 and 2012. You warned of police officers’ “anger” in 2002, 2005 and 2008. And you warned that the police – and the public – were being put in danger in 2001, 2004 and 2007. The truth is that crime fell in each of those years, it’s fallen further since – and our country is safer than it has ever been."
She, and all her predecessors deserve close protection. Although whether the risk of attack is from terrorists, or members of the Police Federation is probably the real question...
However, there's no doubt when she says the front line will be the same / protected and suggests the same can be delivered for less, she's being, shall we say, disingenuous at best.
Adrian W said:
egor110 said:
So people who will work for free?
Fact is people need money to pay rent/mortgages and not rely on state hangouts, by bringing in this culture of being expected to do overtime for free is going to keep people relying on the state.
To late, in most private companies it is whatever it takes to do the job, don't go the extra mile, don't get any progression.Fact is people need money to pay rent/mortgages and not rely on state hangouts, by bringing in this culture of being expected to do overtime for free is going to keep people relying on the state.
For instance many companies only take staff on 20 hour contracts so the staff have to work second jobs leaving them unavailable for overtime.
Saying people should work harder to progress is a cop out, not everyone can or need to progress some people manage there monthly bills on a flat monthly wage, add to that we churn out endless graduates who are unable to find work so retraining manual workers is not the answer.
wc98 said:
Countdown said:
Overtime is actually a relatively efficient way of employing labour. It means you can adjust to temporary fluctuations in workload without needing a pool of surplus labour permanently on standby.
a point the article appears to have missed.Policing is very dynamic at times, and whilst there's some predictability to the demand e.g. more calls in summer, on a short term basis, 'anything' can happen which takes demand into the extremes. It doesn't have to be anything too major, either. A fatal RTC will take out the entire traffic department of a lot of Constabularies. If they attend one a couple of hours before they go off - or realistically any time during their shift - they won't be going home when they're due to finish.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff