Met PC found guilty of neo-Nazi membership
Discussion
Greendubber said:
I doubt this chap was particularly overt with his hobbies when applying. I'm not sure how they could do much more than they already do to be fair. If someone's a secretive wrong-un then how do they weed them out?
I’ve no idea how overt he was, but there are techniques that can be deployed to assess behaviours and maybe a more robust vetting procedure would serve them well. The real point I was trying to make is that I think this is a systemic and cultural issue, you can put any gloss on your recruitment process but I think the changes have to be too down. Earthdweller said:
Now if you think absolute minimum vetting by third parties and interviews over the phone is the best way to recruit the highest calibre of officers is the best way then god help us
The recruitment process should be robust, and if it was better we might not have this ( or other similar) thread(s)
My neighbour's grandson recently joined West Mids and practically all of the recruitment and selection process was done via video call. I think this was due to Covid (mainly) but I am informed that 20% of his intake have already quit, for various reasons.The recruitment process should be robust, and if it was better we might not have this ( or other similar) thread(s)
A robust recruitment and selection process is sensible and should benefit both the force and the applicants.
I note your spat with La Liga concerning home visits. I had a home visit when In joined in the 90's and, once again, I think this is a sensible thing.
Home visits won't happen again as long as the principles (and laws) of wanting vetting to be fair and consistent apply.
You'd need the whole data set and far more information before being able to conclude such things.
For example, what impact do modern PSD practices help find out corruption vs the past etc etc.
Blue62 said:
Greendubber said:
I doubt this chap was particularly overt with his hobbies when applying. I'm not sure how they could do much more than they already do to be fair. If someone's a secretive wrong-un then how do they weed them out?
I’ve no idea how overt he was, but there are techniques that can be deployed to assess behaviours and maybe a more robust vetting procedure would serve them well. The real point I was trying to make is that I think this is a systemic and cultural issue, you can put any gloss on your recruitment process but I think the changes have to be too down.For example, what impact do modern PSD practices help find out corruption vs the past etc etc.
La Liga said:
ou'd need the whole data set and far more information before being able to conclude such things.
For example, what impact do modern PSD practices help find out corruption vs the past etc etc.
I was trying to make the point that it’s top down. We can talk all day about proceed and methods, but the change has to happen right at the top.For example, what impact do modern PSD practices help find out corruption vs the past etc etc.
Blue62 said:
La Liga said:
ou'd need the whole data set and far more information before being able to conclude such things.
For example, what impact do modern PSD practices help find out corruption vs the past etc etc.
I was trying to make the point that it’s top down. We can talk all day about proceed and methods, but the change has to happen right at the top.For example, what impact do modern PSD practices help find out corruption vs the past etc etc.
Best practice will be from the College of Policing so I doubt the seniority in the Met have much to do with it.
La Liga said:
Blue62 said:
La Liga said:
ou'd need the whole data set and far more information before being able to conclude such things.
For example, what impact do modern PSD practices help find out corruption vs the past etc etc.
I was trying to make the point that it’s top down. We can talk all day about proceed and methods, but the change has to happen right at the top.For example, what impact do modern PSD practices help find out corruption vs the past etc etc.
Best practice will be from the College of Policing so I doubt the seniority in the Met have much to do with it.
- Best practice is suitable for purpose.
- Best practice is followed.
Digga said:
La Liga said:
Blue62 said:
La Liga said:
ou'd need the whole data set and far more information before being able to conclude such things.
For example, what impact do modern PSD practices help find out corruption vs the past etc etc.
I was trying to make the point that it’s top down. We can talk all day about proceed and methods, but the change has to happen right at the top.For example, what impact do modern PSD practices help find out corruption vs the past etc etc.
Best practice will be from the College of Policing so I doubt the seniority in the Met have much to do with it.
- Best practice is suitable for purpose.
- Best practice is followed.
My point was vetting is likely to be dictated by the COP, not via ‘top down’ hierarchy.
Red 4 said:
La Liga said:
Home visits won't happen again as long as the principles (and laws) of wanting vetting to be fair and consistent apply.
What laws would prevent home visits regarding an application to join the police ?Late this morning I got a call from my local Neighbourhood Sergeant asking for a home visit. Nearly an hour later and the kettle was on and I was panic shaving the mess that I haven't bothered to touch since my interview at the start of the month.
The home visit was the part of the process that really intrigued me, having not made it to this stage before it was a complete unknown although some of the saints on here gave me at least an inkling of what to expect. The first test was a fairly simple one - white tea none. I didn't get any feedback on that but there was no vomiting so I'm taking it as a pass
The visit essentially consisted of an ID check, around 20 questions designed to find out my attitudes towards drugs, binge drinking and right wing political groups as well as making sure that there was nothing that I hadn't failed to declare on my vetting forms. The questions were fairly formal, but after they were out the way I had an opportunity to sit and have a cuppa with a serving supervisor who could answer any questions about the job in a formal setting.
Just the vetting to wait back on now so hopefully this time next week I'll have a final offer of employment
Red 4 said:
La Liga said:
Home visits won't happen again as long as the principles (and laws) of wanting vetting to be fair and consistent apply.
What laws would prevent home visits regarding an application to join the police?If it's subjective judgement of 'character' / how they live / where they live / interviewing family, using a police officers 'nous' and the other suggestions, then it has a much greater risk of a disproportionate impact which has obligations under the Equality Act 2010.
If the desire is more psychometric, partially subjective testing, then that needs to be carried out by appropriately qualified personnel in an appropriate environment.
Not the local Sergeant deciding whether he likes someone's character or not.
Bigends said:
The visit essentially consisted of an ID check, around 20 questions designed to find out my attitudes towards drugs, binge drinking and right wing political groups as well as making sure that there was nothing that I hadn't failed to declare on my vetting forms. The questions were fairly formal, but after they were out the way I had an opportunity to sit and have a cuppa with a serving supervisor who could answer any questions about the job in a formal setting.
Just the vetting to wait back on now so hopefully this time next week I'll have a final offer of employment
So basically all data that can be captured without needing a home visit. Just the vetting to wait back on now so hopefully this time next week I'll have a final offer of employment
La Liga said:
Red 4 said:
La Liga said:
Home visits won't happen again as long as the principles (and laws) of wanting vetting to be fair and consistent apply.
What laws would prevent home visits regarding an application to join the police?If it's subjective judgement of 'character' / how they live / where they live / interviewing family, using a police officers 'nous' and the other suggestions, then it has a much greater risk of a disproportionate impact which has obligations under the Equality Act 2010.
If the desire is more psychometric, partially subjective testing, then that needs to be carried out by appropriately qualified personnel in an appropriate environment.
Not the local Sergeant deciding whether he likes someone's character or not.
Bigends said:
The visit essentially consisted of an ID check, around 20 questions designed to find out my attitudes towards drugs, binge drinking and right wing political groups as well as making sure that there was nothing that I hadn't failed to declare on my vetting forms. The questions were fairly formal, but after they were out the way I had an opportunity to sit and have a cuppa with a serving supervisor who could answer any questions about the job in a formal setting.
Just the vetting to wait back on now so hopefully this time next week I'll have a final offer of employment
So basically all data that can be captured without needing a home visit. Just the vetting to wait back on now so hopefully this time next week I'll have a final offer of employment
Bigends said:
Cant beat face to face interaction - its how Policing has worked for years. Interviewing officer may have smelt a rat in this case - who knows?
It has been used for years, but it hasn't always worked. Look how has it evolved when it comes to recruitment / promotion and how locked-down those processes now are to try and remove as much room for bias / subjectivity as possible.
If the old ways worked so well why the changes / evolution?
The police and non-police academics at the COP and the instructions that carry out relevant research aren't making it up as they go along. They're creating policy decisions based on the evidence available which best meets the desired objectives.
La Liga said:
Bigends said:
Cant beat face to face interaction - its how Policing has worked for years. Interviewing officer may have smelt a rat in this case - who knows?
It has been used for years, but it hasn't always worked. Look how has it evolved when it comes to recruitment / promotion and how locked-down those processes now are to try and remove as much room for bias / subjectivity as possible.
If the old ways worked so well why the changes / evolution?
The police and non-police academics at the COP and the instructions that carry out relevant research aren't making it up as they go along. They're creating policy decisions based on the evidence available which best meets the desired objectives.
I don’t know what world you are living in but nepotism, cronyism is alive and kicking for the senior ranks and even the PC-PS, PS-INSP system is open to abuse
Once you look at the selection boards for CI uoeards the system is totally abused and if your face don’t fit it doesn’t matter what your ability is
The private company that is better known a the “Collapse of Policing rather than College of Policing you mean ?
It’s as much a part of the old boy network and is a part of the problem not the solution
More word salad from you “policy, objectives, meeting demand, bias, subjectivity” blah
The only thing missing is objectivity from you
Red 4 said:
Earthdweller said:
Now if you think absolute minimum vetting by third parties and interviews over the phone is the best way to recruit the highest calibre of officers is the best way then god help us
The recruitment process should be robust, and if it was better we might not have this ( or other similar) thread(s)
My neighbour's grandson recently joined West Mids and practically all of the recruitment and selection process was done via video call. I think this was due to Covid (mainly) but I am informed that 20% of his intake have already quit, for various reasons.The recruitment process should be robust, and if it was better we might not have this ( or other similar) thread(s)
A robust recruitment and selection process is sensible and should benefit both the force and the applicants.
I note your spat with La Liga concerning home visits. I had a home visit when In joined in the 90's and, once again, I think this is a sensible thing.
The wastage and high attrition rates clearly indicates that there is a problem with the recruitment process and that it is not fit for purpose
The level of turnover with new joiners and young in service officers leaving is not sustainable
As you rightly say if the system was more robust then it may lead to fewer recruits but a higher calibre and less leaving which ultimately means more officers
Bigends said:
Cant beat face to face interaction - its how Policing has worked for years. Interviewing officer may have smelt a rat in this case - who knows?
So La liga now agrees that home visits aren’t against the law as he previously stated I’m absolutely with you bigends, face to face interaction is key
Now as I mentioned up thread, if the socially awkward recruit had been visited would it likely have raises questions to his suitability for the role ?
Would it perhaps have meant more enhanced vetting on him ?
I’d suggest it’s very likely, which many have affected the outcome of the selection process
We have arrived at the situation where recruitment has been outsourced to private companies in many forces, including the Met, and some recruits being telephone interviewed .. that cannot be the best way to recruit
Earthdweller said:
You think the promotion system is fair and locked down ?
I didn't write 'fair'. I said they were 'locked down' when speaking in he context of removing a degree of subjectivity.
Earthdweller said:
I don’t know what world you are living in but nepotism, cronyism is alive and kicking for the senior ranks and even the PC-PS, PS-INSP system is open to abuse.
Once you look at the selection boards for CI uoeards the system is totally abused and if your face don’t fit it doesn’t matter what your ability is
How are you drawing those conclusions? Once you look at the selection boards for CI uoeards the system is totally abused and if your face don’t fit it doesn’t matter what your ability is
'My experience' or anecdotal per chance?
Earthdweller said:
The private company that is better known a the “Collapse of Policing rather than College of Policing you mean?
Probably known as that to those with closed-minds who rose-tint the past. Earthdweller said:
More word salad from you “policy, objectives, meeting demand, bias, subjectivity” blah
I didn't write 'meet demand'. Why do you keep making up things I've said? The other words have direct meaning. I'm not just writing them, I am also explaining why.
Just because you don't like them doesn't mean they are 'word salad'.
Bias, for example, is describing something with an abundance of evidence to support it from the field of psychology. You can't just dismiss it because you don't like it. I even linked it to the COP's 2021 best practice where they mention it as something they want to mitigate, as well as the laws which underpin and obligate that.
It's your problem if you're too lazy to think about it.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff