Can the (Met) police ever change?

icowden

Über Member
What a shame, you mean you have to PROVE someone is a wrong-un, before you can sack them, rather than just sacking them because you find them "odious". I blame the EU, it is all this human rights and employment stuff to blame. Wasn't like this in the old days when you could just sack people at will, for being the wrong religion/colour/gender/etc

By prove I mean *really* provide a very substantial body of evidence, then give them three verbal warnings for three different incidents, then a written warning, then a final notice to improve etc. It really is quite difficult. I spent some time working with an awful Manager in the NHS. She was completely incompetent, a bully and a liar. She alienated every member of staff she managed. I was identified as the problem at first and moved elsewhere. Then the rest of the department were identified as creating problems. Finally senior management determined that she was the problem and moved her elsewhere. The same problems occurred. So they then moved her to an invented managerial role where she had no-one to manage. She is probably still working there despite being manifestly unsuitable for the job in which she works.
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
By prove I mean *really* provide a very substantial body of evidence, then give them three verbal warnings for three different incidents, then a written warning, then a final notice to improve etc. It really is quite difficult. I spent some time working with an awful Manager in the NHS. She was completely incompetent, a bully and a liar. She alienated every member of staff she managed. I was identified as the problem at first and moved elsewhere. Then the rest of the department were identified as creating problems. Finally senior management determined that she was the problem and moved her elsewhere. The same problems occurred. So they then moved her to an invented managerial role where she had no-one to manage. She is probably still working there despite being manifestly unsuitable for the job in which she works.

Yes, I have encountered more than one incompetent, in the NHS strangely enough, who were not dealt with effectively.

Mrs @BoldonLad worked in the private sector, in a Management role, strangely, she managed to get rid of more than one "dodgy" employee, using the correct procedures.
 

Ian H

Über Member
Yes, I have encountered more than one incompetent, in the NHS strangely enough, who were not dealt with effectively.

Mrs @BoldonLad worked in the private sector, in a Management role, strangely, she managed to get rid of more than one "dodgy" employee, using the correct procedures.

Judging by E's experience as a public sector manager, the disciplinary procedures tend to be both very detailed and ineptly applied.
But the other elephant in the room (the police appear to have at least two elephants) is the fact that the vetting of new recruits seems to have failed.
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
Judging by E's experience as a public sector manager, the disciplinary procedures tend to be both very detailed and ineptly applied.
But the other elephant in the room (the police appear to have at least two elephants) is the fact that the vetting of new recruits seems to have failed.

Yes, the vetting procedure does appear to need an overhaul, to put it mildly.
 
OP
OP
glasgowcyclist

glasgowcyclist

Well-Known Member
Hindsight is a wonderful thing

And what do you think we should do with it now?
 

Ian H

Über Member
Met commissioner Sir Mark Rowley said -
"I have about 100 officers in the organisation who have very restrictive conditions on them because, frankly, we don't trust them to talk to members of the public and it's completely mad that I have to employ people like that as police officers who you can't trust to have contact with the public, it's ridiculous."
He said about 500 officers of the 3,000 were suspended or on restricted duties. He told presenter Nick Robinson he was unable throw them out of the force, due to restricted powers available to him.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-63684172
I wonder what those 100 officers who aren't trusted in contact with the public are doing. Vetting new recruits?
 

mudsticks

Legendary Member
Judging by E's experience as a public sector manager, the disciplinary procedures tend to be both very detailed and ineptly applied.
But the other elephant in the room (the police appear to have at least two elephants) is the fact that the vetting of new recruits seems to have failed.

The police have long had a reputation for racism, sexism, and homophobia.

I don't know if that was just accepted because large chunks of the rest of society pretty much accepted those prejudices as 'normal' so the police weren't really held to account for it either.

It's maybe only just lately that women, and marginalised groups have finally found enough of a voice to stand up to these issues, and the police have been thoroughly exposed as stuck with a lot of officers with really dodgy attitudes.

Attitudes that have been allowed to perpetuate, even flourish within the force.
 

AuroraSaab

Über Member
The vetting procedure isn't lightweight by any means. Unfortunately unless there has been prior evidence in school or work references then assessing an applicant's attitude is much harder. Things like sexism, racism, and homophobia aren't necessarily things that would come to light. You'd probably hide those attitudes until you found yourself in a section with like-minded individuals.

I think a more important thing is to end the cover up culture in the police and other institutions where people either close ranks or feel afraid to voice concerns. Instead of reducing these attitudes some police forces seem to be enabling their officers. If the dodgy ones were weeded out early on, at the first sign, it would send a message. Difficult to do though unless those at the top are prepared to make it a priority.
 

C R

Active Member
The vetting procedure isn't lightweight by any means. Unfortunately unless there has been prior evidence in school or work references then assessing an applicant's attitude is much harder. Things like sexism, racism, and homophobia aren't necessarily things that would come to light. You'd probably hide those attitudes until you found yourself in a section with like-minded individuals.

I think a more important thing is to end the cover up culture in the police and other institutions where people either close ranks or feel afraid to voice concerns. Instead of reducing these attitudes some police forces seem to be enabling their officers. If the dodgy ones were weeded out early on, at the first sign, it would send a message. Difficult to do though unless those at the top are prepared to make it a priority.

If memory serves the officer who killed Dalian Atkinson had been convinced for shoplifting before he joined the force, which hadn't been flagged by the vetting process. I think that there's other similar cases, both for officers and police staff, including association with organised crime. Based on that it would appear that the vetting system is somewhat "porous".
 
Top Bottom