October 23rd, 2010

Worrying Times

Posted in The Job - Experience by 200

Now that the figures for the financial√ā¬†cuts√ā¬†are√ā¬†starting√ā¬†to filter through to front-line staff, the rumours begin about the way that forces will be trimming their budgets. Actually, trimming is the wrong word, it will be quite a swinging cut; twenty per cent of the funding for police forces is being wiped off the books in a way which will tax the best brains (and those who run the police forces), to find ever more creative ways to cut the bills.

Since over 80 per cent of funding goes on wages, it’s clear that many people will be losing out. Which department will suffer the most enforced redundancies? Can natural wastage√ā¬†supersede√ā¬†sackings? Talk is rife that they will change our contracts so that they can cut our wages. Figures of six or seven thousand a year off the√ā¬†salary√ā¬†by jiggling working hours can be heard across the control room & in the canteen. Yesterday I spoke to 3 people on my shift alone who said if the contracts were changed & they lost as much as this they would not be able to afford their mortgages & would be forced to look for alternative employment. One is looking for another job now in the hope of jumping ship before a wage cut bites. The trouble is, where can you find a job of an equal√ā¬†salary√ā¬†when everyone is doing the same?

We’ll have to see what the force comes up with in a few months time but things are not looking too good for thousands & thousands of us who are being forced to pay for someone else’s cock-up.

Still, look at the bright side, at least if they drop my salary by a few grand they won’t be able to take away my child tax credits.

You can skip to the end and leave a comment. Pinging is currently not allowed. RSS 2.0

7 comments

  1. JohnM says:

    There are not any spending cuts.
    The deficit is about √ā¬£696 billion now, in four years it will be in excess of √ā¬£740 billion.
    Overseas aid has gone up from √ā¬£7.8 billion to √ā¬£11.5 billion.
    There is “budgetary realignment”, some get more (lots) others get less.

    October 24th, 2010 at 01:08

  2. Fee says:

    Trust me, the private sector is the very same. We’re looking to cut costs by 25%, and like you, our major costs come from the salary side, so it doesn’t take a genius to see major job losses looming.

    October 24th, 2010 at 10:11

  3. Civ_In_The_City says:

    At some point, logically, cuts such as these simply have to mean a decrease in productivity and quality. Whether it be policing or making pots and pans.

    A force not a million miles from my own pseudo-outsourced its ‘back office’ functions a few years ago. Lots of talk at the time of ‘efficiencies’ and transforming the way services are delivered.

    The reality of course is somewhat different to the promise. Less staff, less work done, lower quality of the work that does get done, massive inefficiency. But at the same time a massive increase in management and gathering of statistics, manipulated at will by those new managers, to create that all-important perception that the outsourcing is a massive success. Those two effects are totally intertwined with each other. Cause and effect.

    But nobody wants to be the one to point out the naked emperor riding the white elephant round the living room. So those on the front line gamely soldier on while waiting for the day the dam breaks.

    Those remaining pseudo-outsourced soldiers were, until recently, in receipt of extra payments to put them on a par with their private sector equivalents. You want good staff? Want them to stick around instead of getting some experience then jogging on? Then pay them close to what they can get elsewhere. You want to run policing like a private company don`t you?

    But then those payment were cut back or removed. Some staff dropping √ā¬£10,000. This was before the Cameron/Clegg cuts were announced. What would you do in their position?

    So we can look forward to potentially losing another 20% of staff (several already have C.V.`s out there), and losing more money.

    A bit like you 200, one day their will simply be no bodies to do the work and therefore the work will not be done. Truth and consequences.

    You can format your Excel spreadsheets any colour you like, but divide anything by zero and I guarantee you`ll get the same result every time.

    October 24th, 2010 at 12:21

  4. Plod says:

    In my neck of the woods single-crewing for police officers has been the norm for quite some time. It is a slippery slope policy too- started off until 9/10pm then moved to midnight, now well in to the small hours. I would love to see the comparisons on statistics for assaults on police before and after this change (Though sadly in reality they are probably kept quite similar because being single crewed understandably leads to officers not stopping that vehicle with 4 occupants in the middle of nowhere at 3am)

    October 24th, 2010 at 16:03

  5. Fat blurk says:

    I believe the 16% over 4 years is based on the police getting more from councils to alleviate some of the shortfall. That’ll be the concils which have had a 28% cut over 4 years and can’t raise council tax for at least 2 years.
    I honestly belive all politicians are so far removed from reality we should carry out a PolPot style revolutionary cleansing and start again.
    I voted to gat my family a better deal with some less suicidal fiscal policy and this bunch of clowns go giving more of OUR money to international aid, that’s money we haven’t got and are probably borrowing from China like everyone else. Doesn’t charity begin at home?

    Absolutely mental

    October 24th, 2010 at 18:28

  6. Graham Smith says:

    There is an argument that says, if you cannot find alternative work with a similar remuneration package, then you were being overpaid in the first place…

    And, IMHO, as it’s usually the most competent and able people that are the first to volunteer for redundancy, it’s often the dross that are left. :-(

    October 24th, 2010 at 19:38

  7. Ted says:

    I can’t see the logic in giving aid to India which can afford a space program. Last year India got √ā¬£295 million.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1323245/Extra-3bn-overseas-aid-kept-Harrier-jets-flying-20-years.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

    October 24th, 2010 at 22:13

Leave a comment