Zac is a good example, husky’s promotion/reinstatement to tfu is an example of when this was abused previously, I personally think that providing a public explanation is a great idea as it still allows the purpose of the policy to remain but filters out stupid/bullshit reasons which have been made up to “justify” subtle abuse. @Collier spoke about transparency within the pd within his campaign for chief and therefore I think this change should be made regardless. The policy is in place for a very good reason however it’s abuse should not be tolerated as it has been in the past, I also believe that the use of this policy should be scrutinised by PSD as in the past where it was abused, even the deputy chief would struggle to do anything about it, I believe a policy whereby senior management can “overthrow” or “overpower” (probably not the right words for it at all) the chief in certain situations such as their power is believed to have been used for personal gain or unjustifiably not in the best intentions of the PD.
@Dan feel free to make a complaint. Collier knows why it was said and had the right to justify claims. Stop causing problems as your completely uninvolved.
@Daigestive As far as I'm aware I'm not gonna make a complaint on you, doing that in a back and forth argument is just petty. I'm just saying, although it was a serious situation, do you really think Collier would actively defend Tom?