Plod to be forced to retire.

Discussion in 'Police, PMCs, Security' started by vvaannmmaann, Nov 4, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Roughly, your take home pension is about half your take home pay and allowances at the time of retirement. Therefore, it is financially in a persons interest to leave the police and get another job. However, some are frightened of the outside world and cling on by their fingernail. Some (senior) people don't like the loss of status and cling on. The people at the sharp end tend to want to retire, those in support/non operational positions hang on. The question though, is, will the salary of the recruit plus the pension be less that retaining the officer. I think that it could be a close call
  2. So a Sgt,30 years plod service,has a current salary of.........?
  3. This is just the madness created by various Goverments both Tory and Labour over the last 100 years. What you have to understand is that a Police Officer is unsackable. They can not be dismissed or made redundant other than in circumstances of Gross Misconduct.

    So as the Cuts bite, civvy staff will go, PCSOs will go but the Pasty Munchers and their grossly inflated salaries will be retained.

    As a society what we need is a Maggie with the balls to deal with these people in the same manner that Maggie dealt with the Miners.
  4. Good points western. The reason that plod has become almost unsackable is largely due to the appalling management by senior officers. They cannot be trusted to be fair. Maggie used the police to defeat the miners. Who is going to deal with them?
    Also, when plod is mentioned, a man in a big hat wearing a smart suit with shiny buttons springs to mind. The reals wasters are well below the horizon.
  5. This is good news and I hope they expand it to all forces. My force are only giving those on the 30 plus scheme the push but there are lots of useless, overpromoted seniors in non-jobs that would not be missed.
  6. Come now Gents, it won't be arbitrary, only those with 30 years in who are white, male, British and heterosexual will get the chop.
  7. That is utter tosh ACAB- members of the CPA will be alright!
  8. Ah yes, poor PCSOs, backbone of the force they are. Not forgetting of course the civvie admin bitches, they need to stay. Who needs PCs?

    How big is that chip on your shoulder?

    On the off chance I misinterepreted you though, wouldn't being generally jack and/or useless come make you subject to some sort of disciplinary charge allowing the force to bin you?
  9. Listening to the Chief Constable of Surrey Police today I thought his action was spot on. If you have to make savings then surely this is a positive and logical move. I would rather cuts were made at the top end removing the layer of near retirement police officers. If you are careful to still keep in place enough experienced officers then the disruption caused can be kept to a minimum and shouldn't affect the front line. Hard choices have to be made in the public sector and it is refreshing to see the top end of management being targetted along with the blunt end.
  10. No chip at all mate. There is no other workforce in the world with such proteted Ts&Cs. You seem to be another hater of PCSOs, civvies and the rest of the world. A Persecution Complex of mammoth proportions which is common in your Craft.
  11. There is a MASSIVE civilian tail in all police forces today, very few of which (and I don't count the CJU staff who type up your transcripts and do a lot of the boring paperwork crap) actually do ANYTHING remotely related to police work. I happen to think PSCOs are splendid. Our local guy is and we see a lot more of him than our Community / Town PC.

    The problem, which needs to be faced head on, acknowledged and dealt with is why, over the last 10 years, have the police retained retired detectives as civilian staff?. The answer is simple. Current training is NOTHING but soundbites introduced by the last lot of shit. 'Inclusiveness', 'Diversity', when it should have been 'standards of evidence' and dare I say it 'how to take a ******* statement!' They lowered the physical standard to include more women, they lowered the height limit to include ...dwarfs, they even lowered the intelligence tests coz 3rd worlders found it too difficult to pass and weren't joining in NuLabr approved numbers.

    As you sow, so shall you reap...innit blud?