Yet more police idiocy.

@IcakethereforeIam you are welcome and I agee with your comments there.
I'm trying to just put here what is in the public domain already, but here's a piece from the Independent about one of the former national officers.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-federation-fraud-will-riches-1-million-misconduct-proceedings-charges-iopc-a8426636.html

Thanks for replying @LarkLane it's early (for a Sunday 😁) so perhaps I'm misunderstanding but it seems the repercussions for the Fed, so far, have been minimal. A little reputational damage that they seem set to try to ride out. It seems the people literally bearing the costs are the complainants.

Leigh Day's Summary of the Tribunal Outcome from a lengthy email to members.

"The Federation actively sought to deter and obstruct the Claimants from pursuing the police pensions challenge

The Federation created division and ill-feeling towards the Claimants for pursuing the police pensions challenge

The Federation campaigned, communicated and presented a distorted, misleading and inaccurate assessment of the Claimants’ legal claims, the costs and financial consequences of those claims, and group litigation in general, as well as the impact on other members

The Federation refused to provide any financial support (whether in whole, part or conditional) for any equality challenge to the transitional provisions by its members and/or the police pensions challenge by the Claimants from 2015; refused to consider provision of any financial support (whether in whole, part or conditional) for any equality challenge to the transitional provisions by its members and/or the police pensions challenge by the Claimants from 2015; Refused to reconsider and/or overturn its initial policy (as alleged by the Claimants) or decision (as alleged by the Respondent) not to provide financial support for the Claimant

The Federation refused to recognise the role of the Claimants in pursuing the police pensions challenge in bringing positive benefit to the wider membership from 2015 on an ongoing and continuing basis manifested through the communications and the ongoing refusal to provide financial support

The conduct amounted to detrimental treatment of the Claimants (the ‘alleged detrimental treatment’)"

NB. I'm not a police officer, nor do I identify as one.

@LoobiJee it went to Tribunal as it was a discrimination claim, age is is protected characteristic. Not one that the Fed seems to favour it would seem.

@borntobequiet yes that's the correct link to the decision.

@IcakethereforeIam My own view is that the then National Officers didn't give a shit. They and their pals were comfy on the old pension scheme, and various benefits. One of their claims was that a challenge would exhaust the Federation's entire legal budget. Leigh Day took on the challenge on a no win no fee basis. The outcome is that the officers they represented paid Leigh Day's fees from their compensation which was, mostly, a four figure sum to each officer.
In this present case, which I understand the Fed will not challenge, Leigh Day is taking the union on for age discrimination.

The Fire Brigades Union and even the Judges union at the time managed to speak up for their members who had similar pension challenges. Appalling.

Things got very nasty from the Fed nationally, for certain rank and file police officers who initially launched the Pension challenge.

I've met some excellent local Fed reps, quite a few of them resigned, as they took the flack locally for the dodgy leadership decision.

(Apologies for any typos and poor punctuation, due to disability difficulties)

Goodness. Is this it?

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/648c474b103ca6001303a0a8/Mr_L_Broadbent___Others_-v-Police_Federation_of_England_and_Wales-3207780_2020___Others-_Judgment.pdf

Clearly some officers are misogynistic reality deniers without being trained in it then.

“The members then, via Leigh Day, took their own Federation to an Employment Tribunal for failing to represent them ( and being economical with the truth along the way, as noted in the Tribunal decision).”

How did they take their trade union to Employment Tribunal if they weren’t employed by them? Do ET’s look at cases where there isn’t an employer/ employee relationship? Have you got a link to the judgement?

Might be time to encourage police leadership to speak at length, uninterrupted and unfiltered. They are bound to vomit a shitload of brilliant sunshine

@LarkLane that's outrageous. Any speculation as to why they behaved like that? Has there been or will there be any consequences for the people responsible?

Tiffany Lynch and Co would do better to actually properly represent their rank and file officers, instead of wibbling on. There's a lot I'd criticise Bravermann for, but I'm with her on this.

The Police Federation, nationally, is a joke amongst their own membership. Just one recent example.

National Officers refused to put up a fight for their younger members when there were changes made to the Pension scheme.Would not represent them. Basically, happy to sell them down the river.

Those ordinary members had to organise at grass roots level to go to Leigh Day Solicitors to take forward a challenge to the changes based on Age Discrimination - which they won.

The members then, via Leigh Day, took their own Federation to an Employment Tribunal for failing to represent them ( and being economical with the truth along the way, as noted in the Tribunal decision)

In June this year, the Judgment of the Tribunal was that: the police officers claims of Direct Age Discrimination and Victimisation by their own Trade Union, were upheld.

I don't think I've ever read such a damning Tribunal criticism of a staff association failing to represent it's members.

The Respondents “conduct was particularly egregious given that it was the Claimants’ own staff association, whose very purpose was to protect their rights and interests”

So Tiff Lynch can huff and puff all she likes. In reality, it's the Fed at National level continually shitting on it's membership and not listening to them.

Between all this "ally" malarkey, poor leadership, cosy empire building, corrupt and criminal officers, and their own union failing to represent them, I can well understand why the decent cops keep leaving the job. It is institutionally rotten to the core.

The DM's take on Braverman's review of Police Activism

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12473729/Braverman-woke-cops-review-political-activism.html

This statement from Tiffany Lynch of the Police Federation is infuriating

Tiffany Lynch, deputy chair of the Police Federation of England and Wales, said: 'Policing should never be put on any political agenda and is too important to be kicked around like a political football.
'Our members want to go out there and serve communities in the best way possible, but need help when the Government constantly changes the goal posts.
'One minute they want police officers to be more involved, the next, they want them to act like robots.'

Because, of course, those are the only options; involved or a robot. Also, note the use of 'political agenda'. I thought that is exactly the problem, the Police taking sides in 'political agendas'?

I don't like their statement at the end, have they recorded a NCHI against her?

That's what it reads like.

So much for the new CoP guidance that says the police should use common sense (do they have any?!) when it comes to NCHIs. And that they should contact suspected wrongthinkers in the least intrusive way, like over the phone or email, instead of turning up at their homes or place of work.

Looks like updating the guidance was just for show, and the police are going to carry on being bully boys for butthurt blokes.

I think it was on this thread. The DM has done an article on the lady who was doorstepped by West Yorkshire (lesbian nan) Police for photographing a terfy sticker. I don't like their statement at the end, have they recorded a NCHI against her?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12473521/Retired-social-worker-quizzed-hate-crime-police-sticker-Stand-Trans-poster.html

There are plenty of us in the mental health profession who feel exactly the same about how politicised our profession has become.

I have little time for my membership organisation the BACP partly because of their failures to represent the interests of their members but also because their woke comic therapy today is a politicised joke.

Even five years ago it was a useful resource for CPD articles and now it's just choc full of utter nonsense. All of my fellow professionals agree and we all just chuck it straight in the bin now.

“What’s crystallised it in my mind is meeting hundreds of rank and file cops who have said they’re fed up with the virtue signalling that some police leaders have been spending their time on, instead of focusing on back-to-basics crime.”
She's right.

This could be useful,

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/sep/02/home-secretary-orders-review-into-political-activism-within-policing

Aren't the CqC captured by Stonewall? Stonewall were outed moaning to Ofsted when they were in the Diversity champion protection racket that they weren't talking to little children in primary schools often enough about trans issues. Someone got hold of the letters and Ofsted hurriedly abandoned Stonewall.
Presumably in order to maintain their place in Stonewall's "rankings" the CQC have to focus on trans issues to the exclusion of all other vulnerable groups?

We were recently inspected by the CQC. The only patient group they asked about were trans patients. No interest whatsoever in vulnerable adults, child safeguarding, people with disabilities or - god forbid - cervix-havers.

I know I am not - but the suggestion was that "...The police will be spending even longer..."

That'll be because you aren't a doctor in the NHS.

I can categorically state that we don't spend 3 weeks a year on being trained on how to talk to trans people.

I have never had any such training.

Wow, really? I had no idea. I bet they don't spend half that time in training in relation to the other protected characteristics put together!

Great post.

We are hearing that NHS doctors spend at least three bloody weeks a year being trained on how to talk to trans people.

The police will be spending even longer.

All the time spent on twitter, countless conferences listening to LGBTQ etc "allies" talking... and talking... and talking.... Meetings to discuss rainbow flags, cars, lanyards etc. From the dodgy College of Policing thinking up toxic hate crime policies / policy development enabling male officers who claim to be women to search women, meetings with Stonewall and the countless other trans lobby groups & on and on and on.

Collectively they must be wasting millions of ££££ on officer time / resources on all this. Banning police officers holding all these LGBT etc positions that bear no relation to policing and spending their time & tax payer's money on all this would I suspect redirect significant time and ££ to doing their actual job and serving the community.

They can stop pursuing people for rude social media posts, that'll free up a lot of time.