If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Aged 16-25? Share your experience of using the discussion boards and receive a £25 voucher! Take part via text-chat, video or phone. Click here to find out more and to take part.
Options
Comments
SG: On a small side note, why do you hate stop smoking people so much, or 'five a day co-ordinators'? I knew someone who worked in a smoking clinic and frankly I thought her work was totally worthwhile.
the government has no money left and has nothing left to sell off or privatise, which means taxes and retirement age are going up and public services will be cut back or scrapped, can't wait!
One potential scenario is this: there will be more elderly in the future, thus potentially pushing up healthcare and medical costs. The NHS could buckle under this strain. The workforce will resent having to pay higher taxes to fund all this. A political party will pick up on the anger and dissatisfaction, and the one that promises extremely radical reforms would be elected. This is just one possible scenario, but I think it's hard to deny that government will almost certainly look very different in the year 2107 to what it does now.
Amoung certain groups yes, but in terms of those at the bottom smoking is still as common. I'm just slightly confused by your obvious hatred for someone who stops someone dying, there are quite a lot of similar healthcare jobs.
It is precisely because we are getting old that we want all the people we can grab from Eastern Europe, they are already of working age, they've got a generally good work ethic, and a big chunk of them will leave again before claiming pensions.
I very much doubt you will see a party getting into power wanting to cut back drastically on what the government does, it will be the usual arguments about who is the better manager - which is exactly all politics is now, management.
Police officers have to learn a hell of a lot in a relatively short space of time. You have no idea. Just because its not a "FORMAL" qualification does't make it matter any the less.
Why shouldn't someone who puts themselves at a big risk everytime they go to work get a decent pay packet out of it? Similar to firemen.
If you're a teacher, you need to spend 4 years getting into considerable debt and effectively working full time without pay for about half a year of your course. After that, you need to complete a year on a considerably reduced wage (I think about £16k), and only then can you claim to be qualified and get a fully paid job at about £22k a year. Compare that to a police officer, who gets £20k a year from the off, tuition fees paid, and has risen to £24k a year by the time they've actually qualified. So it takes less time to train, it's at a lower level of academic study, it's all paid for, they get a wage during training, and they get paid more when they're done.
The fact that so many police officers are also graduates is just a reflection of the inflated salary on offer, which is competing with the graduate market, when it shouldn't need to.
Because so many people want to do it anyway. Why should we need to entice them with huge pay packets and benefits at the taxpayers expense? It's not like people don't want to be police officers or firefighters, and it's not even as if it's as dangerous as mining, construction, fishing, or any number of other jobs, if we're talking danger money here.
What a bizarre view.
Whats dangerous about fishing? Policer officers deal with CRIMINALS EVERY day, some very dangerous indeed.
If you really don't see the danger a police officer is faced with every day you really have no idea, and must be looking through tinted glass.
My other half is a police officer so i know what risk he is taking every day.
Also just because he chose that profession does that mean he should't be paid well for a dangerous job just because he picked to do that?!
Coming from a fishing port I've known of people go overboard, get trapped in machinery or be in a boat which goes down with all hands...
What's so dangerous about fishing? Oh, I dunno, maybe the storms, the high sea, the fact that if you fall in you could die because you're so far from the nearest hostpital? Do you want to compare the serious injury and death figures? Fishing is the most dangerous job.
Nope, he should be paid a fair wage based at least to some degree on the market values, like any other job. You say I'm looking at it through tinted glasses, but then you're looking at it through the rose-tinted glasses of someone who's other half is a police officer? How is that any more balanced? When was the last time you heard of a police officer having to retire through serious injury? I'm sure there are plenty, but compare it to working in industry, for example, and the facts don't back up the percieved danger. Firefighting and policing seem to have this have this romantic mystique surrounding them that they're really dangerous jobs, and to some degree they are, but no more so than plenty of other jobs. The only difference is that they physically put themselves in danger, whereas most other jobs attempt to avoid it, but then so do the army, or security guards and they're paid less too.
I doubt that thats a regular thing though. I don't see it as comparible.
And i think the army should earn more too. but this is about police officers.
Personally i wouldn't want to see the police strike but i would aslso the to see the government stick to the agreement!
And look at the difficulties that the parties have in raising funds. The Tories are dependent on Ashcroft, a man too spineless to tell us whether he pays tax in the UK. Labour have just as many dodgy donors - they're being investigated by the police again. And look at the LibDems. Michael Brown did - he's now in prison! Make no mistake - these are parties that represent the politics of the past. It's only a matter of time before they all die out. The only thing that remains to be seen is what comes along next.
On another second, I add my name to the notion that the armed forces should get better pay.
Even as a PCSO with (supposedly) more rules from the union I regularly have leave cancelled or not even allowed in the first place, and it's stressful. Luckily I'm off for christmas, a few of my colleagues have all been told that whatever plans they have made they have to cancel and they're now working new years eve and new years day.
When we ask for a pay rise, it's not just for danger money, it's to reflect the true amount of shit we have to deal with day in and day out from people who are truly horrendous human beings. And if the government thinks a pay rise that equates to about £20 a month is an adequate relflection of that, they can go bollocks.
Lots of jobs can be dangerous. Paramedic, nurse, firefighter, taxi driver, builder...
I don't dispute the fact that it can be a very difficult and stressful job - but the police is hardly unique here... All of that applies to lots of other professions.
and they should be compensated for it.
What's your point? My mum has to do the same thing as well.
Because your job is the only job that involves getting a load of shit from the public, isn't it?:rolleyes:
So if the police did strike, who is going to help my family if we get burgaled?
Exactly.
or beaten up/stabbed etc?
You really do think the the poor coppers are poor little victims don't you?
You took the fucking job on the pay and contract that you did, tough shit, if you don't like it quit.
It's a public service job, we pay for wages with our taxes so we have the right to that protection, period.
We've all had leave cancelled and worked lots of hours mate, I regularly do 80 hours a week, so what?
Out of interest - what exactly are you looking for in your payrise, what % or amount would satisfy you??
Exactly, and all the wittering about how badly coppers get piad obscures the real issue - that Government has broken its side and the coppers, unlike others, have no legal recourse.
Naturally however, Scots MPs would get the full rise from January 1st. As long as Gordon's alright, after all..
I'm "rabbiting" on about his Police Officer victim syndrome, such as
Like that?
So what, lots of us have stressful jobs and hours we HAVE to work when we don't want too which are over and above what we should be doing.
I also have leave regularly cancelled or can't book it as I work shifts and our man numbers are low.
They aren't the only ones. And lots of people in my company got no pay rise or sub-inflation rises this year.
I don't care about the rest of it, the question is should they be allowed to strike, my answer is no, which is because of the nature of the job.
I am confused about where you mentioned three months back pay, why should they get this?
And what is all this nonsense about him pretending to be a victim? These are just some of the grievances he has. Sure, you've got them in every job, but does that mean, just cos he's a copper, he can't say anything? I can't see how the police are playing the victim card, and I can't help but wonder why you're seeing that. Is it just your way of shutting down debate?
The bottom line is that pay should be given too them but only because the goverment agreed.
Not because it's dangerous/stressful/they make you wear tutus etc
Can't you understand my point here?
I don't give a shit if he has to work long hours or has leave cancelled, so does half the rest of country, and in terms of this debate it is of no relevance in my eyes.
Should they get the money? Yes
Because they are stressed? No
Because they are tired? No
etc
I didn't say "the police are playing the victim card" either - I said he has victim syndrome.
Any time coppers are mentioned he pipes in about how it's so stressful and dangerous and underpaid etc
that is a very well put argument
but - thats the job and you know it before you sign up to it.
exactly
Firstly, this isn't my pay rise we're talking about. I get paid differently, and if I get one it'll not be for a few months.
You work 80 hours a week, that's fantastic. As what? I believe you have an IT job. Are you attempting to compare sitting on your arse for most of the week to policing the streets??? lol.
Yes, the public have a right to protection, if the police go on strike i'll be in exactly the same boat, i'm a member of public as well. But the police have a right to fair pay and conditions. The difference between the police and you is that you have the right to withold your labour if your boss screws you over....which if you're working an 80 hour week it sounds like he's doing on a regular basis.
The police don't have that right, this isn't about the money it's about the government breaking yet another promise.
As for this victim syndrom thing, pardon me for speaking out in support of my colleagues. You're the sort of person who bashes the police for everything because you've had a bad experience with them, but you're also the sort of person who would shout loudest if there weren't any around. And you really have no clue about danger would you? I gues you wouldn't if your job involves nothing more dangerous than attempting not breathe in ozone as you walk past a photocopier.
Danger is being sent to a street fight as a pair despite knowing there is no backup if things go wrong. Danger is trying to pull a girl out a car whilst live power lines are lying at your feet. Danger is wading into a group of 20 youths and pulling out the 14 year old girl who is getting the shit kicked out of her.
But, I and my buddies don't complain about any of that, you're completely right. It's the job we signed up for. What we're all pissed off at is the government and Jaqui Smith in particular thinks she can go against a decision that has been reached by an independant organisation and pay us whatever the hell she feels like.
And like I said, so what if I have victim syndrome? I think working for an organisation where you're happy to defend your colleagues is good. Just because you wouldnt give 2 shits about the people you work with because they're all required to work unpaid overtime, doesn't mean I shouldn't.
Or watching some great-grandmother do it for you, because you're not trained for it?
That was their perogative, and one that I most certainly would not replicate. I like to think that I will intervene in a situation like that, and I have done a few times in the past. But then i'm lucky, our force has given us all the powers available to PCSO's, and we're encouraged to intervene knowing that the powers that be will support us when things go wrong. PCSO's in the Met don't have that luxury.