Discussion
Someone I know is taking a hefty pay cut from a 9-5 civvy Police job (no management etc) to starting out as an officer. and is joining for job satisfaction reasons primarily. That can't be right IMO. Police Officer pay is way to low, and unfortunately it must price a lot of bright young things out of the market. You either join because you want to and can afford it based on partners earnings etc), or you join because the wage is comparable to your other options (retail etc). I really do believe that lowering earnings will result in a less skilled workforce, and a lower standard of 'service'. It's very sad and massively undervalues the vast majority of officers.
Shortsighted.
Shortsighted.
Elroy Blue said:
Mk3Spitfire said:
Starting salary for PC - £19k
Equates to £1100/month take home. Dreadful wage for the crap and danger involvedPay was awful when I joined mid 70's - took home £25 a week which was crap even then. Worked 7 on 2 off with little overtime.
However - they'd provide accomodation free of charge whether married or single or pay allowances in lieu. Dental and prescriptions were also free - not any more. Lived and worked where you were put with very little say in the matter.
Pay was that bad, when Queen Maggie was voted in, in 1979 she immediately granted a 30% pay rise to bring Police pay levels somewhere near national average -whats happening now is nothing new.
Mk3Spitfire said:
Starting salary for PC - £19k
£28,836, unless this website is wrong...http://www.metpolicecareers.co.uk/newconstable/pay...
I do appreciate the differences and accept that any direct comparison between the two careers is not really possible. However, if I were to see on the News at 10 tonight that both police officers and members of the armed forces had been out on strike (just go with it) over pay and conditions, while I'd perhaps feel that they both have a case, I know which I'd feel had the more valid gripe.
Simon.
ferrariF50lover said:
Mk3Spitfire said:
Starting salary for PC - £19k
£28,836, unless this website is wrong...http://www.metpolicecareers.co.uk/newconstable/pay...
I do appreciate the differences and accept that any direct comparison between the two careers is not really possible. However, if I were to see on the News at 10 tonight that both police officers and members of the armed forces had been out on strike (just go with it) over pay and conditions, while I'd perhaps feel that they both have a case, I know which I'd feel had the more valid gripe.
Only £28K in the Met - not county forces.
Simon.
ferrariF50lover said:
£28,836, unless this website is wrong...
Simon.
Met Police pay had a Lindon weighting. That nice Political appointee Mr Winsor, the rail regulator who was parachuted into the position of HMIC (and who likes strutting around in a Police Chjefs uniform ) recommend starting pay was reduced to 19k. Most Forces have accepted this.An absolute disgrace. Simon.
Elroy Blue said:
Met Police pay had a Lindon weighting. That nice Political appointee Mr Winsor, the rail regulator who was parachuted into the position of HMIC (and who likes strutting around in a Police Chjefs uniform ) recommend starting pay was reduced to 19k. Most Forces have accepted this.An absolute disgrace.
If its disgraceful then nobody will want to join them and they'll have to increase it. Winsors point that there is no problem recruiting still stands of course, even at 19k.Elroy Blue said:
And you get right back to the standard of person you want to recruit.
Strange that MPs feel their pay should increase to attract 'quality people' yet I don't see any shortage of people wanting to stand for Parliament.
How are you measuring 'the standard'?Strange that MPs feel their pay should increase to attract 'quality people' yet I don't see any shortage of people wanting to stand for Parliament.
The Met are recruiting in fairly large numbers again & some of the intakes are 100% graduates. If they are willing to work for the reduced starting salaries then it's hard to argue that it's wrong. Of course it 'may' be storing future problems but only time will tell. These things (like most) seem to be cyclical.
History tells us what happens when police pay is so low that it is difficult to attract the right kind of people.
When newly recruited officers in the counties with two kids could claim supplementary benefit, I joined with eight others. Two were discovered to have CRO, one for GBH w/i but as that was in Germany (ex squaddie) it took time to surface. Another chap stole from vagrants, making them turn out their pockets and stealing half their money. Whilst this might sound rather odd, we worked out later that he must have doubled his take home 'pay'. No one, apart from me, had any paper qualifications.
All but one had left the job by the time I transfered forces some 9 years or so later. Two because of Operation Countryman into corruption in the Met/City.
We were discouraged from sacking officers who underperformed as it was probable that a replacement would be worse. Better the devil you know.
Whilst there are queues of applicants now, that is because there are few other jobs. Windsor, who got the job despite having interests that might, let's say, conflict with the impartial discharge of his duties and, had he been a PC it would have barred him, did the hatchet job that Cameron had directed him to do.
Once the economy turns around those who are still struggling with pay will move on to something better, their experience in the police standing them in good stead, and those who struggle will remain and this will give the service problems in years to come. This is exactly what happened in the late 60s.
Cameron's history of being anti-police, and favouring mates, will cost us dear in the long run. We've gone from the best police service we've ever had to one where police officers have no hope of doing a proper job. And it is getting worse. When the next riots come, and they will, and they will probably be worse, think how much money has been saved by dropping the starting pay as cities burn and are trashed.
We have one of the smallest police forces in Western European countries, and one of the, if not the, cheapest. We couldn't cope with riots in the late 70s and training and recruitment allowed the police to respond to the miners' strike demands. Couldn't do it now, not in any way. My old patch now puts out fewer officers on the streets than it did when mutual aid took vast numbers of officers away to the coalfields. And workload is considerably higher.
Police pay is 2k less than that of a fireman down this way. That's no way to attract quality officers.
When newly recruited officers in the counties with two kids could claim supplementary benefit, I joined with eight others. Two were discovered to have CRO, one for GBH w/i but as that was in Germany (ex squaddie) it took time to surface. Another chap stole from vagrants, making them turn out their pockets and stealing half their money. Whilst this might sound rather odd, we worked out later that he must have doubled his take home 'pay'. No one, apart from me, had any paper qualifications.
All but one had left the job by the time I transfered forces some 9 years or so later. Two because of Operation Countryman into corruption in the Met/City.
We were discouraged from sacking officers who underperformed as it was probable that a replacement would be worse. Better the devil you know.
Whilst there are queues of applicants now, that is because there are few other jobs. Windsor, who got the job despite having interests that might, let's say, conflict with the impartial discharge of his duties and, had he been a PC it would have barred him, did the hatchet job that Cameron had directed him to do.
Once the economy turns around those who are still struggling with pay will move on to something better, their experience in the police standing them in good stead, and those who struggle will remain and this will give the service problems in years to come. This is exactly what happened in the late 60s.
Cameron's history of being anti-police, and favouring mates, will cost us dear in the long run. We've gone from the best police service we've ever had to one where police officers have no hope of doing a proper job. And it is getting worse. When the next riots come, and they will, and they will probably be worse, think how much money has been saved by dropping the starting pay as cities burn and are trashed.
We have one of the smallest police forces in Western European countries, and one of the, if not the, cheapest. We couldn't cope with riots in the late 70s and training and recruitment allowed the police to respond to the miners' strike demands. Couldn't do it now, not in any way. My old patch now puts out fewer officers on the streets than it did when mutual aid took vast numbers of officers away to the coalfields. And workload is considerably higher.
Police pay is 2k less than that of a fireman down this way. That's no way to attract quality officers.
vonhosen said:
How are you measuring 'the standard'?
The Met are recruiting in fairly large numbers again & some of the intakes are 100% graduates. If they are willing to work for the reduced starting salaries then it's hard to argue that it's wrong. Of course it 'may' be storing future problems but only time will tell. These things (like most) seem to be cyclical.
We are in a recession. Despite what HMG say I don't see many peoples standards of living improving. Quite the opposite in fact.The Met are recruiting in fairly large numbers again & some of the intakes are 100% graduates. If they are willing to work for the reduced starting salaries then it's hard to argue that it's wrong. Of course it 'may' be storing future problems but only time will tell. These things (like most) seem to be cyclical.
However, many people still see the police as a steady job and, dare I say it, a career. I'm afraid it isn't anymore (a long term career that is). Winsor has seen to that. This is just the start.
Factor in starting pay, exams every 3 years (minimum) to get to or remain on top of your pay scale, no progression through the ranks, extended working age, fitness testing (the standard of which will be increased), compulsary severance, etc. etc. and therein lies your answer ...
Red 4 said:
vonhosen said:
How are you measuring 'the standard'?
The Met are recruiting in fairly large numbers again & some of the intakes are 100% graduates. If they are willing to work for the reduced starting salaries then it's hard to argue that it's wrong. Of course it 'may' be storing future problems but only time will tell. These things (like most) seem to be cyclical.
We are in a recession. Despite what HMG say I don't see many peoples standards of living improving. Quite the opposite in fact.The Met are recruiting in fairly large numbers again & some of the intakes are 100% graduates. If they are willing to work for the reduced starting salaries then it's hard to argue that it's wrong. Of course it 'may' be storing future problems but only time will tell. These things (like most) seem to be cyclical.
However, many people still see the police as a steady job and, dare I say it, a career. I'm afraid it isn't anymore (a long term career that is). Winsor has seen to that. This is just the start.
Factor in starting pay, exams every 3 years (minimum) to get to or remain on top of your pay scale, no progression through the ranks, extended working age, fitness testing (the standard of which will be increased), compulsary severance, etc. etc. and therein lies your answer ...
Derek Smith said:
History tells us what happens when police pay is so low that it is difficult to attract the right kind of people.
When newly recruited officers in the counties with two kids could claim supplementary benefit, I joined with eight others. Two were discovered to have CRO, one for GBH w/i but as that was in Germany (ex squaddie) it took time to surface. Another chap stole from vagrants, making them turn out their pockets and stealing half their money. Whilst this might sound rather odd, we worked out later that he must have doubled his take home 'pay'. No one, apart from me, had any paper qualifications.
All but one had left the job by the time I transfered forces some 9 years or so later. Two because of Operation Countryman into corruption in the Met/City.
We were discouraged from sacking officers who underperformed as it was probable that a replacement would be worse. Better the devil you know.
Whilst there are queues of applicants now, that is because there are few other jobs. Windsor, who got the job despite having interests that might, let's say, conflict with the impartial discharge of his duties and, had he been a PC it would have barred him, did the hatchet job that Cameron had directed him to do.
Once the economy turns around those who are still struggling with pay will move on to something better, their experience in the police standing them in good stead, and those who struggle will remain and this will give the service problems in years to come. This is exactly what happened in the late 60s.
Cameron's history of being anti-police, and favouring mates, will cost us dear in the long run. We've gone from the best police service we've ever had to one where police officers have no hope of doing a proper job. And it is getting worse. When the next riots come, and they will, and they will probably be worse, think how much money has been saved by dropping the starting pay as cities burn and are trashed.
We have one of the smallest police forces in Western European countries, and one of the, if not the, cheapest. We couldn't cope with riots in the late 70s and training and recruitment allowed the police to respond to the miners' strike demands. Couldn't do it now, not in any way. My old patch now puts out fewer officers on the streets than it did when mutual aid took vast numbers of officers away to the coalfields. And workload is considerably higher.
Police pay is 2k less than that of a fireman down this way. That's no way to attract quality officers.
I'm not arguing that the workload isn't higher etc, but when they can get intakes full of graduates for several K per head less than they could a few years ago they'd be mad not to wouldn't they?When newly recruited officers in the counties with two kids could claim supplementary benefit, I joined with eight others. Two were discovered to have CRO, one for GBH w/i but as that was in Germany (ex squaddie) it took time to surface. Another chap stole from vagrants, making them turn out their pockets and stealing half their money. Whilst this might sound rather odd, we worked out later that he must have doubled his take home 'pay'. No one, apart from me, had any paper qualifications.
All but one had left the job by the time I transfered forces some 9 years or so later. Two because of Operation Countryman into corruption in the Met/City.
We were discouraged from sacking officers who underperformed as it was probable that a replacement would be worse. Better the devil you know.
Whilst there are queues of applicants now, that is because there are few other jobs. Windsor, who got the job despite having interests that might, let's say, conflict with the impartial discharge of his duties and, had he been a PC it would have barred him, did the hatchet job that Cameron had directed him to do.
Once the economy turns around those who are still struggling with pay will move on to something better, their experience in the police standing them in good stead, and those who struggle will remain and this will give the service problems in years to come. This is exactly what happened in the late 60s.
Cameron's history of being anti-police, and favouring mates, will cost us dear in the long run. We've gone from the best police service we've ever had to one where police officers have no hope of doing a proper job. And it is getting worse. When the next riots come, and they will, and they will probably be worse, think how much money has been saved by dropping the starting pay as cities burn and are trashed.
We have one of the smallest police forces in Western European countries, and one of the, if not the, cheapest. We couldn't cope with riots in the late 70s and training and recruitment allowed the police to respond to the miners' strike demands. Couldn't do it now, not in any way. My old patch now puts out fewer officers on the streets than it did when mutual aid took vast numbers of officers away to the coalfields. And workload is considerably higher.
Police pay is 2k less than that of a fireman down this way. That's no way to attract quality officers.
vonhosen said:
I said it 'may' be storing problems for the future. I agree it is looking less likely to be a 'long term' career for the numbers in it that it used to be, but maybe those joining don't want to do 30 years in it. Yes I also agree (MHO) there will be less progression & that may be a reason that many won't see it as a 30 year career, but it's conjecture at this stage. If the government have judged it right then they'll have saved themselves some money, if they've got it wrong then the service (given) will suffer badly, as I say time will tell.
30 year career von ?Try 35+ for many new starters if they want to see any kind of decent pension.
I'm not trying to be argumentative btw but like I said - this is just the start.
Red 4 said:
vonhosen said:
I said it 'may' be storing problems for the future. I agree it is looking less likely to be a 'long term' career for the numbers in it that it used to be, but maybe those joining don't want to do 30 years in it. Yes I also agree (MHO) there will be less progression & that may be a reason that many won't see it as a 30 year career, but it's conjecture at this stage. If the government have judged it right then they'll have saved themselves some money, if they've got it wrong then the service (given) will suffer badly, as I say time will tell.
30 year career von ?Try 35+ for many new starters if they want to see any kind of decent pension.
I'm not trying to be argumentative btw but like I said - this is just the start.
The economy isn't great and people are living longer, so objectively, reform in this area isn't unreasonable.
What is unreasonable is to keep such private life restrictions and not have industrial rights. Either the restrictions go or industrial rights are granted IMO. The Fed should be focusing on keeping the (eventual) ECHR momentum for this issue.
What is unreasonable is to keep such private life restrictions and not have industrial rights. Either the restrictions go or industrial rights are granted IMO. The Fed should be focusing on keeping the (eventual) ECHR momentum for this issue.
Even now we are suffering the loss of Officers before their two years probation ends. They join full of thoughts they'll change the world, with a chance to progress.
They now see they've got 40 years of having their head kicked in with crap pay and no chance if improving it. It rapidly becomes 'f
k this' and they leave. The cost in lost training and development is immense.
These 'reforms' are paper savings introduced by clueless idiots with a Political agenda
They now see they've got 40 years of having their head kicked in with crap pay and no chance if improving it. It rapidly becomes 'f
k this' and they leave. The cost in lost training and development is immense. These 'reforms' are paper savings introduced by clueless idiots with a Political agenda
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff