You Must Never Give BIBs a Bollocking In Public Ever
Discussion
Siscar said:
So a rig is representative of the real world is it?
The reality is that in a lot of the UK swearing at colleagues will result in a disciplinary, whilst swearing to this level could result in constructive dismissal tribunal cases if done by a manager,
Of course that may not be the norm if you live in a world of trying to be billy big b
ks amongst other insecure blokes, but in the world a lot of people now live that is normal. End up at tribunal with someone who has been sworn at like that and you have an expensive problem.
An IT department is representative of the real world is it The reality is that in a lot of the UK swearing at colleagues will result in a disciplinary, whilst swearing to this level could result in constructive dismissal tribunal cases if done by a manager,
Of course that may not be the norm if you live in a world of trying to be billy big b
ks amongst other insecure blokes, but in the world a lot of people now live that is normal. End up at tribunal with someone who has been sworn at like that and you have an expensive problem. ? See i can be a patronising fanny as well. Billy Big b
ks is the guy that ignores signs and safety procedures and walks into the testing area. 15000psi against a ram bonnet when it lets go doesn't care who you are, it's coming straight through you, the wall behind you, and out to sea. Or in the case of Hydril in Aberdeen, out of the test area, through the wall, across the car park and into the waste land. I would prefer to be at a tribunal for upsetting a persons delicate sensibilities, than at a tribunal for killing them due to their actions. Guess you don't have that problem in IT.
Bosshogg76 said:
An IT department is representative of the real world is it ? See i can be a patronising fanny as well.
Billy Big bks is the guy that ignores signs and safety procedures and walks into the testing area. 15000psi against a ram bonnet when it lets go doesn't care who you are, it's coming straight through you, the wall behind you, and out to sea. Or in the case of Hydril in Aberdeen, out of the test area, through the wall, across the car park and into the waste land.
I would prefer to be at a tribunal for upsetting a persons delicate sensibilities, than at a tribunal for killing them due to their actions. Guess you don't have that problem in IT.
No, nor does 99% of the country either. Whatever it is you are saying, and it's far from clear, does not represent the world most people live in, ? See i can be a patronising fanny as well. Billy Big b
ks is the guy that ignores signs and safety procedures and walks into the testing area. 15000psi against a ram bonnet when it lets go doesn't care who you are, it's coming straight through you, the wall behind you, and out to sea. Or in the case of Hydril in Aberdeen, out of the test area, through the wall, across the car park and into the waste land. I would prefer to be at a tribunal for upsetting a persons delicate sensibilities, than at a tribunal for killing them due to their actions. Guess you don't have that problem in IT.
We aren't an IT department, but whatever we are I think we are much more representative of the normal world than whatever it is you are trying to depict.
Siscar said:
No, nor does 99% of the country either. Whatever it is you are saying, and it's far from clear, does not represent the world most people live in,
We aren't an IT department, but whatever we are I think we are much more representative of the normal world than whatever it is you are trying to depict.
He's saying that in many jobs swearing, or being sworn at, is not unusual.We aren't an IT department, but whatever we are I think we are much more representative of the normal world than whatever it is you are trying to depict.
Whilst you may not find that acceptable between colleagues - it is the norm in many jobs, like it or not.
Scuffers said:
Red 4 said:
Eclassy said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxnS87hqqaI
WPC calls MOP an idiot for absolutely no reason. well not absolutely no reason, he was filming an arrest
If it behaves like an idiot it is more than likely an idiotWPC calls MOP an idiot for absolutely no reason. well not absolutely no reason, he was filming an arrest
Another muppet who gets his kicks from trying to wind up the police
I'd say the sergeant's opinion was pretty much spot on, actually
Siscar said:
No, nor does 99% of the country either. Whatever it is you are saying, and it's far from clear, does not represent the world most people live in,
We aren't an IT department, but whatever we are I think we are much more representative of the normal world than whatever it is you are trying to depict.
And your post is hardly an advert for the Plain English campaign is it? We aren't an IT department, but whatever we are I think we are much more representative of the normal world than whatever it is you are trying to depict.
I assume your point about "nor does 99% of the country", refers to deaths in the work place...but it is far from clear.
Taking the construction industry, in 2011 employed 23.4 million people, and the UK population is 63 millionish, and this industry suffers from deaths in the workplace due to the job (39 last year). That figure is a bit bigger that your 99% you plucked out of thin air.
You may think your industry is more representative of the normal world. However there are at least 2 of on this thread that disagree with you, the OP and GallardoGuy and I being 3.
To clear up your confusion
1) If someone disobeys a warning sign, they will be shouted out, possibly sworn at, and if they haven't already left the area after both of these they will be forcibly ejected.
2) On being ejected, a Safety observation report will be submitted. On review of this they will most likely be removed from the rig.
Hope that clears that point up.
So the reason for the animated reaction to a safety sign being ignored.
1) Their safety is paramount, and if they aren't going to take the necessary steps to protect themselves from danger. Then actions will be taken to protect themselves from their own stupidity.
2) Swearing at someone to get the point across, and facing a possible tribunal, is preferable to not swearing at someone and attending a tribunal into the reason for their death.
Given I've worked is few engineering areas before heading off shore, such actions were common place.
Edited by Bosshogg76 on Saturday 5th April 23:10
Where I work:
1) Yelling, bawling, shouting & general abuse will not be tolerated. I can't be bothered with it. If anyone does so I will arrange for them to seek employment elsewhere. The chaps actually like this rule as it leads to a more harmonious workplace.
2) In circumstances where someone is being stupid or dangerous, rule 1 is suspended.
1) Yelling, bawling, shouting & general abuse will not be tolerated. I can't be bothered with it. If anyone does so I will arrange for them to seek employment elsewhere. The chaps actually like this rule as it leads to a more harmonious workplace.
2) In circumstances where someone is being stupid or dangerous, rule 1 is suspended.
Rovinghawk said:
Where I work:
1) Yelling, bawling, shouting & general abuse will not be tolerated. I can't be bothered with it. If anyone does so I will arrange for them to seek employment elsewhere. The chaps actually like this rule as it leads to a more harmonious workplace.
2) In circumstances where someone is being stupid or dangerous, rule 1 is suspended.
I really should have wrote something like this instead, far more succinct. 1) Yelling, bawling, shouting & general abuse will not be tolerated. I can't be bothered with it. If anyone does so I will arrange for them to seek employment elsewhere. The chaps actually like this rule as it leads to a more harmonious workplace.
2) In circumstances where someone is being stupid or dangerous, rule 1 is suspended.
Rovinghawk said:
Where I work:
1) Yelling, bawling, shouting & general abuse will not be tolerated. I can't be bothered with it. If anyone does so I will arrange for them to seek employment elsewhere. The chaps actually like this rule as it leads to a more harmonious workplace.
2) In circumstances where someone is being stupid or dangerous, rule 1 is suspended.
Like cycling to work? 1) Yelling, bawling, shouting & general abuse will not be tolerated. I can't be bothered with it. If anyone does so I will arrange for them to seek employment elsewhere. The chaps actually like this rule as it leads to a more harmonious workplace.
2) In circumstances where someone is being stupid or dangerous, rule 1 is suspended.
Bosshogg76 said:
Taking the construction industry, in 2011 employed 23.4 million people, and the UK population is 63 millionish, and this industry suffers from deaths in the workplace due to the job (39 last year). That figure is a bit bigger that your 99% you plucked out of thin air.
Really. You think that 23.4 million people work in construction? The UK working population is 30.12 million and over 77% of them work in construction do they?It's amazing how much the rest of us manage to do then.
Siscar said:
Bosshogg76 said:
Taking the construction industry, in 2011 employed 23.4 million people, and the UK population is 63 millionish, and this industry suffers from deaths in the workplace due to the job (39 last year). That figure is a bit bigger that your 99% you plucked out of thin air.
Really. You think that 23.4 million people work in construction? The UK working population is 30.12 million and over 77% of them work in construction do they?It's amazing how much the rest of us manage to do then.
total UK workforce is down as just shy 28M
Construction listed as 1.3m
manufacturing as 2.4M
the scary one is Health at 3.7M (and consider that this is public funded stuff!)
Red 4 said:
PC Patrick has resigned.
The Employment Tribunal/ Court Case will, no doubt, reveal all.
I'll leave it 'til then.
I don't know if you heard Sir Hogan-Howe speaking with Mr Ferrari yesterday:The Employment Tribunal/ Court Case will, no doubt, reveal all.
I'll leave it 'til then.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2606080/Hi...
Former PC James Patrick called in.
'You resigned'. Thems the rules. It doesn't matter if the disciplinary procedures are being misused by those with a personal grudge or are misusing them to their own ends, misusing disciplinary procedures where the burden of proof is less than would be required in a court of law.
If the police misuse procedures to stitch up their own colleagues, why would we not think that some police officers may be tempted to misuse the law to stitch up unsuspecting, gullible or overly trusting members of the public?
Given this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-22951540
BBC News Website 18 June 2013 said:
Kent's police chief has admitted there was a "distortion of activity" by the force in some areas of the county to achieve crime statistic targets.
Ian Learmonth was facing questions from the police and crime commissioner (PCC) after a report found one in 10 crimes had been inaccurately recorded.
Has PC James Patrick done much different? He's just told it how it is, and creative accounting with the crime stats is nothing new and something a Chief Constable has admitted to? Ian Learmonth was facing questions from the police and crime commissioner (PCC) after a report found one in 10 crimes had been inaccurately recorded.
It's different as PC James Patrick willingly volunteered the truth to a bunch of outsiders in the public domain, where as former Chief Constable Learmonth was just caught out cooking the crime stats books?
The Oath talks about integrity, impartiality and serving the public. I am not sure it mentions keeping police ineptitude and criminality secret. Is it a pledge of allegiance to the police? Brand management isn't just the responsibility of Professional Standards? The 'Brand' must look shiny and polished even if some know what and who lies underneath?
Another reason for posting that link to the two callers to Sir Hogan-Howe was that a felon called in and used the term 'CRO' something I'd only read about here from people belittling eclassy.
If you listen to Sir Hogan-Howe he mentions that background intelligence can be useful when dealing with known previous offenders but that the police should treat even known offenders decently. The former robber, or known felon said that the Met police had him down as a crook for a life where as he got the impression up country that the police treated him differently rather than automatically assuming that he must still be on the rob.
The die is set? Once you've been convicted you're a crook for life? Once Nigel Farage of Dulwich College has been running around town shouting Hitler youth songs the die is set? Once teenage PCC Paris Brown had been caught sending offensive and racist Tweets she must be unthinking and stupid for life? It's no different from considering that all Coppers are bent until proven otherwise just as all MPs must be coining it in on expenses just as Maria Miller was?
The police from PCSO to Chief Constables and PCCs regularly organise public consultations and meetings to gauge public opinion and to help PCCs formulate their crime 'plans'? How is that different from a MoP telling police officers that they're being a bit of a muppet? Police officers don't know everything about everything do they, even though some may think the badge gives them those Superhero abilities.
What's the difference between a MoP swearing at a police officer and Chief Constables foisting dodgy crime stats onto an unsuspecting public?
Presenting dodgy crime statistics isn't fraud by misrepresentation?
What's the difference between inaccurate or fiddled crime statistics and giving this PH front page motor short back and sides or as some call it 'odometer correction'?
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=3&a...
I'm not sure I care for Sir Hogan-Howe. If he doesn't care about the truth and how police criminality and ineptitude tarnishes the police 'Brand' I fail to see why I should. I'd stand beside former PC James Patrick anyday of the week.
I don't care if Sir Hogan-Howe owns the rule book. I'll stand beside the person that told the truth.
FYI, this anti-police 'troll' knowingly shook hands with someone I knew to be a police officer this week. I think they're a good apple and a decent and honest person even when they're not and weren't a police officer. That promise to myself was somewhat short lived.
Edited by carinaman on Thursday 17th April 11:11
Carinaman, I've waded through your post .....
Kudos to former PC Patrick for challenging the Met Commissioner on a live radio show.
Hogan-Howe said he was prepared to meet PC Patrick and discuss the matter ... well, what else could he say ?
Did you know some senior officers receive performance related bonuses relating to how crime is "managed" ? It's a key performance indicator ... do you think these bonuses are a way of rewarding police performance or do you think it might encourage some to cook the books ? I don't have the answer by the way, but it is an interesting question, don't you think ?
Consider this - police numbers are down. There are fewer officers coping with more and more demands. Do you think that will make crime rates fall ? It's a complicated area - certain types of crime are certainly down - gun crime for one - but some may say if things keep on going the way they are the service will reach breaking point. Of course, a rise in reported crime might mean numbers police numbers need to be increased ... and that might not sit well with certain areas of government.
Like I said, I don't have the answers. Maybe PC Patrick does. For what it's worth crime figures have always been manipulated in various ways. It's nothing new.
Kudos to former PC Patrick for challenging the Met Commissioner on a live radio show.
Hogan-Howe said he was prepared to meet PC Patrick and discuss the matter ... well, what else could he say ?
Did you know some senior officers receive performance related bonuses relating to how crime is "managed" ? It's a key performance indicator ... do you think these bonuses are a way of rewarding police performance or do you think it might encourage some to cook the books ? I don't have the answer by the way, but it is an interesting question, don't you think ?
Consider this - police numbers are down. There are fewer officers coping with more and more demands. Do you think that will make crime rates fall ? It's a complicated area - certain types of crime are certainly down - gun crime for one - but some may say if things keep on going the way they are the service will reach breaking point. Of course, a rise in reported crime might mean numbers police numbers need to be increased ... and that might not sit well with certain areas of government.
Like I said, I don't have the answers. Maybe PC Patrick does. For what it's worth crime figures have always been manipulated in various ways. It's nothing new.
Edited by Red 4 on Thursday 17th April 13:40
Red 4 said:
For what it's worth crime figures have always been manipulated in various ways. It's nothing new.
I guess the difference is you stated it here on the Internet and not in front of the Public Administration Select Committee? I learnt the PASC abbreviation from James Patrick's call.So he's guilty of harming the public perception of the police by telling the truth?
It was probably him feeding the Operation Othona documents to the shredders too, and he was probably in the vicinity of the computers holding the computerised versions of those documents that suffered a 'catastrophic' failure. Perhaps some of the Technicians and Engineers that the police call upon to retrieve evidence from computers and mobile phones can salvage some of the data about Operation Othona eh?
Back ups eh? Who needs 'em?
BBC News website 10 April 2014 said:
Three out of 43 police forces in England and Wales have a comprehensive plan to deal with a large-scale cyber-attack, a report has found.
Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) warned only Derbyshire, Lincolnshire and West Midlands had sufficient plans in place.
It also found only 2% of police staff across 37 forces had been trained on investigating cybercrime.
Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) warned only Derbyshire, Lincolnshire and West Midlands had sufficient plans in place.
It also found only 2% of police staff across 37 forces had been trained on investigating cybercrime.
from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26963938
I guess you don't need an NPIA approved Crystal Ball to wonder that if the police can't manage to back up data on anti-corruption cases then dealing with 'Cybercrime' may be a bit beyond them? Before tackling Cybercrime familarising themselves with the truth and the whys and wherefores of back ups may be useful?
OOD stands for Object Orientated Design, not Operation Othona Destruction.
Chin up Red 4! I'm imagining a smile as white and crisp as the innards of a rosy red apple. Or a sparkly new paper shredder just delivered on a pallet and unwrapped.
Edited by carinaman on Thursday 17th April 16:32
Red 4 said:
Scuffers said:
Yet another example of senior police being unfit for office.
How does hogan how manage to keep his job?
You'll have to elaborate on that ...How does hogan how manage to keep his job?
What has Bernard Hogan-Howe done to warrant losing his job ?
The rules say he's allowed to leave.
Theresa May announced removing the option of officers to resign as a route to avoid censure on 12 February 2013. It's now 29 May 2014.
It could seem Theresa May was mouthing platitudes as she accused the police of doing at the police federation conference in Bournemouth on 21 May 2014.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-276394...
The Met said PC Birks had been suspended "in the interests of allowing a full reinvestigation".
Sean Rigg died in August 2008 so not quite six years ago.
How long will it be before the family of Thomas Orchard, a schizophrenic killed in custody in October 2012 get closure?
I doubt when the CCTV of what happened to the late Thomas Orchard is released into the public domain it will be as offensive as this:
http://www.ocregister.com/video/v/1628003509001/cr...
The Met said PC Birks had been suspended "in the interests of allowing a full reinvestigation".
Sean Rigg died in August 2008 so not quite six years ago.
How long will it be before the family of Thomas Orchard, a schizophrenic killed in custody in October 2012 get closure?
I doubt when the CCTV of what happened to the late Thomas Orchard is released into the public domain it will be as offensive as this:
http://www.ocregister.com/video/v/1628003509001/cr...
Edited by carinaman on Friday 30th May 19:45
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff