Police Scotland fined £100,000 for H&S breach
Discussion
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-cen...
Can't find the original thread, but a crashed car was reported just off the M90. By the time Plod responded - 3 days later - one occupant was dead and the other died in hospital of her injuries.
Can't find the original thread, but a crashed car was reported just off the M90. By the time Plod responded - 3 days later - one occupant was dead and the other died in hospital of her injuries.
No individual will be found to have done anything wrong. It will be an organisational/procedural/systemic error & lessons will be learned.
We apparently don't want a culture of blame where people are accountable for their actions as this is bad. Only those inside the system understand & outsiders know nothing.
We apparently don't want a culture of blame where people are accountable for their actions as this is bad. Only those inside the system understand & outsiders know nothing.
It is a shocking failure. Anyone that might have been accountable seems to have moved on. Lessons will be learnt etc...
The 100K fine seems a pointless penalty - all it involves is moving money from one pocket to the other. Maybe better to remove it from the Police Scotland xmas party fund - that might focus some better behaviours.
The 100K fine seems a pointless penalty - all it involves is moving money from one pocket to the other. Maybe better to remove it from the Police Scotland xmas party fund - that might focus some better behaviours.
Lotobear said:
You have to feel so sorry for that poor women who I understand might have survived had the police attended when they should have.
N
The Police have completely f
ked up but does anyone else not wonder why the farmer did not go down to inspect the car?
Not clear, but perhaps the farmer was driving by on the motorway, not working in a field? And his being a farmer was not particularly relevant? He at least called the police.N
The Police have completely f
ked up but does anyone else not wonder why the farmer did not go down to inspect the car?There is a lesson there to all of us who might whizz by on a motorway thinking 'someone must be aware already' or 'it's just an abandoned car' .
Whilst Police Scotland are undoubtedly culpable for the failures detailed in the news article, the wider accountability should be laid squarely at the feet of the SNP government. It was their decision to amalgamate the various police forces into one centralised police body, against the wishes of the Police Federation, and furthermore close call centres & centralise into one at Bilston Glen to save money, are almost certainly at the heart of this failure. Interesting that the SNP government have cheerfully thrown Police Scotland under the bus here and refused to accept any liability whatsoever.
Article said:
In the early part of 2015, police control centres in Glenrothes and Stirling were closed and their work transferred to Bilston Glen.
A report later that year said there had been concerns about insufficient staffing, which had led to low levels of performance.
The Scottish government noted that Police Scotland had now admitted "criminal liability for failings in relation to its call-handling service and apologised to the families".
A spokesperson added: "Ministers acted swiftly following the tragic events in 2015 to direct Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary to undertake an independent review of call handling in Police Scotland's Contact, Command and Control Division.
A report later that year said there had been concerns about insufficient staffing, which had led to low levels of performance.
The Scottish government noted that Police Scotland had now admitted "criminal liability for failings in relation to its call-handling service and apologised to the families".
A spokesperson added: "Ministers acted swiftly following the tragic events in 2015 to direct Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary to undertake an independent review of call handling in Police Scotland's Contact, Command and Control Division.
Biggy Stardust said:
No individual will be found to have done anything wrong. It will be an organisational/procedural/systemic error & lessons will be learned.
We apparently don't want a culture of blame where people are accountable for their actions as this is bad. Only those inside the system understand & outsiders know nothing.
So which individual would you go after?We apparently don't want a culture of blame where people are accountable for their actions as this is bad. Only those inside the system understand & outsiders know nothing.
Years ago I applied for a job with the police in a civilian support role. I got as far as an interview. One of the questions I was asked was as follows:
Two calls come in simultaneously. One concerns an overturned car in a roadside ditch, the other a child gone missing in a shopping centre. Which do you prioritise?
Now, I had worked in retail for years, and kids going AWOL was a pretty common occurrence. You would just stand somewhere conspicuous with them, and pretty soon a panicking mum would come rushing up to claim them. I know there is always a chance of an abduction, but I reckoned that would be a very slim one.
On the other hand, a car in a ditch would have had at least one occupant when it ended up there, and you would never know if they were still inside unless you went to have a look.
On the balance of probabilities I thought that the car should be checked out first. The missing kid, although the more emotive situation, and probably the ‘popular’ choice, was more than likely to resolve itself.
I failed the interview, and I was told specifically it was because of this answer. I still think I was right.
I would like to know what jobs the police were prioritising instead of going to check the car.
Two calls come in simultaneously. One concerns an overturned car in a roadside ditch, the other a child gone missing in a shopping centre. Which do you prioritise?
Now, I had worked in retail for years, and kids going AWOL was a pretty common occurrence. You would just stand somewhere conspicuous with them, and pretty soon a panicking mum would come rushing up to claim them. I know there is always a chance of an abduction, but I reckoned that would be a very slim one.
On the other hand, a car in a ditch would have had at least one occupant when it ended up there, and you would never know if they were still inside unless you went to have a look.
On the balance of probabilities I thought that the car should be checked out first. The missing kid, although the more emotive situation, and probably the ‘popular’ choice, was more than likely to resolve itself.
I failed the interview, and I was told specifically it was because of this answer. I still think I was right.
I would like to know what jobs the police were prioritising instead of going to check the car.
Roofless Toothless said:
Years ago I applied for a job with the police in a civilian support role. I got as far as an interview. One of the questions I was asked was as follows:
Two calls come in simultaneously. One concerns an overturned car in a roadside ditch, the other a child gone missing in a shopping centre. Which do you prioritise?
Now, I had worked in retail for years, and kids going AWOL was a pretty common occurrence. You would just stand somewhere conspicuous with them, and pretty soon a panicking mum would come rushing up to claim them. I know there is always a chance of an abduction, but I reckoned that would be a very slim one.
On the other hand, a car in a ditch would have had at least one occupant when it ended up there, and you would never know if they were still inside unless you went to have a look.
On the balance of probabilities I thought that the car should be checked out first. The missing kid, although the more emotive situation, and probably the ‘popular’ choice, was more than likely to resolve itself.
I failed the interview, and I was told specifically it was because of this answer. I still think I was right.
I would like to know what jobs the police were prioritising instead of going to check the car.
Probably policing the weekly demonstrations banging on about independence. Two calls come in simultaneously. One concerns an overturned car in a roadside ditch, the other a child gone missing in a shopping centre. Which do you prioritise?
Now, I had worked in retail for years, and kids going AWOL was a pretty common occurrence. You would just stand somewhere conspicuous with them, and pretty soon a panicking mum would come rushing up to claim them. I know there is always a chance of an abduction, but I reckoned that would be a very slim one.
On the other hand, a car in a ditch would have had at least one occupant when it ended up there, and you would never know if they were still inside unless you went to have a look.
On the balance of probabilities I thought that the car should be checked out first. The missing kid, although the more emotive situation, and probably the ‘popular’ choice, was more than likely to resolve itself.
I failed the interview, and I was told specifically it was because of this answer. I still think I was right.
I would like to know what jobs the police were prioritising instead of going to check the car.
Roofless Toothless said:
I failed the interview, and I was told specifically it was because of this answer. I still think I was right.
I think you're right too, but it's ridiculous if they expected you to give the right (to them) answer without training.Maybe they thought your reasoning was flawed and that's what they faulted you on.
Sheepshanks said:
Roofless Toothless said:
I failed the interview, and I was told specifically it was because of this answer. I still think I was right.
I think you're right too, but it's ridiculous if they expected you to give the right (to them) answer without training.Maybe they thought your reasoning was flawed and that's what they faulted you on.
Iwantafusca said:
The court heard there had been no previous concerns about the call handler's work and that the incident was due to "human error"
Ah well that’s fine then.
I take it the police officer involved got told he was a naughty boy and that’s that.
Believe it or not but human errors do occur and in this case, Police Scotland didn't have a robust system in place to reduce the likelihood or severity of such errors and were found guilty and fined for it.Ah well that’s fine then.
I take it the police officer involved got told he was a naughty boy and that’s that.
"I would like to know what jobs the police were prioritising instead of going to check the car".
They weren't doing anything else. A Sgt took the call, wrote it on a bit of paper or notebook then forgot to get it put on the command and control computer system .
Once on the system it is in the Controllers queue and cant get forgotten. Every call gets actioned.
If busy then less serious calls are delayed but not forgotten about.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff