Expensive gagging of ex-staff. Why?
Discussion
http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/330000-public-ca...
During this period there have been several controversial internal investigations - one involving the PCC and expenses, and the other involving the Chief Constable, and a lengthy investigation into his behaviour while in office.
But from the article it seems this is not limited to the police, and nationwide, councils have been using the same tactic to prevent revelations form councils becoming public.
News and Star said:
The county's constabulary has confirmed it had spent £334,511.44 on settlement agreements for the employees when they agreed to depart between 2011 and 2015.
The controversial contracts, which were known as compromise agreements until 2013, provided each officer with an enhanced severance package providing they agree to a set of strict conditions.
Usually, these include signing away the right to talk about work matters after they leave or revealing the true nature of their departure.
Jonathan Isaby, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, a pressure group set up to scrutinise spending from the public purse, was critical of the move.
He said: "These arrangements are not only an extra burden on taxpayers, but there is also a danger that they can be used to cover up incompetence and wrong doing.
"At a time when every police force is having to find savings and police officers are facing pay freezes or worse, these payments will be particularly hard to justify."
So what could these agreements be concealing that couldn't already be part of a contract?The controversial contracts, which were known as compromise agreements until 2013, provided each officer with an enhanced severance package providing they agree to a set of strict conditions.
Usually, these include signing away the right to talk about work matters after they leave or revealing the true nature of their departure.
Jonathan Isaby, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, a pressure group set up to scrutinise spending from the public purse, was critical of the move.
He said: "These arrangements are not only an extra burden on taxpayers, but there is also a danger that they can be used to cover up incompetence and wrong doing.
"At a time when every police force is having to find savings and police officers are facing pay freezes or worse, these payments will be particularly hard to justify."
During this period there have been several controversial internal investigations - one involving the PCC and expenses, and the other involving the Chief Constable, and a lengthy investigation into his behaviour while in office.
But from the article it seems this is not limited to the police, and nationwide, councils have been using the same tactic to prevent revelations form councils becoming public.
Abbott said:
The big deal is using taxpayers money to gag potential whistle blowers.
Compliance has changed everything in the past few years and now most large companies should be encouraging whistle blowers etc.
If the gagging related to work matters that were above board, surely a clause in the employment contract should suffice.Compliance has changed everything in the past few years and now most large companies should be encouraging whistle blowers etc.
The fact these people are only being gagged as they leave, suggests that there is something underhand going on which the various authorities concerned wish to keep from the public.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff