Professional Standards - Queries & Concerns
- Thread starter Super_
- Start date
-
- Tags
- plpd professional standards psd q&a
@Mimball Can you please explain in what way Patrol and Traffic have the exact same workload? And would it not make sense to have Traffic as a secondary division, and then put your time into training and maybe some nice videos officers could watch? Rather than have to deal with supervisors etc...
Traffic seems to have a very small amount of officers, all tho they have the same amount of SGTs as Patrol.
Patrol - 582 officers
Dispatch - 113 officers
Traffic - 75 officers
TFU - 43 officers.
Why not focus on training and recruitment to 100%?
Traffic seems to have a very small amount of officers, all tho they have the same amount of SGTs as Patrol.
Patrol - 582 officers
Dispatch - 113 officers
Traffic - 75 officers
TFU - 43 officers.
Why not focus on training and recruitment to 100%?
@Samuel So my monthly tasks include monitoring the OR quality and quantity (soon to change) of officers in RTU. This whilst written down seems quite small however it is a very large monthly task to take on for our Corporals+ and involves grading each OR handed out by every RTU Corporal+. The number of officers we have in total isn't a true representation of our workload as that's like saying patrol have to deal with all 582 officers on the daily.
@Mimball Of course statistics don't show the real world picture. Its impossible for statistics to say how much work you or GamingPeach do. But what it can tell us is that Patrol got a total of 14 CPLs when Traffic has 12.
What would the downside of moving the responsibility for these officers to Patrol? And allow you to focus 100% on training etc... In the beginning RTU was supposed to be something special, where officers actually dealt with traffic stuff. But right now it's just the way to get a speed camera and a few new cars. Maybe a change like this could fix that?
What would the downside of moving the responsibility for these officers to Patrol? And allow you to focus 100% on training etc... In the beginning RTU was supposed to be something special, where officers actually dealt with traffic stuff. But right now it's just the way to get a speed camera and a few new cars. Maybe a change like this could fix that?
@Samuel I completely agree RTU has a whole needs to focus more on Training and Recruitment however we are currently in the middle of planning changes to our recruitment process etc to modernise it and make it more relevant, easier to get into RTU whilst the quality of RTO's should increase. Moving things to patrol will just increase their workload to twice what it is now and lower mine considerably.
- Thread starter
- #27
Hi,
The simple answer would be no. One of the PD's primary goals currently is to downsize the command teams and as it currently stands, an additional command member for PSD would not be required nor needed as the workload in itself is not significant enough to warrant having an LT to assist me. However, like Collier said in response to Samuel, the PSD line is being changed to separate PSD from the Complaint Committee, etc. so a new slot may open up in the near future.
The simple answer would be no. One of the PD's primary goals currently is to downsize the command teams and as it currently stands, an additional command member for PSD would not be required nor needed as the workload in itself is not significant enough to warrant having an LT to assist me. However, like Collier said in response to Samuel, the PSD line is being changed to separate PSD from the Complaint Committee, etc. so a new slot may open up in the near future.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
