Winsor repays his debt to the tories

[ExFiF]

It's a complete waste of time and breath typing to try and explain to some of the PH idiots. We only have to read some of the pathetic whinges in the Jobs and Employment section to understand most MoP just wouldn't accept the restrictions placed on private life backed up by potential disciplinary. These people will ultimately get the service they deserve., which likewise concerns me for my family.

Job is f*cked. Ah'm oot.

[dandarez]

Elroy Blue said:

Your comment was:

Andy Zarse said:

in such a union led industry as the police.

Exactly how are we 'union led'. That suggests to me you see the Police Fed as something akin to Bob Crow. I asked for examples of how they have acted as such. You haven't given any. While you're at it, you might like to give examples of all those 'spanish practices' you talked about. You seem to have missed my request for those.

Does the Fed represent Police Officers. Yes (poorly some might say). Is your local car enthusiasts club a union. They don't have any power to strike or lead industrial action. But they are a group of members acting together.

I'd like to say I'm past caring. But I'm not. My kids will find that in the future, should they be a victim of crime, the profitibility of the reponse will be the primary consideration,. The privatised 'service' will be inspected by a man who recommended the privatisation and whose firm makes money from Police privatisation, so I'm sure his inspections will show everything is fine and dandy.

You reap what you sow. Coming to a high street near you.

Very worrying. But no surprise.
The Derailer is coming...


'Mr Winsor insisted that, despite working on the two reports for 3,372 hours over 349 days, neither he nor his law firm White & Case had been paid a penny for the work – and he had turned down a Home Office offer of more than £104,000.'

The Derailer... he works for free as well?

The Derailer, he's back on track to derail again. Recompense for working for free will come further down the line.

The Derailer has full knowledge of the police, he's heard the whistle on the platform.

God help this country.

[Gene Vincent]

All the while the public have the perception that the police can resource money making schemes yet just get a number to claim on their own insurance for what is a real and upsetting crime the plea of 'profit policing' will fall on deaf ears and we the general public simply mutter 'plus ca change'...

21st Century, people talk to each other far more than 30 years ago and things like the recent thread about flashing fellow motorists and being fined for it, does more harm than a years worth of good works, like it or not, that is the reality.

It only compounds the degradation of public opinion to have officers supporting or appearing to support such things.

Making someone a 'bogey-man' is just evidence of a deep-seated displacement syndrome, blame others for bad decisions of the past and present.

The lax attitude to what really mattered to the general public doesn't cause riots on the streets in the UK, it cause disillusionment and a 'who cares' attitude. It's the English way right to the core.

The more the Police promote Winsor as a bogey-man the more the public will cynically consider the police are afraid of a new broom... and from my place in the machine that is not so much a sneaking feeling, it seems to me to be self-evidently true.

Just my opinion.

[Andy Zarse]

dandarez said:

Very worrying. But no surprise.
The Derailer is coming...


'Mr Winsor insisted that, despite working on the two reports for 3,372 hours over 349 days, neither he nor his law firm White & Case had been paid a penny for the work – and he had turned down a Home Office offer of more than £104,000.'

The Derailer... he works for free as well?

The Derailer, he's back on track to derail again. Recompense for working for free will come further down the line.

The Derailer has full knowledge of the police, he's heard the whistle on the platform.

God help this country.

From wiki...

Winsor's five-year term as Rail Regulator began on 5 July 1999, and he immediately announced a new regulatory agenda, one which contemplated holding the privatised railway companies much more closely to account.

Winsor's ability to pursue his new regulatory agenda was significantly hampered by problems with Railtrack coming to a head very shortly after he took office. One of Winsor's principal motivations in applying for the post of Rail Regulator had been his frustration with - some critics elevated it to a visceral hatred of - Railtrack's incompetence and how it impeded so much progress in the privatised railway. He was also reported as being increasingly exasperated with the failure of his predecessor to hold Railtrack properly to account, and to use the powers of the office to apply pressure on the company and to reform - increase - the powers of the Rail Regulator to make regulatory and contractual accountabilities more effective.



Winsor is a derailer how?

[XCP]

Andy Zarse said:

Semantics.

Name me a trade union that one becomes a member of automatically on appointment but whose subscriptions are voluntary.
Name me a trade union that was incorporated by Act of Parliament with a mandate to negotiate on matters of efficiency and welfare.

[Andy Zarse]

XCP said:

Name me a trade union that one becomes a member of automatically on appointment but whose subscriptions are voluntary.
Name me a trade union that was incorporated by Act of Parliament with a mandate to negotiate on matters of efficiency and welfare.

Otiose points I'm afraid.

[Red 4]

This thread is deja vu.

It's all been said before.

No surprise that Winsor has been appointed.

For those seeking an argument I suggest you need to get a life.

[XCP]

Andy Zarse said:

Otiose points I'm afraid.

Why?
You claim the Federation is a trade union.
I would have thought that these points prove that it is not. Leaving aside the matter of industrial action, the fact that the Federation was set up by the Government with a legal responsibility to consult on matters of welfare and efficiency hardly supports the trade union argument.
Indeed as far as I recall it is a discipline offence for a police officer to be a member of a Trade Union, otherwise than with the Chief Constables permission.

( this may not be the case now, but it certainly was when I joined)

[ED209]

ExFiF said:

Actually it's not semantics, when you objectively take in the differences and the particular T&Cs which are disciplinary offences the regulations enforce on officers that no MoP would accept in their job there is a significant difference. These conditions have been discussed many times on the various threads and I can't be Zarsed to repeat them.

Nobody is arguing that change isn't needed, nobody is arguing that there aren't ways that efficiencies can be improved, and nobody is arguing that they are not willing to participate in such change.

What the public seem to be unaware is that whilst genuine cuts are being implemented, front line response officers (troops on the street) are being decimated, yet the workload on the response police is increasing due to more and more incidents falling off the end of other agencies' desks, and in some cases other agencies abdicating their responsibilities knowing the police will have to pick things up as first responders.

Yes, Social Services and parts of the Ambulance Service, I'm looking directly at YOU!

Exactly! social services being the worst offenders, on my patch last night which is a fairly small area with maybe 16 response cops on duty (nobody else during the night) we had 12, yes thats a dozen reports of children missing from the various local authority homes on our patch.

A one off you might think?? well not quite as the night before we had 10 reports, all which require investigating, all of which involve social services totally abdicating responsibility to the police. The sitiuation is so absurd some of the kids usually ring the homes and say "I am in x place i want to come back to the home, please can i be picked up"

Do social services pick them up? NO
Do they send a taxi for them? NO
Do they tell them to walk? NO

They flatly refuse to do all of these and phone the police, the police being the risk adverse monster we currently are sends cops to pick them up. All of these jobs mean the few cops on duty are not doing what they should be doing but wasting time doing social services job for them. All this because if they die or have an accident, it will be the polices fault, not social services, not the parents, and certainly not the kids.

[XCP]

Another saving that could be made at a stroke of a ministers pen.

Delete the words ' or Police Station' from the list of places of safety to which persons apparently suffering from mental illness can lawfully be taken for assessment.

There. We could save millions

[ED209]

XCP said:

Another saving that could be made at a stroke of a ministers pen.

Delete the words ' or Police Station' from the list of places of safety to which persons apparently suffering from mental illness can lawfully be taken for assessment.

There. We could save millions

As someone who has to deal with these persons every other day and take responsibility for their welfare i 100% agree. The police station is not a suitable place for them, however health professionals wont touch anyone who has had a drink (i mean had a drink not necessarily drunk), used drugs or has shown the slightest hint of agression.

Unfortunately the police station is the place of last resort because no body else seems to want to know.

You dont take them to the police station and something bad happens - It's your fault. You take them to the police station and something happens - It's your fault.

Its never the persons choice, but its always the police's fault. Fact is the police spend a huge amount of time dealing with things that are either somebody elses job or nobody at all's job because they are cringe worthy loads of rubbish. (facebook complaints, petty childish disputes, etc etc etc)

[paulrussell]

I think in several years time the police will be glad that Tom Winsor was hired. It seems he did a good job at Rail Track and Network Rail. I don't think he was critizising the police in the daliy mail link.

[ED209]

paulrussell said:

I think in several years time the police will be glad that Tom Winsor was hired. It seems he did a good job at Rail Track and Network Rail. I don't think he was critizising the police in the daliy mail link.

really? So we now have a rail network that is cheap, efficient and acessible to all?

Of course we dont, its unreliable, expensive and crowded.

[Elroy Blue]

paulrussell said:

I think in several years time the police will be glad that Tom Winsor was hired. It seems he did a good job at Rail Track and Network Rail. I don't think he was critizising the police in the daliy mail link.

The Police won't be. But G4S will.