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.
Options
Should police be able to avoid duty they don't like?
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5408470.stm
In mixed minds about this. I'm not sure that the uniformed services should be able to avoid any duty on 'moral' grounds, but at the same time if someone does feel queasy about something and the police can fit their views in without compromising efficiency perhaps they should do so.
On this particular case, it may be complicated if there was also a welfare reason as well.
In mixed minds about this. I'm not sure that the uniformed services should be able to avoid any duty on 'moral' grounds, but at the same time if someone does feel queasy about something and the police can fit their views in without compromising efficiency perhaps they should do so.
On this particular case, it may be complicated if there was also a welfare reason as well.
0
Comments
Personally i think if it was down to that, he should have been left to do the job hes paid for.
Exactly, he made a reasonable request to make a short term change in his duties because of exceptional circumstances and it was accepted. This happens all the time in virtually every company which has decent managers.
IF he had insisted that he not be made to do it and kicked up a massive fuss and refused to do it it would be another issue, but any reasonable request with an easy solution between an employee and their manager should be left at that.
His job involved guarding the Israeli Embassy, I fail to see how events in the Middle East render him ‘unable’ to carry out duties at the London embassy. Guarding the embassy presumably involves protecting it from attack – does this officer think events in the Middle East justify an attack on the embassy? It’s the job of the police to protect, this protection is not dependent on nationality or religion – this officer has refused to protect, does he think those at the Israeli embassy do not deserve protection?
Good on The Sun for exposing this.
Police should be able to request not to do certain things, but if the request is denied they should do them. What the Met did sounds like good management to me; I would have no objection if a black officer was excused duties guarding the BNP, say.
Dis, was the embassy left unguarded? No? well what the hell are you wittering on about then?
So something is alright as long as the public don't find out about it?
But the public interest is nothing to do with bringing the service into disrepute - its about whether uniformed personell should be allowed to pick and choose their duties and the relationship between employer and employee
It doesn't sound like a pick-and-choose situation to me. In fact FYI army, navy and airforce personel can be conciensious objectors if they go through the right channels...
and frankly, if it's the risk involve with the job here that matters, most of the time just being a civilian have more risk than working for the police...
Did someone force them to sign up? Did they have no clue that you have to do what you are ask to do before they join?
And the fact that his wifes family was in the middle of a war zone isnt at all mitigating circumstances?
It was a temporary change during a period which I assume was very stressful for him and his family. This sort of thing is done by virtually every big company.
Did you not see me say that you can be a concious-objector in the armed forces?
As I'mWithStupid said, people have tough jobs, and no they can't pick and choose, but any sensible person would take into account why you wouldn't want to do something if you had a good reason.
Would a British Jewish police officer with family in northern Israel be right to avoid service guarding the Lebanese Embassy? I don't think so. He shouldn't avoid duty and the fact that he made the request is unprofessional...
We have no idea whether or not he (the jewish police officer) could have been moved onto other duties, so thats just groundless speculation.
Yes I agree with that, but when I have a job where they ask me to do something that I have good reason to not do, it doesn't make any difference either...
I am not saying it is the best way to do it or that it should be that way, but if it is one way for some it should be for everyone...
My point was, were that the case I would believe the request should not be granted.
Well if you have a reasonable boss, it probably is that way for everyone. Obviously, if they say no, you can quit or suck it up. But I don't see why it should be an issue if you can just swap with someone else for a couple of months.
the army and conchies isn't relevant. You can register as a CO, but you're then discharged from the army (and you can only do it certain circumstances - if you're in Iraq you have to grin and bear it until you get back).
Just as I think those fireman in Scotland were wrong to refuse to attend a Gay Pride march, it is wrong of this man to refuse to guard the Israeli embassy on principle.
The only consideration to be made is if the transfer request was made on welfare grounds rather than moral ones (as the police claims is the case).
If it had transpired in certain circles that a man married to a Lebanese woman was guarding the Israeli embassy while Israel bombed the country to fuck, it is not unreasonable to fear for the safety of the wife's family in Lebanon- or even for the wife herself in Britain.
The man has now said he's more than happy to resume his duties at the embassy so there might be some truth in all of that.
Plenty of other police officers put in other requests to the rota, this one has been picked up by sensasionalist journo's looking for a fight with the met. It seems that no one involved (including the Israeli embassay) had any objection, so who are we to judge.
If only a certain evil Murdoch red-top rag took note of that...