Any alternatives to police Federation?
Discussion
After 10 years of paying handsomely for the services of the police federation I have become totally disguntled with the toothless tiger. They let us down time and time again.
As a result of this i wish to withdraw my subscription that most of us seem to pay just in case we get in the clarts. Not wishing to leave myself wide open I would like to take out some personal legal cover in case the worst ever happened and i required representation in court or disciplinary matters.
Do any of the other BIB on here know of any comapnies that will provide some kind of legal cover which would give me protection ????
I think the fed subs are now about £20 a month which to be honest IMHO is a waste of cash. It simply pays for fed reps to feather their own nests and go on expenses paid trips away with free drink!
As a result of this i wish to withdraw my subscription that most of us seem to pay just in case we get in the clarts. Not wishing to leave myself wide open I would like to take out some personal legal cover in case the worst ever happened and i required representation in court or disciplinary matters.
Do any of the other BIB on here know of any comapnies that will provide some kind of legal cover which would give me protection ????
I think the fed subs are now about £20 a month which to be honest IMHO is a waste of cash. It simply pays for fed reps to feather their own nests and go on expenses paid trips away with free drink!
Not sure to be honest - you would need to be carefull with regards to police regs when it comes to representation in discaplinary cases which are not criminal investigations.
Also i guess its handy having representation which has an inside line to the police and the rules and regs.
With regards to everything else that you would expect the fed to help out on a represent the officers, i agree they are damed near useless. But worth their weight when it comes to regs and discaplinary stuff.
Also i guess its handy having representation which has an inside line to the police and the rules and regs.
With regards to everything else that you would expect the fed to help out on a represent the officers, i agree they are damed near useless. But worth their weight when it comes to regs and discaplinary stuff.
and don't forget that the Federation are the envy of most trade unions in the successful way they negotiate over pay and conditions.That's why the government hate the Federation!
Obviously you don't have to contribute to receive the benefits, but if you think your rep is doing a bad job, stand against him/her at the next election.
Obviously you don't have to contribute to receive the benefits, but if you think your rep is doing a bad job, stand against him/her at the next election.
Yep. Over the last 25 years unions have been emasculated. All we have to do is turn up en masse in London and people start taking notice.
I agree that the current leadership of the Fed is not a patch on what it used to be ( Alan Eastwood?) but then if you don't like it get yourself elected.
I agree that the current leadership of the Fed is not a patch on what it used to be ( Alan Eastwood?) but then if you don't like it get yourself elected.
R_U_LOCAL said:
chrispy porker said:
and don't forget that the Federation are the envy of most trade unions in the successful way they negotiate over pay and conditions.
I'll be interested to see if you still hold that opinion once this years pay negotiations are over.
Any other tax payers reading alarmed and wondering why there's not some sort of plan for policing on the cheap. Oh there is.
chrispy porker said:
and don't forget that the Federation are the envy of most trade unions in the successful way they negotiate over pay and conditions.That's why the government hate the Federation!
Obviously you don't have to contribute to receive the benefits, but if you think your rep is doing a bad job, stand against him/her at the next election.
Obviously you don't have to contribute to receive the benefits, but if you think your rep is doing a bad job, stand against him/her at the next election.
I think my rep and others in my force are doing a shocing job, Mainly due to the way we are being bullied into a shift change. The fed are actually taking the chief officers side before the membership has been balloted!!!!
Pay and condition negotiations??? they failed miserably a few years ago over SPP etc and they are failing this year over the indexation!
I have no interest in joining the fed for 2 reasons, I have no wish to spend time arse licking management, feathering my own nest and socialising with the other tossers who are fed reps, I also feel its a conflict of interest for someone trying to get promoted to be involved in such things. How can you fight cheif officers properly when your trying to please them to get promoted? It just wont work! Doesnt seem to bother the other fed reps though¬!
A decent thread revival, but on a matter I was only thinking of recently with the news of the Fed arrests last week.
I begrudge paying into an organisation which doesn't seem fit for purpose and is now seemingly corrupt at the very top.
Like any insurance you don't claim on, it always seems like a waste of money. But is there now another option to the Fed?
I begrudge paying into an organisation which doesn't seem fit for purpose and is now seemingly corrupt at the very top.
Like any insurance you don't claim on, it always seems like a waste of money. But is there now another option to the Fed?
For what little you pay each month, I doubt it s worth stopping your subs. The only real visible benefit is for a disciplinary, but I think then they only represent you if there s a clear chance of winning.
Local Fed reps might mean well but national Fed seem like a joke.
Personally I wouldn t take the risk
Local Fed reps might mean well but national Fed seem like a joke.
Personally I wouldn t take the risk
The Federation is not a union. It was brought in following the 1919 strike and it is a form of control by the government.
It is banned from taking any form of industrial action. The Government/Home Office is not required by regulation to negotiate with regards pay and conditions, which is why Cameron and May were able to change all the conditions with regards to rest days, pay and time off regardless of what the police wanted, and without negotiation. It's an appalling way to treat a group of employees but there is nothing the fed can do about it.
The fed took a government to civil court - something unknown by unions - and win. This obviously upset May and her response was to attack the fed, in particular its regs which the HO impose. Then the fire service discovered their pension had been underpaid, in one case in excess of £60,000, and they tried to claim it back but were told by the government to clear off. The FS came to the fed and the police, similarly underpaid, had enough funds to pursue the matter. After a number of years the government lost the case, as they knew they would, and were ordered to pay the retired the money they had not paid they, plus a minor amount of interest, and after some years, they did so. Without the fed, this would not have happened. Some police officers were underpaid by £60,000. May and Cameron were so upset by this that she cut the funding to the fed - remember it is imposed of the federated ranks - and ordered a review.
The fact that the CEO of the fed was paid £700,000 pa, rather than the £50k the Met PC who ran it before was imposed on the fed.
The fed is toothless. It was designed that way.
I used the threat of civil action, funded by the fed, and my force backed down immediately. I could not have afforded to do so without their help.
The right to free association, banned by the government, is against civil rights legislation. If it is challenged, then the HO will lose.
The cost of alternative legal protection is, I am assured but haven't checked, prohibitive for a police officer. On that level alone, the fed subscription is a bargain. On top of that there are other benefits. Just accept the fed is hamstrung by the law. The reps aren't free to do what they want.
As an aside, I worked in industry for a dozen years before joining the police. I was a member of my firm's union committee and my experience is that nationally unions are interested in keeping jobs and pay at a decent level. If you rock the boat, they will come down and sort you out.
It is banned from taking any form of industrial action. The Government/Home Office is not required by regulation to negotiate with regards pay and conditions, which is why Cameron and May were able to change all the conditions with regards to rest days, pay and time off regardless of what the police wanted, and without negotiation. It's an appalling way to treat a group of employees but there is nothing the fed can do about it.
The fed took a government to civil court - something unknown by unions - and win. This obviously upset May and her response was to attack the fed, in particular its regs which the HO impose. Then the fire service discovered their pension had been underpaid, in one case in excess of £60,000, and they tried to claim it back but were told by the government to clear off. The FS came to the fed and the police, similarly underpaid, had enough funds to pursue the matter. After a number of years the government lost the case, as they knew they would, and were ordered to pay the retired the money they had not paid they, plus a minor amount of interest, and after some years, they did so. Without the fed, this would not have happened. Some police officers were underpaid by £60,000. May and Cameron were so upset by this that she cut the funding to the fed - remember it is imposed of the federated ranks - and ordered a review.
The fact that the CEO of the fed was paid £700,000 pa, rather than the £50k the Met PC who ran it before was imposed on the fed.
The fed is toothless. It was designed that way.
I used the threat of civil action, funded by the fed, and my force backed down immediately. I could not have afforded to do so without their help.
The right to free association, banned by the government, is against civil rights legislation. If it is challenged, then the HO will lose.
The cost of alternative legal protection is, I am assured but haven't checked, prohibitive for a police officer. On that level alone, the fed subscription is a bargain. On top of that there are other benefits. Just accept the fed is hamstrung by the law. The reps aren't free to do what they want.
As an aside, I worked in industry for a dozen years before joining the police. I was a member of my firm's union committee and my experience is that nationally unions are interested in keeping jobs and pay at a decent level. If you rock the boat, they will come down and sort you out.
XCP said:
I have been retired for 18 years.
I still pay for the Fed. insurance via my pension ( health, life, travel)
Perhaps I could get it elsewhere but it's easy and seems good value. Or it is until I get to 70 anyway.
Same, only I have no real idea what it gives me beyond travel and mobile phone insurance tbh. I had nothing from the fed when I retired and kept it going to say exactly what the benefits are?I still pay for the Fed. insurance via my pension ( health, life, travel)
Perhaps I could get it elsewhere but it's easy and seems good value. Or it is until I get to 70 anyway.
When my insurance ended because I turned 70, my NARPO told me of an insurance that includes public liability they ran. It's cheap enough compared to the estimates I got when I was going to showrooms, small factories and garages to photograph cars. When I claimed on it for tax, I discovered it had a facility to contact a doctor within 24 hrs and free membership of the RAC accident/breakdown facility.
Someone posted that the Federation needs reform from the top. That's what gave them the £700k pa CEO. The then government organised an 'independent' review, and the fed was obliged to accept and implement all the recommendations.
Someone posted that the Federation needs reform from the top. That's what gave them the £700k pa CEO. The then government organised an 'independent' review, and the fed was obliged to accept and implement all the recommendations.
As a paying member along with thousands of others the reform needs to be in consultation with it's paying members. NOT the government.
I've been a member for 20 years, I had no idea we were paying someone a completely inappropriate wage to be the CEO until it came into the press. That's the problem with the Fed, they're so detached from the majority of it's members, it's massive gravy train and they simply rely on the fact we all need legal cover so remain members.
It's an absolute shambles.
Workplace reps and discipline reps are excluded from my last point.
I've been a member for 20 years, I had no idea we were paying someone a completely inappropriate wage to be the CEO until it came into the press. That's the problem with the Fed, they're so detached from the majority of it's members, it's massive gravy train and they simply rely on the fact we all need legal cover so remain members.
It's an absolute shambles.
Workplace reps and discipline reps are excluded from my last point.
Plus the Federation dint advertise their hotel in Leatherhead that members can use and get weekend deals, seems they like to keep that one quiet.
I think they were told they were holding too much money so they started spending on things like static caravans for members to rent, but last time I looked the sites where the caravans were located were cheaper to rent than the Federation caravans
I think they were told they were holding too much money so they started spending on things like static caravans for members to rent, but last time I looked the sites where the caravans were located were cheaper to rent than the Federation caravans
Edited by The Gauge on Wednesday 11th March 13:13
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff