A Personal Commentary on the Baroness Casey Review - Part Two

PART TWO

Cont’d

The history of recruitment into the police service has see-sawed over history.?At times the waiting lists to apply have been too large for forces to be confident that they were selecting the best from a huge pool.?In other periods policing has been desperate for new recruits. In the last few years the service has been recruiting as heavily and as quickly as it can. The fact that police pay has, in real terms, fallen for years does not help. ?In our multi force model this has led to competition between forces and at times of shortage a desire to attract ready trained officers from other forces.??Transfers between forces are a healthy and useful way of sharing experience.?But to be successful the receiving force needs to understand, as part of the vetting process, why officers (really) wish to uproot themselves and to do something new.?The Met (and other forces) have benefited greatly from the transfer market but have also paid a heavy price in some cases.

When recruitment is seen as a competitive activity there is a lot of pressure to make recruitment material as slick and as attractive as possible.?Generally this has led to a situation where advertisements look like they are selling a product rather than trying to attract the right people to do a difficult job:

“During the course of the Review, a series of new adverts on radio and television was launched to attract new recruits to the Met (and to policing nationally). We noted that the ads for the Met focused on an image of officers in a variety of roles which, while including officers ‘on the beat’, tended to focus more on specialist roles including firearms and bomb disposal. These were described in the campaign as ‘a career most people only see on screen’. (p78)

“A contributor to the Review said: “It shows the job as being very technical and action oriented when people skills are the most important requirement. Like advertising for jobs at Tesco’s showing people tasting wine and sampling cheese.” (p78)

“While the frontline is struggling and public confidence at an all-time low, the culture of the Met drives them to spin excitement and promote elite policing roles, rather than emphasising the values of consent and integrity inherent in the Peelian principles and the oath of allegiance, and the importance of frontline policing and a real connection to Londoners”(p78)

It is not surprising that some new recruits feel as if they have been conned.?Wastage is a problem.?Unhappy officers contribute to the breeding ground of negativity.

Casey does not dwell for long on the issue of recruit training although she does observe:

“The Review team heard considerable criticism from new recruits on the new programmes. Beyond the strong moral purpose that had drawn most to the job, particularly the desire to make a difference for Londoners, it was hard to elicit positive comments from new recruits.” (p 80)

It is good to hear about the strong moral purpose.?This mirrors my own experience of working with new officers.?It provides grounds for cautious optimism.

Many people in the world of policing were surprised that the Met should contract out the delivery of recruit training to a commercial company which then works with four universities to deliver the PEQF programme.?Although the Met were never part of the system of District Training Centres (DTCs – an early example of multi force collaboration overseen by the Home office) the reputation of Hendon was high.?It was an important part of the Met brand.?This is not the place for the continuing debate about the PEQF approach, but the experience of initial training is an important factor in the development of police culture and sub cultures.?The extensive use by the Met contractor, and by the universities, of retired officers as instructors (note the word lecturers is avoided by the universities) has an unknown influence on early cultural development (*).?Given that people are always the greatest asset of a police force the fact that the Met inducts and trains its new recruits at arm’s length is interesting.

Casey does not engage much with the concept of discipline.?Misconduct is a form of a breach of discipline.?The fact that the police service needs to be a modern organisation that must throw off some of the quasi military trapping of the past does not mean that the fundamental idea of it being a disciplined service should change.?Police officers, especially new ones, need to understand that they are not working for a high street retailer or a fintech enterprise.?The modern police service must be inclusive and consultative.?The opinions of the most junior staff must be heard.?But in the final analysis good order and discipline must be maintained.?If this paragraph sounds old fashioned then this is intentional.?One way out of the misconduct and cultural mess is by using the existing tools, including existing cultural levers, to bring about change.?The public hand wringing of senior police officers about the state of their workforce could be replaced by a more determined disciplinary style.?In the modern supervisory world police officers are taught to be leaders, mentors and coaches.?Rank is not enough.?This is an improvement on the old days of swagger sticks and saluting.?The police service needs good, inspiring and well trained leaders.?But holding supervisory rank in the police service also involves the imposition of discipline. An unembarrassed maintenance of discipline.??A discipline that enforces the standards, ethics and policy of the police service.?In every scandal that has beset the Met in recent years the question has always arisen ‘where was the sergeant/inspector’??It is a fair question.?The police service could learn from the armed forces in how to strike the balance between modern leadership and necessary discipline.

The supervisory question is addressed by Lady Casey:

“We looked at the Met’s supervision and management arrangements. These are fundamental cogs in the wheel of the organisation which drive performance, make sure things get done, and embed values and good conduct. They are also the means through which early problems can be identified and acted upon, whether they relate to an individual, the team operation or wider issues. Despite many leaders recognising that ‘something needs to be done’, supervision and management are both woefully lacking in the Met. Part of this is down to how stretched officers are, particularly those on the frontline. We discuss this further in chapter 4. As discussed in chapter 2, Met workforce data shows a growth in the proportion of officers who are Constables (from 76% in 2012-13 to 81% in 2022-23) while the proportion of officers who are Sergeants or Inspectors (supervisory ranks) has declined (from 22% in 2012-13 to 17% in 2022-23). This increases ‘supervision spans’: the number of officers managed by a supervisor.” ?????NOTE: Emphasis added (p81)

Police forces are run by sergeants and inspectors.?They are the people who actually make things happen, often against the odds.?If there are not enough of them, or if they are not properly trained or supported they can easily sink, or even become part of the problem.?Most officers at that rank are desperate to do the right thing but often they spend their days trying to keep their heads above water.

A Chief Constable (a former Met Assistant Commissioner) once told a course I attended “if you only have ￡100 in your training budget spend ￡99 on sergeants and inspectors because they are the people who are doing the job while you are tucked up in bed.?Remember if you are the night turn inspector headquarters policy departments might as well be on another planet”.?It was sound advice.

The Review observed:

“Several Sergeants told us it had taken over ten months to access training. Some told us they had not had training at all. Several acting Sergeants told us they could not access training, and had no support to step into the role unless they found it for themselves from friends and colleagues. Embedded on-site HR support was also withdrawn under austerity, leaving supervisors relatively unsupported. They therefore supervised as they had been supervised, or improvised according to their own preferences and style. Having difficult conversations, supporting officers under pressure, keeping a keen eye on performance, and developing individuals, are important skills. They don’t just come naturally. However, the importance of these skills is not recognised. We did not hear from any officer we spoke to that such skills were discussed in any judgement of an individual’s performance, such as part of an annual appraisal, or for promotion purposes: “Line management in the Met is seen as a luxury, a ‘nice to have’ rather than an essential part of good leadership.” “There is no training at all on becoming a line manager…I would have to look up what to do if someone came to me with a problem.” “The biggest mistake was making HR self-service and outsourced via the intranet…You’re always scrabbling the intranet for information, which isn’t even fit for purpose when you find it. How can you do that if you’re out on the streets?” (p82)

Shocking as these comments are I was struck by the next paragraph:

“ We could not establish any clarity about the Met’s supervision policy of the Met. When we queried this, the Human Resources team pointed us to guidance called Sergeant in an E-Box, a toolkit developed for new and acting sergeants, set out in 23 PowerPoint slides”. (p82)

Twenty three power point slides???I stopped reading at this point as I needed a drink.?

The end of section conclusion provides a succinct and insightful summary:

“The absence of good training and clear expectations about supervision and management means people learn from what’s around them, and will do things as they’ve always done them. This presents a significant risk because the existing culture, the ‘how we do things round here’, becomes more important than the stated values and intentions of the organisation. The Met leadership has talked about the importance of supervision and management, but only backed this up with more short-life initiatives without wider embedding of improvements or systems to reinforce them. Inadequate management allows those who seek to do wrong to continue their activities and affect other officers, staff and the public. But it also means mediocre performance goes unchecked, putting greater pressure on other officers to pick up the slack. It also seriously impedes the potential of good officers who are not given the support and challenge they need to progress in the organisation. Far too much is left to chance.” (p83)

?

TO BE CONTINUED……………

·???????I should declare an interest as an occasional PEQF instructor

·??????

The comments in this blog are personal.?They do not represent the views of my clients or employers.