Police to be balloted on right to strike (From Daily Echo)

£36k basic wage, fantastic pension, easy life,you are so hard done by.

bigfella777 wrote:
£36k basic wage, fantastic pension, easy life,you are so hard done by.

Not sure where you are getting your figures from, but £36k is after 10 years service. Starting pay is around £24k.

Easy life!! where are you living BigFella in the Outer Hebrides? your view on this 'cosy life' that everyone has would be funny if I didn't think you were being serious !

not-me wrote:

bigfella777 wrote:
£36k basic wage, fantastic pension, easy life,you are so hard done by.

Not sure where you are getting your figures from, but £36k is after 10 years service. Starting pay is around £24k.

It'll be from the Leprechaun that's sitting with his pot of gold at the end of the rainbow ;)

bigfella777 wrote:
£36k basic wage, fantastic pension, easy life,you are so hard done by.

Not so I'm afraid, the current starting pay is around £25k yet if the Winsor report is fully implemented a PC will start on no more than around £20k. For a job where you physically put yourself in harms way and can be ordered into work at a moments notice and not see your family for days on end this level of pay is derisory. To add to this some current officers in frontline roles are facing paycuts of around £10k! As for pensions well officers already pay over 11% of their salary, and this is to be increased further, higher than any other similar public sector role. Please dont be naive enough to kid yourself that Police Officers do the job for its 'perks', its simply farcical, besides, if its such an 'easy life' feel free to apply!

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

not-me wrote:

bigfella777 wrote:
£36k basic wage, fantastic pension, easy life,you are so hard done by.

Not sure where you are getting your figures from, but £36k is after 10 years service. Starting pay is around £24k.

It'll be from the Leprechaun that's sitting with his pot of gold at the end of the rainbow ;)

Yes and the majority do have 10 years service what's your point.

When you become a Police officer you have a duty of care to the public. You do not deliver this care by striking and therefore shouldnt be given the right to strike. You know this before you get the job.

The Salv wrote:
When you become a Police officer you have a duty of care to the public. You do not deliver this care by striking and therefore shouldnt be given the right to strike. You know this before you get the job.

Yes, but when you take the job you also know the terms and conditions of your employment and the remuneration you can expect, those terms of employement are now being fundamentally changed without any consultation with the workers. Police Officers are still human beings with families to feed and bills to pay, no sense of public duty or moral obligation will pay a mortgage or put food on the table. It's high time the government woke up and realised they are on the verge of destroying policing as we know it.

The Salv wrote:
When you become a Police officer you have a duty of care to the public. You do not deliver this care by striking and therefore shouldnt be given the right to strike. You know this before you get the job.

Yes and your employer has a duty of care also ....... perhaps the employer may just be lacking in theirs !!

Forest Resident wrote:

The Salv wrote:
When you become a Police officer you have a duty of care to the public. You do not deliver this care by striking and therefore shouldnt be given the right to strike. You know this before you get the job.

Yes, but when you take the job you also know the terms and conditions of your employment and the remuneration you can expect, those terms of employement are now being fundamentally changed without any consultation with the workers. Police Officers are still human beings with families to feed and bills to pay, no sense of public duty or moral obligation will pay a mortgage or put food on the table. It's high time the government woke up and realised they are on the verge of destroying policing as we know it.

Police officers don't have families what planet are you on?

Some time ago, in a previous century, the rules for Met officers were that boots were worn when on beat duty. Drivers on foot duty however sensibly wore shoes just in case of sickness of an officer on driving duty. One day at my nick a new inspector had a go at those on beat duty wearing shoes. Next day the area car and van driver were on sick leave and all the other drivers were wearing boots. This action sorted the jobsworth out. We knew that sick leave could be a tool to use in emergency, however the destruction of the police conditions is a bit more serious than we ever had to contemplate and I believe the police are more than justified in looking at the need for industrial action. I suspect however that the dedicated men and women in the job are most unlikely to go down this road. They have a record of putting us, Joe public, ahead of their own interests.

bigfella777 wrote:

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

not-me wrote:

bigfella777 wrote:
£36k basic wage, fantastic pension, easy life,you are so hard done by.

Not sure where you are getting your figures from, but £36k is after 10 years service. Starting pay is around £24k.

It'll be from the Leprechaun that's sitting with his pot of gold at the end of the rainbow ;)

Yes and the majority do have 10 years service what's your point.

The point is that your point is invalid.

The Salv wrote:
When you become a Police officer you have a duty of care to the public. You do not deliver this care by striking and therefore shouldnt be given the right to strike. You know this before you get the job.

All public servants have a duty of care to the public, so by your logic none of them should be allowed to strike?

Forest Resident wrote:

The Salv wrote: When you become a Police officer you have a duty of care to the public. You do not deliver this care by striking and therefore shouldnt be given the right to strike. You know this before you get the job.

Yes, but when you take the job you also know the terms and conditions of your employment and the remuneration you can expect, those terms of employement are now being fundamentally changed without any consultation with the workers. Police Officers are still human beings with families to feed and bills to pay, no sense of public duty or moral obligation will pay a mortgage or put food on the table. It's high time the government woke up and realised they are on the verge of destroying policing as we know it.

If they are unhappy with the changes then they have the right... the right to leave and find another job. I bet they would struggle to find one that paid as well and had the same pension and security.

I have always held the view that if any employer treats the workers badly then the workers should have the right to withdraw their labour if the problem cannot be fixed through meaningful negotiated means. I do not see any reason why anybody should have different set of standards for people working in police or any other service
.
Police Federation has always bent backwards to compromise with establishment, their members have been paying the price for that approach for a very long time
.
Even now despite total dishonesty by last NuLabour regime, which refused to honour national agreements and unprecedented attacks upon policing by the current ConDem Coalition the PF has reacted to the situation in very calm and relaxed manner
.
They have been pushed against the wall so much that only choice left is to think of securing the right of doing what most of us trade unionists would have done long time ago
.
Because this vote is not exactly for going on strike, as some spin doctors may try to spin it, but for securing the right to withdraw labour when all else fails. Any police officer not supporting this idea will only be investing in even more frustrations with governments in the future.

not-me wrote:

The Salv wrote: When you become a Police officer you have a duty of care to the public. You do not deliver this care by striking and therefore shouldnt be given the right to strike. You know this before you get the job.

All public servants have a duty of care to the public, so by your logic none of them should be allowed to strike?

No they dont.
.
But if you want an example - bin men. They should not be allowed to strike for personnel reasons due to the nature of the job. If it is under health and safety then yes, but in todays world anything of that nature would be sorted as a matter of urgency. But pay disputes etc no. Dont like it, vote with your feet and get another job.

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
I have always held the view that if any employer treats the workers badly then the workers should have the right to withdraw their labour if the problem cannot be fixed through meaningful negotiated means. I do not see any reason why anybody should have different set of standards for people working in police or any other service . Police Federation has always bent backwards to compromise with establishment, their members have been paying the price for that approach for a very long time . Even now despite total dishonesty by last NuLabour regime, which refused to honour national agreements and unprecedented attacks upon policing by the current ConDem Coalition the PF has reacted to the situation in very calm and relaxed manner . They have been pushed against the wall so much that only choice left is to think of securing the right of doing what most of us trade unionists would have done long time ago . Because this vote is not exactly for going on strike, as some spin doctors may try to spin it, but for securing the right to withdraw labour when all else fails. Any police officer not supporting this idea will only be investing in even more frustrations with governments in the future.

"I have always held the view that if any employer treats the workers badly then the workers should have the right to withdraw their labour if the problem cannot be fixed through meaningful negotiated means."
.
Absolutely, removing their labour by taking another job. How hard is it.

The Salv wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
I have always held the view that if any employer treats the workers badly then the workers should have the right to withdraw their labour if the problem cannot be fixed through meaningful negotiated means. I do not see any reason why anybody should have different set of standards for people working in police or any other service . Police Federation has always bent backwards to compromise with establishment, their members have been paying the price for that approach for a very long time . Even now despite total dishonesty by last NuLabour regime, which refused to honour national agreements and unprecedented attacks upon policing by the current ConDem Coalition the PF has reacted to the situation in very calm and relaxed manner . They have been pushed against the wall so much that only choice left is to think of securing the right of doing what most of us trade unionists would have done long time ago . Because this vote is not exactly for going on strike, as some spin doctors may try to spin it, but for securing the right to withdraw labour when all else fails. Any police officer not supporting this idea will only be investing in even more frustrations with governments in the future.

"I have always held the view that if any employer treats the workers badly then the workers should have the right to withdraw their labour if the problem cannot be fixed through meaningful negotiated means."
.
Absolutely, removing their labour by taking another job. How hard is it.

And when all the experienced plods have left, what then? I'd rather they were not given the inducement to leave or take industrial action. Perhaps we can destroy the employment deals of MPs and persuade them to leave or take industrial action instead.

Inform Al wrote:

The Salv wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote: I have always held the view that if any employer treats the workers badly then the workers should have the right to withdraw their labour if the problem cannot be fixed through meaningful negotiated means. I do not see any reason why anybody should have different set of standards for people working in police or any other service . Police Federation has always bent backwards to compromise with establishment, their members have been paying the price for that approach for a very long time . Even now despite total dishonesty by last NuLabour regime, which refused to honour national agreements and unprecedented attacks upon policing by the current ConDem Coalition the PF has reacted to the situation in very calm and relaxed manner . They have been pushed against the wall so much that only choice left is to think of securing the right of doing what most of us trade unionists would have done long time ago . Because this vote is not exactly for going on strike, as some spin doctors may try to spin it, but for securing the right to withdraw labour when all else fails. Any police officer not supporting this idea will only be investing in even more frustrations with governments in the future.

"I have always held the view that if any employer treats the workers badly then the workers should have the right to withdraw their labour if the problem cannot be fixed through meaningful negotiated means." . Absolutely, removing their labour by taking another job. How hard is it.

And when all the experienced plods have left, what then? I'd rather they were not given the inducement to leave or take industrial action. Perhaps we can destroy the employment deals of MPs and persuade them to leave or take industrial action instead.

Then the Police realise that they need to make the job attractive again and will offer improved terms, but I doubt that anybody would leave as per pre-mentioned points above.

The Salv wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

The Salv wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote: I have always held the view that if any employer treats the workers badly then the workers should have the right to withdraw their labour if the problem cannot be fixed through meaningful negotiated means. I do not see any reason why anybody should have different set of standards for people working in police or any other service . Police Federation has always bent backwards to compromise with establishment, their members have been paying the price for that approach for a very long time . Even now despite total dishonesty by last NuLabour regime, which refused to honour national agreements and unprecedented attacks upon policing by the current ConDem Coalition the PF has reacted to the situation in very calm and relaxed manner . They have been pushed against the wall so much that only choice left is to think of securing the right of doing what most of us trade unionists would have done long time ago . Because this vote is not exactly for going on strike, as some spin doctors may try to spin it, but for securing the right to withdraw labour when all else fails. Any police officer not supporting this idea will only be investing in even more frustrations with governments in the future.

"I have always held the view that if any employer treats the workers badly then the workers should have the right to withdraw their labour if the problem cannot be fixed through meaningful negotiated means." . Absolutely, removing their labour by taking another job. How hard is it.

And when all the experienced plods have left, what then? I'd rather they were not given the inducement to leave or take industrial action. Perhaps we can destroy the employment deals of MPs and persuade them to leave or take industrial action instead.

Then the Police realise that they need to make the job attractive again and will offer improved terms, but I doubt that anybody would leave as per pre-mentioned points above.

I doubt that many will leave, or take industrial action, as most seem to be programmed to look after society's interests before their own. I myself left the job when a paedo we had put away was out on the streets again within a couple of years. I felt I was wasting my time as the courts and the government seemed to put the villains human rights before those of the decent majority. As its got worse since I left I really do feel for the current lot in the job.

The Salv wrote:

Forest Resident wrote:

The Salv wrote: When you become a Police officer you have a duty of care to the public. You do not deliver this care by striking and therefore shouldnt be given the right to strike. You know this before you get the job.

Yes, but when you take the job you also know the terms and conditions of your employment and the remuneration you can expect, those terms of employement are now being fundamentally changed without any consultation with the workers. Police Officers are still human beings with families to feed and bills to pay, no sense of public duty or moral obligation will pay a mortgage or put food on the table. It's high time the government woke up and realised they are on the verge of destroying policing as we know it.

If they are unhappy with the changes then they have the right... the right to leave and find another job. I bet they would struggle to find one that paid as well and had the same pension and security.

And they should have the right to strike, they are a civilian force not a military force, the right for police officers to strike was taking away from them in 1990 Tory Government, even lo the police have not gone on strike since 1910/12

southy wrote:

The Salv wrote:

Forest Resident wrote:

The Salv wrote: When you become a Police officer you have a duty of care to the public. You do not deliver this care by striking and therefore shouldnt be given the right to strike. You know this before you get the job.

Yes, but when you take the job you also know the terms and conditions of your employment and the remuneration you can expect, those terms of employement are now being fundamentally changed without any consultation with the workers. Police Officers are still human beings with families to feed and bills to pay, no sense of public duty or moral obligation will pay a mortgage or put food on the table. It's high time the government woke up and realised they are on the verge of destroying policing as we know it.

If they are unhappy with the changes then they have the right... the right to leave and find another job. I bet they would struggle to find one that paid as well and had the same pension and security.

And they should have the right to strike, they are a civilian force not a military force, the right for police officers to strike was taking away from them in 1990 Tory Government, even lo the police have not gone on strike since 1910/12

Wrong, they should not have the right to strike.

Would you like to see the Army patrolling the streets? That would send your Conspiracy ganglion into overdrive wouldn't it?

Protect & Serve. That's what they signed up for.

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:

The Salv wrote:

Forest Resident wrote:

The Salv wrote: When you become a Police officer you have a duty of care to the public. You do not deliver this care by striking and therefore shouldnt be given the right to strike. You know this before you get the job.

Yes, but when you take the job you also know the terms and conditions of your employment and the remuneration you can expect, those terms of employement are now being fundamentally changed without any consultation with the workers. Police Officers are still human beings with families to feed and bills to pay, no sense of public duty or moral obligation will pay a mortgage or put food on the table. It's high time the government woke up and realised they are on the verge of destroying policing as we know it.

If they are unhappy with the changes then they have the right... the right to leave and find another job. I bet they would struggle to find one that paid as well and had the same pension and security.

And they should have the right to strike, they are a civilian force not a military force, the right for police officers to strike was taking away from them in 1990 Tory Government, even lo the police have not gone on strike since 1910/12

Wrong, they should not have the right to strike.

Would you like to see the Army patrolling the streets? That would send your Conspiracy ganglion into overdrive wouldn't it?

Protect & Serve. That's what they signed up for.

The point of all of this is that their "job security, wage and pension terms" are all changing. Their pension contributions are already 11%, far higher than most, and rising to over 14% so less take home pay. The pay itself will also fall due to a freeze in pay increments and then on top of that freeze a 1% cap for another two years... A real term loss. And now they want to be able to do compolsory redundencies to save money. Well the reason police can't strike is because that was never possible in the past so if this government want to move the goalposts that much why shouldn't they be able to push back? Everyone has to make a contribution to saving money but the police seem to be taking ab bigger hit than most. Why don't they save moneu by cutting their massive benefits instead?

not-me wrote:

bigfella777 wrote:

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

not-me wrote:

bigfella777 wrote: £36k basic wage, fantastic pension, easy life,you are so hard done by.

Not sure where you are getting your figures from, but £36k is after 10 years service. Starting pay is around £24k.

It'll be from the Leprechaun that's sitting with his pot of gold at the end of the rainbow ;)

Yes and the majority do have 10 years service what's your point.

The point is that your point is invalid.

You can't say that - BigFella works in Human Resources and knows it all!

mooky9 wrote:

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:

The Salv wrote:

Forest Resident wrote:

The Salv wrote: When you become a Police officer you have a duty of care to the public. You do not deliver this care by striking and therefore shouldnt be given the right to strike. You know this before you get the job.

Yes, but when you take the job you also know the terms and conditions of your employment and the remuneration you can expect, those terms of employement are now being fundamentally changed without any consultation with the workers. Police Officers are still human beings with families to feed and bills to pay, no sense of public duty or moral obligation will pay a mortgage or put food on the table. It's high time the government woke up and realised they are on the verge of destroying policing as we know it.

If they are unhappy with the changes then they have the right... the right to leave and find another job. I bet they would struggle to find one that paid as well and had the same pension and security.

And they should have the right to strike, they are a civilian force not a military force, the right for police officers to strike was taking away from them in 1990 Tory Government, even lo the police have not gone on strike since 1910/12

Wrong, they should not have the right to strike.

Would you like to see the Army patrolling the streets? That would send your Conspiracy ganglion into overdrive wouldn't it?

Protect & Serve. That's what they signed up for.

The point of all of this is that their "job security, wage and pension terms" are all changing. Their pension contributions are already 11%, far higher than most, and rising to over 14% so less take home pay. The pay itself will also fall due to a freeze in pay increments and then on top of that freeze a 1% cap for another two years... A real term loss. And now they want to be able to do compolsory redundencies to save money. Well the reason police can't strike is because that was never possible in the past so if this government want to move the goalposts that much why shouldn't they be able to push back? Everyone has to make a contribution to saving money but the police seem to be taking ab bigger hit than most. Why don't they save moneu by cutting their massive benefits instead?

Sorry last bit did'nt make sense... I meant cut MP's benefits and perks.

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:

The Salv wrote:

Forest Resident wrote:

The Salv wrote: When you become a Police officer you have a duty of care to the public. You do not deliver this care by striking and therefore shouldnt be given the right to strike. You know this before you get the job.

Yes, but when you take the job you also know the terms and conditions of your employment and the remuneration you can expect, those terms of employement are now being fundamentally changed without any consultation with the workers. Police Officers are still human beings with families to feed and bills to pay, no sense of public duty or moral obligation will pay a mortgage or put food on the table. It's high time the government woke up and realised they are on the verge of destroying policing as we know it.

If they are unhappy with the changes then they have the right... the right to leave and find another job. I bet they would struggle to find one that paid as well and had the same pension and security.

And they should have the right to strike, they are a civilian force not a military force, the right for police officers to strike was taking away from them in 1990 Tory Government, even lo the police have not gone on strike since 1910/12

Wrong, they should not have the right to strike.

Would you like to see the Army patrolling the streets? That would send your Conspiracy ganglion into overdrive wouldn't it?

Protect & Serve. That's what they signed up for.

"Protect & Serve", careful Shoong, someone will accuse you of using "yank" phrases, and don't even consider calling them police "forces", as the BBC do, otherwise you'll be on a similar charge. :)

Yes, I agree, a police force should not have the right to strike, there are other available means. I would also extend this to cover other so called 'emergency services', but that would cause some unions to throw a tantrum.

Donning helmet, protective clothing and heading for cover. :)