Dear Colleague

The West Yorkshire Police Federation Joint Branch Board feels that we need to set the record straight in relation to shift pattern changes.

We recently, gave all the sergeants and constables in West Yorkshire (based upon legal advice) the opportunity to decide upon a Variable Shift Arrangement (VSA) package proposed by the Command Team. We were told by the Command Team that the package which had to be taken in its entirety suited the needs of the Organisation and would provide a better service to the public of West Yorkshire by matching resources to demand. At no time were we given the opportunity for any input on the shift patterns which were proposed. We have not been supplied the demand profile which the Force used to determine the VSA package which was offered.

We did not agree with their analysis. Our view was then, and is now, that the Force Standard Duty Rota (FSDR) meets the needs of the organisation. We based that assertion with the following reasons.

• Reported crime rates have been falling.
• The number of offenders brought to justice has been rising.
• And sickness levels amongst police officers have fallen to an all time low.

At the beginning of the process we were told by the Command Team that an eight hour shift pattern would better meet the needs of the Organisation. We say, if that is the case, why didn’t the Chief Constable withdraw from all VSA agreements, as is his right under Police Regulations?

When we balloted our members we took advice from the Elections Officer at Wakefield Council. She advised us throughout the process and oversaw the count. The Joint Branch Board (JBB) is satisfied that the result, to reject the proposed VSA package is a valid result. We are disappointed that only 52.93% of those eligible to vote did so. The majority view expressed by officer’s in the ballot was accepted by a large majority at the JBB meeting, which followed the declaration of the result.

Since details of the result have become public knowledge, we have been inundated with questions from many different sources; mainly those officers on patrol, who are unhappy about the result and the implications the result has for them.

At the start of this process we suggested that the Force should leave officers on 24/7 response teams alone and that we would have been prepared to discuss a review of those groups of officers who were working a form of FSDR but not working 24/7. That was rejected by the Command Team.

As a result of ‘spin’ released by the Force, we are continually being asked why we cannot accept the Chief Constables offer and sign up to VSA1 for Response Officers only. That was not an option when the process began; VSA’s were offered as a package, which had to be taken as a whole. The package was rejected by a majority of those eligible to, and who took the trouble to vote. The JBB took an almost unanimous view to accept this. Although the majority was small we felt that we had been given a mandate to reject the offer on the table. You were asked to vote on the whole package not offered a ‘pick and mix deal’. That package affected many groups including Response, Neighbourhood Policing Teams, Investigative Teams and officers in Operational Support. We believe the VSA package was not attractive to a large numbers of those officers. We cannot sign up to a VSA1 for Response Teams alone. If significant changes were made to the VSA package we would consider a re-ballot of all our members.

The validity of the ballot has been questioned by a number of people on the grounds that some people did not receive ballot papers.
We were supplied the officers’ addresses by the Force and as far as we were aware that list was up to date. We were later informed that the list may have been up to 10% out of date. That may be true as we were contacted by a large number of officers who had not received ballot papers. The officers who had not received ballot papers fell into two categories. The first were officers who had not informed the Force that they had changed their address, or where officers had informed the Force they had changed their addresses the administration department in their divisions and departments had not updated the Oracle database. We sent out replacement packs to officers who contacted us and when the replacement packs ran out we invited officers to attend the Federation office and vote in person, which a number of you did. We sent the voting packs to officer’s home addresses by Royal Mail. We believed that 1st class mail would be more reliable, and less problematic than the internal mail system. This gave us an integrity check on the returned papers.

Throughout this whole process we have questioned why so much change is taking place at the same time. Changing to a new shift pattern is problematic in itself without all the other change that is going on within this organisation. We have not seen any evidence which compels us to believe that all these changes are needed. The Command Team tell us that work life balance and caring for staff is important; talk is cheap. Actions speak louder than words. We don’t believe that the needs of staff are being considered. We believe that the need of the organisation is riding roughshod over everything which affects your work life balance.

Since the result has become known we have made a number of suggestions which we think would help to make the Agreement and the shifts more acceptable. Other than an offer of minor tinkering with the Agreement there has been no movement on behalf of the Force. We believe that we need to see a significant change to the VSA package and the VSA agreement to make it more acceptable for Police officers in Response Teams, Neighbourhood Policing Teams, Investigative Teams and other groups who would work a VSA before we can have a re-ballot.

Since the publication of the ballot result we have been disappointed by the response of the Force and the tactics they have adopted. The Police Federation is not opposed to change. Over the years our members have adapted to many changes in working practices. The change to shift patterns was initiated by the Force, if they had really wanted change to happen they should have listened to our concerns and made proposals which would have found acceptance amongst the vast majority of our members.

Some Divisional Command Teams have been urging you to contact the Federation office to express your unhappiness at our refusal to sign up to VSA1 for officers in Response Teams. We would urge you, if you are unhappy about the tactics the Force are using to write to them and make your feelings known.

We hope this clarifies the position taken by the Police Federation on your behalf. We will continue to interact with the Command Team in an effort to reach a VSA package and agreement that is more acceptable.

West Yorkshire Police Federation Joint Branch Board