1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Police Privatisation...

Discussion in 'CycleChat Cafe' started by hotfuzzrj, 3 Mar 2012.

  1. hotfuzzrj

    hotfuzzrj Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Surrey
  2. 3DHB

    3DHB New Member

    Location:
    Worcestershire
    Advert
    Had a quick look at the article but it seems that it is typical press at work. Most forces already have civvie staff doing those roles as it is so why not put it out to contract if it saves money?
  3. Grizzly

    Grizzly Well-Known Member

    Location:
    East Kilbride
    Cos in the long term it wont save money. At the moment the Police are responsible for the civilian staff they employ, if the member of staff is not up to the job then they can take that through their management system and get it dealt with. Having a third party dealing with staff means that you lose control of these personnel issues, you cant decide who to employ or enforce recruitment standards. Private companies are about maximising profits, and to do this they employ cheap staff and cut corners, I dont want a Police force like this thanks.
  4. compo

    compo Über Member

    Location:
    Harlow
    Will the police be vetting staff employed by these security firms? Pretty well anyone can obtain a SIA licence including those with criminal records. Security firm recruitment advertisements will usually demand a 10 year checkable work history whilst employing many from overseas who haven't been in this country very long and often have less than excellent communication skills in English. Perhaps the low wages and poor working conditions offered by the industry is reflected in the calibre of staff they recruit.
  5. screenman

    screenman Veteran

    What is wrong when the public sector costs more than a company that needs to make a profit costs to do the same job. I can never figure out why it is cheaper to outsource than do the job themselves, dustmen and the suchlike certainly hard working guys but why cheaper.
  6. GlasgowGaryH

    GlasgowGaryH As found on Strava

    Location:
    Glasgow
    In a shot its all down to workers conditions of employment,lower pay,reduced holidays, no sick pay and other benefits that public workers have that these private firms do away with to get the job done cheaply.
  7. Cunobelin

    Cunobelin Guru

    Location:
    Gosport
    Usually paid less ?
    marinyork likes this.
  8. subaqua

    subaqua Veteran

    Location:
    Leytonstone
    sounds like the security for getting onto the olympic park . I kid ye not.
  9. albion

    albion Über Member

    Location:
    South Tyneside
    "The NHS is safe with us"

    "Next!"
  10. 2Loose

    2Loose Über Member

    Location:
    Nottingham
    Unfortunately it is rarely the same job.

    It is cheaper to cut corners and be very inflexible according to an outsourcing agreement, therefore the companies provide only what is written on the contract and nothing more. They don't care about the business that employs them or anything but the bottom line.

    Example, privatised hospital cleaners had cleaning targets of a few minutes per room and specific tasks. The staff were treated poorly and therefore only worried about their pay, not the safety of the patients. Now they are employed by the NHS again iirc and reports of MRSA etc are fading. Staff that care keep standards up.

    Every local authority I have heard of that outsourced their IT departments have ended up paying extra to cancel the contract and bring IT back in house. Private company strictly provide only x,y,z services, but any new requirements and they charge very steeply on top of the agreement, thus rendering any savings lost.

    It is no secret that outsourcing companies such as Capita expect any 1m pound contract to become worth more than 2m pound once the hidden extras are added over the life of the contract.
    Archie_tect likes this.
  11. Paul J

    Paul J Guest

    Another outsource that will eventually fail and at a huge cost to the taxpayer. Lets face it, it's nothing more than a get rich scam for politicians with there noses in the trough :cursing:
  12. 3DHB

    3DHB New Member

    Location:
    Worcestershire
    No long term sickness to pay for, no maternity leave, no pension, no holiday, no this, that and the other. No Unions to worry about when they want to cut staff numbers, then no redundancy pay. My personal thoughts aside, I can see how it can appeal to the Police Authority after the number crunchers have glammed it up a bit when they present their agenda.
    As I said a lot of these roles are already done by civvies, either employed directly by Force/Constabulary or via external companies. Most Bobbies would rather have a police officer doing the back office roles, you can't beat experience in the job to offer the best support to serving officers, however, the public do not want it, the press do not want it, and senior management don't want it. That being said most Bobbies don't want to be back office anyway.
    My main fear is not in the privitisation, its that the civvie staff will be made redundant and then offered their jobs back but with reduced salary, worse conditions, etc. Even before this cost-cutting scheme it is a rocky time for a lot of civvie staff.
    Grizzly likes this.
  13. MontyVeda

    MontyVeda a short-tempered ill-controlled small-minded troll

    How long before our 'bobbies on the beat' are getting work experience in return for benefits plus expenses?
  14. albion

    albion Über Member

    Location:
    South Tyneside
    I'm far more bothered about trust basis. Overall our police are not corrupt.

    Private companies have other priorities and are far more naturally corrupt.
  15. MontyVeda

    MontyVeda a short-tempered ill-controlled small-minded troll

    yep, I've heard many a bad report about private security companies running festival security; police and fleece.
  16. Rockymountain

    Rockymountain Just resting

    Yes, madness. Just look at the privatisation of interpreting services in the courts. Big contract to ALS/Capita meant to save the public £18m in the first year. They've hacked off the interpreters who have boycotted the service and the cost of the ensuing disruption for the first couple of months is already £18m. Brilliant. If this was an isolated case, they perhaps we could say it was bad luck but it's being repeated time and time again.
    growingvegetables likes this.
  17. Arch

    Arch Engaged to Night Train

    Location:
    York, UK
    It's a tiny scale, but where I work at the Environment Centre, they had a contract with a cleaning company. A cleaner came in twice a week for a couple of hours. It was expensive, and the manager wasn't especially happy with the standard of the work, or the security (alarm codes written on bits of paper etc). So they got out of the contract (apparently at no cost, somehow), and now employ me and a colleague for less than the contract price, to work a total of 6 hours a week spread over 4 days. More frequent cleaning makes it easier, and better, and also we have a relationship with the building and organisation that makes us care about the job.
  18. Night Train

    Night Train Maker of Things Betrothed to Arch

    I don't like it.
    Mainly a trust issue and also a quality of training and service delivery issue. Some things shouldn't be run 'for a profit' but for delivering the best possible service for the available budget. And if the budget isn't enough then find it from a less important spend.
  19. CopperCyclist

    CopperCyclist Über Member

    It's too late to stop it now. Decisions have been made, the previous cuts have paved the way for it, and it's inevitable. The only question now is to the scale of the privatisation...
  20. TheDoctor

    TheDoctor Man-Machine

    Location:
    Hertfordshire
    I've worked for an outsourced company. Our main - indeed only - target was to hit the Service Level Agreement or SLA. As long as 90% of calls were answered within 30 seconds (or whatever it was) and we stuck to the script then that's all the managers cared about. Many of us were temps, and the pay was low. Anyone who was good didn't stick around long.
    The SLA is key to why outsourcing doesn't work well. The customer thinks the SLA defines a minimum level of service that standards will not fall below. It doesn't. It lays down the best you will ever get, and that target will be reached as cheaply as possible. If that means employing, say, IT helpdesk people off the checkouts at Tesco then that's what'll happen.