UPDATE

This is SGT Laura Jones from Sandwell Partnership team. Now follows a message from the Business Partnering Team.

Private partnership business case makes it clear that core policing services will not be affected

WEST Midlands Police has today made public the business case for its Business Partnering for Police programme (BPP).

BPP is exploring the possibility of whether the force can work with the private sector to transform the way policing is delivered and improve services to the public.

The plan makes it clear that the programme is not about privatisation and any partner will not deliver core policing services like patrolling, responding to calls for help, investigating crime and managing dangerous offenders.

The force is looking at how working with industry could improve policing services in a period where the financial context remains a challenging one.

To-date, savings of �78 million pounds have been made and crime is at a record low but the force recognises that to continue improving service and providing public protection it will need to add something different to the policing mix. As a result, it is looking at ways of transforming the service.

New figures released by the force today show that total recorded crime plummeted by over 9,500 offences to levels not seen in a generation.

The force is not complacent though and firmly believes more can be done to improve the service it delivers.

The 28 page business case is to be presented to the Police Authority for approval next week (Thursday 12 July).

The report explores the following areas in terms of any future partnership:

'Transformation capacity' looks at what a business partner could give the public in terms of more choice in how to contact the force and more choice in how cases are managed. It also looks at resource control and management and how they could be improved.

The 'enhanced delivery' element makes it clear that a partner will not be involved in visible services or where the powers of a constable are required but could work alongside leadership teams to introduce new ways of working.

The 'direct delivery' section outlines how a partner may be able to transform and reduce costs by direct operation. Areas where this could take place are in custody, finance, criminal justice, call handling, data recording and information technology.

However, each area would need a careful assessment and it is still too early to define which areas could be subject to direct operation. Any form of direct delivery would need careful judgements, weighing up the benefits and the impact on the public and staff.

The paper is also explicit about the accountability of any future partner. Critically, it makes a clear reference to the role of the incoming Police and Crime Commissioner and the fundamental role they will play in progressing the programme.

The force makes it clear that the programme is not about privatisation and any partner will not deliver core policing services like patrolling, responding to calls for help, investigating crime and managing dangerous offenders.

Later this summer the force plans to launch a public consultation on the shape of policing for the future.

Deputy Chief Constable David Thompson said: "We are acutely aware that BPP has been hotly debated. Some of those debates have been based on myths surrounding the programme and I hope that the business plan will go some way to clarify the force position and allay concerns people might have on the programme.

"The Chief Constable has been very clear that the programme is not about privatisation and I want to reiterate that West Midlands Police is not for sale.

"We are committed to bringing about transformational change in order to improve service delivery.

"The changes we want to bring in cannot be ordered from a catalogue; we have to create them and we want to achieve this transformation by combining the things we have and the wealth of skills we already bring with the capabilities of a partner.

"While we continue to be successful in tackling crime, with crime at its lowest levels in a generation in some key areas we believe we could do more".

"By working with a business partner we believe we will be able to improve the services we provide to the public and operate more effectively."

The business plan is a living document that will evolve and be updated as the programme develops.

grassrootsleft: Grass Roots Left Chair Jerry Hicks on Twitter

grassrootsleft: Grass Roots Left Chair Jerry Hicks on Twitter: Today 01/07/12: Tories EU referendum http://bbc.in/LpPPfA :I want a referendum on Trident 75Bn 4 nuclear arms or 75Bn 4 more Nurses T...

grassrootsleft: About Us

grassrootsleft: About Us: Welcome to a new type of Left in the trade union "Unite". We are different.  We are genuinely on the Left ( look at our policies ) unlike ...

Unite activists launch Grass Roots Left

Unite activists launch Grass Roots Left

Black police reporting racism 'labelled troublemakers'

Black police reporting racism 'labelled troublemakers'
By Allan Urry Reporter, File on 4

More black and minority ethnic officers left the police service between 2010-11 than were recruited

Continue reading the main story

Related Stories

• Police review anti-racism reforms
• Met attacked over racism record
• Race term 'barrier' to Met reform

Police forces are unfairly disciplining black and Asian officers who complain about racism, says the National Black Police Association.

It says officers who file complaints are labelled as "troublemakers" and pressured to leave the force.

A separate, unpublished police report has said disproportionate numbers of minority officers in some forces end up in the disciplinary system.

The Association of Chief Police Officers says the data is "worrying".

Speaking to Radio 4's File on 4 programme, President of the NBPA Charles Critchlow said:

"I think the worst aspect is it appears that even senior officers are prepared to use instruments within the service, for example the disciplinary process, to put pressure on these officers and ultimately force them out of the organisation and that's something that we're very, very concerned about."

He added: "I think there still exists within the police service a pattern of behaviour where officers, particularly junior officers, who make a complaint or challenge inappropriate behaviour - particularly if it's got anything to do with race - seem to be labelled as troublemakers."

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

Even senior officers are prepared to use instruments within the service, for example the disciplinary process, to put pressure on these officers and ultimately force them out ”

End Quote Charles Critchlow National Black Police Association

However, Mr Critchlow also stressed: "That is not to say that all officers are racist or discriminate against people, but there seems to be a problem in the police service when it comes to dealing with race issues."

The BBC has also seen an internal draft report which shows police disciplinary procedures being used disproportionately against black and Asian officers in some forces.

The report was compiled by academic researchers on behalf of Greater Manchester Police and includes data from the West Midlands Police and the British Transport Police.

It acknowledges concerns from minority officers about unfair treatment and confirms that in the West Midlands, black and minority ethnic (BME) officers are almost twice as likely to be the subject of an investigation as white officers.

Findings for the British Transport Police are broadly similar.

The research also looks at officers being kept under surveillance in internal counter-corruption investigations and found that in Greater Manchester the proportion of minority officers being investigated is three times higher than that of white officers.

Continue reading the main story

Find out more

Listen to the full report on File on 4 on BBC Radio 4 on Tuesday, 5 June at 20:00 BST and Sunday, 10 June at 17:00 BST

• Listen via the Radio 4 website
• Download the File on 4 podcast
• Got a story? Contact the File on 4 team

In the West Midlands, the rate of allegations of corruption against BME officers is more than five times higher than the rate of allegations against white officers.

The authors of the report are calling for further research and say their findings suggest the problems identified are not limited to the three forces featured in the research.

Chief Constable of Bedfordshire Police Alfred Hitchcock, who is the Association of Chief Police Officers lead on equality, diversity and human rights, says he has not yet seen the internal report but says the data is "worrying".

He told the BBC he would be speaking to other chief officers about the matter, but defended the way internal complaints are dealt with.

"If there are matters relating to racist or improper behaviour, then those are investigated and people who are victims are treated as victims.

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

If there are matters relating to racist or improper behaviour, then those are investigated and people who are victims are treated as victims”

End Quote Alfred Hitchcock Association of Chief Police Officers

"The service is very keen to make sure that we deal properly and appropriately with all staff and by doing that we would hope that people see us as being fair with all, and that is the objective," he said.

File on 4's investigation also uncovered concerns about the slow progress forces have made in recruiting and promoting BME officers.

Thirteen years after the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry recommended increased numbers of black and ethnic minority officers, the latest Home Office figures show more BME officers are leaving the police than joining.

In 2010-11, 165 BME officers were recruited, but 204 left the service.

Mr Hitchcock blames government cuts on police funding which has led to a recruitment freeze and subsequently a dip in numbers, but acknowledges the police leadership must do more:

"If some people think that we've got this sorted I think they're living in a dream world. I think there is an awful lot of work for us still to do.

"There is a danger that we put an over-negative spin on where we've come in the last decade because actually we've made fantastic progress. But that doesn't mean we stop; that means we actually need to renew and re-energise."

Listen to the full report on File on 4 on BBC Radio 4 on Tuesday, 5 June at 20:00 BST and Sunday 10 June at 17:00 BST.

Listen again via the Radio 4 website or download the File on 4 podcast.

 

EAT Rules that Lap Dancer was an Employee

EAT Rules that Lap Dancer was an Employee.
Many employment rights - including the right to sue for unfair dismissal - are confined to employees. Defining just who is and who is not an employee has long proved something of a challenge for the courts and tribunals.

Take, for example, the recent decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in Quashie v. Stringfellows Restaurants Ltd. Q worked as a lap dancer at Stringfellows. She was paid in what was described as "Heavenly Money " - vouchers paid to her by customers which Stringfellows later redeemed for real money minus deductions. Those deductions included commission payable to Stringfellows, a "house fee" and fines. Dancers were fined for such things as being off rota or late for a shift or stage dance. Dancers were also required to pay a set fee to the "House Mother", who was responsible for ensuring that the dancers were well turned out and for looking after the dancers' general wellbeing. Q's earnings came entirely from the customers. On any particular night, it was possible that her earnings might be less than the amount she had to pay out, with the result that she would earn nothing for that night.

When Stringfellows terminated Q's contract over drug dealing allegations, she sued for unfair dismissal. Stringfellows had two lines of defence. It argued, first, that Q was not an employee and, second, that Q's contract had been illegally performed by reason of her tax returns and claims for tax credit. Dealing with the employee point as a preliminary "knock-out" point, the Employment Tribunal ruled that Q was not an employee.

The EAT allowed Q's appeal. Although Q's earnings came entirely from customers, rather than Stringfellows, she was being paid for work done. Employment status is not a matter of the source, or the route, of the payment. The Employment Tribunal had been wrong to focus too narrowly on the "wage/work" bargain. Q had been obliged to turn up for work in accordance with the rota. She was not entitled to send a substitute. The imposition of fines or deductions by agreement implied an ongoing relationship.

The EAT sent the case back to the Employment Tribunal so that it could hear Q's unfair dismissal claim and deal with the illegality point.

Whether or not an individual is an employee will always depend on the facts of the particular case. Employers need to appreciate that an Employment Tribunal will always look at the substance, or reality, of the situation. It will not be bound to accept the particular label which the parties have chosen to put on their relationship. Even an individual whose contract clearly states that he or she is not an employee may, in fact, be an employee in law and have all the rights of an employee.

To find out more, please contact Nick Crook or Gareth Pobjoy.
Filed: 14/05/2012 09:07:07

Solidarity

Train drivers in pensions battle
Submitted on 23 May, 2012 - 09:04

Share
Author: A train driver
Train drivers working for East Midlands Trains (EMT) have taken 6 days of strike action in the past 3 weeks to try and prevent the company from reducing contributions to their pension fund.

In 2010 an actuarial valuation revealed a funding level of 99.1% and a prediction that if the Joint Contribution Rate (the money paid into the fund by management and workers) stayed the same, then the fund would probably move into surplus.

With the current financial turmoil, drivers are rightly concerned that any reduction now will leave a deficit in 2013. The company has been asked to provide an interim valuation to confirm that the fund is in surplus now but has refused. In other companies where recent valuations have shown actual surpluses union members have voted to reduce the contributions. EMT has also been unwilling to commit to make up any shortfall if the reduction goes ahead. Drivers are suspicious that, as 2013 is the end of the franchise, EMT are looking to make a fast buck at our expense before they give up or lose the franchise.

So far, only members of the drivers’ union ASLEF have taken action. The other unions organising on EMT, RMT and Unite, are in the process of balloting their members on this issue. ASLEF will probably wait for the results of those ballots before deciding what to do next. If the other unions vote for action (and this could be a proxy for all the other issues we currently have with the company including victimisation of reps, pay, rosters and the car park levy), it will be difficult for EMT to maintain their strike day skeleton service if different grades strike on different days. It would be feasible for instance that the drivers could strike one day, other train crew the following day and platform staff the day after that. Coupled with a possible week long strike by train maintainers, which would see trains gradually becoming unfit for service, there is a good chance we could win this one quickly. If we don’t get the results, ASLEF could call token strikes to keep the ballot live and then have another push during the Olympics, which would give the dispute national publicity.

As we are always being told to save more for our pensions, the company would be shown up to be the pension raiders that they are, and we can rightly portray ourselves as the responsible party trying to maintain them.