Plans to make it easier to sack police "ludicrous"

Mike Stubbs has hit back at claims  officers should go in order for savings to be made

Mike Stubbs has hit back at claims officers should go in order for savings to be made

First published in News
Last updated

SUGGESTIONS it should be easier for police officers to be sacked have been branded "utterly ludicrous" by the police federation.

A report, by independent think tank Reform, said this week it was too difficult for police forces to make savings by getting rid of underperforming officers and replacing them with PCSOs or other volunteers.

The report said: "Forces' ability to manage savings in this way has been hampered by workforce restrictions which make it very difficult to fire underperforming officers.

"This means that in some cases a less effective and more expensive segment of the workforce has been retained while cheaper and more adaptable PCSOs have been cut back in large numbers. Relaxing these restrictions and allowing forces greater control over their workforce will enable them to better control their costs while maintaining a high standard of service delivery."

Mike Stubbs, chairman of North Yorkshire Police Federation, said: "This report clearly fails to recognise that police officers and PCSOs have entirely different roles. The comment about PCSOs being more adaptable is utterly ludicrous and shows a complete lack of understanding on the part of the authors.

Mr Stubbs pointed out it was police officers, not PCSOs, who were able to support communities in events such as the 2011 riots, or for national events like the London Olympics, where "police officers stepped in to fill the gaps caused by the failings of private contractors such as G4S".

He said: "We would never wish to denigrate our PCSO colleagues. Police officer numbers in North Yorkshire were cut from 1650 in 2007 to 1392 by 2012 which means that PCSOs can be the only link some of our communities now have with the police service - but they don’t have either the training or the powers to deal with the vast range of incidents that police officers do.

"Unsatisfactory performance procedures already exist to deal with underperforming officers, just as they do for underperforming PCSOs and other police staff. If restructuring the workforce in the way this report suggests would provide a better service to the public, the Chief Constable could simply choose not to replace retiring officers.

"Around 30 years ago there was significant police officer recruitment which means that a large number of police officers are retiring now or approaching retirement. The fact that North Yorkshire Police is actively recruiting to replace them demonstrates that the Chief Constable recognises that he needs to maintain the number of fully warranted police officers to properly police our communities."

Comments (14)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:06am Tue 29 Jul 14

CHISSY1 says...

Who are these idiots who come out with garbage like this.Anybody that deserves to be sacked should be,the police are no exception.The police come in for criticism all the time.They are understaffed and people wonder why crimes are not solved and crimes are on the increase.I was talking to an officer the other day and they are told not to tell the public how it really is,his friend want to join the police force but he is putting him off.Traffic cops at one time were mainly for traffic but now they have to travel 40-50 miles to pub fights and the like because there are not enough officers.We keep getting told by this spineless,useless government that budget cuts are not effecting law and order,they dont have a clue and neither do a lot of people who criticize the police.No doubt the usual bar room lawyers will be having a go at me.
Who are these idiots who come out with garbage like this.Anybody that deserves to be sacked should be,the police are no exception.The police come in for criticism all the time.They are understaffed and people wonder why crimes are not solved and crimes are on the increase.I was talking to an officer the other day and they are told not to tell the public how it really is,his friend want to join the police force but he is putting him off.Traffic cops at one time were mainly for traffic but now they have to travel 40-50 miles to pub fights and the like because there are not enough officers.We keep getting told by this spineless,useless government that budget cuts are not effecting law and order,they dont have a clue and neither do a lot of people who criticize the police.No doubt the usual bar room lawyers will be having a go at me. CHISSY1
  • Score: 17

9:16am Tue 29 Jul 14

the-e-man says...

On the same subject but on a slightly different theme, I remember the days when a police officer would patrol alone whether it was on foot or in a vehicle. I am told that In fact some Inspectors and Sergeants used to be quite active in trying to find patrolling Constables who met up with Constables on adjacent beats.
We now regularly see PSOs patrolling in pairs or with a Constable.
Surely it would be less costly to employ one Constable than two PSOs and that would come with the added advantage of the Constable having greater training and powers.
Blunket introduced PSOs without any real forethought. He had that typical Labour idea that just to throw money at a problem would solve it. What he should have done was to create a new rank of "Patrol Constable" with duties confined purely to patrolling. He could have mainly employed suitable ex servicemen who would already have a good level of discipline and, one would expect, a reasonable level of fitness. This would have also solved the long existing problem of finding suitable employment for ex servicemen many of whom feel "lost" when they leave the armed services.
This would also provide a a good pool to recruit regular Constables from.
On the same subject but on a slightly different theme, I remember the days when a police officer would patrol alone whether it was on foot or in a vehicle. I am told that In fact some Inspectors and Sergeants used to be quite active in trying to find patrolling Constables who met up with Constables on adjacent beats. We now regularly see PSOs patrolling in pairs or with a Constable. Surely it would be less costly to employ one Constable than two PSOs and that would come with the added advantage of the Constable having greater training and powers. Blunket introduced PSOs without any real forethought. He had that typical Labour idea that just to throw money at a problem would solve it. What he should have done was to create a new rank of "Patrol Constable" with duties confined purely to patrolling. He could have mainly employed suitable ex servicemen who would already have a good level of discipline and, one would expect, a reasonable level of fitness. This would have also solved the long existing problem of finding suitable employment for ex servicemen many of whom feel "lost" when they leave the armed services. This would also provide a a good pool to recruit regular Constables from. the-e-man
  • Score: 18

10:40am Tue 29 Jul 14

holden79 says...

I once stumbled up to the front desk of Police HQ in Halifax City Centre and mistakenly tried ordering a 12" margherita with chips, and if I'm perfectly honest from the tone of their response they didn't seem the tiniest bit concerned with dwindling numbers or cuts to funding.
I once stumbled up to the front desk of Police HQ in Halifax City Centre and mistakenly tried ordering a 12" margherita with chips, and if I'm perfectly honest from the tone of their response they didn't seem the tiniest bit concerned with dwindling numbers or cuts to funding. holden79
  • Score: 1

11:27am Tue 29 Jul 14

gravitydrips says...

Isn't this one of the main problems of our society? The constant criticism by overpaid corrupt traitors, thieves and nobodies of the very people who keep the pillars of our society upright. Police, nurses, firemen, prison officers, social workers ect ect ect are constantly having to deal with these vindictive assaults on their professionalism. Always from people who couldn't or more likely wouldn't ever do the job themselves. Yes, the police and others occasionally make mistakes, and there are already in place robust procedures to deal with those who do. The fact is the vast number of police do a fantastic job and I'm glad there about, and I'd rather have our tax pounds spent on fully trained police officers than politicians and their useless 'think tanks'.
Isn't this one of the main problems of our society? The constant criticism by overpaid corrupt traitors, thieves and nobodies of the very people who keep the pillars of our society upright. Police, nurses, firemen, prison officers, social workers ect ect ect are constantly having to deal with these vindictive assaults on their professionalism. Always from people who couldn't or more likely wouldn't ever do the job themselves. Yes, the police and others occasionally make mistakes, and there are already in place robust procedures to deal with those who do. The fact is the vast number of police do a fantastic job and I'm glad there about, and I'd rather have our tax pounds spent on fully trained police officers than politicians and their useless 'think tanks'. gravitydrips
  • Score: 9

11:38am Tue 29 Jul 14

ian923 says...

I find it strange that in the 60's police did not even have radios but detection rates were a lot higher than they are today despite all the forensic and technological advances. Perhaps the reason is that in the 60's police patrolled the streets and actually SPOKE to members of the public gaining their confidence. Perhaps a return to this method would yield benefits.
I find it strange that in the 60's police did not even have radios but detection rates were a lot higher than they are today despite all the forensic and technological advances. Perhaps the reason is that in the 60's police patrolled the streets and actually SPOKE to members of the public gaining their confidence. Perhaps a return to this method would yield benefits. ian923
  • Score: 11

1:24pm Tue 29 Jul 14

the-e-man says...

ian923 wrote:
I find it strange that in the 60's police did not even have radios but detection rates were a lot higher than they are today despite all the forensic and technological advances. Perhaps the reason is that in the 60's police patrolled the streets and actually SPOKE to members of the public gaining their confidence. Perhaps a return to this method would yield benefits.
Exactly - my idea of creating a new rank of "Patrol Constable" (as detailed in my previous post above) would do just this. A Patrol Constable who would spend their entire duty time patrolling the streets, meeting and talking to the public and giving much needed reassurance that they are there for them.
Another problem is that the modern Police is now referred to as a "Service" not, as used to be, a "Force" It is an unfortunate fact that criminals and yobs understand "Force" far more than "Service" !!!!
[quote][p][bold]ian923[/bold] wrote: I find it strange that in the 60's police did not even have radios but detection rates were a lot higher than they are today despite all the forensic and technological advances. Perhaps the reason is that in the 60's police patrolled the streets and actually SPOKE to members of the public gaining their confidence. Perhaps a return to this method would yield benefits.[/p][/quote]Exactly - my idea of creating a new rank of "Patrol Constable" (as detailed in my previous post above) would do just this. A Patrol Constable who would spend their entire duty time patrolling the streets, meeting and talking to the public and giving much needed reassurance that they are there for them. Another problem is that the modern Police is now referred to as a "Service" not, as used to be, a "Force" It is an unfortunate fact that criminals and yobs understand "Force" far more than "Service" !!!! the-e-man
  • Score: 4

3:30pm Tue 29 Jul 14

Meirion M says...

ian923 wrote:
I find it strange that in the 60's police did not even have radios but detection rates were a lot higher than they are today despite all the forensic and technological advances. Perhaps the reason is that in the 60's police patrolled the streets and actually SPOKE to members of the public gaining their confidence. Perhaps a return to this method would yield benefits.
I agree with ian923.
In the 1960s and before policing was policing: the officers tried to stop crime.
In the 2010's the police are rarely seen on our streets and communities. No wander that crime is soaring in and around York.
Come on, Commissioner: make the police work for their salaries for a change.
[quote][p][bold]ian923[/bold] wrote: I find it strange that in the 60's police did not even have radios but detection rates were a lot higher than they are today despite all the forensic and technological advances. Perhaps the reason is that in the 60's police patrolled the streets and actually SPOKE to members of the public gaining their confidence. Perhaps a return to this method would yield benefits.[/p][/quote]I agree with ian923. In the 1960s and before policing was policing: the officers tried to stop crime. In the 2010's the police are rarely seen on our streets and communities. No wander that crime is soaring in and around York. Come on, Commissioner: make the police work for their salaries for a change. Meirion M
  • Score: 0

3:36pm Tue 29 Jul 14

Firedrake says...

I'm not exactly sure when "bobbies on the beat" were first issued with radios, but I'd have thought it was some time in the mid to late 60s perhaps? (Perhaps not in all areas.) They certainly had them in patrol vehicles though: remember Z Cars!
I'm not exactly sure when "bobbies on the beat" were first issued with radios, but I'd have thought it was some time in the mid to late 60s perhaps? (Perhaps not in all areas.) They certainly had them in patrol vehicles though: remember Z Cars! Firedrake
  • Score: 5

4:05pm Tue 29 Jul 14

Frenchlife says...

Ever thought that maybe back in the 60's there was not as much crime and definitely there was not the amount of drunks around causing the problems that there is now. How ever I do agree with getting the bobbies back on the beat and talking to the public. But we're does the money come from?
Ever thought that maybe back in the 60's there was not as much crime and definitely there was not the amount of drunks around causing the problems that there is now. How ever I do agree with getting the bobbies back on the beat and talking to the public. But we're does the money come from? Frenchlife
  • Score: 2

6:29pm Tue 29 Jul 14

Compo238 says...

In the armed forces if you don't cut it you are out, only pathetic union protected professions can get away with continuing to employ those past there sell by date. As for the functionality of the police that is a separate issue and is not fit for purpose right now.
In the armed forces if you don't cut it you are out, only pathetic union protected professions can get away with continuing to employ those past there sell by date. As for the functionality of the police that is a separate issue and is not fit for purpose right now. Compo238
  • Score: -3

7:46pm Tue 29 Jul 14

julia brica says...

CHISSY1 wrote:
Who are these idiots who come out with garbage like this.Anybody that deserves to be sacked should be,the police are no exception.The police come in for criticism all the time.They are understaffed and people wonder why crimes are not solved and crimes are on the increase.I was talking to an officer the other day and they are told not to tell the public how it really is,his friend want to join the police force but he is putting him off.Traffic cops at one time were mainly for traffic but now they have to travel 40-50 miles to pub fights and the like because there are not enough officers.We keep getting told by this spineless,useless government that budget cuts are not effecting law and order,they dont have a clue and neither do a lot of people who criticize the police.No doubt the usual bar room lawyers will be having a go at me.
Not so chissy1 this is one who totally agrees with you. Well said.
[quote][p][bold]CHISSY1[/bold] wrote: Who are these idiots who come out with garbage like this.Anybody that deserves to be sacked should be,the police are no exception.The police come in for criticism all the time.They are understaffed and people wonder why crimes are not solved and crimes are on the increase.I was talking to an officer the other day and they are told not to tell the public how it really is,his friend want to join the police force but he is putting him off.Traffic cops at one time were mainly for traffic but now they have to travel 40-50 miles to pub fights and the like because there are not enough officers.We keep getting told by this spineless,useless government that budget cuts are not effecting law and order,they dont have a clue and neither do a lot of people who criticize the police.No doubt the usual bar room lawyers will be having a go at me.[/p][/quote]Not so chissy1 this is one who totally agrees with you. Well said. julia brica
  • Score: 0

7:48pm Tue 29 Jul 14

CHISSY1 says...

julia brica wrote:
CHISSY1 wrote:
Who are these idiots who come out with garbage like this.Anybody that deserves to be sacked should be,the police are no exception.The police come in for criticism all the time.They are understaffed and people wonder why crimes are not solved and crimes are on the increase.I was talking to an officer the other day and they are told not to tell the public how it really is,his friend want to join the police force but he is putting him off.Traffic cops at one time were mainly for traffic but now they have to travel 40-50 miles to pub fights and the like because there are not enough officers.We keep getting told by this spineless,useless government that budget cuts are not effecting law and order,they dont have a clue and neither do a lot of people who criticize the police.No doubt the usual bar room lawyers will be having a go at me.
Not so chissy1 this is one who totally agrees with you. Well said.
Thank you.
[quote][p][bold]julia brica[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHISSY1[/bold] wrote: Who are these idiots who come out with garbage like this.Anybody that deserves to be sacked should be,the police are no exception.The police come in for criticism all the time.They are understaffed and people wonder why crimes are not solved and crimes are on the increase.I was talking to an officer the other day and they are told not to tell the public how it really is,his friend want to join the police force but he is putting him off.Traffic cops at one time were mainly for traffic but now they have to travel 40-50 miles to pub fights and the like because there are not enough officers.We keep getting told by this spineless,useless government that budget cuts are not effecting law and order,they dont have a clue and neither do a lot of people who criticize the police.No doubt the usual bar room lawyers will be having a go at me.[/p][/quote]Not so chissy1 this is one who totally agrees with you. Well said.[/p][/quote]Thank you. CHISSY1
  • Score: 4

10:03pm Tue 29 Jul 14

stopatred says...

I seem to remember the 60s when I was a kid where the copper on patrol would give you a clip round the ear for any cheek you gave them . you soon learned to behave. Oh happy days !!! Can't imagine that happening now more,s the pity
I seem to remember the 60s when I was a kid where the copper on patrol would give you a clip round the ear for any cheek you gave them . you soon learned to behave. Oh happy days !!! Can't imagine that happening now more,s the pity stopatred
  • Score: 2

9:34am Wed 30 Jul 14

Firedrake says...

A "clip round the ear"? Back in the 60s I remember people saying exactly the same thing about the 30s! Nostalgia is a wonderful thing.
A "clip round the ear"? Back in the 60s I remember people saying exactly the same thing about the 30s! Nostalgia is a wonderful thing. Firedrake
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree