Jump to content

Unwise Chief Constable statement?


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, buncha wankas said:

They need to bring in emergency powered before this gets out of hand. 

How can they? If they have no police who is going to police emergency powers? The weirdos in civil defense? The British army? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Don’t get me wrong Derek. I see lots of some aspects of Police work. Don’t envy anyone in the job.  Three things. My personal views. 1. No-one should be allowed to retire from public service

Yes yes, that’s exactly what it was.    (it wasn’t). 

Let's face it, the last few governments have brought our beautiful home down to close to rock bottom and still they spend OUR cash on vanity projects, massive overburden of govt. and CS  for what is a

Posted Images

19 minutes ago, CowMan said:

How can they? If they have no police who is going to police emergency powers? The weirdos in civil defense? The British army? 

British Army ~ After 14 days isolation with testing on days 1, 7 and 15? Be all over by then. 😏

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/5/2021 at 7:24 PM, CowMan said:

Looks like a free pass for all the crims and burglars in the next few weeks. The Chief Constable has now publicly admitted that he can’t cope and that they’re 50 officers down. I’d better get a new lock for my garage and set the car alarm. I’m also not sure this is the wisest statement to make when we’re relying on everyone to observe lockdown rules that look that they will now be largely unpoliced. 

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/police-thin-on-the-ground-with-50-officers-self-isolating/

OR ....... A very cunning plan to lure the low life out to show themselves when they think there are no Police about?

Edited by Boris Johnson
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Boris Johnson said:

OR ....... A very cunning plan to lure the low life out to show themselves when they think there are no Police about?

The Childrens Champion has asked parents to contact him if they are struggling with their children.https://www.facebook.com/Onchan.MHK

Wtf is this man going to do or has he become.

 

Edited by Holte End
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2021 at 10:13 AM, John Wright said:

Don’t get me wrong Derek. I see lots of some aspects of Police work. Don’t envy anyone in the job. 

Three things. My personal views.

1. No-one should be allowed to retire from public service, receive lump sum and pension and then be re-employed in the public service.

2. The force has many more at senior, even sergeant, numbers than it did. Yes, population has increased as have specialisms. But overall size and especially higher ranks and civilian support have increased disproportionally. It’s double the size it was 40 years ago. It was accepted then that it was disproportionally over staffed because of the huge increase in summer population due to visitor numbers, which have now substantially decreased.

3. number 1. can be resolved by having a common public service retirement age of 67. Retain expertise. Utilise it. Divert older personnel from front line to support/admin/specialisms/supervisory roles.

Edited by Derek Flint
Link to post
Share on other sites

I substantially agree with much of that. I'd personally introduce a pension system more like the military, with shorter 'jumping off periods. 6,12,18,22,30,35 years with a gratuity for everything up to the 22 year point then a pension proper being available. If applied across the public sector we might see better crossover, more diverse thinking and less silo. Imagine being able to move from a senior military or policing role into the civil service, or even vice versa?

The force is bigger, but the job is definitely more complex than it was. Automation hasn't led to fewer people!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2021 at 10:13 AM, John Wright said:

No-one should be allowed to retire from public service, receive lump sum and pension and then be re-employed in the public service.

Totally agree. Too many doing it though.

There are much better ways of retaining all that knowledge and experience and re-engaging with public services without going on the payroll.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2021 at 10:13 AM, John Wright said:

Don’t get me wrong Derek. I see lots of some aspects of Police work. Don’t envy anyone in the job. 

Three things. My personal views.

1. No-one should be allowed to retire from public service, receive lump sum and pension and then be re-employed in the public service.

 

Why would you do this? Surely,  so long as there is a fair process you cant discriminate against someone just because if their previous employment. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

Why would you do this? Surely,  so long as there is a fair process you cant discriminate against someone just because if their previous employment. 

Read my point three and understand

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Derek Flint said:

I substantially agree with much of that. I'd personally introduce a pension system more like the military, with shorter 'jumping off periods. 6,12,18,22,30,35 years with a gratuity for everything up to the 22 year point then a pension proper being available. If applied across the public sector we might see better crossover, more diverse thinking and less silo. Imagine being able to move from a senior military or policing role into the civil service, or even vice versa?

The force is bigger, but the job is definitely more complex than it was. Automation hasn't led to fewer people!

Isn’t this already enabled to a large extent via the GUS, and the ability to apply internally for any Government job?

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Derek Flint said:

Imagine being able to move from a senior military or policing role into the civil service, or even vice versa?

Sounds like some kind of dystopian future

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Wright said:

Read my point three and understand

I do understand your point 3 but I still don't think it covers it. Are you not getting into the subject of ageism there.

Let's say a person retires at 58. Has a couple of years but them circumstances change (say patrney dies).  He wants a job and goes for a government (or statutory board) job. They have the skills and no previous conflict/advanatage. Why would they be discriminated against. It would not be right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...