Traffic cops - i think they have a real future

[Sir Fergie]

Heres why...

The thing that puzzles me about the whole system with regard to the resourcing of traffic cops, the introduction of HATOs and the utilisation of Vosa for trucking enforcement stuff like tachos is as follows.

I will create a little scenario - now before people start criticising - this is purely a scenario ive created in my head.

Its 10 am Monday Morning - we are sitting in a contro room "somewhere" that allows us to see whats happening on a motorway somewhere.

We are looking at one particular stretch - on this stretch at 10 am on a Monday - are 6 traffic officers, 4 HATOs and 2 VOSA guys.

A car has broken down and 2 of the HATOs are dealing with the incident, meanwhile further up the motorway - a criminal comes flying past the other 2 HATOs - they aren't able to do anything about it - except perhaps if they think the cars been driven dangerously - get the police to keep an eye out.

Meanwhile our 2 VOSA guys are stopping trucks on random checks - when an accident occours - but all they can do is notify emergency services. But our Traffic cops are dealing with another incident so there is a delayed response as the nearest available traffic unit has further to travel.

Ive completely made up the above scenario - however...

Would you not be better off with a situation where you had the traffic cops trained up to do the VOSA role -
i mean the VOSA lads all started off at some stage with little or no trucking knowledge themselves. And if you had extra traffic cops on the road - if there was a sufficient number of extra traffic cops available - wouldn't HATOs be redundant.

My point is this - remember at the start i said we had 6 traffic officers 4 HATOs and 2 VOSA guys on a particular stretch of motorway at a particular time. So are you better to bring in 6 extra traffic cops - so you have 12 traffic cops now - and thus if the traffic cops had all the training needed for the new additional responsibilities - plus extra pay etc for the hassle - you have 6 extra police officers now.

Is that not better then having 6 guys and girls who can't do police officer stuff and don't have police officer powers. Yet our 6 extra traffic cops could do the VOSA and HATO roles - with 2 of the traffic cops been trained in commercial vehicle matters.

I thus based on the argument above see a real future for traffic cops - if the highly intelligent people who are highly paid to make these big decisions would be prepared to try and do things right.

Its just an argument i have in my head - id love to hear what flaws the men and women of pistonheads can identify in my arguments above. Im not saying its the best solution (i think it has merit mind - i wouldn't have put them forwards otherwise )- but i think it is something that is worth considering.

Sir Fergie

[joema]

So you're saying ditch wombles in favour of cops?

[Sir Fergie]

joema said:

So you're saying ditch wombles in favour of cops?

Yup thats my thinking - i know that if someones a HATO they won't like that - fair enough because obviously that means they are out of a job.

My point is though - i think well trained traffic cops have lots to offer and - well i think - that some of these benefits are all too easily overlooked. You see we might criticise the idea of a highly trained traffic cop dealing with something a non traffic cop could deal with.

However imo - the fact that this extra traffic cop is now an extra person that can deal with police matters -
like catching criminals and dealing with people who drive like idiots. Do HATOs have a valuable role at the moment - yes they do. But the reason they are needed at the moment is becaus traffic cops have been reduced in numbers.

Sir Fergie

[DrTre]

Sir Fergie said:

id love to hear what flaws the men and women of pistonheads can identify in my arguments above.

Cost. Pure and simple.

[Sir Fergie]

DrTre said:

Cost. Pure and simple.

Oh i agree - absolutely - but remember - 6 extra traffic cops = 6 extra police officers available as well.

You could recruit new police officers at the bottom of the ladder - while the new traffic cops would be coming from existing officers.

Yes extra costs - but imo - youve got superior service and efficency.

Sir Fergie

[redtwin]

The bod in charge of the budget most likely is not the bod responsible for ensuring adequate service.

The problem is endemic in pretty much all service industries.

[Crippo]

Cost,..... the country has a trillion pound debt.

[KM666]

I'd love to see more traffic cops on the roads. I see so much bad/dangerous driving especially on motorways and a Police presence would curb that behaviour IMO. Sadly enforecement of road safety is too focused on speeding and the related revenue.

I see some very random driving when people spot a HATO Rangey' on the motorway.

Edited by KM666 on Thursday 17th January 22:15

[wolf1]

I see plenty of traffic cops able to deal whilst vosa are checking trucks and hatos are dealing with the standard admin of a motorway on a daily basis. Just because you can't see them OP doesn't mean they aren't there.

[Mojooo]

Well if the VSA and HATOs are occupied most of the time then what benefit is there having a Police Officer doing the same job. If we assume a PO costs more money then it doesnt make financial sense.

Plus there is clearly a benefit in having specialists who do the same job over and over rather than jack of all trade types. I dunno how much hassle it would be for a PO to retain the knowledge required for the other 2 jobs if they are only doign it rarely. And of course you would have to train a lot of/all the other traffic cops to take on these responsibilities so cover is available.

Without knowing how HATOS and VOSA peopel are utilised its difficult to answer.

[deltashad]

I wonder what the costs of outsourcing to HATO are in relation to training traffic cops and putting them into a reasonable car.

[anonymous-user]

Mmmm 7 regional Control rooms for England all/most with co-located motorway police groups, I cannot see why we don't have a similar regional set up for the police instead of approx 30-40 police HQ's, Then bang the fire & ambo in, loads of room for integrated working & massive cost cutting.

If you move your 'scenario' to the health service, either have ward auxiliaries upskilled to take temperatures, give drugs etc, or get nurses to hand out meals do cleaning etc when they're not chatting @ the nursing station.

[Landshark]

You mean just like it used to be????? There's an idea!!!!

[Sgt Bilko]

Before the introduction of HATOs the tax payer were stumping up the cost of infrastructure damage through unreported incidents (and that includes when the police attended) to the tune of a few hundred Million each year. These days is only a few hundred thou.

Would you like a fully trained, qualified and experienced police officer dealing with:

Mrs miggins who has no breakdown cover
Abandoned cars left on the hard shoulder
Mr Smith who is disabled and can't exit his vehicle
Tyre fitters on LGVs who need a lane closure to work in safety
Dead dogs in the central reservation which generate multiple calls
Non injury collisions
National Grid who want to drop/raise new Hig Voltage cables which span the carriageway (requiring multiple short duration rolling blocks)
Maintenance Teams who need blocks to switch the cones around in order to compete overnight works rather than remove 300 cones and replace them another night
Manning closures for collision investigation/serious & major incidents (at least two patrols wasting their time for hours in end)
Directing traffic when traffic lights fail (yes on some motorways there are traffic lights, and I don't mean ramp metering)

And this is before you start to consider the actions where they work together.

The VOSA/HATO thing was discussed ages ago. In some areas there would be skill fade as hardly anything happens and the motorway is a dangerous working environment. Similar to railways but with less control over the oncoming transport. In other areas it is so busy that no VOSA work would be competed and let's not forget, VOSA only sped 40% of their activity on the motorway.

The police on the motorway have evolved, and that would have happened regardless of HATOs. Now it's much more intelligence drive with more unmarked vehicles than ever before. ANPR operations/response is a more common activity and seemingly more productive in the fight against crime. Police officers fighting crime, who'd have thought it.

Edited by Sgt Bilko on Friday 18th January 03:54

[Landshark]

Sgt Bilko said:

Would you like a fully trained, qualified and experienced police officer dealing with

Edited by Sgt Bilko on Friday 18th January 03:54

Playing devils advocate (cause its fun!!)

Yes I would, because a fully trained police officer can also deal with other things as well (which I think the point the OP was making)

Such as when the car on the hard shoulder has no MOT, the driver is drunk or the vehicle is in a dangerous position etc. The pedestrian can be removed ( and given a fine), can deal with the non injury which can turn into an injury or allegations are made. Collecting debris or doing a quick rolling road doesn't take up too much time. Roadwork and things like the elec cables used to be down by a specific crew who were paid for by the company who needed them. Damage to the infrastructure was reported via a form which was sent off to the HA.
ETA not forgetting, ticketing the foreign (and UK) vehicles that think it's okay to have a tacho break on the H/S!!

I know you guys and girls do a good job, but as I say I'm just playing devils!!

Edited by Landshark on Friday 18th January 07:09

[pitmansboots]

Sir Fergie said:

DrTre said:

Cost. Pure and simple.

Oh i agree - absolutely - but remember - 6 extra traffic cops = 6 extra police officers available as well.

You could recruit new police officers at the bottom of the ladder - while the new traffic cops would be coming from existing officers.

Yes extra costs - but imo - youve got superior service and efficency.

Sir Fergie

Have you really?

I think your suggestion, illustrated by your scenario means that when officers are dealing with a breakdown and they see a more "interesting" or more pressing matter they ditch that and fu'k-off after the dangerous driver leaving the incident that they were dealing with unattended. Good plan.

Oh? And what do you do with your 12 unoccupied and highly trained officers while nowt or only menial tasks are in the offing? Pay them a lot more than HATO's and VOSA, that's what.

Here's another thing. Training up a super-cop even in traffic will make them generalists rather than establishing specialisms especially in the case of VOSA officers functions. There's a lot more to VOSA operations than stopping trucks on the motorway for instance.

I don't think you have thought your plan through.

[Furry Exocet]

Sir Fergie said:

Oh i agree - absolutely - but remember - 6 extra traffic cops = 6 extra police officers available as well.

You could recruit new police officers at the bottom of the ladder - while the new traffic cops would be coming from existing officers.

Yes extra costs - but imo - youve got superior service and efficency.

Sir Fergie

It would still cost a lot more money. Driving courses, New vehicles due then to dive, fast roads training, traffic patrol officers course, prohibitions course etc etc etc. The cost soon adds up.
You also have to look at the things that the Hatos do that I used to dislike doing, clearing debris on the motorway, sitting with a broken down vehicle, dealing with non injury accidents and hanging around for recovery and closures.

Lots of people don't like them, but they have a role to do and it actually helps free up the current traffic police officers (waiting for Landshark to moan at me now )

[Sgt Bilko]

Landshark said:

Sgt Bilko said:

Would you like a fully trained, qualified and experienced police officer dealing with

Edited by Sgt Bilko on Friday 18th January 03:54

Playing devils advocate (cause its fun!!)

Yes I would, because a fully trained police officer can also deal with other things as well (which I think the point the OP was making)

Such as when the car on the hard shoulder has no MOT, the driver is drunk or the vehicle is in a dangerous position etc. The pedestrian can be removed ( and given a fine), can deal with the non injury which can turn into an injury or allegations are made. Collecting debris or doing a quick rolling road doesn't take up too much time. Roadwork and things like the elec cables used to be down by a specific crew who were paid for by the company who needed them. Damage to the infrastructure was reported via a form which was sent off to the HA.
ETA not forgetting, ticketing the foreign (and UK) vehicles that think it's okay to have a tacho break on the H/S!!

I know you guys and girls do a good job, but as I say I'm just playing devils!!

Edited by Landshark on Friday 18th January 07:09

Nothing wrong with devils advocate. These days, the details of the jobs are passed electronically to the police desk who I understand often run the vehicles through PNC. The results don't come back but sometimes an officer will "pop up" if there is anything hooky about it. I give you the DD issue, but after seven years experience the lads and lasses are a little more tuned to this than most and often ask for a patrol if one is available. Yes, that won't get you the "even though it's 9am, just quickly blow into this for me before getting off to work. Opps, it appears you have blown 69......, heavy night was it?".

Roadworks were paid for by the company, and guess where that charge came back to......? Yes, the Highways Agency and the tax payer.

Police "may" have reported damage via a form, but there was a reason why £100M+ went unreported. A non injury collision where the driver(s) claim they didn't hit anything might not have produced a response from the police in the past. It produces an immediate response regardless from the HATO. Probably why the outstanding claims is down to a few hundred thousand these days. Some forces simply couldn't be bothered, and the same applies to pedestrians and LGVs taking tacho breaks. Officers i knew before the HA started never used to bother issuing tickets. Now, there is a dedicated small police team for LGV enforcement who can spend their time, not running around to collisions, looking for LGV infractions. Apparently it is the only cost neutral and sometimes income generating unit.

It's OK thinking that the police can deal with many things, but there was always the admissions that they had to because no-one else was around/trained/qualified/authorised to do it. All these jobs add up, and with the inception of Managed Motorways, and now the cheaper All Lane Running, the cops were never going to get more money to deal with the increase in incidents let alone carry on as normal. There were (IIRC) 52 police forces who had motorways and there were 52 ways of dealing with incidents, 52 ways of setting signals, 52 ways of reporting incidents, 52 ways of not sharing intelligence on a national or regional basis and so on.

[FiF]

As discussed on here the problem comes when one looks at the overall costs of putting each patrol unit out on the road.

Yes, the cost incl training,pension etc of a HATO is less than a police officer, but when taking capital, management and infrastructure costs into the equation there is hardly any difference.

Pitmansboots' arguments about the cost when they are doing nothing is actually looking at it the wrong way round. When the unit is not tasked to an incident the HATO unit can do not a lot other than polish trousers, whereas a police unit can look and take action on dangerous driving, vehicle and load condition and potential criminal activity. If they need specialist backup, eg trained vehicle examiner, or someone specialised in tacho interpretation then it would be made available.

WE had this argument at the time of the inception of the service, over and over again. I'm not attacking the troops on the street, but the management and politicians who made the decisions and flawed cost calculations.

Re the question by the OP, we are where we are, and with Cameron's vindictive attack on the police service there is less chance than no chance this would happen.

[Furry Exocet]

FiF said:

As discussed on here the problem comes when one looks at the overall costs of putting each patrol unit out on the road.

Yes, the cost incl training,pension etc of a HATO is less than a police officer, but when taking capital, management and infrastructure costs into the equation there is hardly any difference.

Pitmansboots' arguments about the cost when they are doing nothing is actually looking at it the wrong way round. When the unit is not tasked to an incident the HATO unit can do not a lot other than polish trousers, whereas a police unit can look and take action on dangerous driving, vehicle and load condition and potential criminal activity. If they need specialist backup, eg trained vehicle examiner, or someone specialised in tacho interpretation then it would be made available.

WE had this argument at the time of the inception of the service, over and over again. I'm not attacking the troops on the street, but the management and politicians who made the decisions and flawed cost calculations.

Re the question by the OP, we are where we are, and with Cameron's vindictive attack on the police service there is less chance than no chance this would happen.

But when this police officers are then committed dealing with criminals that they have just found, who's going to do the stuff that the Hatos would have done when a job comes in?

I'm all for more traffic police, but keep the Hatos and Vosa too