A Report of HM Inspectorate of Constabulary: Grampian Police Review Inspection 1999

5 Human Resources

Strength

5.1 At 31 March 1999 Grampian Police had 1249 police officers (including 17 on secondment outwith the force) and 560 support staff (including 78 part time). This compares with 1202 police officers and 503 support staff (75 part time) at 31 March 1998. HMIC acknowledges the efforts made by the force to have achieved this level of recruitment and notes the significant improvement since the time of the Primary Inspection. At the time of the Review Inspection however recruitment had been halted and an intake of twelve recruits planned for May 1999 had been postponed. This decision had been taken in light of the expenditure likely to be incurred in response to Year 2000 issues, including the operational response which will be required over the millennium period. While this freeze on recruitment is hoped only to be temporary, it has caused concern among senior officers and staff associations within the force and is a situation which any chief constable would wish to avoid. In Grampian however the force is in a weaker position than most to deal with further resourcing restrictions. The Primary Inspection report showed police and support staff strength per 100,000 population and a comparison between the force and the average figures for Scottish forces in respect of both categories. An updated version of these figures is shown in Figure 5 below.

Figure 5: Police and Support Staff per 100,000 Population

5.2 Statistics on levels of police personnel need to be treated with caution. Since 1995 there have been no government controls on staffing levels and these are now determined locally within available resources. In some cases investment has been prioritised towards non-personnel expenditure, such as improved technology, and it is probably right to say that some forces are more effective in turning finance into police posts than others. This can sometimes be a result of unavoidable local circumstances. Alternatively, forces which have civilianised larger numbers of non-operational posts can in consequence show a lower ratio of police officers, although it could be convincingly argued that in these circumstances the actual deployment of police personnel was more effective. In assessing how effectively a force is using its available revenue the combined total of all staff, both police and civilian can sometimes be a more helpful indicator. Nevertheless the statistics relating to the staffing of Grampian Police combined with those on its financial position set out earlier (Figure 4 on page ) appear to show a position of comparative disadvantage which must inevitably pose serious challenges to the management of the force.

5.3 The force has the second lowest number of police officers per head of population of any Scottish police force and is well below the Scottish average figure in respect of support staff. This situation appears to be a direct consequence of the fact that Grampian also has Scotland's second lowest per capita spending on policing. A table showing a comparison between per capita expenditure on policing by other forces is shown at Figure 4 on page of this report.

Recruitment

5.4 The Primary Inspection stressed the need for good financial information to be incorporated into recruitment planning and part of the problem identified was the lack of good financial information available within the force generally at that time (paragraph 5.2). This situation has improved and the force executive, commanders and heads of departments including the superintendent in charge of Human Resources now have access to better financial information to assist them with planning matters such as advance recruitment. As described above, the information can be negative as well as positive and require plans to be put on hold as has happened recently, as well as allowing plans to progress in the knowledge that the funding is available. The important thing is that the information is now more readily available. Recommendation 4 earlier in this report encourages the force to calculate the likely implications of the three year financial settlement. If this is done it should be possible to plan a more even pace of recruitment over a longer period.

5.5 As part of the force's response to the MacPherson Report (on the Stephen Lawrence murder enquiry) and the recent emphasis on race relations, consideration was being given, at the time of the Review Inspection to the force's recruitment strategy for ethnic minorities. During the major recruitment drive held in 1998 the force sent recruitment literature to Grampian Racial Equality Council. Recruitment figures for 1998 show that five applications to join the police were received from people of an ethnic minority background and fifteen applied for support staff vacancies. From these numbers two people were employed, one as a police officer and one in a support staff post with four people remaining in a pool for support staff vacancies. This brings the total of ethnic minority officers in the force to three (0.24% of the police strength), with the new support staff member being the first of an ethnic minority background. Figures from the last population census suggest that the force area has an ethnic population of around 4,500 people which represents 0.87% of the population.

5.6 The relatively low number of ethnic minority residents must not become a reason for complacency and it is essential that the issues highlighted during the Stephen Lawrence enquiry are fully addressed by all Scottish police forces to ensure that the police service in Scotland is seen to be an organisation which will not tolerate racism either internally or within the communities it serves. Grampian's consideration of a recruitment strategy for ethnic minorities is only part of its response to the issue and the force's action in this respect is encouraging.

5.7 In terms of recruitment generally HMIC noted the force's greater use of "pools" from which it can fill vacancies and reduce the recruitment period for both police officers and support staff. Such pools consist of applicants for previous vacancies who have been unsuccessful at the time of interview but identified as suitable for appointment at a later stage. HMIC considers this good practice.

Civilian Support Staff

5.8 The Primary Inspection report highlighted a number of aspects of support staff deployment within the force where review of existing practices or further development was deemed appropriate. These observations included:

Scope for use of civilian support staff in administrative support and turnkey roles (paragraph 5.33)

5.9 This observation was made in qualification of the comment in the Primary Inspection report that the force had addressed Scottish Office guidelines on civilianisation in a positive manner. These two roles were identified as areas where the force could still benefit from more civilian support staff in these posts. The force is addressing this issue within the context of its overall needs through the Human Resourcing Plan described in paragraph 5.11 below.

Need to review all areas of specialist support to ensure best use of specialist civilian expertise (paragraph 5.33)

5.10 This observation in the Primary Inspection report again related to specialist areas such as Finance and IT where HMIC considered that specialist civilian expertise was not being used to best advantage and that senior police officers were unnecessarily involved in the management of these departments. The force's response to this is covered in paragraphs 1.39 and 3.5 of this report.

Need to review procedures for filling support staff vacancies (paragraph 5.35)

5.11 The force has developed a Human Resourcing Plan based on bids made by divisional commanders and heads of departments for additional staff. Posts are prioritised, costed and dates of appointment identified. The plan is managed and administered by the Human Resources Department where vacancies are also monitored. A separate plan recording the current status of advertised posts is maintained and includes the post title, date of vacancy and is updated as each post is filled. Comprehensive management information is produced on a regular basis including a list of vacancies which remain unfilled for more than sixteen weeks, temporary posts, temporary agency appointments and posts over establishment. Analysis is also undertaken of all civilian support staff posts within each division and department identifying the nature of each post and whether it is full-time or part-time. Breakdown of the actual support staff strength is also provided according to category of post, gender and whether full-time or part-time.

Scope for development of support staff (paragraph 5.38)

5.12 The force introduced its Staff Review and Development Scheme in August 1998 which provides support staff with an appraisal and performance review system similar to that for police officers.

5.13 Comprehensive guidance is provided for support staff in respect of personal development planning and further guidance and support is available on request from the Staff Development Unit located within the Human Resources Department. This information is available on the force intranet which is accessible by the majority of staff.

Transfer Policy

5.14 The Primary Inspection report also highlighted a human resources issue in respect of difficulties in attracting experienced officers to work in particular rural areas within the force (paragraph 5.3). This was the subject of discussion with officers at all levels during the Review Inspection and it was found that the same concerns still exist.

5.15 A Chief Constable's Memorandum was issued in December 1998 which states the authorisation levels required for the transfer of police officers within the force. However it does not set out a transfer policy nor provide any explanation or guidance to officers regarding the procedures involved or the options available where officers themselves wish to transfer to to another area. In light of the concerns expressed by officers about the uncertainty which exists regarding the force's transfer policy and the impact which transfer can have on an officer's domestic circumstances, HMIC encourages the force to publish a transfer policy which addresses the apparent lack of clarity in this area, including the circumstances in which officers may apply for transfer. Reference was made to a list which was kept in respect of officers who had expressed either a wish or a willingness to work in certain sub-divisions but there was a perception that this was not always taken into account when transfers were taking place. HMIC were also made aware of some advertising of posts which had taken place on local initiative within sub-divisions. Overall however, there was an apparent lack of central direction in respect of this issue. While certain transfers have to be made for the benefit of the force with individual preferences not always being conducive to the intentions behind the moves, HMIC would urge the force, in setting out its transfer policy, to consider the formalisation of the "transfer list" referred to and to select officers who have expressed an interest in working in the area concerned wherever it is possible to do so without detriment to the objectives behind the move.

Equal Opportunities

5.16 The force published an Equal Opportunities policy in November 1998 which includes information on harassment, discrimination and the grievance procedures in place to deal with such issues. The force has a designated equal opportunities officer who is a qualified personnel officer and has an established network of contact advisers to assist staff who wish to discuss or pursue a grievance. A small number of cases indicated that the grievance procedures were being used and around the force there was an awareness of the process and the existence of contact advisers among officers and staff. Notices highlighting the scheme were displayed at suitable locations. There is an evaluation system in place in respect of the process and this is managed by the Equal Opportunities officer.

5.17 Equal Opportunities Monitoring Reports are prepared on a monthly basis and discussed at monthly meetings. The management information contained in these reports is comprehensive and up to date. It relates to recruitment, service and rank profiles, promotions, part-time working, wastage and grievances all broken down according to gender, ethnic minority and disability. HMIC acknowledges the quality of this information and the commitment shown by the force in this respect.

5.18 The Primary Inspection report recorded a "disappointing level of women in promoted posts" (paragraph 5.15). The relatively small numbers involved however mean that following the promotion of five women over the past two years, this figure, which at the time of the Primary Inspection placed Grampian below average compared to other Scottish forces, now shows the number of women in promoted posts within the force to be close to the Scottish average. Figure 6 below shows the relevant statistics.

Figure 6: Women Officers in Force/in Promoted Posts

Assessment Centres

5.19 HM Inspectors in the Primary Inspection report encouraged the Human Resources Department to offer advice and increase awareness of prospective candidates for assessment centres. An information pack was suggested to allow preparation on a uniform basis and to ensure so that no-one felt disadvantaged through a lack of information about the process. This followed comments by officers in rural areas who considered themselves less well informed than those working in Aberdeen, particularly in headquarters (paragraph 5.9).

5.20 The Review Inspection found that guidance notes are now issued to all candidates. These were detailed and informative and reflected the efforts made, by the chief inspector in charge of the Staff Development Unit in particular, to ensure that the assessment centre process is seen to be as open and transparent as possible.

5.21 Candidate background information will be used in future assessment centres as an additional means of assessing candidates and a "career portfolio" is also to be introduced. This will allow officers' professional experience to be taken into consideration as part of the selection process, a factor which many officers had believed was previously overlooked.

5.22 A promotion policy was in draft form at the time of the Review Inspection. This will outline the process for selection of police officers for promotion and reaffirm the force's commitment to a fair and open selection process.

Absence Management

5.23 The force had no absence management policy in place at the time of the Primary Inspection and HM Inspectors urged the force to address this omission (paragraph 5.17). At the time of the Review Inspection however it was found that a draft policy intended for implementation in September 1998 was still awaiting approval. HMIC would re-iterate the need for such a policy to be introduced without further delay. Sickness absence statistics show that the total number of absences due to sickness in the force by both police and support staff have risen each year for the past three years. The total number of working days lost by police officers has also risen significantly over the same period. This re-inforces the need for the force to implement an effective sickness management policy including the setting of achievable targets to reduce the current levels of sickness absence within the force.

Occupational Health

5.24 At the time of the Primary Inspection the force's contract with Aberdeen University for the provision of occupational health services was due to expire in December 1998 and HM Inspectors urged the force to consider its options regarding the long-term occupational health provision for the future (paragraph 5.20). The Review Inspection found a significant development in this respect in that a full time medical officer for the force had been appointed with effect from 1 May 1999. The occupational health consultant appointed to this post is one of the two doctors who previously worked for the force under its contract with Aberdeen University and has good knowledge of the force and its management. HMIC recognises this appointment and the in-house provision of occupational health consultancy as a positive move by the force and one which should benefit both the organisation and the individuals within it. The force is now encouraged to develop an occupational health strategy consistent with policies on related issues such as stress and sickness absence management.

5.25 During the Primary Inspection HM Inspectors questioned the value of the force's drug screening programme and suggested a need for evaluation of this policy (paragraph 5.21). The policy was introduced in 1996 and involves pre-employment drug testing as part of the recruitment process, "with cause" testing where there is reason to suspect someone is under the influence of drugs in the workplace and random voluntary testing. It is the value of this last category in particular which was questioned during the Primary Inspection.

5.26 No evaluation of the programme was undertaken and the contract provider for the service went into liquidation during 1998. At the time of the Review Inspection, HMIC found that a new contract had been awarded to a local laboratory and that the random voluntary screening had resumed in June 1999. This was communicated to the force by a chief constable's memorandum and was included in the weekly orders circulated throughout the force. The force's substance misuse policy, of which the drug screening programme is a major part, is a clearly defined policy which is available to all staff on the force intranet. The procedures are clearly stated along with the consequences which would follow from either a refusal to take a test or a positive result. An individual's right to decline a test "without prejudice" is clearly stated and that person's name will not be made known to the force. Officers and key personnel were asked for their views during the inspection and there was widespread negative comment regarding the scheme in its current format.

5.27 HMIC recommends that the force carries out a formal evaluation of the costs and benefits of its substance misuse policy, in particular the voluntary drug screening programme in order that the value of the policy can be kept under review.

Critical Incident Stress De-Briefing

5.28 The Primary Inspection report highlighted a need for uniform availability and awareness of post-incident de-briefing (paragraph 5.18). Although there has been a draft document in existence for some time, there has still been no policy decided in respect of this important area. Concerns were expressed about the merits and indeed demerits of some aspects of stress de-briefing and these are an important part of any discussion in deciding the best approach. They should not be used as an excuse for lack of policy however and should instead be used to inform and provide a basis for the policy which is deemed most appropriate for the force. In light of the prevalence of stress related absence in the force, (mental illness is the third highest single cause of absence for police officers after muscular/skeletal complaints and minor ailments), HMIC encourages the force to press ahead with the development of stress management policy as part of a wider strategy to deal with sickness absence management within the force.

Personnel System

5.29 The Primary Inspection report highlighted a need for project management of the personnel computer system (paragraph 5.13). The Review Inspection found that progress meetings in respect of PS2000, the force's personnel system are being held on a regular basis. The system is still confined to the Human Resources Department however and no progress had been made regarding the transfer of personnel data to the force's command and control system. The system's progress and development of its application would benefit from project management and HMIC would re-iterate this suggestion to allow the force to maximise the potential of this system as quickly as possible.

Investors in People

5.30 The Investors In People (IIP) status awarded to the force in 1996 was noted in the Primary Inspection report as good practice (paragraph 5.11). The award would have been due for renewal in 1999 but initial assessment has suggested that it would not be renewed without considerable work being undertaken by the force. The decision was taken not to pursue renewal of the award which had been an objective of a previous force executive and the new command team will now focus on other goals. Notwithstanding this decision, HMIC would urge the force to address outstanding policy issues within the human resources environment and to seek to ensure that the procedures followed by the force are consistent with good practice, whether or not formal IIP recognition is to be sought at a future date.

Health and Safety

5.31 At the time of the Primary Inspection HM Inspectors found that the post of Health and Safety adviser had been transferred from the Human Resources Department to the Inspectorate and Review Division. As Health and Safety is regarded as a human resources issue HMIC had some concern about this move and stressed the need for strong links to be maintained between the Health and Safety officer and the Human Resources Department (paragraph 5.23).

5.32 HMIC also suggested a review of the links between Health and Safety and Complaints and Discipline with Inspectorate and Review (both were part of Inspectorate and Review Division at the time of the Primary Inspection). The Review Inspection found that the force has now reviewed these links but intends to retain the Health and Safety adviser's post within the Inspectorate and Review Division. The Health and Safety adviser will continue to report to the superintendent in charge of this division but that officer no longer has any responsibility in relation to the Complaints Department with the chief inspector in charge of complaints now reporting directly to the Deputy Chief Constable. Although this change in relation to the supervision of the Complaints Department has been verbally communicated to the chief inspector and superintendent concerned, documentation of this decision would provide more clarity. HMIC however still regards Health and Safety as a personnel issue and the role of adviser one which extends beyond the carrying out of inspections. It is noted that the Health and Safety adviser is a member of the Human Resources Group at which human resource policies and related matters are discussed and this is an important link for that postholder to maintain. In order that the personnel aspect of this role is given appropriate recognition within the force structure however HMIC would suggest again that the force reviews the current location of the Health and Safety adviser within the Inspectorate and Review Division. This issue is also discussed in paragraph 2.11 of this report.

5.33 HMIC was pleased to note at the time of the Review Inspection the force had been able to purchase sufficient stab resistant vests to equip almost half its operational personnel. Although comments were received from some officers who had yet to receive this equipment HMIC is satisfied that the force is committed to equipping all operational officers as soon as possible. Some officers expressed concern that their yellow jackets could not be worn with the new body armour and that in wet weather or in situations where yellow jackets are required officers were removing their body armour. HMIC suggest that the force may wish to examine these concerns to avoid the safety benefits of the body armour being compromised. Following the inspection, HMIC were advised that further funding had been provided to purchase vests for those officers who had not received them during the first allocation. The force advised HMIC that the issue surrounding the officers' yellow jackets was also being addressed.

Training

5.34 At the time of the Primary Inspection it was found that the five sub-divisional training sergeants were part of the Training Department and although most were located within their respective sub-divisions, sub-divisional officers had no line management responsibility for them. HMIC suggested a need to devolve management responsibility for these officers to local commanders (paragraph 5.25). This observation has been met with some resistance however and the officers remained under headquarters line management at the time of the Review Inspection. There was concern that "decentralisation" of these officers would result in diffusion of their specialist roles through local commanders deploying them on other duties, a drop in their classroom inputs to training courses due to conflicting needs of sub-divisions and a less standard approach than is currently afforded by these officers being part of the same department as other Training Department staff. These issues are managed in other forces however and should not be seen as a barrier to devolving line management responsibility to divisional commanders who may be able to maximise the benefit of these officers' roles within sub-divisions.

Special Constables

5.35 Special Constables with a wide range of experience and from a broad spectrum of the community were interviewed during the Review Inspection. This included a student with a few months service in the city, a farmer with over thirty years of rural policing experience and a grandmother who had policed her local rural community for ten years. The contribution made by such individuals to the policing of all communities should never be underestimated and the force is fortunate to have people of the calibre of those interviewed who are prepared to assist the force in this way.

5.36 Although all special constables spoken to had received officer safety training and had been issued with police batons and handcuffs, some were required to keep this equipment at the offices where they most regularly take duty. This proved an inconvenience on some occasions where the officers were attending elsewhere to fulfil a tour of duty and had to make special journeys to uplift their equipment first. Where appropriate, the force might wish to consider relaxing this rule providing security of the equipment is assured.

5.37 Most of the officers spoken to had undertaken duties of a specialist nature with units such as the General Enquiry Department dealing with deaths, execution of warrants and licensing matters within the city and the CID and Traffic Department.

5.38 It was noted that the force does not authorise its Special Constables to drive police vehicles. In view of the remote nature of many areas of the force and the fact that many Special Constables are experienced drivers, this is something which the force might wish to consider in order to make best use of resources. When asked about the nature of their duties they described a largely supporting role and there was no evidence of even minor cases being dealt with directly and taken to a conclusion by members of the special constabulary. In addition there were some expressions of frustration at local policies which precluded patrolling other than under the "supervision" of a regular officer. This sometimes resulted in long periods of "sitting around" in police stations. Whilst the progress made by the force is recognised HMIC is of the view that further steps need to be taken for the force to achieve best value from its special constabulary.

Staff Associations/Unions

5.39 Following the Primary Inspection HMIC encouraged the force executive to make every effort to consult with all parties, including trade unions, in the development of force policy (paragraph 5.39). The force had created a Joint Consultative Committee for support staff which included representation of non-union staff. Some concern surrounded this however and HMIC was pleased to note during the Review Inspection that these concerns had now dissipated and a sufficient level of trust had developed between the different groups to allow joint consultation and negotiation to take place.

5.40 The force has now taken this Committee a stage further to include representation of all staff associations including the police staff associations, trade unions and the support staff association for non-union members. Representatives spoken to during the inspection expressed satisfaction with the level of consultation which now takes place and the involvement which they now have in issues affecting the force.

5.41 Although this new joint committee has met at reasonable intervals since the appointment of the new Chief Constable, it was noted that future meetings are still arranged on an ad hoc basis at the conclusion of each meeting. HMIC would repeat the suggestion made in the Primary Inspection Report (paragraph 5.40) that a programme of scheduled meetings should be set up to formalise the arrangements for this important forum.