RC or Non RC

Jill77

TSG 15 wrote: »

Says it all.

Sorry did I ramble on too much??

PEGGYSUE'S MAMA

not in the slightest, well written and succinct post that probably sums up how alot of folk on here feel.... did you know strathclyde polis are on the look out for women folk to join up with them at the minute?

TSG 15

Jill77 wrote: »

Sorry did I ramble on too much??

No. not at all. I have a friend in the same position as yourself. Perfect cop material but disadvantaged by the 50.50. I totally sympathise

Jill77

PEGGYSUE'S MAMA wrote: »

not in the slightest, well written and succinct post that probably sums up how alot of folk on here feel.... did you know strathclyde polis are on the look out for women folk to join up with them at the minute?

Oooh don't tempt me, don't know if the heart could take two applications at once Anyways, my heart is here in NI, really.

TSG 15 wrote: »

No. not at all. I have a friend in the same position as yourself. Perfect cop material but disadvantaged by the 50.50. I totally sympathise

Ah, I was worried I'd said too much by the confoosed smilie!!!

This site is brilliant, I'm so glad I have found it, some great advice and support on here. Glad to be going through it this time with some likeminded folk!

Penis Eye

Jill77 wrote: »

But what really, really gets me is that I know for a fact that non-RC applicants are getting accepted who aren't really that arsed about being in the police, it's a notion and they see it as a decent salary and something a bit different to do - please note this is not a sweeping statement to all non-RC applicants, far from it.

Then people like me and from the looks of things, a large proportion of you guys on here, who are passionate about this as a career and who would put their heart and soul into it, are getting rejected (after acheiving higher marks than some of those non-enthusiasts getting accepted).

i agree with u although i dont think its a religious thing... people from both backgrounds who arent in it for the passion and are only in it for the money!

when RCs are applyin many ppl say things like aggh ull get in no bother ur a catholic... its still not easy!

i wouldnt be surprised if the news from the last week or so will put non passionate people off with their applications! certainly its made some people think twice... and no offence but im glad it does put folk off! the ones that continue on wil be the ones who will be the type of folk the same as you.. they'll have ur back and "largely" the same view as you as opposed to having someone who is only in it for the money as your partner!

Jill77

Penis Eye wrote: »

i agree with u although i dont think its a religious thing... people from both backgrounds who arent in it for the passion and are only in it for the money!

when RCs are applyin many ppl say things like aggh ull get in no bother ur a catholic... its still not easy!

i wouldnt be surprised if the news from the last week or so will put non passionate people off with their applications! certainly its made some people think twice... and no offence but im glad it does put folk off! the ones that continue on wil be the ones who will be the type of folk the same as you.. they'll have ur back and "largely" the same view as you as opposed to having someone who is only in it for the money as your partner!

Very true. Theres no doubt at all that anyone who does get accepted, regardless of religion, has scored well and worked hard. However I really believe that a strenuous interview should be part of the application process as it is in Strathclyde and most other police forces - I think that could differentiate between those applying with the right motivation and those not. I came out of my first interview with Strathclyde feeling like I'd gone 10 rounds!

Two sides to the coin of who is going to apply now - firstly, we all know theres a recession and I think someone already mentioned ont his thread that there are so many people out of work that perhaps some people will apply to PSNI who never thought about it before. On the flip side, you are right PE, the recent events in NI could well put off some applicants, particularly those younger ones who have never lived the Troubles and never thought it would be a factor again.

Hmmm. who the heck knows.

Sods law, I'll score really highly in everything and they'll turf me out at medical cos of my neck surgery! :rolleyes:

cpn

Uilleam wrote: »

Again, TSG 15 has a valid point . . . not only the ECHR, but indeed nearly all employment legislation and equality and non discrimination legislation in the UK and the EU opposes any form of discrimination.
However, and this is the core element of this topic, the current recruitment policy of the PSNI, whilst discriminatory against non RC applicants, is set down as legally binding by the British Parliament in London.
This is the Parliament that claims jurisdiction over this part of the Province of Ulster (whether rightly or wrongly). As such, it is allegedly democratically representative of the people that elected the Parliament, and therefore valid in our society.
Again, I agree with the point TSG 15 makes, but as disgusting as we may find this recruitment policy, we are still bound by it and no amount of bickering or posturing will change the imposition of this policy by the British Government.
RC applicants will have an easier time getting accepted into the PSNI than Non RC, even though they will quite often score lower in testing.
This is a dead end argument that will not change for a while.

Interesting point but not strictly true. The Human Rights Act enshrined the ECHR into British law a few years ago. This means that all British laws have to be compatable with the ECHR and so it would seem that 50:50 recruitment is in fact illegal.

I completly understand that our Police force must represent the community, its just a shame that this is the way it has to be done because it is not really fair.

DC Dibble

i wouldnt be surprised if the news from the last week or so will put non passionate people off with their applications! certainly its made some people think twice

It was that very sad news that made me finally feel that now is the time for me to go through with the application. Unless people like me and from my community apply, what hope is there ever for a normal society, and a normal police service that everyone can support. The more these nutters are marginalised and shunned by all sections of society the better.

DC Dibble

Sorry Jill777 I should have credited you with the quote I used in my last post, still getting used to this malarky

Penis Eye

DC Dibble wrote: »

Sorry Jill777 I should have credited you with the quote I used in my last post, still getting used to this malarky

Oi! I'll be taking the credit for that, thank you!!!

If everybody thought like you DC Dibble, it'd be a fine police force to work with!

DC Dibble

Penis Eye wrote: »

Oi! I'll be taking the credit for that, thank you!!!

Sorry bout that Penis Eye, credit where credits due

MrsGeneHunt

Jill77 wrote: »

Theres no doubt at all that anyone who does get accepted, regardless of religion, has scored well and worked hard.

I've read this thread with interest but sorry, cant get onboard with this statement.

From campaign 14 it will happen that people placed as many as 700 places lower than others will get training places based on religion.

Yes to get on the merit list you had to be in the top 10% of everyone who applied. Very good, pats on the back all round.

But the 440 training places should go to the top 440 scoring candidates.

This view in no way will affect how I do the job on the street. You're out there to serve the whole community. I'll arrest someone who is breaking the law and I wont give a rats ass if they're black, white, gay, lesbian or a Jewish humpbacked dwarf with a hare lip.

But not getting the career you really want, that you have proved you are capable of, purely because of religion......:mad:

I don't know if I'd have it in me to arrest a Jewish humpbacked dwarf with a hare lip ahh the mental images!

Anyways, I completely understand what they are trying to do with the 50:50 and that yes, the PSNI has to become more equally representative of the society, but surely there's a better way to do it that doesn't stop some competent applicants who in a normal, straight competition of best man (or woman!) wins would have got the place. It actually unerves me in a way to think that there are many many people out there who would of made perfect police officers who didn't get the place even thought people who maybe aren't quite as good are doing their job. Yes, we want a representative police service, but we also want the best police service, and in my mind this just isn't we right way to achieve either.

As Jill77 mentioned, it has always amazed me that there's no formal interview involved in the application process for the PSNI...there's alot you can get from a person from an interview that no amount of maths tests, role plays and physicals can.

Jill77

MrsGeneHunt wrote: »

Jill77 wrote: »

Theres no doubt at all that anyone who does get accepted, regardless of religion, has scored well and worked hard.

I've read this thread with interest but sorry, cant get onboard with this statement.

From campaign 14 it will happen that people placed as many as 700 places lower than others will get training places based on religion.

Yes to get on the merit list you had to be in the top 10% of everyone who applied. Very good, pats on the back all round.

But the 440 training places should go to the top 440 scoring candidates.

This view in no way will affect how I do the job on the street. You're out there to serve the whole community. I'll arrest someone who is breaking the law and I wont give a rats ass if they're black, white, gay, lesbian or a Jewish humpbacked dwarf with a hare lip.

But not getting the career you really want, that you have proved you are capable of, purely because of religion......:mad:

I 100% agree with you there - my original post outlines my exact same feelings on this matter. The fact of the matter is that anyone scoring in the top 10% of applications has scored well. The point of people with lower scores than others being accepted based on religion is an entirely separate one in my opinion - and one that guts me greatly.

Jill77

Deleted User wrote: »

As Jill77 mentioned, it has always amazed me that there's no formal interview involved in the application process for the PSNI...there's alot you can get from a person from an interview that no amount of maths tests, role plays and physicals can.

Agreed x a trillion

MrsGeneHunt

Deleted User wrote: »

Anyways, I completely understand what they are trying to do with the 50:50 and that yes, the PSNI has to become more equally representative of the society, but surely there's a better way to do it that doesn't stop some competent applicants who in a normal, straight competition of best man (or woman!) wins would have got the place. It actually unerves me in a way to think that there are many many people out there who would of made perfect police officers who didn't get the place even thought people who maybe aren't quite as good are doing their job. Yes, we want a representative police service, but we also want the best police service, and in my mind this just isn't we right way to achieve either.

Excellent point.

TSG 15

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't know if I'd have it in me to arrest a Jewish humpbacked dwarf with a hare lip ahh the mental images!

Remember... statistically, six out of every seven Dwarfs are not Happy:rolleyes:

Jill77

TSG 15 wrote: »

Remember... statistically, six out of every seven Dwarfs are not Happy:rolleyes:

Boom boom

MrsGeneHunt

TSG 15 wrote: »

Remember... statistically, six out of every seven Dwarfs are not Happy:rolleyes:

ROTFLMAO:P

( Sorry bout the text speak PYG!!)

TSG 15

Jill77 wrote: »

Boom boom

Unless they are Dwarfs from the lucky side of the 50.50

TSG 15

MrsGeneHunt wrote: »

ROTFLMAO:P

( Sorry bout the text speak PYG!!)

ROTF? got the rest, a bit slow

nickni

ROTF = Roll On The Floor.

MrsGeneHunt

TSG 15 wrote: »

ROTF? got the rest, a bit slow

Laughing my A$$ off!!
Best get back to topic or le Moderator will have a field day infracting one and all.;)

TSG 15

MrsGeneHunt wrote: »

Laughing my A$$ off!!
Best get back to topic or le Moderator will have a field day infracting one and all.;)

When I first joined the RUC I had an hour long interview in my own home and that was just to explain to a Sergeant why I wanted to be a cop. Not squeeze 105 words into a box......... and nobody asked me what my religion was

nickni

Maybe you cant answer tsg, but how long ago we talking? That sounds like a far better way imo

MrsGeneHunt

TSG 15 wrote: »

When I first joined the RUC I had an hour long interview in my own home and that was just to explain to a Sergeant why I wanted to be a cop. Not squeeze 105 words into a box......... and nobody asked me what my religion was

Yup. Lot to be said for that way of doing things.

TSG 15

nickni wrote: »

Maybe you cant answer tsg, but how long ago we talking? That sounds like a far better way imo

Almost 20 years ago..... They took on babies then . At that time I was in the full time reserve but I then had to go through the same process as you are all doing more recently to get into the regular force. Its complicated if you dont know what the FTR is.

dark side

TSG 15 wrote: »

Can you imagine the outcry anywhere else in the UK if 50.50 recruiting was introduced to address imbalace of under representation of, for instance, black officers. It just wont happen. The human rights act says that to discriminate against someone on grounds of their religeon is unlawful and it does not list Northern Ireland as an exception.

HI TSG maybe not 50:50 recruiting happened in the UK - but there is definately positive discrimination towards ethnic minorities, that was brought in after a report into the death of Steven Lawerence - But they are scrapping it now.

TSG 15

dark side wrote: »

HI TSG maybe not 50:50 recruiting happened in the UK - but there is definately positive discrimination towards ethnic minorities, that was brought in after a report into the death of Steven Lawerence - But they are scrapping it now.

I dont doubt what you are saying but the just cant "bring it in" I needs to be legislated for because it is illegal to discriminate on race, gender, religion, etc

Troy Bayliss

Patten recommended 10 years or 30% both of which are nearly due so it'll lapse on that quota. Any ideas why it was only 30% and not a more represenative 40%+ ?